Cotton, Pryor On Opposite Sides Of Farm Bill Vote (UPDATED)

After studying the 960-page Farm Bill that emerged from a bipartisan, bicameral conference committee, U.S. Rep. Tom Cotton, R-Dardanelle, voted against the measure.

Cotton released this statement on Wednesday morning ahead of a House vote in which he was the only member of Arkansas’ delegation to oppose the bill:

“Growing up on a farm in Yell County, I learned a simple lesson: you can’t spend more than you take in. That’s why I’ve worked hard to protect Arkansas taxpayers and that’s why I can’t support the food-stamp bill. This bill spends too much and leaves Arkansas farmers with too little. Arkansas farmers will receive barely 0.5% of its bloated $956 billion price tag—half of what they received in the 2008 bill. Also, it imposes unfair regulations on livestock producers, opening all Arkansas farmers to retaliatory tariffs. That’s one reason most livestock groups oppose the bill, as do countless Arkansas farmers I’ve heard from. And even a small dip in crop prices from the bill’s historically high target prices could leave taxpayers on the hook for tens of billions of dollars.

“This bill can only be called a food-stamp bill when nearly 80% of its funding doesn’t support farmers. Food-stamp spending has grown by 86% under President Obama and enrollment is at a record high, while 70% of adults who receive food stamps have been on the program for more than 5 years. Yet this bill fails to make real reforms—lacking even common-sense work requirements that would provide job training to able-bodied adults receiving food stamps.

“Arkansas taxpayers cannot continue to foot the bill for President Obama’s failed policies and Arkansas farmers shouldn’t be held hostage to President Obama’s runaway food-stamp program. I will continue to fight for policies that support Arkansas farmers and protect Arkansas taxpayers.”

Cotton’s position puts him at odds with Sen. Mark Pryor, D-Arkansas, whom Cotton is challenging in a re-election bid. It also put him in juxtaposition to all of Arkansas’ GOP Congressional officials who voted for the bill that passed in the U.S. House.

“I’m pleased to see that the conference committee has reached a bipartisan agreement. I hope my colleagues in the House will turn off the politics and help us get this bill over the finish line. Our agriculture sector — which contributes $17 billion to Arkansas’s economy alone — needs certainty to stay strong and thrive,” Pryor said in a statement on Tuesday.

After Cotton’s vote, Pryor said, “This farm bill means good jobs and economic security for families across Arkansas, and I’ve stood beside my Republican colleagues John Boozman, Rick Crawford, Steve Womack and Tim Griffin to get this bipartisan bill done for the people of our state.”

“In voting against the farm bill, Congressman Cotton once again sided with his special interest allies, the same Washington groups spending millions on his campaign that urged him to oppose the farm bill. It’s reckless and irresponsible for Congressman Cotton to put his own ambitions ahead of what’s best for Arkansans, and the people of our state deserve better,” Pryor added.

THE BILL’S DETAILS

The Farm Bill that emerged from a conference committee would, according to the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, reform numerous agri programs and eliminate almost 100 programs that are considered duplicative.

Other aspects of the bill, according to the Senate committee, include:

• Repeals the direct payment program and strengthens risk management tools;
• Strengthens conservation efforts to protect land, water and wildlife for future generations;
• Maintains food assistance for families while addressing fraud and misuse in SNAP;
• Reduces the deficit by billions of dollars in mandatory spending;
• Strengthens and modernizes crop insurance programs;
• Provides a livestock disaster assistance program;
• Consolidates 23 conservation programs into 13 programs; and
• Seeks to boost export opportunities for U.S. farmers.

A primary point of dispute with the Farm Bill has been over the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which is commonly referred to as the food stamp program. Senate leaders and the White House have objected to the deeper cuts in SNAP funding. House members, particularly more conservative members of the Republican caucus, have said the SNAP cuts did not go far enough, even calling for separate consideration of the program outside of the scope of farm bill. Cotton was one of the House members to previously call for SNAP to be considered separate from a farm bill.

OTHER CONGRESSMEN WEIGH IN

Sen. John Boozman, R-Arkansas, said the bill wasn’t perfect but he felt it was “good” and “fair.”

“No one is going to say this bill is perfect, but it is a good, fair bill that achieves real savings in mandatory spending, reduces and streamlines government programs and provides much-needed reform for the food stamp program,” Boozman said. “At the same time, this bill ensures the continued safety, affordability, and reliability of our food supply while protecting the most vulnerable members of our communities. So I was pleased that the House passed it today and will push for quick consideration in the Senate of this hard-fought agreement.”

Congressman Steve Womack (R) voted in favor of the bill, but he wasn’t necessarily happy about it.

“It would be difficult to overstate my disappointment with the conference report,” said a frustrated Womack from the House floor Wednesday before the vote. “For me, it would be easy to vote against this conference report. But unlike my Senate counterparts, I recognize that – in a divided government – each side must work to find common ground.”

The congressman commended his colleagues on the House Agriculture Committee, including fellow Arkansas Congressman Rick Crawford (R) who sits on the committee, for their work to reform farm and food programs, which he says ultimately “moves the ball forward.” But his issues with the report remain.

“Because of the Senate’s my-way-or-the-highway attitude, we are considering a conference report that does nothing to address an out-of-control agency, GIPSA, from imposing on American companies regulations that go well-beyond congressional intent,” said Womack. “Because of the Senate’s all-or-nothing approach, we are considering a conference report that will subject American industries and companies to retaliatory tariffs.”

GIPSA, or the Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration, is the agency within the U.S. Department of Agriculture that facilitates the marketing of livestock, poultry, meat, cereals, oilseed, and related agricultural products.

Congressman Rick Crawford (R) was more upbeat, but he also criticized GIPSA. Additionally, he said while progress was made, it did not go far enough.

“This bill provides a strong safety-net that protects all producers from market risks, while expanding access to crop insurance so that it works in the Mid-South,” Crawford said. “In addition, we can finally provide relief to our cattlemen by permanently reauthorizing disaster assistance programs after years of hardship, resulting from drought and adverse weather.”

“I believe we could have gone farther,” Crawford added. “I’m proud of the conservative reforms we made to the Food Stamp program by eliminating waste and loopholes, while setting the stage for work requirements.”

Congressman Tim Griffin (R ), who represents central Arkansas’ Second District, said the bill was far from perfect, but it provided certainty for farmers.

“There’s no such thing as a perfect piece of legislation, and this farm bill is no exception. But I support the bipartisan agreement because Arkansas’s agricultural community is a critical part of our state’s economy, accounting for 260,000 jobs and $17 billion in value,” he said. “Providing it with certainty will promote stability and encourage more growth. Conferees Rick Crawford and John Boozman have worked hard to maximize the reforms and savings in this bill, which repeals or consolidates nearly 100 USDA programs, establishes a new risk-management system to protect farmers who suffer significant losses, and ends direct payments—a significant and historic reform. Overall, this agreement cuts $23 billion in mandatory spending.”

Griffin, who is not seeking re-election in 2014, also said the President’s policies were to blame for driving up the costs of food stamps.

“The unfortunate news is that, because of President Obama’s lackluster economy and his Administration’s aggressive recruiting of enrollees, a record 20 percent of American households were on food stamps in 2013, causing the program’s cost to run twice as much as it did only five years ago. The good news is that this agreement will close loopholes in the program, empower states to use mandatory work programs and ensure benefits are not given to illegal immigrants, lottery winners, traditional college students and dead people,” Griffin said.

FARM BUREAU’S TAKE
The state’s largest agricultural advocacy group, the Arkansas Farm Bureau, issued this statement:

Arkansas Farm Bureau officials thanked members of the state’s House of Representatives delegation who voted for passage of the conference committee version of the farm bill, H.R. 2662, which cleared the House Wednesday morning.

The vote, 251-161 for passage, paves the way for a five-year program that will give farmers the ability to plan for the future. Congressmen Rick Crawford, Tim Griffin and Steve Womack voted for passage. The Senate is expected to vote on the proposal as early as Thursday.

Sen. John Boozman and Rep. Crawford were members of the conference committee, which worked to bridge the differences between the Senate and House versions of the farm bill that were passed last fall.

Arkansas Farm Bureau President Randy Veach, a cotton, soybean, corn and wheat farmer from Manila (Mississippi County), said the organization was supportive of passage, though there were several areas that leave voids in the traditional farm safety net.

“This is far from a perfect bill, but we do welcome the certainty it brings to farmers and ranchers,” Veach said Wednesday from the organization’s winter commodity meetings. “Having a five-year program, as opposed to year-by-year or ad-hoc programs, was imperative, particularly as we go about making planting and livestock decisions for the coming year.”

Veach noted the 2014 Farm Bill includes more than $7 billion for livestock producers through conservation (EQIP, etc.), disaster and grazing programs.

The 2014 Farm Bill includes the expansion of crop-insurance programs and eliminates direct payments. Crop-insurance programs kick in when weather significantly impacts crop yields.

“Direct payments were crucial for mid-south farmers, particularly those who rely heavily on irrigation to help ensure they make a crop,” said Veach. “We will work with USDA’s Risk Management Agency to develop a crop-insurance program that will work for irrigated crops. As it stands now, the expansion of crop-insurance doesn’t help the majority of mid-south row-crop farmers. The proposed reference prices in this farm bill won’t replace the safety net that direct payments provided, but at least it will help.”

Veach was pleased that the legislation maintained the historic connection between commodity and nutrition programs and preserves the farm bill’s permanent law tenants.

“We believe that is a natural, and obvious, connection, where the production of food and the feeding of those in need are appropriately connected,” Veach said.

“Farmers make a living adapting to changes, whether it is market forces, improvements in technology or weather. We will have to adjust to this new farm bill, for sure. But I believe in the resourcefulness of our farmers.”