Our Long, National Farm-Bill Nightmare Is Over

After three years of congressional wrangling, the Senate has passed the bill.

Shoulder-high stalks are seen in a corn field July 5, 2006 in Prairie View, Illinois. Despite above average precipitation this spring, a devasting drought last summer that dragged into early 2006 continues to pose a threat to crops. Last year's corn crop was able to weather the drought thanks to saved-up soil moisture, a factor experts say is missing this year. Despite the concerns, this year's crop is well ahead of last year, according to experts.
National Journal
Elahe Izadi
Feb. 4, 2014, 10:01 a.m.

It took Con­gress three years to pass a bill that deals with the most fun­da­ment­ally uni­ver­sal as­pect of Amer­ic­an life: eat­ing.

The Sen­ate gave the fi­nal stamp of ap­prov­al on the five-year farm bill Tues­day, vot­ing 68-32. The 959-page, nearly $1 tril­lion bill is a massive over­haul of food policy, and cov­ers all sorts of food-re­lated items, such as elim­in­at­ing dir­ect pay­ments to farm­ers in lieu of crop in­sur­ance and cut­ting $8 bil­lion in food-stamp fund­ing.

The fi­nal bill is a product of on-again, off-again con­fer­ence-com­mit­tee ne­go­ti­ations. “It’s done!” Sen­ate Ag­ri­cul­ture Com­mit­tee Chair­wo­man Debbie Stabenow ex­claimed after its fi­nal pas­sage. Fel­low Demo­crat­ic Sen. Bar­bara Mikul­ski had giv­en her a high-five on the Sen­ate floor dur­ing the vote.

But not every­one was pleased with the fi­nal product.

Nine Sen­ate Demo­crats, in­clud­ing Kirsten Gil­librand and Eliza­beth War­ren, joined 23 Re­pub­lic­ans in op­pos­ing the bill.

Sen. Robert Ca­sey of Pennsylvania and oth­er Demo­crats cited cuts to the Sup­ple­ment­al Nu­tri­tion As­sist­ance Pro­gram, aka food stamps, in their de­cision to op­pose the bill.

“There’s a lot in the bill that I could cer­tainly sup­port…. Debbie Stabenow de­serves a lot of cred­it for drop­ping it down from where the House was,” Ca­sey said Tues­day. The House ver­sion of the bill called for $39 bil­lion in SNAP cuts. “But I just couldn’t at this time sup­port a cut of that di­men­sion.”

In­de­pend­ent Sen. Bernie Sanders also wor­ried about the food-stamp cuts but said he voted for the bill after re­ceiv­ing as­sur­ances from Ver­mont Gov. Peter Shum­lin that the state will be able “to pro­tect lower-in­come Ver­monters from these cuts” through state fund­ing. At the same time, Sanders said, he could not ig­nore the needs of Ver­mont’s well-known dairy in­dustry.

Passing farm bills has his­tor­ic­ally been an easy and bi­par­tis­an ef­fort, but pro­gress on push­ing this le­gis­la­tion through had been im­peded over dis­agree­ments on food-stamp, dairy, and sug­ar pro­grams, as well as crop in­sur­ance and oth­er as­pects of ag­ri­cul­tur­al policy. The pre­vi­ous farm bill had been tem­por­ar­ily ex­ten­ded dur­ing last year’s fisc­al-cliff deal, but ex­pired at the end of Septem­ber.

Such swift ap­prov­al in Con­gress this time around be­lies how tough of a go it’s been to reach pas­sage. The farm bill un­ex­pec­tedly failed in the House last sum­mer when con­ser­vat­ives voted against it be­cause cuts to the food-stamp pro­gram didn’t go deep enough, while a bloc of lib­er­als voted no be­cause the cuts went too far. This time around, the mo­mentum was there for pas­sage, bolstered by the pro­spect of an­oth­er “dairy cliff” and a spike in milk prices, as well as by the sup­port of a broad range of in­terest groups. 

As with so many as­pects of le­gis­lat­ing, it’s not pretty to watch how the saus­age is made (or in this case, how the corn is grown). Things were so rough that House Ag­ri­cul­ture Com­mit­tee Chair­man Frank Lu­cas had said that if he died dur­ing the fi­nal run-up to the bill, “I want a glass of milk carved on my tomb­stone — be­cause it’s what killed me.” 

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
These (Supposed) Iowa and NH Escorts Tell All
35 minutes ago
NATIONAL JOURNAL AFTER DARK

Before we get to the specifics of this exposé about escorts working the Iowa and New Hampshire primary crowds, let’s get three things out of the way: 1.) It’s from Cosmopolitan; 2.) most of the women quoted use fake (if colorful) names; and 3.) again, it’s from Cosmopolitan. That said, here’s what we learned:

  • Business was booming: one escort who says she typically gets two inquiries a weekend got 15 requests in the pre-primary weekend.
  • Their primary season clientele is a bit older than normal—”40s through mid-60s, compared with mostly twentysomething regulars” and “they’ve clearly done this before.”
  • They seemed more nervous than other clients, because “the stakes are higher when you’re working for a possible future president” but “all practiced impeccable manners.”
  • One escort “typically enjoy[s] the company of Democrats more, just because I feel like our views line up a lot more.”
Source:
STATE VS. FEDERAL
Restoring Some Sanity to Encryption
35 minutes ago
WHY WE CARE

No matter where you stand on mandating companies to include a backdoor in encryption technologies, it doesn’t make sense to allow that decision to be made on a state level. “The problem with state-level legislation of this nature is that it manages to be both wildly impractical and entirely unenforceable,” writes Brian Barrett at Wired. There is a solution to this problem. “California Congressman Ted Lieu has introduced the ‘Ensuring National Constitutional Rights for Your Private Telecommunications Act of 2016,’ which we’ll call ENCRYPT. It’s a short, straightforward bill with a simple aim: to preempt states from attempting to implement their own anti-encryption policies at a state level.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
What the Current Crop of Candidates Could Learn from JFK
35 minutes ago
WHY WE CARE

Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Hillary Is Running Against the Bill of 1992
35 minutes ago
WHY WE CARE

The New Covenant. The Third Way. The Democratic Leadership Council style. Call it what you will, but whatever centrist triangulation Bill Clinton embraced in 1992, Hillary Clinton wants no part of it in 2016. Writing for Bloomberg, Sasha Issenberg and Margaret Talev explore how Hillary’s campaign has “diverged pointedly” from what made Bill so successful: “For Hillary to survive, Clintonism had to die.” Bill’s positions in 1992—from capital punishment to free trade—“represented a carefully calibrated diversion from the liberal orthodoxy of the previous decade.” But in New Hampshire, Hillary “worked to juggle nostalgia for past Clinton primary campaigns in the state with the fact that the Bill of 1992 or the Hillary of 2008 would likely be a marginal figure within today’s Democratic politics.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Trevor Noah Needs to Find His Voice. And Fast.
1 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

At first, “it was pleasant” to see Trevor Noah “smiling away and deeply dimpling in the Stewart seat, the seat that had lately grown gray hairs,” writes The Atlantic‘s James Parker in assessing the new host of the once-indispensable Daily Show. But where Jon Stewart was a heavyweight, Noah is “a very able lightweight, [who] needs time too. But he won’t get any. As a culture, we’re not about to nurture this talent, to give it room to grow. Our patience was exhausted long ago, by some other guy. We’re going to pass judgment and move on. There’s a reason Simon Cowell is so rich. Impress us today or get thee hence. So it comes to this: It’s now or never, Trevor.”

Source:
×