|
|
| |
| Mon, Dec. 1, 2008 |  |
 |
|
||
| |
Senate rejects farm payment limit reduction Friday, Dec 14, 2007 By Aaron Sadler Stephens Washington Bureau WASHINGTON - The Senate on Thursday turned back an amendment to the Farm Bill that would have slashed crop subsidies - and, according to Arkansas lawmakers, threatened the livelihood of the state's farmers. A bid to cut farm payment limits by $110,000 annually fell four votes short of passage. Had it been approved, Sen. Mark Pryor, D-Ark., said he would have voted against the overall $286 billion legislation. Southern-state senators said farmers rely on government payments to offset high production costs of crops like rice and cotton. Reducing payment limits to $250,000 per married couple per year from $360,000 would force farmers out of business and force Americans to look to overseas for food and fiber, said Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark. "Farm families in Arkansas should not have to sacrifice their way of life and that's what this proposal would have done," Lincoln said. Farmers accrue so much debt to produce their crops that subsidies are a must, said Harvey Joe Sanner, a longtime farm activist from Des Arc. "Things are not rosy on the farm," he said Thursday. "If not for those farm payments, from Little Rock to Memphis would be a big ghost town right now. They are the one safety net. Without it, we would have wholesale bankruptcies." The Senate is rushing to complete a Farm Bill before the end of the year. Under a bipartisan agreement to speed up the process, 60 votes were needed to approve the payment-limit amendment. It failed 56-43. Another amendment that would have eliminated payments to farmers who make more than $750,000 a year was rejected 48-47. Lincoln and Pryor opposed both amendments. The farm legislation is typically renewed every five years. It contains money for wide-ranging agriculture, conservation and nutrition programs, such as food stamps. The president has threatened to veto both Senate and House versions of the bill, saying subsidies are too costly. Lincoln said Southern farmers have sacrificed enough already. She cited an earlier compromise on income limits and elimination of the "three-entity rule," which allowed higher subsidies for farmers in business partnerships. The subsidy safety net keeps food safe, affordable and protects American farmers in the global marketplace, she said. "It's a difference maker, a difference as to whether you stay in business or not these days," said Joe Christian, a Craighead County farmer. |
