Ag Policy Blog

Cantor Sees Farm Bill, WRDA on Early House Agenda

Chris Clayton
By  Chris Clayton , DTN Ag Policy Editor
Connect with Chris:

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor laid out in a memo Friday to House Republicans his proposed legislative agenda as the House returns to session on Tuesday.

The Virginia Republican's agenda starts out with another attempt to deal with Obamacare, mainly by making sure information is secure and protected from security breaches. Cantor indicated there will likely be more hearings on the healthcare law.

Cantor also indicated he expects work to continue toward agreements with the Senate on both the farm bill and the Water Resources Development Act. Both pieces of legislation are in the midst of conference talks. "These two conference reports represent new ideas on how government programs should work and as soon as they are ready for consideration, I expect to schedule these in the House," Cantor stated.

Cantor's main work on the farm bill thus far has been to hit "the pause button" while helping split the legislation into two pieces last summer.

Cantor also indicated the House could attempt to reform the way EPA manages the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act, or CERCLA. In general, the legislation is more commonly known as the "Superfund" used for cleaning up major environmental contamination. Cantor praised legislation that "reduces red tap inhibiting job creation and keeps our environment healthy."

With no specifics, Cantor also indicated legislation could come forward in the next few months on trade and immigration.

Follow me on Twitter @ChrisClaytonDTN.


To comment, please Log In or Join our Community .

Bonnie Dukowitz
1/12/2014 | 7:19 PM CST
Good grief Kuster, 7 of the 14 comments have your name at the bottom. Do you not feel just a little bit guilty? Probably not.
W Kuster
1/11/2014 | 5:48 PM CST
Sorry - should be "farmers think"
W Kuster
1/10/2014 | 7:09 AM CST
About 1/2 of the country thinks the government owes them living costs, healthcare, retirement, and cellphones. Many farmers thinks the government should guarantee their crop investments as well as profits as well as pay for most of the costs of paying for these guarantees. Anyone who saves for their retirement is a villain and and those who pay taxes are stupid. Those who pay a lot of taxes are evil along with those who create jobs are particularly evil. How is government dependency a path to a prosperous future? Oh I forgot, being prosperous is evil.
W Kuster
1/9/2014 | 1:05 PM CST
My apologies for typo error and not proofreading. Should read "Thanks for confirming I am on target. Hogs on full feed do not want the rations reduced."
Raymond Simpkins
1/9/2014 | 10:13 AM CST
Do any of you guys and gal proof read your comments. REALLY!
1/9/2014 | 8:16 AM CST
Kester Thanks for the morning humor and for confirming my statement.
W Kuster
1/8/2014 | 10:31 AM CST
Thanks for confirming I am on target. Hogs of full feed do not want the rations reduced.
1/7/2014 | 9:18 AM CST
Kester Calling an idiot an idiot is not slander if it is true.
Bonnie Dukowitz
1/6/2014 | 5:35 PM CST
And when one finds oneself in a deep hole, Quit digging. Unknown.
W Kuster
1/6/2014 | 7:36 AM CST
�When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.� � Socrates
Bonnie Dukowitz
1/6/2014 | 6:42 AM CST
Do you live in Colorado, Wes? Move to a lower elevation. Will not be so smokey. Please Melvin. Do not assume Wes is a Republican. For you to state farmer removal is from bad Republican Food Bills is as goofy as most of what Wes has to contribute.
W Kuster
1/5/2014 | 10:25 PM CST
Wes - insane government spending by both parties is nothing new nor is government programs doing the exact opposite of what politicians promise and claim. To think government programs ever had anything to do with saving family farms is preposterous. See Farm Bill Recipe For Financial Ruin? By: Mike Lavender, Ag Reform Coordinator FRIDAY, JANUARY 3, 2014 As the Wall Street Journal (subscription required) noted this week (Jan. 2), negotiators cooking up a new farm bill may well blend together a mix of commodity and crop insurance subsidies that would leave taxpayers with a bad taste in their mouths. By including the most costly components of the farm bills that passed the House and Senate, the bill expected to emerge this month from a House-Senate conference committee could cost taxpayers even more than current farm programs � and ignite a trade war to boot. Here�s one recipe for financial ruin: One Scoop of Guaranteed Prices � Through its proposed Price Loss Coverage (PLC) program, the House bill seeks to lock in today�s record prices for crops such as corn and cotton in the form of statutory price guarantees. If prices fall even modestly, the cost of the program could balloon to nearly $7 billion a year � or $5 billion more a year than advertised. A Second Scoop of Shallow Loss Coverage � The Senate bill includes a new program to cover losses in revenue, called Average Revenue Coverage (ARC). Though forecast to cost about $3 billion a year, experts warn that the cost could exceed $7 billion if crop prices drop back close to their historic averages. Three Cups of Crop Insurance � Both bills increase unlimited crop insurance subsidies in three ways: by increasing coverage levels to 90 percent and by creating special, super-charged crop insurance programs for cotton and peanuts. In combination, the cost of crop insurance could total more than $10 billion a year. At time when most of us are going on a diet, farm bill negotiators could well be feasting at the federal trough. Beefing up commodity and crop insurance subsidies could eliminate most of the savings from the elimination of the long-discredited �direct� payments program. As EWG�s Scott Faber told the Wall Street Journal, Congress could wind up �replacing a discredited subsidy with a soon-to-be discredited subsidy.� And expanding commodity and crop insurance won�t only bloat our fiscal waistline. Larding up these programs might also run afoul of international trade agreements, which place a $19.1 billion annual limit on �trade-distorting� subsidies. With the cost of these trade distorting or �amber box� subsidies potentially topping $20 billion a year, the World Trade Organization may no longer consider U.S. crop insurance subsidies to be de minimis, inviting a legal challenge from our trading partners. That should make some policymakers � and business leaders � sick to their stomach.
melvin meister
1/5/2014 | 9:53 PM CST
Wes;please read some farm bill history and you will find that most farmer removal was caused by BAD REPUBLICAN FARM BILLS .Ezra Taft Bensons Sliding Scale Of Parity 1952 equals .85 cent corn in 1955 Clayton Yeuters Market clearing Loan Prices at $1.67 for corn Fredom to Farm 1995 =$1.25 corn and the most costly Farm Bill ever .RFS has been the only program that gave the farmer any properity in my 65 years as a farmer and in retirement.STOP trying to comment on ag policy as you only repeat Right Wing talking points.I am 79 years old and have lived it all so I know it first hand.
W Kuster
1/5/2014 | 8:22 PM CST
How many decades have we had of politicians targeting the largest and wealthiest farmers in the country with cash and insurance benefits of the greatest value. These mindless government farm programs have been a major factor in depopulating rural America of smaller farmers. In order to level the playing field for all farm businesses, all farmers are equally deserving of government benefits of comparable value. It is time for politicians to stop harming smaller farmers by depriving them of the government benefits they award the wealthiest and most profitable farms. Stop taking money from the taxpayer and better yet give all farmers the same equal benefit of $0. Removing masses of smaller farmers from rural America and replacing them with just a few monster farm operations is not a step in food security for the nation. Politicians pontificate how government farm programs are all about food security for the nation, but choose to ignore those financially harmed by this mindless government targeting of the largest benefits to the wealthiest and most profitable.
melvin meister
1/4/2014 | 6:24 AM CST
Good Grief Wes.