DATE=5/10/2002

TYPE=AGRICULTURE TODAY

NUMBER=7-36285

TITLE=THE NEW FARM BILL: PROS AND CONS

BYLINE=ROB SIVAK

TELEPHONE=202-619-2023

DATELINE=WASHINGTON

EDITOR=NANCY SMART

CONTENT=

INTRO: After more than a year of public hearings and months of debate, the U-S Congress has enacted a sweeping overhaul of American food and agriculture programs. President Bush is expected to sign it into law.

The 2002 Farm Bill boosts federal spending on farm programs by more than 80 billion dollars over the next ten years - a jump of 80 percent over current spending. The legislation also marks a sharp reversal in U-S farm policy - a reversal that's winning praise from major agribusiness groups. But environmental activists and some of America's most important trading partners are attacking the new bill as a cave-in to special interests and election-year politics. VOA's Rob Sivak has more:

AUDIO: SFX: SEN CLERK READS VOTE TALLY/STRIKES GAVEL :07

"The ayes are 64, the nays are 35. The Conference Report is agreed to." (GAVEL STRIKE)

TEXT: With that decisive vote in the U-S Senate Wednesday, the Congress gave its final approval to the 2002 Farm Bill. Supporters of the bill were led by Democrat Tom Harkin of Iowa, a Midwestern state that is home to some of the nation's biggest maize, soybean, and hog operations. Senator Harkin says the new Farm Bill makes a welcome turn away from the current Freedom to Farm law, enacted by a Republican-led Congress in 1996, by restoring and expanding a system of federal crop subsidies and price supports that the old farm bill had scrapped. Speaking before Wednesday's vote, Senator Harkin said that despite its flaws, the new farm bill will provide a needed boost for rural America:

AUDIO: CUT TWO - HARKIN :40

"In every aspect -- for commodities, for nutrition, for conservation, for rural development -- when you look at it in its broad aspects, this is a bill worthy of support. This bill restores sound farm income protection. It offers predictability and stability to agricultural producers, their suppliers and lenders. It greatly strengthens our commitment to conservation, and invests in jobs, economic growth, and the overall quality of life in rural communities. And for the first time ever, we have an energy title in this farm bill to boost farm based renewable energy."

TEXT: But critics point out that the bill mostly helps giant corporate farms, providing them with huge production-based subsidies and doing little to help struggling small farmers. And the farm bill's price tag - 190 billion dollars over the next ten years - has sparked strong opposition from fiscally conservative Republicans. Senator Richard Lugar, a maize farmer from the midwestern state of Indiana, suggests that some of his colleagues have been eager to shower their constituents with federal benefits to win votes in an election year. But he warns that the generous new price supports will encourage excess production and ultimately, depress prices. Worse, says Senator Lugar, the new farm bill commits the government to spending money it doesn't have:

AUDIO: CUT THREE - LUGAR :40

"Whatever may be the desire for some certainty that a farmer can get $2.60 per bushel for corn, the certainty for all other Americans is that we are going to have a larger deficit, that the prospects for solving social security and medicare are set back, and that we as trustees for the American people either do not understand that farm bills cannot be discussed in a vacuum, divorced from the rest of the world, or that we are so deliberate about our intent to spend this money, come hell or high water, that we plunge ahead."

TEXT: It isn't only fiscal conservatives who think the Farm Bill is a bad idea. The new subsidies have angered many of America's foreign trade competitors, who -- like Senator Lugar -- fear that increased U-S crop production will further depress world prices. The European Union - which doles out more than 60 billion dollars a year to its own farmers -- warns that it may challenge the new U-S farm subsidies before the World Trade Organization. And leading U-S environmental groups say most of the progressive reforms contained in earlier drafts of the farm bill - such as lower limits on payments to bigger, more polluting farms -were dropped in the final measure. And activists say the sizeable boost in conservation money in the bill can't make up for the environmental damage they predict will occur, as the nation's biggest farms ramp up production in response to the new subsidies.

But mainstream agribusiness groups, including the five million member American Farm Bureau Federation, say the new law has something for everyone in the U-S agricultural community. And Mary Kay Thatcher, the Farm Bureau's senior policy analyst, says the bill's benefits extend beyond the farm:

AUDIO: CUT FOUR - THATCHER :35

"This farm bill is good for farmers, but it's also good for rural communities, it's good for the environmentalists, it's got a lot of new conservation funding in there to help farmers do even better conservation practices, and it's good for the consumers. We might as well admit it, we have a cheap food policy in this country. We spend less than ten percent of our disposable income on food and that is what consumers like. And this bill will ensure us that we can continue to be competitive in producing those products at home. But it's good for a much broader range of folks than just farmers and ranchers."

TEXT: Supporters and critics say the debate over U-S farm policy doesn't end with passage of the 2002 farm bill. Both sides say they'll continue efforts to fine-tune the law. And both sides say even with the new Farm Bill, a tightening federal budget and the sometimes vicious whims of Nature mean the U-S farm economy will probably stay high on the Congressional agenda. (SIGNED)

Neb/rms/nes