Why you should join MWCA
Why should your business or organization join the Midwest Council on Agriculture? A lot of prospective members ask, “what is in it for me to join this agriculture coalition”? They may already have federal representation in DC, or they might have an issue on which they are singularly focused and do not think their interests align with others in the agriculture world.
In ProFarmer today, Jim Wiesemeyer writes about a House Agriculture subcommittee hearing held yesterday, where members of different commodity groups testified about their divergent priorities. Here is the headline: House Ag subcommittee hearing finds groups all over the place.
Frankly, this kind of headline (and story) shows how difficult a path forward for a Farm Bill will be.
If you’re reading this, it is likely that your business or organization is part of the Midwestern agriculture economy. The Midwest Council on Agriculture is a consensus coalition, that is focused on realistic priorities for the 2023 Farm Bill, and on maintaining a strong agriculture economy throughout the Midwest. You can read about our priorities here.
With House Agriculture Chairman Emeritus Collin Peterson leading our efforts in DC, we are working to keep all the divergent interests from muddying the waters, and focused on getting a strong farm bill across the finish line. All of us connected to agriculture need to work together. Let’s get this done.
From ProFarmer:
— House Ag subcommittee hearing finds groups all over the place in suggestions on new farm bill. The only consensus about what should be changed in writing a new farm bill is that there is no consensus. Commodity group representatives were all over the map on the topic during the lengthy hearing.
Suggestions included:
Voluntary updating of base acres, including the frequent topic of how to get base for some producers who are beginning farmers and others who have altered plantings in recent years.
Mostly opposition to setting farm program payments on planted acres versus base acres as is currently the case.
Increasing reference prices and/or modifying the escalator, with corn growers acknowledged any major change would cost a lot if triggered. NCGA President Tom Haag said it would take “a lot of money” to increase the statutory reference price for corn, which is now $3.70 a bushel, considerably below what he said was a $5 breakeven price. FAPRI estimates the effective reference price for corn will rise to $4.01 in 2024 for corn and hit $4.25 by 2026, because of recent increases in market prices. Some said an across-the-board hike in reference prices may not be necessary.
Timing of reference prices increases were also called into question, with a wheat producer noting increases in reference prices due to the escalator provision happen well after market prices have dropped and growers need help, especially with rising costs of production.
Some groups want increases in marketing loan rates.
A commonsense acknowledgement by one witness that the decision each year to pick ARC or PLC is simply not worth the time, especially if others must agree with the decision. The suggestion: Make payments from whichever program provides growers with the most money in a given year. This would come at a cost that no one detailed.
Rice growers again stressed that unlike other major commodities recently, rice did not see the price runup but faced stiff rising costs of production.
Cotton growers pushed lawmakers to allow them to participate in PLC, even if they also purchase a supplemental insurance product, known as STAX — cotton farmers aren’t allowed to enroll acreage in both STAX and PLC. Removing that restriction “'would allow growers to better tailor their risk management options,” said Shawn Holladay, a Texas producer who chairs the National Cotton Council.
Bottom line: No one says it, but it may be time to simply start all over and construct totally new safety net programs to better reflect the new world conditions and have them be more flexible than the current version.