DTN Political Correspondent Jerry Hagstrom reported yesterday (link requires subscription) that, “The White House has promised Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Blanche Lincoln that the Obama administration will provide $1.5 billion in agriculture disaster assistance to Arkansas farmers by administrative action.
“‘While I firmly believe agricultural producers are rural small businesses — it was clear the Republicans pulled out all the stops to block my legislation,’ Lincoln said in a statement. ‘In exchange for pulling ag disaster from the small business bill, I have secured an agreement from both Majority Leader Reid and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and have their commitment to deliver critical agriculture disaster assistance administratively in the next two weeks.’”
Mr. Hagstrom added that, “The aid package would give producers who suffered crop losses in counties USDA declared ‘primary’ disaster areas $1.1 billion in payments. In addition, it would give $300 million to specialty crop producers, $50 million to livestock producers and $42 million to cotton seed handlers. It also earmarks $75 million for Arkansas poultry producers who took losses due to the bankruptcy of Pilgrim’s Pride and provides $20 million in aid to Hawaiian sugar producers.”
House Agriculture Subcommittee Hearing- Quality Control Systems in SNAP
Yesterday, the House Agriculture Committee’s Subcommittee on Department Operations, Oversight, Nutrition and Forestry, held a hearing to review quality control systems in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
A House Agriculture Committee news release stated that, “The Subcommittee heard testimony from government officials and advocacy and industry groups about efforts to reduce the error rate in the SNAP program and to combat fraud and abuse in the system.”
Ms. Julie Paradis, the Administrator of USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service, provided a fascinating background and statistical overview on the recent upsurge in SNAP program participation rates. She also indicated that according to a report last month, “The SNAP national payment accuracy rate, for FY2009, had reached an all time high of 95.64 percent.” To listen to a portion of this overview, just click here (MP3- 1:08).
During the discussion portion of yesterday’s hearing, Rep. Kurt Schrader, D-Oregon, inquired about the possibility of reaching a “tipping point,” or point of “diminishing returns” with respect to resource allocation for improving SNAP program payment accuracy. In addition, Rep. Schrader also asked about “unauthorized immigrants” and the SNAP program. To listen to a portion of this dialogue from yesterday, just click here (MP3- 2:38).
Meanwhile, Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper, D-Pennsylvania, asked the first panel of witnesses at yesterday’s hearing about the use of SNAP benefits at local farmers markets, a portion of this exchange is available here (MP3- 1:28). In the clip, FNS Administrator Paradis notes that, “Our goal is to have every farmers market in the country participating in the [SNAP] program.”
Subcommittee Ranking Member Jeff Fortenberry, R-Nebraska, expressed concern about health and obesity rates, and noted that data from the Healthy Incentives Pilot (HIP) would not be available for another two years. He went on to ask the second panel of witnesses yesterday an interesting theoretical question about a potential “new paradigm” in linking SNAP benefits to improved choice. He offered a hypothetical example: “Instead of a SNAP card having $100 on it, a SNAP card would have 100 ‘nutritional points,’ and that would also be measured as you buy certain foods and therefore the market would then respond to develop food products that would fit easily into the nutritional categorizations.” To listen to this interesting discussion on linking SNAP benefits to nutritional health, click here (MP3- 8:12).
An audio replay of yesterday’s Subcommittee hearing on SNAP is available here, while prepared testimony can be found here.
Sam Youngman reported yesterday at The Hill’s Energy Blog that, “Climate measures could be added in conference to an energy bill the Senate will take up this week, according to the White House.
“White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said he wouldn’t rule out adding some climate measures to the legislation in conference, assuming a scaled-down energy bill passes the Senate.”
The update indicated that, “The measure in the Senate drops the language from the House dealing with climate change and carbon emissions. By dropping those controversial measures, Democrats hope they can pass a bill through the Senate before lawmakers leave for the August recess.
“‘I don’t think the bill is essentially dead for the year,’ Gibbs said. ‘The House passed a very strong and very comprehensive energy bill last year. The Senate is going to take up a version that is more scaled down, but still has some important aspects, particularly dealing with how we deal with oil spills in the future.’
“He added: ‘I don’t think that closes the door. Once a bill passes each house, it doesn’t close the door to having some sort of conference.’”
In addition, Mr. Youngman stated that, “Gibbs said tackling expanded legislation in conference isn’t something that would have to wait for a lame-duck session.
The Washington Insider section of DTN reported yesterday (link requires subscription) that, “House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson, D-Minn., made a bold political move to use what observers suggest was bitter medicine for some of his constituents as a political bargaining point.”
“At issue is USDA’s Crop Insurance program. The agency uses private insurance companies and agents to offer the federal programs under a Standard Reinsurance Agreement.”
The DTN item explained that, “USDA began the renegotiation process late last year, and now has finally determined that payments for administrative and operating costs subsidized by the government would be capped at $1.3 billion next year, with the limit rising to $1.37 billion in 2015. Recently, USDA announced that all 16 companies signed the new SRA that will cut costs about $6 billion over 10 years.
“As the negotiation process wound down, its effect on the ‘agriculture baseline,’ became controversial, especially a decision by the Office of Management and Budget that $4 billion of the reduction would be used to reduce the deficit rather than support other agricultural programs as many agricultural supporters proposed.
“The remaining $2 billion in ‘baseline credit’ is to be allocated for several programs, including expansion of the pasture, rangeland, and forage program; providing a performance discount or refund to reduce the cost of crop insurance for certain producers; increasing conservation reserve program acreage; and, investing in new and amended conservation reserve enhancement program initiatives and CRP monitoring.”
On Friday, FarmPolicy.com had the opportunity to speak with Rep. Adrian Smith (R-Neb.). Rep. Smith serves on the House Agriculture Committee and our conversation focused on trade issues.
A transcript of our discussion from Friday is available here, while an audio replay can be heard here (MP3- about five minutes).
Follow us on twitter
Site Feed
Podcast
Email Updates
