Every week, 2,000 - 3,000 Second District residents write to me about the issues pending before Congress, and I work hard to respond to each person as promptly and thoughtfully as possible.  On this "Letter of the Week" blog, I highlight constituent letters that are of general interest.  If you'd like to share your own views, please feel free to e-mail me at any time!

Dear Nancy,

I write as a person of faith to ask your support for important improvements in the Farm Bill conference committee bill.

Please end farm subsidies to the rich, the land owners who don't grow, and reform disaster payments to ensure that ONLY those who need them, will receive it.

I am appalled that my taxes are being used to give incentives for the non-use of our country's land.  Right now, many thousands of landowners are being paid to not grow.  Yet, 35 million Americans live in households that struggle to put food on the table.  And, worldwide grain prices are soaring causing famines and strife.

Imposing limits (to end payments to any farmer who earns more than $250,000 a year) and to limit commodity subsidy payments, overall, would be one way to level the playing field among farmers and provide the needed funds to invest in these important programs.

I believe that we can use U.S. farm policy to lift up good, sustainable farm practices while also ensuring needed resources to feed the hungry, at home and abroad, protect endangered land from degradation, and strengthen rural communities.

I urge you to support a final farm bill with these needed changes.

Thank you for your service. I look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Matthew from Topeka, KS

Dear Matthew,

Thank you for contacting me about the 2007-2008 Food and Farm Bill. Please accept my apology for a delay in my response. My staff and I receive hundreds of letters a day, and are working hard to address each constituent’s concerns in a timely manner.

As you know, the Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008 (H.R. 2419), otherwise known as the Food and Farm Bill, passed 316-108 in the House and 82-13 in the Senate and has been enacted into law, with the exception of the bill’s trade title. The trade title was included in the conference report passed by Congress, but was inadvertently left out of the official copy of the Food and Farm Bill that the President vetoed. This was a mistake; I wouldn’t want to be the clerk who made that mistake! The House has taken action to correct the error that resulted in the unintentional omission of the trade title from the enrolled farm bill. We will work to ensure that the entire farm bill is enacted into law swiftly. Most of the farm bill is now law and the Administration can begin implementing the new programs and policies immediately.

I am pleased to report that the Food and Farm Bill makes important investments in conservation, nutrition and renewable energy while maintaining a strong safety net for America ’s farmers and ranchers, which is why a broad, bipartisan coalition voted overwhelmingly to pass this bill.

No one got everything they wanted in this bill. I believe Congress struck the best compromise that meets our pressing needs. Whether that be people struggling with high food prices or supporting America’s farmers and ranchers as they continue to provide a safe, abundant, homegrown supply of food and fiber. Our bill continues the goal of protecting our natural resources and developing new sources of renewable energy.

Since I arrived in Congress, there has been a beehive of activity around this bill. Every producer group has been in my office several times. I also had many farmers and ranchers come to the offices in D.C. and in Topeka to talk with me and my staff about the Farm Bill and issues affecting farmers and ranchers in the Second District of Kansas.

From the beginning, I heard two main messages from these visits. First, the current bill works pretty well, but it tends to pay farmers when they don’t need it and not pay when they really do. Second, farmers understood that substantially fewer dollars were going to be available for subsidies. They understood that if not one word had been changed to the existing 2002 Farm Bill formula, crop subsides would have made up only 13% of total spending in the new Food and Farm Bill. This is because higher crop prices mean fewer subsidies.

There were also many people who called and came to my offices who are deeply concerned about nutrition, energy, conservation, the concentration of farmland and the concentration of large agribusiness in general. One of the main concerns I heard was about the Food Stamp program. Food Stamps had not been adjusted for a cost of living increase in nearly 30 years, and only allowed for an average of $1 per meal. That means only $21 per week for food. As a mother, I understand how hard it is to provide a nutritious meal for a family. This is especially difficult for those on a fixed income at a time of rising food prices, and providing only $1 per day is simply insufficient.

As you can imagine, a tremendous amount of work went into reaching a balance among these important priorities, which is why virtually every major farm organization urged me to support its passage. Some people were concerned that the direct payment program for farmers had been dramatically slashed. While the program has been cut in three of the next ten years, this represents only one-half of one percent cut in direct payment spending over the course of the bill’s lifespan. Again, compromises had to be made. This bill included compromises, but direct payments were certainly not slashed.

Some important highlights of the Food and Farm Bill include:

Energy

oThe bill makes important new investments in renewable energy research, development and production in rural America . This bill is very good for Kansas .

oProvides overall $1 billion in funding for renewable energy industry investments and research in new technologies and new feedstocks.

oProvides loan guarantees for biorefineries producing advanced biofuels.

oCreates the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP), providing $250 million in grants and loan guarantees for small businesses and agricultural producers to purchase renewable energy systems and make energy efficiency improvements.

oThe Food and Farm Bill also takes a critical step in transitioning biofuels beyond corn— by reducing the current tax credit for corn-based ethanol by six cents per gallon and creating a new tax credit to promote the production of cellulosic biofuels.

Commodities and Conservation

oProvides farmers participating in commodity programs with a choice between traditional price protection and new revenue-based coverage payments. This addresses the pay-when-it’s-needed problem.

oIncreases funding for conservation programs by $7.9 billion.

oExtends and makes significant new investments in popular conservation programs, including the Conservation Reserve Program, Wetlands Reserve Program, Environmental Quality Incentive Program, Farm and Ranchland Protection Program, and many others.

oRebalances loan rates and target prices among commodities, achieving greater regional equity.

oThis bill begins to end payments to farmers who don’t need the help, with the most significant reforms in over 30 years.  It reduces the cap for non-farm income by 80%, to $500,000, and puts in place the first-ever cap for farm income at $750,000 for fixed direct payments. The bill also closes a loophole (the three-entity rule) that for decades has allowed some to collect up to double the farm payment limits by collecting cash on more than one business. While this does not go as far as I would have liked, it is an important step forward and is drastically better than what is allowed under current law.

Nutrition - Fruits and Vegetables

oIncreases funding for nutrition programs by $10.36 billion.

oExpands the USDA Snack Program, which helps schools provide healthy snacks to students during after-school activities in all 50 states and continues the DOD Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, which provides a variety of fresh produce to schools.

oRaises and indexes the minimum standard deduction of food stamps and increases the minimum benefit for food stamp recipients, which is especially important for senior citizens in need.

oIndexes food stamp asset limits and excludes retirement and education accounts as assets, as well as lifts the dependent care cap, allowing participants to deduct the full cost of dependent care. It also excludes combat pay as income in determining food stamp eligibility.

Rural Development and Research

oI worked hard to include the New Era Rural Technology Program—an innovative community college initiative that will provide support, in the form of grants, for rural community colleges who are currently conducting classes in bioenergy. This network will allow schools to develop a technologically advanced network to share information—a kind of “best practices.”

oIncludes key provisions that invest in rural communities nationwide, including economic development programs and access to broadband telecommunication services.

oEstablishes a National Institute of Food and Agriculture to coordinate the programs and activities of USDA’s research agencies to minimize duplication and maximize coordination at all levels and creates a competitive grants program. Land-grant universities such as Kansas State think this change will make the offices more efficient and competitive.

Livestock

oThe Food and Farm Bill also included language that will finally allow full implementation of mandatory Country of Origin Labeling for meat. This legislation had been stalled for five years. This is a victory for consumers who overwhelmingly support the program. A compromise was reached with the beef industry to allow for reduced paperwork and for reasonable fines for minor mistakes.

oThe final bill also allows for the first time the interstate sale of meat inspected by state agencies. This is an important change for small producers and retailers in rural areas.

Not surprisingly, no one got everything they wanted. We’ve gotten many comments that some folks are very unhappy that caps on farm payments did not go far enough. Others thought we were spending too much on nutrition, or were upset with the two percent cut in direct payments for three of the ten years. I believe that we took a step in the right direction, and although we have more work to do, we laid a very strong foundation for agriculture and agribusiness.

Thank you again for contacting me. As your representative, I both need and value your perspective. I hope you will continue to keep in touch and let me know whenever I may be of future assistance.

 Sincerely,

Nancy Boyda
Member of Congress