Search

Local News

Thune says House farm bill still flawed

Previous Next
Previous Page
Share
Print
Email

More than 40 agricultural organizations have signed a letter critical of the most recent U.S. House farm bill proposal, according to Sen. John Thune, R-S.D.,

"I applaud these groups for speaking up on behalf of the family farmers and ranchers they represent," Thune said in a news release. "The latest House farm bill proposal is flawed and would not be good for South Dakota."

Ag groups including the American Farm Bureau Federation, National Farmers Union, National Corn Growers Association, National Association of Wheat Growers, the American Soybean Association and the American Agriculture Movement have signed the letter criticizing the House proposal.

The House proposal was developed by House Ag Committee Chairman Collin Peterson, D-Minn., after negotiations with the Bush administration. President Bush has threatened to veto the earlier farm bill versions passed by both the House and Senate, saying they would cost too much money.

Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, D-S.D., has defended the new, scaled-down House proposal as a realistic starting point to get a farm bill that Bush will sign.

But Thune argues that the House proposal would hurt South Dakota agriculture for the following reasons:

* It takes away all mandatory funding for the permanent disaster program in the Senate-passed farm bill.

* It includes an ineffective crop-revenue program based on national yields, which likely would not benefit South Dakota.

* It eliminates direct payments in the ninth year, 2016.

* It negates Thune's amendment keeping the Loan Deficiency Payment safety net intact.

* It cuts the Conservation Reserve Program acreage cap without providing additional tools, such as making rental rates more competitive, to keep CRP a viable tool for farmers who wish to use it to exercise sound land stewardship.

"The Senate Farm Bill passed with an overwhelming bipartisan and veto-proof majority (79-14), and it should be the vehicle used as the basis for a conference report that could be signed by the president," Thune said.

Thune has criticized House leadership for not naming members to a House-Senate conference committee that will be required to resolve differences between the two bills before a final measure is submitted to the president. The Senate has named its conferees.

Herseth Sandlin said the new House proposal has gotten the Senate "off the dime" to negotiate a bill that the president will sign.

Rapid Reply

Send us your Rapid Reply

(optional)
   
The preceeding are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the views of the Rapid City Journal or Lee Enterprises.

The opinions above are from readers of rapidcityjournal.com and in no way represent the views of the Rapid City Journal or Lee Enterprises.

Rapidcityjournal.com provides this community forum for readers to exchange ideas and opinions on the news of the day. Passionate views, pointed criticism and critical thinking are welcome. Name-calling, crude language and personal abuse are not welcome. Moderators will monitor comments with an eye toward maintaining a high level of civility in this forum. Our comment policy explains the rules of the road for registered commenters.

If you don't see your comment, perhaps...

  • you called someone an idiot, a racist, a dope, a moron, etc. Please, no name-calling or profanity (or veiled profanity -- #$%^&*).
  • you rambled, failed to stay on topic or exhibited troll-like behavior intended to hijack the discussion at hand.
  • YOU SHOUTED YOUR COMMENT IN ALL CAPS. This is hard to read and annoys readers.
  • you named a business or identified a business in a way good or bad. Contact the business directly with your customer service concerns or your praise – they’ll likely appreciate your feedback.
  • you believe the newspaper's coverage is unfair. It would be better to write Jerry Steinley at jerry.steinley@rapidcityjournal.com or call him at 394-8427. This is a forum for community discussion, not for media criticism. We'd rather address your concerns directly.
  • you included an e-mail address or phone number, pretended to be someone you aren't or offered a comment that makes no sense.
  • you accused someone of a crime or assigned guilt or punishment to someone suspected of a crime.
  • your comment is in really poor taste.

Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

Top Jobs

Featured Dealers

Newspaper Ads

RCJ Extras

Advertisement