Senate Farm Bill Ready for Floor Consideration

The Senate intends to bring the 2007 Farm Bill to the floor for debate this week, finally moving forward on the largest piece of agricultural legislation in the country. Although the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee just passed the bill through carefully-crafted compromises, the bill’s authors are worried about getting bogged down in an onslaught of amendments once the bill reaches the floor. Nutrition stakeholders should be watching both the funding for the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program (FFVP) expansion and the proposed amendment regarding national nutrition standards for competitive food.

The Senate bill contains an expansion for the FFVP into all fifty states, with each receiving 1% of the available funding, with additional funds allocated based on a state’s proportion of students available for free or reduced prince lunches. The bill calls for $225 million for fiscal year 2008, contingent on available funds. This is a considerable increase from the $70 million authorized in the House’s version of the bill, though the House bill does not make their spending level contingent on available funds. The final decision on funding falls to appropriators as each fiscal year begins, but the authorized levels at least give lawmakers a mark to aim for.

FFVP advocates are worried about the authorized funding levels currently in the Senate proposal. A number of agricultural and farmer advocacy groups are all lobbying members of Congress for additional funding for a variety of programs. The extra $155 million above the House’s version may prove a desirable target for shifting funding priorities. Most notably, the Farm Bureau, the nation’s largest farming advocacy group, is pushing for additional funding for various farm subsidies, and have already voiced their opposition to Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Tom Harkin’s (D-IA) proposal of using certain subsidy cuts to fund other priorities, such as nutrition. Harkin and his supporters may have a long road ahead of them to ensure that $225 million funding level remains in the final Senate version of the Farm Bill.

Sen. Harkin is also planning to bring an amendment to the floor that would call for national nutrition standards for food sold outside of cafeterias on public school grounds. In previous years, food and snack companies have lobbied against any such standards, but recently they have offered passive resistance, or even support in certain cases, regarding Harkin’s proposal. The proposal comes from S. 771, a bill which Harkin introduced earlier this year. As the bill currently stands, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is directed to implement the new standards through regulations and guidance. There is no definite timeline for implementation. The current language also places no restrictions on states from enacting their own standards that go beyond those regulated through the USDA.

Harkin and certain nutrition coalitions are currently working on an alternative proposal to the original bill language, which would implement the new standards through its own legislative language, rather than waiting for USDA rulemaking. However, this new negotiated language my bind states to strictly adhere to the national standards, not allowing states the flexibility to move beyond the federal levels. At the time of publication, Harkin had yet to decide which language he would bring to the Senate floor.

Regardless of how Harkin moves forward with his own amendments, there is still no guarantee that the Senate will be successful in moving the bill through the floor debate. Outside of nutrition, there are a number of controversial provisions involving farm subsidies, commodity programs, and other issues that may keep the majority from securing the sixty votes necessary to bring the bill to a final vote. If the Senate successfully passes the bill, there is no timeline set for when the two chambers will conference on the bill. The uncertainty, along with the various appropriations issues still facing Congress point towards a possible failure to pass the Farm Bill before Congress adjourns at the end of the year.

Author: SAS