|
A quirk
in farm policy threatens the Midwest vegetable industry
Send a link to a friend
[JUNE
3, 2004]
ELWOOD,
Ind. -- An unintended consequence of the 2002 Farm Bill jeopardizes
the livelihood of many Midwestern fruit and vegetable farmers and
processors. In fact, a provision in the Farm Bill may threaten the
long-term viability of the entire Midwestern fruit and vegetable
industry.
|
|
Much of the land used for fruit and
vegetable production in the Midwest is leased. The Farm Bill
discourages landlords from allowing fruit and vegetable production
on their land. Because fruit and vegetables are not considered
"program crops," they are ineligible for federal farm payments.
Thus, land that has a proven program crop history receives
considerable federal subsidies today, whereas land with predominant
fruit and vegetable history does not.
Under current law and historical
practice, if future landlords allow fruit or vegetable production on
their land, they would lose eligibility for program payments if
Congress permits another base update in the future.
In congressional testimony, Glen Abbett,
a vegetable producer in Porter County, Ind., said: "I am struggling
to get rented ground for growing my processed tomatoes. In the
Midwest, most family farms rely on rented acres to grow their crops.
I have found that landlords who I have approached -- and rationally
so -- say that future base recalculations will result in loss of
base acres on their farm if they rent it to me for processed tomato
production. This means that my ability to rotate crops and to
fulfill my traditional contract obligation to Red Gold is severely
restricted."
Several lawmakers recognize the
seriousness of this problem and are seeking to remove these
detrimental provisions from the Farm Bill. Indiana congressman Mike
Pence and Wisconsin congresswoman Tammy Baldwin have introduced
House Resolution 2181, known as the Farming Flexibility Act. This
legislation is garnering strong support within the Midwestern
agriculture community and has 23 bipartisan cosponsors in the House
of Representatives. Indiana Sen. Richard Lugar has introduced the
companion Senate Bill 2141 with four Senate co-sponsors at this
time.
[to
top of second column in this article]
|
The Farming Flexibility Act would allow
farmers to opt out of the Farm Bill's soybean program annually. This
would enable farmers to take soybean acres out of the farm program
each spring and plant them to fruits and vegetables without penalty.
By doing so, they would become ineligible for farm payments on that
land for that year. The payment reduction is on an acre-for-acre
basis.
The effort to rectify the Farm Bill's
detrimental effects is not without opposition. Farmers who produce
fresh fruit and vegetables, often in states like California and
Florida, have objected to the Farming Flexibility Act out of concern
that increased production in the Midwest would have a negative
impact on their market. This is a misconception. The Farming
Flexibility Act pertains only to fruits and vegetables that are
grown for processing, not for fresh produce. These two commodities
do not directly compete against one another.
Adoption of this provision would
actually save American taxpayers millions of dollars. The Farming
Flexibility Act would provide practical means for Midwest farmers to
forego receiving farm program payments in order to produce fruits or
vegetables for processing. The Congressional Budget Office has
estimated that this reduction in farm program payments would save
the federal treasury $10 million through fiscal 2007.
[News release
from the Canned-Frozen Food
and Grower Coalition]
 |
