Farm Bill Serves as Poster Child for Congressional Dysfunction

None

National Journal
Norm Ornstein
Dec. 11, 2013, 3:52 p.m.

The news that there will be no farm bill this year, after three fu­tile years of em­bar­rass­ing set­backs and tur­moil, made me re­flect on the lar­ger is­sues. Ex­hib­it A is the farm bill, the poster child for the state of dys­func­tion in Con­gress and Amer­ic­an polit­ics.

In 1969-70, my first year in Wash­ing­ton, George McGov­ern mem­or­ably took to the Sen­ate floor to re­flect on his col­leagues’ culp­ab­il­ity in the Vi­et­nam War. He said, “The walls of this cham­ber reek with blood,” draw­ing a col­lect­ive gasp from those on the floor and in the gal­ler­ies. You wer­en’t sup­posed to talk that way in the Sen­ate. A week or so later, Bob Dole, then a fresh­man sen­at­or, took to the floor and ripped the bark off of McGov­ern for his apostasy.

But some­time later in the year, I saw McGov­ern and Dole walk­ing arm in arm in the Old Sen­ate Of­fice Build­ing. They forged a re­la­tion­ship that blos­somed in­to a 40-year-plus friend­ship, based on their com­mon in­terest in deal­ing with food is­sues. Dole, rep­res­ent­ing his Kan­sas farm­ers, em­braced the food-stamp pro­gram on their be­half, a way to deal with farm sur­pluses. McGov­ern, with a deep pas­sion to al­le­vi­ate hun­ger in Amer­ica, em­braced a sys­tem of price sup­ports that gave money to ag­ribusi­nesses for not plant­ing crops as a way to fund the food-stamp pro­gram.

Their al­li­ance re­flec­ted a more than five-dec­ade re­la­tion­ship between rur­al and urb­an law­makers that made farm bills pos­sible, a kind of mod­el for how Con­gress, through com­prom­ises and trade-offs, can find ma­jor­it­ies for le­gis­la­tion that primar­ily be­ne­fits minor­it­ies or nar­row­er in­terests. To be sure, the al­li­ance was at best im­per­fect; the farm price sup­port sys­tem was not very smart pub­lic policy. But on bal­ance, the co­ali­tion worked, giv­en the lar­ger polit­ics that sur­roun­ded both ag­ri­cul­ture and food stamps, provid­ing stable and ample food sup­plies while adding to the safety net for the poorest among us.

In mid-2012, there were “green shoots” in the Sen­ate over a re­new­al of the five-year au­thor­iz­a­tion of the farm bill due to ex­pire at the end of this year. Through adroit man­euvers, Ag­ri­cul­ture Com­mit­tee Chair­wo­man Debbie Stabenow, work­ing with Pat Roberts and oth­er Demo­crats and Re­pub­lic­ans, put to­geth­er a pack­age that got over­whelm­ing, broad sup­port in the Sen­ate. It looked like a mod­el of bi­par­tis­an co­oper­a­tion, provid­ing a lower budget and a mod­est but real set of re­forms in the an­ti­quated price-sup­port sys­tem that dis­com­fited a lot of farm-state so­lons. It also con­tained some cuts in food stamps, a bow to con­ser­vat­ives who wanted to re­duce spend­ing but a loss for lib­er­als. The deal man­aged to win 90 votes.

Politico‘s Dav­id Ro­gers, who has covered the farm-bill dy­nam­ics me­tic­u­lously, quoted Rep. Col­lin Peterson, D-Minn., the rank­ing mem­ber of the House Ag­ri­cul­ture Com­mit­tee, about the tea-party-dom­in­ated House, “If this gets through the Sen­ate, the dy­nam­ics change and I don’t think they can stop it.”

Wrong. Des­pite fa­cing the greatest drought since the Great De­pres­sion and broad and deep sup­port for a bill in the Sen­ate, the House man­aged to reach new depths of dys­func­tion­al em­bar­rass­ment when Ma­jor­ity Lead­er Eric Can­tor single­han­dedly blew up a del­ic­ate com­prom­ise forged by House Ag­ri­cul­ture Com­mit­tee Chair­man Frank Lu­cas and rank­ing mem­ber Col­lin Peterson. Can­tor de­cided to get be­hind a pro­vi­sion on the House floor aimed at cut­ting food stamps dra­mat­ic­ally over 10 years; in­sti­tuted pun­it­ive new work re­quire­ments; gave states fin­an­cial in­cent­ive to drop eli­gible people from the food-stamp rolls; and took away states’ flex­ib­il­ity over waivers of job-train­ing pro­vi­sions in the pro­gram in the face of con­tinu­ing high un­em­ploy­ment. As Ro­gers de­tailed, 62 House Re­pub­lic­ans who voted for the amend­ment (which ali­en­ated a slew of mod­er­ates) then voted against the bill, killing it on the floor. Nine of the 62 were com­mit­tee chairs who took on their fel­low chair­man Lu­cas, show­ing that the reg­u­lar or­der of de­lib­er­a­tion in com­mit­tees, and a ba­sic de­fer­ence to the del­ic­ate, bi­par­tis­an com­prom­ises worked out there, had dis­ap­peared in the House.

Sub­sequently, Can­tor took the nu­tri­tion com­pon­ent and, ig­nor­ing the com­mit­tee pro­cess, jammed through a plan to double down on food-stamp cuts, slash­ing $40 bil­lion over 10 years, on a 217-210 vote that in­volved no com­mit­tee markup and no amend­ments al­lowed on the House floor.

To be sure, Can­tor’s ac­tions were not just based on his own views. A slew of House Re­pub­lic­ans were — and still are — de­term­ined to blow up the food-stamp pro­gram, trans­form­ing it rad­ic­ally while cut­ting it deeply, un­deterred by the high level of hun­ger in Amer­ica and stub­bornly high un­em­ploy­ment, and un­fazed by the fact that this de­mand has it­self blown up any abil­ity to get a bill en­acted.

After all the tur­moil, we fi­nally saw a House/Sen­ate con­fer­ence com­mit­tee con­vene; it has worked di­li­gently for weeks to try to beat the year-end dead­line and fi­nally get a new law. The con­fer­ence has not been easy; be­sides dif­fer­ences over food stamps and oth­er nu­tri­tion pro­grams, the ef­fort to cut farm as­sist­ance and re­form the price-sup­port sys­tem has led to in­fight­ing among and between dif­fer­ent com­mod­ity groups, fray­ing tra­di­tion­al al­li­ances with more ten­sion as time has passed without a deal. Des­pite the prob­lems, all the groups in­volved, in­clud­ing farm pro­du­cers and nu­tri­tion ad­voc­ates, want a bill to emerge.

Tues­day, it be­came clear that the con­fer­ence had failed, put­ting off the day of reck­on­ing un­til at least the end of Janu­ary — pre­sum­ably with an ex­ten­sion in the cur­rent law to pre­vent milk from bal­loon­ing to $7 a gal­lon as a New Year’s present for Amer­ic­ans.

But even if the con­fer­ees find the elu­sive com­prom­ise, it may well fail in the House — los­ing Demo­crats be­cause it will cut food stamps too much and Re­pub­lic­ans be­cause any­thing short of the $40 bil­lion cut will not be enough. The com­prom­ise may also lose the sup­port of some rur­al law­makers who be­lieve that their com­mod­it­ies have been shaf­ted com­pared with oth­ers.

The same day the farm con­fer­ence came a crop­per, we got a mini budget deal, cre­at­ing a brief feel-good mo­ment, a sense that maybe com­prom­ise is still pos­sible. But with Ed Meese, Freedom­Works, and Her­it­age Ac­ton lead­ing an ef­fort on the right to scuttle the budget deal, it has its own chal­lenges. The farm bill may have been over­shad­owed by spend­ing bills, Obama­care, and oth­er high­er-pro­file con­tro­ver­sies, but it tells us way too much about the do-nothingest Con­gress in our life­time.

What We're Following See More »
‘PULLING A TRUMP’
GOP Budget Chiefs Won’t Invite Administration to Testify
2 days ago
THE DETAILS

The administration will release its 2017 budget blueprint tomorrow, but the House and Senate budget committees won’t be inviting anyone from the White House to come talk about it. “The chairmen of the House and Senate Budget committees released a joint statement saying it simply wasn’t worth their time” to hear from OMB Director Shaun Donovan. Accusing the members of pulling a “Donald Trump,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said the move “raises some questions about how confident they are about the kinds of arguments that they could make.”

Source:
A DARK CLOUD OVER TRUMP?
Snowstorm Could Impact Primary Turnout
1 days ago
THE LATEST

A snowstorm is supposed to hit New Hampshire today and “linger into Primary Tuesday.” GOP consultant Ron Kaufman said lower turnout should help candidates who have spent a lot of time in the state tending to retail politicking. Donald Trump “has acknowledged that he needs to step up his ground-game, and a heavy snowfall could depress his figures relative to more organized candidates.”

Source:
IN CASE OF EMERGENCY
A Shake-Up in the Offing in the Clinton Camp?
1 days ago
THE DETAILS

Anticipating a primary loss in New Hampshire on Tuesday, Hillary and Bill Clinton “are considering staffing and strategy changes” to their campaign. Sources tell Politico that the Clintons are likely to layer over top officials with experienced talent, rather than fire their staff en masse.

Source:
THE LAST ROUND OF NEW HAMPSHIRE POLLS
Trump Is Still Ahead, but Who’s in Second?
1 days ago
THE LATEST

We may not be talking about New Hampshire primary polls for another three-and-a-half years, so here goes:

  • American Research Group’s tracking poll has Donald Trump in the lead with 30% support, followed by Marco Rubio and John Kasich tying for second place at 16%. On the Democratic side, Bernie Sanders leads Hillary Clinton 53%-41%.
  • The 7 News/UMass Lowell tracking poll has Trump way out front with 34%, followed by Rubio and Ted Cruz with 13% apiece. Among the Democrats, Sanders is in front 56%-40%.
  • A Gravis poll puts Trump ahead with 28%, followed by Kasich with 17% and Rubio with 15%.
IT’S ALL ABOUT SECOND PLACE
CNN Calls the Primary for Sanders and Trump
14 hours ago
THE LATEST

Well that didn’t take long. CNN has already declared Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump the winners of the New Hampshire primary, leaving the rest of the candidates to fight for the scraps. Five minutes later, the Associated Press echoed CNN’s call.

Source:
×