“Farmers are excited about the programs offered in the new farm bill,” stated Johnson.  “Overall, it is a good piece of legislation that allows for modernization of a continually changing industry.  However, the administrative process is problematic in specific areas and I would like Ag Secretary Veneman and the USDA to correct that process.  In creating this legislation, I know that we as a Congress did not intend to confuse and complicate the administrative aspect of farming, therefore I believe the USDA should reexamine certain issues and make necessary changes.”

Johnson listed the specific aspects of the farm bill that his constituents believe need modification:
· Rotational Farms:  This method seemingly disenfranchises oilseed producers; therefore if changes are possible in the interpretation of the language, they are recommended.
· Verifiable Evidence:  Livestock producers are being punished for adding value to their farming and new farm owners are, in certain cases, unable to report a very accurate yield average based on language involving “Third-Party Verifiable Evidence.”
· Timing of Payments:  Should the USDA make farm program payments to producers without requiring full enrollment in a given program, then later rectify payments, farmers will not face such financial hardship due to excessive paperwork. 
· Power of Attorney:  The 2002 Farm Bill raises many different and more complex issues than any previous bill and as a result, I believe that updating the Power of Attorney for landowners is necessary.
· Multiple landlords under the same FSA farm number:  The USDA notice CM-441 should be incorporated into the final regulations. 

Producers have brought these issues to Rep. Johnson’s attention. The broad-based and 
comprehensive legislation, while greatly beneficial to the agricultural community, does require the above, proposed modifications be considered to create a more efficient and effective farm bill, according to Johnson and 15th district farmers.