|
| | ||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| HOME | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SUBSCRIBE | NEWSSTAND LOCATIONS | ||||
| ||||
|
|
| | |
Renewable energy large part of future farm bill Tuesday, December 5, 2006
Agri News staff writer
NORTH MANKATO, Minn. -- Renewable energy is going to play a large part in the 2007 farm bill, along with keeping the safety net from the 2002 farm bill.
"It's a great opportunity in the state," said Curt Watson, president of the Minnesota Corn Growers Association.
Watson was one of three keynote panel members at last week's 24th annual Rural Legislative Forum at South Central College.
Minnesota has 16 ethanol plants and three biodiesel plants. The call for energy independence is becoming a trend in Washington, D.C.
Tony Eberhard, legislative assistant for Sen. Norm Coleman, said support exists for a strong energy title in the farm bill, but that Coleman wants to make sure financial support for that doesn't come out of Title 1.
"I think the farming industry is going to continue to play a big role," Eberhard said. The bill will need bipartisan regional collaboration to obtain the goals producers want, he said.
"It takes all of us in the agriculture family to carry these votes," Watson said of getting all farming states to agree on a farm bill. Watson said Minnesota doesn't have many representatives and can't pass a farm bill on its own.
Conservation is "a key part of the new farm bill," he said.
Watson stressed the importance of producers getting involved in the process of talking about the environment.
Watson also said the bill should have funds dedicated to research, including continued development in cellulosic ethanol and other biomass products.
The Minnesota Corn Growers Association remains neutral on the national proposal because of unanswered questions, but Watson said the National Corn Growers Association proposal includes a core of four programs.
It calls for the direct payments to continue to producers, changing the non-recourse loan program to a recourse loan program, creating a base revenue protection program and modification of counter-cyclical payment program into a revenue counter-cyclical program.
"These two areas will dramatically change how crop insurance is approached," Watson said of the last two proposed programs. It also will be a regional issue because crop insurance across the nation is viewed differently by region because of different risks, he said.
"The advantage with this program is É that you have an ongoing disaster (safety net)," Watson said. It addresses the years that individuals have disasters without a widespread disaster in their regions.
John Monson, vice president of rural markets with AgStar and former state Farm Service Agency director, said farm bills are there to create stability in times of ups and downs.
"If it was a shock absorber, it wasn't intended to be an economic engine," Monson said, noting that people don't always remember that the farm bill isn't meant to create jobs.
"If you want safe, abundant and affordable food, this is the price you pay," he said.
Monson said he predicts the farm bill will get less money because of federal budget concerns, conservation program lands might change to include working lands and renewable fuels may get incentives.
Commodity programs are up for debate, he said.
Monson said he's heard from many Minnesota producers and they want current core provisions extended, to talk about a revenue assurance program, disaster protection and potential for a Conservation Reserve Program row-crop provision.
He said Minnesota farmers need the payment limitation rules simplified, MILC extended, incentives for crops for renewable fuels, continuation of the sugar program and crop insurance options. |
| | |
| |
Copyright 2008 Agri News
All Rights Reserved
