Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002

Last updated
Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002
Great Seal of the United States (obverse).svg
Long titleAn Act to provide for the continuation of agricultural programs through fiscal year 2007, and for other purposes.
Nicknames
  • 2002 U.S. Farm Bill
  • Agricultural Act of 2001
Enacted bythe 107th United States Congress
EffectiveMay 13, 2002
Citations
Public law 107–171
Statutes at Large 116  Stat.   134 through 116 Stat. 540 (406 pages)
Legislative history

The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, also known as the 2002 Farm Bill , includes ten titles, addressing a great variety of issues related to agriculture, ecology, energy, trade, and nutrition. This act has been superseded by the 2007 U.S. Farm Bill.

Contents

The act directs approximately 16.5 billion dollars of funding toward agricultural subsidies each year. [1] These subsidies have a dramatic effect on the production of grains, oilseeds, and upland cotton. The specialized nature of the farm bill, as well as the size and timing of the bill, made its passage highly contentious.

Debated in the U.S. House of Representatives during the immediate aftermath of the September 11th attacks in 2001, the bill drew criticism from the White House and was nearly amended. The amendment, which failed by a close margin, was proposed by Rep. Ron Kind (D-WI) and would have shifted money away from grain subsidies to conservation measures. Public debate over the farm bill continued, and the Senate proposed sweeping amendments to the bill, leading to a series of meetings from February through April. As a result, the current farm bill was not passed until May 2002, a few weeks after the 1996 farm bill had already expired.

Contents

Summary

Provisions included:

Spending tables

The following is the subsidies by crop in 2004 in the United States.

CommodityUS Dollars (in Millions)Percentage of Total
Feed Grains2,84135.4
Wheat 1,17314.6
Rice 1,13014.1
Upland and ElS Cotton 1,42017.7
Tobacco 180.2
Dairy 2953.7
Soybeans and products6107.6
Minor Oilseeds 290.4
Peanuts 2593.2
Sugar 610.8
Honey 30.0
Wool and Mohair 120.1
Vegetable Oil products110.1
Other Crops1602.0
Total8,022100

Source USDA 2006 Fiscal Year Budget [2]

Titles

2002 Farm Bill Titles
Title I: Commodity Programs
Title II: Conservation
Title III: Trade
Title IV: Nutrition Programs
Title V: Credit
Title VI: Rural Development
Title VII Agricultural Research
Title VIII: Forestry
Title IX: Energy
Title X: Miscellaneous

Passage of the bill

"Let's push the pedal to the metal and try to get something done this year."

Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE) after 9/11 [3]

Proponents of subsidy expansion

Shifting subsidies to conservation

Subsidy caps

The largest difference between the House bill and its Senate counterpart was that the total amount of subsidies received by an individual farmer was capped by the Senate. Voicing concerns that "millionaire farmers" were reaping all the benefits of the farm bill legislation, a coalition of farm-state Senators pushed for these limits.

Opposing overproduction

After September 11, the farm bill was considered problematic for three reasons. First, it would neither receive nor deserve the careful attention necessary during the aftermath of the terrorist attacks. Second, its expenditures would consume the entire budget surplus, money that could be necessary for the American invasion of Afghanistan. Finally, Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman opposed the new farm bill. On September 19, her office issued a report criticizing traditional agricultural policies and calling for a shift from subsidies to conservation. According to her assessments, commodity subsidies would lead to overproduction and expensive land. [7] Her position was supported by various other groups and legislators.

Eggplant Caucus

With mounting opposition from both sides of the aisle, the fate of the farm bill was unclear in early 2002. Anxious farmers were frustrated by the gridlocked Senate, which had promised a quick resolution to the impending expiration of the previous bill. The emergence of the Eggplant Caucus, so named for a major New Jersey crop, was a major factor in the passage of the bill.

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) saw the opportunity for what he considered to be a more fair and equitable farm bill, and sought to unite over 20 senators from states with less powerful farming interests in support of subsidies for specialty crops and conservation. Active members of the Eggplant Caucus included Senators Hillary Clinton, Charles E. Schumer, and Harry Reid.

Timeline

The House of Representatives

September 10, 2001: $171 billion, 10-year farm bill (with $73 billion in new spending) reported out of committee, to be considered by the full House of Representatives.

September 11: September 11, 2001 attacks

September 19: Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman criticizes traditional farm policy, calls for a shift from commodity subsidies to conservation measures

September 27: Secretary Veneman criticizes the new bill as expensive in post-9/11 budget, claims it will lead to overproduction and expensive land.

October 2: Rep. Ron Kind (D-WI) introduces an amendment to shift $19 billion (approx. 15%) of commodity subsidies to conservation measures.

October 2: Rep. Larry Combest (R-TX), farm bill sponsor, threatens to pull the bill if it is amended.

October 3: Rep. Leonard Boswell (D-IA), proposes shifting $650 million to ethanol, amendment fails.

October 4: Kind amendment falls 26 votes short, fails.

October 5: 10 year, $73 billion farm bill increase passes in the House of Representatives.

Source: (H.R.2646)

The Senate

October 24: Senators Ben Nelson (D-NE) and Tom Harkin (D-IA) reject Sec. Veneman's request that the Senate delay consideration of the farm bill to focus on war effort.

December 14: Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and his Eggplant Caucus add dramatic increases in conservation spending ($21.3 billion). Co-sponsors Nelson and Harkin cut the House version in half (5 year life, $45 billion in new spending).

January 17, 2002: Spurred by a website listing absentee landlords of huge farms, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) supports an amendment to cap subsidy payments at $225,000. Amendment passes, shifting $1.3 billion to programs for beginning farmers.

February 14: Senate passes a 5-year version of the bill, with a $45 billion spending increase, by a 58:40 vote.

Source: (S. 1731)

Reconciling the bills

March 19: After two weeks of closed door negotiations, House agrees to $17 billion for conservation.

April 19: House passes non-binding resolution capping subsidies at $275,000 per farm (a $50,000 increase from the Senate bill).

April 26: Final version agreed upon: $360,000 subsidy cap, $17.1 billion for conservation. Expected to cost a total of $190 billion over ten years, an increase of over $90 billion (expires in September, 2007, six years later)

May 13: The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 [8] signed into law by President Bush. [9]

Criticism

Critics of U.S. agricultural policy claim that it may be in violation of World Trade Organization agreements, asserting that domestic subsidies may be considered to be a non-tariff trade barrier. Others, including the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies, the Union of Concerned Scientists, the Iowa Corn Growers Association, and Oxfam America, argue that subsidizing domestic grains leads to overproduction that is harmful both for farmers and for the general public. They claim that subsidies depress market prices while increasing land values. Many farmers do not own their land, and as a result, the subsidies they receive are capitalized into the value of the land they farm, and therefore provide little benefit to the farmers themselves.

Author Michael Pollan's book, The Omnivore's Dilemma suggests that corn subsidies in particular have led to the success of the feedlots or concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFOs) that he and journalist Eric Schlosser have blamed for the emergence of e. coli as a major health concern. Subsidized corn is so inexpensive that beef companies find it profitable to build large facilities to feed corn to their cattle. Cows do not normally live in enclosed areas or consume corn, so these CAFOs generate large amounts of waste and require antibiotics and other drugs to keep the animals healthy.

Others have criticised the balance of subsidies on nutritional grounds, saying that oilseed crops (used to make vegetable oil) and corn should be subsidized less (because it can be made into high fructose corn syrup) and that fruits and vegetables should be subsidized more. [10]

The act's expansion of food stamp eligibility to non-citizens has also been criticized. [11]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Agricultural Adjustment Act</span> United States federal law of the New Deal era

The Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA) was a United States federal law of the New Deal era designed to boost agricultural prices by reducing surpluses. The government bought livestock for slaughter and paid farmers subsidies not to plant on part of their land. The money for these subsidies was generated through an exclusive tax on companies which processed farm products. The Act created a new agency, the Agricultural Adjustment Administration, also called "AAA" (1933-1942), an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, to oversee the distribution of the subsidies. The Agriculture Marketing Act, which established the Federal Farm Board in 1929, was seen as an important precursor to this act. The AAA, along with other New Deal programs, represented the federal government's first substantial effort to address economic welfare in the United States.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States Department of Agriculture</span> Department of the US government

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) is an executive department of the United States federal government that aims to meet the needs of commercial farming and livestock food production, promotes agricultural trade and production, works to assure food safety, protects natural resources, fosters rural communities and works to end hunger in the United States and internationally. It is headed by the secretary of agriculture, who reports directly to the president of the United States and is a member of the president's Cabinet. The current secretary is Tom Vilsack, who has served since February 24, 2021.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Common Agricultural Policy</span> Agricultural policy of the European Union

The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is the agricultural policy of the European Commission. It implements a system of agricultural subsidies and other programmes. It was introduced in 1962 and has since then undergone several changes to reduce the EEC budget cost and consider rural development in its aims. It has however, been criticised on the grounds of its cost, its environmental, and humanitarian effects.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Agricultural subsidy</span> Governmental subsidy paid to farmers and agribusinesses

An agricultural subsidy is a government incentive paid to agribusinesses, agricultural organizations and farms to supplement their income, manage the supply of agricultural commodities, and influence the cost and supply of such commodities.

Crop insurance is insurance purchased by agricultural producers and subsidized by a country's government to protect against either the loss of their crops due to natural disasters, such as hail, drought, and floods ("crop-yield insurance", or the loss of revenue due to declines in the prices of agricultural commodities.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Charles Stenholm</span> American politician (1938–2023)

Charles Walter Stenholm was an American businessman and Democratic Party politician from a rural district of the state of Texas. After establishing himself as owner-operator of a large cotton farm, he entered politics and was elected to Congress in his first run for office. Stenholm was a Democratic Party member of the United States House of Representatives for 13 terms, representing Texas's 17th congressional district from 1979 to 2005.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">McNary–Haugen Farm Relief Bill</span> Unsuccessful American bill

The McNary–Haugen Farm Relief Act, which never became law, was a controversial plan in the 1920s to subsidize American agriculture by raising the domestic prices of five crops. The plan was for the government to buy each crop and then store it or export it at a loss. It was co-authored by Charles L. McNary (R-Oregon) and Gilbert N. Haugen (R-Iowa). Despite attempts in 1924, 1926, 1927, and 1931 to pass the bill, it was vetoed by President Calvin Coolidge, and not approved. It was supported by Secretary of Agriculture Henry Cantwell Wallace and Vice President Charles Dawes.

The Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) is a wholly owned United States government corporation that was created in 1933 to "stabilize, support, and protect farm income and prices". The CCC is authorized to buy, sell, lend, make payments, and engage in other activities for the purpose of increasing production, stabilizing prices, assuring adequate supplies, and facilitating the efficient marketing of agricultural commodities.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States farm bill</span> Primary agricultural and food policy instrument of the federal government

In the United States, the farm bill is comprehensive omnibus bill that is the primary agricultural and food policy instrument of the federal government. Congress typically passes a new farm bill every five to six years.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008</span> United States federal law

The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 was a $288 billion, five-year agricultural policy bill that was passed into law by the United States Congress on June 18, 2008. The bill was a continuation of the 2002 Farm Bill. It continues the United States' long history of agricultural subsidies as well as pursuing areas such as energy, conservation, nutrition, and rural development. Some specific initiatives in the bill include increases in Food Stamp benefits, increased support for the production of cellulosic ethanol, and money for the research of pests, diseases and other agricultural problems.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Food vs. fuel</span> Debate concerning diversion of food supply for biofuels production

Food versus fuel is the dilemma regarding the risk of diverting farmland or crops for biofuels production to the detriment of the food supply. The biofuel and food price debate involves wide-ranging views, and is a long-standing, controversial one in the literature. There is disagreement about the significance of the issue, what is causing it, and what can or should be done to remedy the situation. This complexity and uncertainty is due to the large number of impacts and feedback loops that can positively or negatively affect the price system. Moreover, the relative strengths of these positive and negative impacts vary in the short and long terms, and involve delayed effects. The academic side of the debate is also blurred by the use of different economic models and competing forms of statistical analysis.

The agricultural policy of the United States is composed primarily of the periodically renewed federal U.S. farm bills. The Farm Bills have a rich history which initially sought to provide income and price support to US farmers and prevent them from adverse global as well as local supply and demand shocks. This implied an elaborate subsidy program which supports domestic production by either direct payments or through price support measures. The former incentivizes farmers to grow certain crops which are eligible for such payments through environmentally conscientious practices of farming. The latter protects farmers from vagaries of price fluctuations by ensuring a minimum price and fulfilling their shortfalls in revenue upon a fall in price. Lately, there are other measures through which the government encourages crop insurance and pays part of the premium for such insurance against various unanticipated outcomes in agriculture.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990</span> United States federal law

The Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade (FACT) Act of 1990 — P.L. 101-624 was a 5-year omnibus farm bill that passed Congress and was signed into law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Food Security Act of 1985</span> United States federal law

The Food Security Act of 1985, a five-year omnibus farm bill, allowed lower commodity price, income supports, and established a dairy herd buyout program. This 1985 farm bill made changes in a variety of other USDA programs. Several enduring conservation programs were created, including sodbuster, swampbuster, and the Conservation Reserve Program.

Farm programs can be part of a concentrated effort to boost a country’s agricultural productivity in general or in specific sectors where they may have a comparative advantage. There are many different types of farm programs, with a variety of objectives and created with different economic mechanisms in mind. Some are meant to benefit farmers directly, while others seek to benefit consumers. They target food prices and quantity of food available on the market, as well as production and consumption of certain goods. Some are meant to benefit farmers directly, while others seek to benefit consumers. They target food prices and quantity of food available on the market, as well as production and consumption of certain goods.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Corn production in the United States</span> Production of maize crop in the United States

The production of corn plays a major role in the economy of the United States. The US is the largest corn producer in the world, with 96,000,000 acres (39,000,000 ha) of land reserved for corn production. Corn growth is dominated by west/north central Iowa and east central Illinois. Approximately 13% of its annual yield is exported.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Agricultural Act of 2014</span> United States federal law

The Agricultural Act of 2014 is an act of Congress that authorizes nutrition and agriculture programs in the United States for the years of 2014–2018. The bill authorizes $956 billion in spending over the next ten years.

Every year, the United States Congress is responsible for writing, passing, reconciling, and submitting to the President of the United States a series of appropriations bills that appropriate money to specific federal government departments, agencies, and programs for their use to operate in the subsequent fiscal year. The money provides funding for operations, personnel, equipment, and activities. In 2014, Congress was responsible for passing the appropriations bills that would fund the federal government in fiscal year 2015, which runs from October 1, 2014, to September 30, 2015.

The Hemp Farming Act of 2018 was a proposed law to remove hemp from Schedule I controlled substances and making it an ordinary agricultural commodity. Its provisions were incorporated in the 2018 United States farm bill that became law on December 20, 2018.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018</span> United States law

The 2018 farm bill or Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 is an enacted United States farm bill that reauthorized $867 billion for many expenditures approved in the prior farm bill. The bill was passed by the Senate and House on December 11 and 12, 2018, respectively. On December 20, 2018, it was signed into law by President Donald Trump.

References

  1. EconSouth (2003) Funding for Farmers
  2. "USDA Budget Summary 2006. Farm and Foreign Agriculture Services". Archived from the original on 2007-03-20.
  3. War effort may stymie farm bill Lawmakers disagree over timing of change in current ag policies., Omaha World Herald (Nebraska), September 27, 2001, Thursday, MIDLANDS EDITION, Pg. 1A;
  4. Proposed farm subsidy reforms bring praise, St. Petersburg Times (Florida), October 21, 2001, Sunday, 0 South Pinellas Edition, NATIONAL; WASHINGTON JOURNAL; Pg. 3A
  5. Rein in ag subsidies, Grassley says The Iowa senator, directly challenging Democrats on the mired farm bill, wants it amended to lower the annual cap in a bid to distribute funds more evenly., Omaha World Herald (Nebraska), January 17, 2002, Thursday, IOWA EDITION, Pg. 1B
  6. Senate Passes $44.9 Billion Farm Bill Limiting Subsidies, The New York Times, February 14, 2002 Thursday, Late Edition - Final, Section A; Column 1; National Desk; Pg. 26
  7. Agriculture Secretary Says Wartime Budget Leaves $171 Billion Farm Bill in Doubt, The New York Times, September 27, 2001 Thursday, Late Edition – Final, Section A; Column 1; National Desk; Pg. 14
  8. "Archived copy" (PDF). www.ers.usda.gov. Archived from the original (PDF) on 9 September 2015. Retrieved 13 January 2022.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  9. "President Signs Farm Bill". georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov.
  10. Lochhead, Carolyn (November 1, 2007). "Huge farm bill offers more of same for agribusiness / Draft before House fails to limit big crop subsidies". The San Francisco Chronicle.
  11. "2002 Farm Bill". Archived from the original on 2012-07-18. Retrieved 2012-07-20.