Lack of farm bill forces farmers toward “dairy cliff”

2012-12-09T14:30:00Z Lack of farm bill forces farmers toward “dairy cliff”By ELIZABETH DOHMS | Chippewa Herald

The federal fiscal cliff crisis is lending its name and political stalemate politics to the as-yet unresolved federal farm bill, what has now been dubbed the “dairy cliff.”

A new farm bill is enacted about every five years, with the most recent bill having expired on Sept. 30.

Without action from the U.S. House of Representatives to either enact a new farm bill or extend the 2008 bill by Jan. 1, the last permanent law would take effect — a bill from 1949.

“We can’t be going back to 1949 policy,” U.S. Rep.  Ron Kind (D-La Crosse) said. “That’s ridiculous.”

If the 1949 bill is reenacted, consumers could see the price of milk at least double.

Kara Slaughter, government relations director for the Wisconsin Farmers Union, said she can’t foresee Congress allowing the 1949 bill to be reenacted.

“If they don’t do their job and get a new bill passed by the end of 2012, then the most likely scenario is they’ll extend the current bill,” she said.

But extending the 2008 bill poses two significant problems, according to Slaughter.

First, under the recently expired bill, farmers that grow main commodity crops, such as corn, receive payments from the government as part of the Direct Payments Program.

“In times like this where corn prices are at record highs, it’s absurd for government to be giving farmers incentives to grow corn,” she said. “They have all the incentive they need to grow corn.”

Slaughter said extending the 2008 bill would end up costing taxpayers millions more, versus introducing a new bill.

Slaughter said the Senate and the House Agriculture Committee each wrote new legislation for a 2012 bill that excludes such outdated programs.

But Kind said Republican House leadership is refusing to bring this legislation to the floor for consideration.

“Allow this to be debated,” he said. “That’s how things are supposed to get done around here.”

Both Kind and Slaughter think the motives behind the filibuster are political.

Jim Holte, newly-elected Wisconsin Farm Bureau President, also said the sticking point on the farm bill has little to do with programs involving farmers.

“There’s been a relatively high level of agreement on most all of the actual farm programs and the changes there, but the two sides of the aisle have not been coming together on how to best change or keep the same food-type programs,” he said.

Although dairy farmers are able to cope with the loss of federal aid for now because of high milk prices, they can’t bet on that security.

“(Dairy) farmers will be in a real bind if we have another significant dip in milk prices,” Slaughter warned.

One measure of the previous farm bill that compensated dairy farmers for lost profit was the Milk Income Loss Contract.

“When milk prices plummeted, that assistance would kick in,” Kind  said.

As of Sept. 12, nearly 12,000 dairy farmers in Wisconsin received $84 million under MILC in 2012, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

“The MILC program was the one backstop against total devastation for Wisconsin dairy farmers during the 2009 dairy crisis,” Slaughter said.

Mark Dietsche, who owns a dairy and crop farm in rural Bloomer, is expecting Congress to replace the MILC program with milk insurance coverage.

“A lot of farmers don’t like the MILC program because it doesn’t make up for their losses but insurance won’t cover them either,” he said.

Dietsche explained that a dairy farmer can estimate the future price for commodities based on quotes, purchase insurance for that fixed amount, and receive federal aid if the price per hundredweight dips below that.

If it rises above, the farmer counts it as a loss.

“It used to be supply and demand, but it’s not anymore,” he said. “Now, it’s speculative investing.”

Although Dietsche favors MILC to milk insurance, he recognizes the budget needs to shrink.

“The farm bill is only one percent of the budget, but it’s where they can cut,” he said.

Dietsche added there is little incentive for a new generation of farmers to pick up where their fathers left off, like Dietsche’s family has done since their arrival in Bloomer in 1864.

“The farm programs are designed to stabilize the farm base,” he said. “I don’t know if we’ve been real successful.”

Copyright 2015 Chippewa Herald. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

(2) Comments

  1. southernboy
    Report Abuse
    southernboy - December 10, 2012 8:12 am
    with no farm bill, Milk is 5 dollars a gallon, lettuce 5 bucks a head,
    cereal 7 dollars a box and in 12 months between 4-8% of population will experience severe hunger and starvation daily.

    the total weight of the things you dont understand about the farm bill would fill a library

    make yourself a sandwich and read a little...or keep demonstrating the magnitude of things you dont understand
  2. RIP
    Report Abuse
    RIP - December 09, 2012 6:14 pm
    I don't believe their should be a farm bill. The farmers get huge tax breaks and a whole bunch of financial benefits from state and local governments, the federal government should stay out of faming unless they nationalize farming. Food stamps should be a law on it's own.
Add Comment
You must Login to comment.

Click here to get an account it's free and quick

Follow The Chippewa Herald

Search local business directory

Hint: Enter a keyword that you are looking for like tires, pizza or doctors or browse the full business directory.



Should Wisconsin follow Indiana in cracking down on drivers who hog the left lane?

View Results

Featured Businesses