1. AGRIBUSINESS LOBBY THREATENS SENATE FARM BILL GAINS

This week, as Senate and House conference committee members get ready to debate the final Farm Bill, committee staff members have been busy identifying disagreements in policy areas. After this initial "walk through" it is evident that many important conservation and pro-family farm provisions won in the Senate face uncertain futures. Opposition, particularly from the agribusiness lobby in the House of Representatives threatens to erode benefits gained in conservation and competitive practices. Issues that need continued support are: commodities payment limitations, EQIP provisions, the packer ownership ban and a suite of conservation incentive initiatives. It's not too late to take action and CALLS ARE STILL NEEDED to preserve these important measures in the Farm Bill! To learn what you can do visit: www.familyfarmer.org/signon.pdf.

2. STRONG SUPPORT FOR SENATE CONSERVATION AND ENERGY TITLES

In an amazing and timely response over 300 organizations from 47 states and the District of Columbia signed onto a letter to Farm Bill conferees asking them to adopt, in full, the Senate versions of the Conservation and Energy titles. This diverse array of groups, representing environmentalists, family farmers, hunters, clean energy advocates, and religious and community activists, told House and Senate conferees that "Passage of the Senate titles will not only improve environmental protection, energy security, and natural resource conservation, but will also provide significant new income streams for farmers and ranchers and rural communities."

This effort solidly demonstrates the power that diverse allied grassroots and national groups have shown in forcing improvements in conservation and farmer incentives in the next Farm Bill. As final negotiations proceed it remains to be seen whether the House conferees and the White House will listen. To view the letter and groups signed on by state, visit: http://www.familyfarmer.org/22602.html

One of President Bush's most contested appointments has been the naming of Thomas Dorr as the USDA's undersecretary for Rural Development. Since the nomination last year, family farmers have called Dorr a "sell out" and a "poster boy for corporate agribusiness." Dorr raised the ire of social and religious institutions when he commented that communities with little racial diversity were more successful economically than those with greater diversity. Now, after months of dispute Dorr's hearings began in Washington today amid the release to the press of an alleged taped conversation between Dorr and his brother. During the conversation in question Dorr reportedly said that government officials might "raise hell" if they audited his participation in federal farm-subsidy programs. U.S. Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa said this week that Dorr had to repay the government $17,000 after a 1995 review of his farm operations by federal officials. To date, the White House has made no comment on the situation.

Last month family farmers rallied to victory as the Senate passed a provision in their version of the farm bill designed to help tame the runaway "vertical integration" farmers say is anti-competitive and killing their markets. As this "packer ownership ban" goes to the conference committee for consideration, committee member Representative Charles Stenholm (D-TX) went on record saying he does not believe the provision, called the Johnson-Grassley amendment, should "become final law." Stenholm made this comment last week while speaking at the National Farmers Union annual conference. Adding that the "status quo" was not acceptable, Stenholm said he favored "something along the lines" of the study of packer ownership proposed by Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho. This comment upset key National Farmers Union leaders who made the ban a top priority in their Farm Bill negotiations.

If you would like to subscribe or unsubscribe to this list, visit our
Rural Updates Subscriber Center