Ag Policy Soup, the FarmPolicy.com podcast has been updated.

Today’s segment includes excerpts from a presentation by U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns, who outlined the Bush administration’s proposals with respect to the 2007 Farm Bill this morning.

The audio report also includes analysis from Mary Kay Thatcher of the American Farm Bureau Federation and Scott Faber, the Farm Policy Campaign Director for Environmental Defense.

Click here for complete details.

-Keith

I. U.S.D.A. Farm Bill Proposal
II. Trade-Doha
III. T.P.A- Farm Bill- Doha- Analysis of the Triangle
IV. Budget

I. U.S.D.A. Farm Bill Proposal

A recent U.S. Department of Agriculture news release stated that, “Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns will report back to the people on the Bush Administration’s farm bill proposals. These proposals reflect the views heard during USDA’s 52 Farm Bill Forums held across the country. Webcast: January 31, 2007 10:00 a.m.

“WHO: Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns

“WHAT: Discussion about Administration’s farm bill proposals

“WHEN: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 10:00 a.m. EST

“Please join us for the webcast at 10:00 a.m. EST - will require Windows Media Player. The link to the webcast can be found at http://www.usda.gov.”

Reuters writer Charles Abbott reported yesterday that, “The Bush administration plan to overhaul the U.S. farm program is too timid to meet its goal of producing 35 billion gallons a year of biofuels, said a Senate chairman briefed on the proposal on Tuesday.

“The package would propose a new approach to farm supports — so-called revenue assurance that protects farm income. Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns was scheduled to unveil the package on Wednesday.

“By revising U.S. crop supports, the Bush administration could improve prospects for a world trade agreement as well as save money. Brazil won a World Trade Organization ruling against a U.S. cotton subsidy in 2004 and Canada challenged U.S. corn supports this month.”

President Bush discusses trade in a speech yesterday at Caterpillar in Peoria, Illinois.

Mr. Abbott indicated that, “[Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Tom Harkin (D-Iowa)] declined to say if the administration would propose elimination of price support loans as part of its revenue assurance proposal. During an impromptu session with reporters, he repeatedly said more money was needed to develop biofuels.”

Concluding, Mr. Abbott added that, “Johanns seemed certain to propose elimination of the ban on growing fruits and vegetables on land eligible for crop subsidies, said one trade group official. It would be offset by more money for research and marketing promotion for fruit,vegetables, nuts and nursery crops.”

Jim Downing, writing in today’s Sacramento Bee, reported that, “In Washington, D.C., U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns is expected to propose a policy shift that would cut traditional subsidies for Midwestern commodity crops like corn and soybeans, and boost support for research, marketing and conservation programs that would benefit California’s huge produce industry.

“‘We are really looking forward to what the secretary outlines in his talk,’ said Barry Bedwell, president of the California Grape and Tree Fruit League and a founding member of the nationwide Specialty Crop Alliance, a lobbying group formed in 2005 to push the fruit, nut and vegetable agenda in the nation’s capital.

“But while Bedwell and other California farm leaders are counting on strong support from Johanns and the Bush administration, policy experts caution that today’s announcement is only the first volley in what is likely to be an eight-month struggle over the 2007 farm bill — the rewriting of national farm spending policy that Congress undertakes roughly every five years.”

Mr. Downing explained that, “Bedwell and other members of the Specialty Crop Alliance are not asking for direct payments to their members. Instead, they are seeking federal support for programs that they say will help keep their industry internationally competitive.

“Those programs range from marketing efforts, to research aimed at combating plant diseases and increasing food safety, to conservation grants to reward farmers for adopting environmentally sound practices.”

The Bee article noted that, “Daniel Sumner, an economics professor who directs the University of California Agricultural Issues Center at the University of California, Davis, said that while Johanns’ proposals will set the stage for the debate, the real power in crafting the farm bill historically has resided in the House and Senate agriculture committees… Still, Sumner said, several issues this year — including stronger-than-ever international pressure from the World Trade Organization to cut commodity subsidies — could turn the debate in unexpected ways.”

II. Trade-Doha

On a separate yet related track, this week the Bush Administration is also highlighting general trade issues while focusing specifically on the renewal of trade promotion authority (T.P.A.). Many observers have noted that a successful completion of the Doha Round of W.T.O. trade talks will be difficult to achieve without a Congressional extension of T.P.A.

But the interaction of T.P.A. extension and the Doha talks appears to go both ways: A factor weighing on a potential T.P.A. extension is a sign of movement or significant momentum in the Doha negotiations. The timing of the release of the Administration’s Farm Bill proposal, which comes right after the World Economic Forum meetings in Davos, could be interpreted as a signal that the executive branch is serious about agricultural reform and is hoping to sustain movement in the Doha negotiations.

Simultaneous focus on T.P.A. and the Farm Bill could be seen as two sides of the same coin, a conjunctive strategy to achieve three goals: T.P.A. extension, farm policy reform and a successful completion of the Doha round.

Peter Baker, writing in today’s Washington Post, reported on President Bush’s trip yesterday to Peoria, Illinois, home of the Caterpillar Corporation.

Mr. Baker stated that, “He focused here on trade, promoting his record at a time when lawmakers are considering whether to extend his authority to negotiate agreements that are subject to ‘fast-track’ up-or-down votes in Congress without amendment. Every president in modern times has enjoyed such power, but it expires this summer, and with Democrats now in charge of Congress, Bush faces a tough time getting it extended. He has completed trade pacts withPanama, Peru and Colombia that are awaiting congressional approval, and he is negotiating with South Korea and Malaysia. He also wants to jump-start stalled global trade talks.”

But Peter S. Goodman, in a separate Washington Post article, also published in today’s paper, reported that, “As President Bush was out in Peoria touting the virtues of foreign trade and asking for fresh authority to promote it, newly ascendant Democrats on Capitol Hill signaled just how tough it’s going to be for the president to get what he wants.”

Mr. Goodman then provided this synthesis of the key inter-related issues: “The hearing took place as President Bush visited the Illinois headquarters of Caterpillar, the construction-equipment giant and a highly successful exporter. There, the president asked Congress to extend his so-called trade promotion authority — his legal right to negotiate trade pacts that he can submit to lawmakers for a simple up-or-down vote. It expires at the end of June, and without it, trade deals stand little chance of getting through Congress as individual legislators pick them apart to protect jobs in their districts.

“The administration is intent on gaining an extension in hopes of restarting talks aimed at lowering tariffs around the world. Those talks, known as the Doha round of trade negotiations, have been stalled for months over American and European unwillingness to pare farm subsidies and over claims from India and other poor countries that they will not benefit enough from opening their markets further to foreign goods.

“In recent days, trade ministers have been meeting at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, to try to jump-start the talks. Though most analysts assume the prospect of a breakthrough remains dim, U.S. Trade Representative Susan C. Schwab offered tempered optimism yesterday.”

And Reuters writer Doug Palmer reported yesterday that, “Trade has been one of the most divisive issues in Congress since Bush took office in January 2001, with Democrats generally pushing for stronger labor and environmental provisions in trade agreements than Republicans have been willing to include.

“[House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D-NY)] said he hoped to restore a bipartisan consensus to trade and move the two parties out of ‘divorce court.’

“The top Republican on the Ways and Means panel, Rep. Jim McCrery of Louisiana, said he believed the constructive tone of Tuesday’s hearing already showed ‘we are out of divorce court andmoving into counseling.’”

III. T.P.A- Farm Bill- Doha- Analysis of the Triangle

Reuters news reported yesterday that, “US lawmakers say they want a new global trade agreement, but it’s unlikely they will support any deal they believe sells farmers short, especially as a new US farm bill hangs in the balance, trade analysts said on Monday.”

The article added that, “Dave Salmonsen, who follows trade for the American Farm Bureau Federation lobbying group, said a Doha deal would be judged on whether it provided US farmers with meaningful access to new markets.

“‘We know there’s going to be lower spending limits on the domestic support programs … but we need to have the balance as far as looking for how producers will be affected,’ he said.”

Reuters also provided this perspective, “Analysts said they don’t believe the recent developments on Doha would sway lawmakers — some of whom are fiercely protective of agricultural subsidies — one way or the other.

“The farm bill debate will ‘move rapidly on its own steam and in its own direction unless and until something’s coming from Geneva and the Doha Round which pushes it in a different direction,’ said Sherman Katz, a trade analyst at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.”

“Senior lawmakers like Minnesota Democratic Rep. Collin Peterson, who chairs the House Agriculture Committee, are adamant that they won’t allow US farm policy to be dictated by the World Trade Organization,” the article noted, while adding that, “Sallie James, a trade expert at the Cato Institute, agreed farm bill debate will roll ahead until US negotiators can show Congress new offers from other countries on market access.”

Forrest Laws, writing yesterday at the Delta Farm Press webpage, provided more detail on Chairman Peterson’s thinking with respect to the Farm Bill.

According to Mr. Laws, “Unless the Bush administration can win major concessions in a revival of the Doha Round negotiations, it shouldn’t look to the House Agriculture Committee for help in passing a new WTO agreement.

“That’s the impression a group of 200 or so farmers took away from a town hall meeting in Pine Bluff, Ark., Jan. 25, which featured House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson as a special guest and speaker.

“‘There’s pressure on us to change the farm bill because ‘that’s the only way we can get a trade deal,’’ said Peterson, a Minnesota Democrat. ‘Now, I’m sorry, but I’ve had enough of these trade deals. And unless we can get something good outof, I don’t give a darn if we get one.’”

Meanwhile, Jake Caldwell of the Center for American Progress, noted yesterday that, “The sudden burst of enthusiasm among the world’s leading trading powers to complete the long-stalled Doha Round of multilateral trade negotiations within the next several months is welcome news. Equally encouraging are signs that the Bush administration’s 2007 Farm Bill, which is expected to be unveiled shortly, will contain laudable recommendations, including a boost to biofuels research and a potential increase in the number of farmers eligible for benefits.

“Nonetheless, numerous questions remain as to whether the Bush administration is truly committed to doing the hard work in the 2007 Farm Bill and in the final push of the Doha Round. The administration needs to transform its rhetoric into reality to produce real change down on the farm and in world trade. Without creative and sustained leadership by the United States at home and abroad, we will miss a unique opportunity to move both our nation’s farm and trade policy forward together and complete a final trade and development pact that all members of the World Trade Organization can sign.

“The United States has the ability in the next few months to make key policy making decisions at home that could well spur ourtrading partners to make similar efforts. Agricultural tariffs and subsidies are the main sticking points to a final trade accord–obstacles that the Bush administration, in league with congressional leaders on both sides of the political aisle, can overcome with creativity and nerve.”

Edward Alden, in an item published in yesterday’s Financial Times, stated that, “Without a TPA renewal, Mr Bush’s legacy on trade will be thin, composed of a hodge-podge of bilateral agreements with small countries that account for a tiny fraction of US exports and imports. However, with Democrats controlling the Congress, Mr Bush will have to pay heavily to get what he wants. A shaky coalition of Republicans and a smattering of Democrats gave Mr Bush victory by a single vote on TPA the last time it came before the House of Representatives, in 2001. That coalition was shattered by the November election. In particular, more than three dozen new Democratic members – dubbed the ‘Lou Dobbs Democrats’ after the CNN broadcaster who rails against free trade, outsourcing and illegal immigration – see in their election a mandate to change direction on trade policy.”

Mr. Alden also provided this historic context on trade, “The last time the stars were similarly aligned was in 1988, when Republican President Ronald Reagan faced an identical dilemma. Import competition from Japan had hurt the US motor, steel and semiconductor industries, Democrats had regained control of the Senate in 1986 and Mr Reagan needed an extension of fast track to complete the Uruguay round of trade talks. The outcome troubled many free traders. In particular, the Democratic Congress created the infamous Super 301 provision requiring the administration to use the threat of unilateral trade sanctions to force countries to open their markets to US goods.

“The debate this year is likely to cause similar consternation. At the very least, Congress will insist on measures to allow US companies to block imports from their Chinese competitors if they can demonstrate that such products were unfairly subsidised by the Chinese government. It will also try to hit back against recent World Trade Organisation dispute panel decisions that have weakened the US ability to restrict imports it considers unfairly dumped. Congress is also certain to insist on tougher labour and environmental standards in future trade agreements and to increase assistance for workers displaced by import competition.”

IV. Budget

Lyndsey Latyon reported in today’s Washington Post that, “House and Senate Democraticleaders agreed yesterday to a $463 billion spending plan for the remainder of the fiscal year that would freeze many federal agencies at 2006 levels but include more money for veterans’ health, education, scientific research, HIV programs and public parks, among other things.

“In an unusual move, the congressional leaders stripped the spending bill of all earmarks, or narrow, special-interest provisions. The measure had to be cobbled together now because Congress did not finish its work last year and failed to pass nine of 11 spending bills.

“Four months into the current fiscal year, the federal government has been running on a temporary budget that is set to expire Feb. 15. The House is scheduled to vote on the spending package today, while the Senate will take it up in the coming week.”

The Washington Wire Blog (The Wall Street Journal) added yesterday that, “Democrats put the final touches on a $463.5 billion spending bill designed to keep the government operating for the rest of the fiscal year and bridge the gap left by the collapse of the budget process last fall.

“Never before in modern times has Congress attempted this type of streamlined funding resolution on such a large scale.”

Recall that a Congressional Research Service Report published last month (“Agricultural Issues in the 110th Congress,” by Ralph M. Chite) noted that, “A number of issues of interest to U.S. agriculture are expected to be addressed by the 110th Congress. At the top of the agenda, Congress will be considering the unfinished business of FY2007 funding levels for U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) programs and activities in the annual agriculture appropriations bill.”

The C.R.S. report added that, “These funding decisions for FY2007 might intersect with congressional consideration of the FY2008 budget and appropriations, which begins shortly after the release of the Administration’s budget request in early February 2007. Of interest to agriculture is the FY2008 budget resolution, whereby Congress will establish a blueprint for all federal spending over a multi-year period, which could set the fiscal parameters of the next omnibus farm bill, to be debated in 2007.”

In addition, a separate C.R.S. report published in January explained that, “It will be the CBO baseline published in early 2007, in conjunction with the FY2008 budget resolution, that likely will serve as the guide for determining the spending authority included in a 2007 farm bill.”

-Keith Good

I. Farm Bill
II. Ethanol

I. Farm Bill

On Friday,Reuters writer Charles Abbott reported that, “The decades-old U.S. farm subsidy system should be replaced by tax-deferred ‘income stabilization accounts,’ an environmental group said on Friday, amid rising expectation the Bush administration would propose farm reform within days.

“One farm lobbyist said the centerpiece might be an insurance-like program to protect farm income. That would be a dramatic change from subsidies offered for each bushel of grain and soybeans or pound of cotton and rice that a farmer grows.

“Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns says the farm support system, created in the Depression era and costing $20 billion a year, needs to be modernized.

“A Johanns aide said ‘no date has been locked in’ for unveiling the administration plan but an announcement should come within a couple of weeks. He said the proposal would be very detailed and declined to outline it.”

“Participants at Nebraska’s Husker Harvest Days line up to discuss with Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns about the next Farm Bill. Secretary Johanns and other USDA officials have been holding listening sessions across the country” (via U.S.D.A. webpage).

Mr. Abbott indicated that, “While several large U.S. farm groups want to maintain the farm-subsidy structure now in use, the National Corn Growers Association supports a switch to a ‘revenue assurance’ program. Wheat and soybean growers want higher support rates.”

A Dow Jones news article posted yesterday at DTN (link requires subscription), indicated that, “The U.S. Department of Agriculture on Wednesday will unveil the Bush administration’s proposals for what it believes the 2007 farm bill should look like, although it will be the Democratic-led Congress that actually writes the multi-year blueprint for U.S. agricultural policy.

“The proposals, USDA said in an announcement made Monday, will ‘reflect the views heard during USDA’s 52 Farm Bill Forums held across the country,’ but one key lawmaker has already disputed USDA’s contention that its proposals are what will be best for farmers.”

The article noted that, “USDA Secretary Mike Johanns, speaking to reporters Monday, said, ‘We went out there. We talked to farmers and they told us what was on their minds and we triedto listen very, very carefully about … what they were urging us to consider.’”

However, House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-MN) stated that, “It still remains a mystery to me who he was talking to when he was having his listening sessions as opposed to who we were talking to, because we certainly didn’t hear what he says he heard.”

The “Washington Insider” section of DTN reported yesterday that, “Johanns has continued to insist that the proposals will be far reaching and propose substantial changes to U.S. farm policy. His recent appearances have focused on the level of trade in U.S. farm goods and the harm that could be done if substantial changes are not made in U.S. farm policy.”

Peter Shinn reported yesterday at Brownfield that, “Last week, U.S. Ag Secretary Mike Johanns released USDA’s first official farm bill recommendation, calling for a $1.6 billion investment in research and development of cellulosic ethanol technology. And Monday, Johanns announced he would unveil the rest of USDA’s recommendations to Congress on the 2007 farm bill Wednesday morning.

“The recommendations are expected to be based on the theme papers Johanns commissioned on a variety of topics, including risk management, conservation and rural development. Johanns said the input received during over 50 farm bill listening sessions USDA conducted in 2005 and 2006 will factor into the recommendations.

“Right after Johanns holds that Washington D.C. media event releasing the recommendations, he’ll take off on a whirlwind tour to promote them. First, Johanns flys to Tunica, Mississippi, Wednesday afternoon and then to the Hy Vee Exhibition Hall in Des Moines, Iowa, Wednesday evening. Johanns then goes on to Modesto, California, Thursday morning and then to the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association annual meeting in Nashville, Tennessee, on Friday.”

Mr. Shinn added that, “USDA will web cast the release of the Bush administration’s farm bill recommendations. The media event starts at 9 a.m. Central time.”

With respect to Sec. Johanns’ trip to Modesto, Environmental Working Group President Ken Cook noted yesterday that, “Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns isn’t heading all the way out to Modesto… so he can deliver disappointing news to the produce crowd about the farm bill proposal he will have announced here in Washington the day before.

“We’re betting that this, one of his first stops in farm country to explain the administration’s farm bill ideas, is intended to be a pep rally aimed at the ag producers he must have on his side if his ideas for reforming subsidy programs are to make any political headway. And he’ll need the Modesto-based House Ag Subcommittee Chairman on his side, too.

“If we’re right, his visit should give a big boost to the Specialty Crop Farm Bill Alliance and the legislation they’ve put forward, the EAT Healthy America Act introduced last year.”

Mr. Cook also pointed to an article by Michael Doyle, who reported that, “A former Nebraska governor, Johanns lacks the direct Valley experience of his predecessor, Modesto native Ann Veneman. His 2005 Senate confirmation hearing paid scant attention to the specialty crops — the fruits and vegetables — for which the Valley is known.

“That could all be changing, as Johanns on Wednesday will be publicly unveiling the administration’s farm bill proposal. The proposal follows upon 52 Agriculture Department hearings conducted in 48 states over more than a year.

“Already, Johanns has hinted thatfruits and vegetables will be given more consideration than in years past.”

In anticipation of the Administration’s farm policy proposals, Environmental Defense issued a news release yesterday which stated that, “On the eve of the Farm Bill proposal by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Environmental Defense today proposed a dozen ‘Fresh Ideas’ for federal farm and food policy that would help more farmers, consumers, communities and the environment.

“Among the national environmental group’s proposals are: a major increase in USDA incentives to improve water quality and stabilize the climate, a transition from subsidies to income stabilization accounts, and more USDA resources to combat sprawl and to develop renewable energy on farms and ranchland.

“‘Renewal of federal farm and food programs in the 2007 Farm Bill creates a rare opportunity to boost the profitability of many more farmers and communities,’ said Scott Faber, farm policy campaign director for Environmental Defense. ‘It also could provide consumers with more food and energy choices, and reward farmers and ranchers when they take steps to help meet the nation’s most pressing environmental challenges. The next Farm Bill should help many more farmers, consumers, communities and the environment.’”

More detail regarding thegroup’s proposal’s can be found here.

***

Meanwhile, as Secretary Johanns prepares to unveil the Administration’s farm policy proposals, President Bush’s schedule this week indicates that he could be highlighting the Doha round of W.T.O. trade talks, an issue that could also apply political pressure on the 2007 Farm Bill.

On the heels of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, where trade ministers continued to trudge forward for a possible breakthrough in the talks, President Bush might couple comments regarding trade and the upcoming Farm Bill proposals to draw additional focus on agricultural policy.

Reuters writer Doug Palmer reported yesterday that, “The White House urged Congress on Monday to renew President George W. Bush’s fast-track authority to negotiate a new world trade deal, but winning over the Democratic-controlled Congress is expected to test Bush’s skills in working with his opponents.

“The White House comments followed a weekend meeting of top trade officials from about 30 countries in Davos, Switzerland, which appears to have re-energized the five-year-old Doha round of world trade talks, even though no breakthroughs have been announced.”

Mr. Palmer added that, “‘We certainly think it is important that Congress renew [trade promotion authority],’ White House spokesman Tony Snow said. ‘We are in a very important part of (the Doha) negotiations. We have a small window to get a lot of things done.’”

(FarmPolicy Note: Here is one excerpt on trade from yesterday’s White House Briefing

“Q: The President is going to talk about trade tomorrow. Does he need — would he like to have fast-track authority to negotiate trade deals?

“MR. SNOW: Absolutely. What he wants to do is to continue to have Trade Promotion Authority; every other President has had it. It is the ability to negotiate a good faith trade agreement without their later being changed by Congress, which means you have to go back to the table and kind of renegotiate. It is an important device in extending free trade and also allowing negotiators to operate effectively. President Clinton used it to positive effect during his presidency, as have prior presidents, and we certainly think it is important that Congress renew it.

“Q Will he talk about that tomorrow?

“MR. SNOW: I don’t know if he’s talking about it tomorrow or Thursday, but he will be talking about it — I mean, tomorrow or Wednesday, but he will talk about it this week.”)

The Reuters article reported that, “Bush is expected to stress the importance of trade to the U.S. economy in speeches on Tuesday and Wednesday in Illinois and New York. He won fast track trade legislation in 2002 after a bitter fight with Democrats in the House of Representatives.

“With Democrats now in control of the House and the Senate, many analysts believe Bush needs a breakthrough in world trade talks in the next few months to have any chance of persuading Congress to renew fast track.

“‘The more likelihood there is of a positive outcome to Doha, the more pressure there will be on both parties to come up with a deal’ on fast track, said Sherman Katz, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. But ‘it will take tough bargaining,’ Katz said.”

Mr. Palmer also noted that, “[T]he U.S. Agriculture Department announced it will outline its proposals on Wednesday for revamping U.S. farm subsidy programs, which are up for renewal this year. Many countries could see the proposal as a barometer of how serious Washington is about reforming agriculture in the Doha round.”

An update posted yesterday at The Washington Wire Blog (The Wall Street Journal), stated that, “President Bush is stepping back into the debate over trade policy, appealing for the Democratic-controlled Congress to renew his soon-to-expire authority to negotiate trade deals.

“Bush drew criticism last week for not taking on the issue directly during his State of the Union address. But in a speech this week, perhaps as soon as Tuesday, Bush will urge lawmakers to support an extension of his negotiating authority. The president’s authority expires at the end of June, but many members of the new Democratic majority are skeptical of the White House trade agenda and its renewal is in doubt.”

(FarmPolicy Note: A separate excerpt from yesterday’s White House Briefing indicated that, “Tony, so the main issue tomorrow in Peoria is trade; is that right?

“MR. SNOW: Yes.

“Q: There seemed to be some movement on this over the weekend, on the issue of world trade talks. What do you see — what’s your assessment for a world trade agreement at this point?

“MR. SNOW: [U.S. Trade Representative] Sue Schwab and her counterpoint — counterpart with the EU have been working very hard, and they’ve also been reaching out to the G20 nations. It’s a very complex set of negotiations going forward. Also it’s, I think, realized that it is going to be in the best interest of all to have success in the Doha round.

“I cannot and would not get into details at this point. We are at a very important point ofthe negotiations. We’ve got a small window to get a lot of things done. And I know all sides are working very hard on this. But the President is deeply committed to working with all our allies. And they’ve assured us that they’re committed also in working with us toward resolution.

“Q And will he address this tomorrow?

“MR. SNOW: He’s not going to talk in detail about it, but what he will do is once again point to the importance of free trade. You see, not only do we have free trade within the global structure of the Doha round, but also the United States is engaged in a series of free trade agreements that also have yielded real benefits for American businesses and workers.”)

***

Meanwhile, other perspectives on the 2007 Farm Bill continue to emerge.

Joanie Stiers, writing in Sunday’s Register-Mail (Illinois), reported that, “The under-debate 2007 farm bill most likely will look like the 2002 bill, a former U.S. official told Knox County farmers Saturday.

“‘I think we’ll have it passed by this fall sometime, and it will look similar to what we have right now,’ said John ‘Jack’ Block, a former U.S. secretary of agriculture and Knox County native. He spoke to members of the Knox County Farm Bureau and Knox County Pork Producers during their back-to-back annual meetings Saturday.”

The newspaper article added that, “Block thinks the decision is much simpler than congress is making it. He said the current higher crop prices, created by the ethanol movement, leads to less dependence on government support of farm income.

“‘If these prices stay where they are now, there won’t be much money flowing to the commodity programs anyway,’ Block said. ‘We’ll be getting our money from the marketplace.’

“In the end, Block thinks the farm bill will be similar with some minor changes, such as more money for conservation programs and specialty crops, such as fruits and vegetables. A renewable fuel title likely will be added, he said.

“Block said other key agriculture-related issues to watch in Washington include immigration, World Trade Organization talks, animal rights coalitions, food origin labeling, animal identification, food safety and trade disputes.”

Lee Morrison, noted recently at The Times-Reporter Online (Ohio) that, “This year’s federal farm bill will be one of the most important ever, and Rep. Zack Space, D-Dover, relishes being involved in forming it.

“Space sees this as a historic opportunity to shape American agricultural policy.

“‘In some ways, we expect it’s going to be very similar to the last farm bill although tweaked,’he said. ‘But what’s really historic is the interjection of alternative energy into the picture. The potential for the production of ethanol through corn and other materials, all brings something new to the table. We’re far beyond where we were on those issues five years ago. That’s a very significant part of this bill, but certainly not the only part. It’s very exciting and very promising.’”

II. Ethanol

Dow Jones writer Lisa Kalla reported yesterday that, “U.S. President George W. Bush’s alternative fuel goals for the next 10 years are ‘technically feasible’, according to U.S. Department of Agriculture’s undersecretary for rural development, Thomas Dorr.

“‘I am confident that these goals can be met,’ Dorr said Monday in a speech at the Clean Fuel Finance Forum in London.

“‘The pace of innovation is quickening. The rate of private investment in new technologies is soaring.’

“Last week Bush proposed a mandatory alternative fuels standard to use 35 billion gallons of renewable and alternative fuels in 2017. This would be about seven times the amount of current biofuel production capacity.”

The ethanol issue also generates some conservation concern. Ron Schara, in an item posted on Sunday at the Minneapolis Star-Tribune Online, indicated that, “Minnesota’s ringneck pheasants are in a fight for survival.

“It was made official last week. President Bush said as much.”

The item stated that, “As we learned last week, the State of the Union includes a growing thirst for renewable fuel energy from cornfields rather than imported petroleum from the sand dunes of the Mideast.

“The idea had Republicans and Democrats standing and cheering the President in the nation’s Capitol the other night.

“How this rush to plant more corn to make more ethanol will play out it remains a question mark.

“If we go corn crazy, the rush also will be on to eliminate or severely reduce the nearly 37 million acres of farm land enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), which consists mostly of grasslands.

“If CRP disappears, the abundance of ringneck pheasants will, too.”

-Keith Good