Congressman Paul Ryan

Farm Bill Reauthorization
The farm bill is the most important piece of legislation affecting our nation’s farmers. It sets policy and covers a wide range of programs, including price support programs, conservation programs and nutrition assistance. While the 2002 farm bill expired in September 2007, it was extended temporarily while the 2008 farm bill was negotiated.

In Wisconsin, the importance of agriculture to our economy cannot be overstated. There have been many changes in the 2008 farm bill that will affect our agriculture sector. Several specific programs important to Wisconsin’s dairy program were changed – the milk income loss contract program (MILC); the dairy price support program (DPSP); and the federal milk marketing order program. Specifically, in the MILC program the payment percentage rate increased to 45%, from a previous level of 34%. Additionally, due to rapidly increasing feed costs, it allows the target price to be adjusted in response to rising feed costs.

Additionally, the federal government’s largest land retirement program, the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) also saw changes. The CRP provides payments to farmers to take highly erodible or environmentally sensitive cropland out of production for ten years or more. It was first enacted by Congress in 1985 to help control soil erosion, stabilize land prices and control excessive agricultural production. Since then, the program’s purposes have been expanded to include environmental goals.

As said earlier, the farm bill is one of the most important pieces of legislation that the Congress considers. It is extremely broad, covering energy, trade and disaster assistance programs. Unfortunately, I had several concerns about this bill, and I could not support the bill that came before me.

I believe a farm bill should be designed to assist family farmers in times of need, rather than direct most of the subsidies to very large, corporate farming operations. We need to pass a farm bill that also gives the U.S. the ability to open up new export markets for our products. Unfortunately, this bill does the opposite.

When the farm bill originally came before the House floor, I supported the bipartisan Kind-Flake Fairness in Farm and Food Policy Amendment. This amendment adopted the USDA’s proposals to make the marketing loan program more efficient and market oriented and included no tax increases. This amendment would have also shifted savings into deficit reduction and provided more funding for conservation and nutrition programs. Finally, the amendment would have addressed trade distorting subsidies. Unfortunately, this reform-minded provision failed by a vote of 117-309 on July 26, 2007. It is this type of fiscally sound reforms that I believe are necessary to the agriculture sector of our economy and I hope that they will be implemented in future agriculture legislation.

Dairy Product Price Support Program (DPPSP) & Milk Income Loss Contract (MILC) Program
In 2009, U.S. dairy producers have been caught in a classic "price-cost squeeze," with farm milk prices declining sharply from record highs while feed costs remain high. From January through July 2009, the all-milk price received by farmers was 38% below a year earlier, when prices were near a record high. Meanwhile, feed costs, as measured by alfalfa prices, were down only 14% from a year earlier.
Declining milk and dairy product prices in late 2008 and early 2009 have reactivated government programs to support dairy prices and dairy farm income. During this period, after several years of relative inactivity, the dairy price support program resumed purchases of surplus dairy products as prices approached support levels. USDA estimates that it removed 111 million pounds of nonfat dry milk in 2008 and expects to remove 439 million pounds in 2009, along with small amounts of butter and cheese. In February 2009, milk prices declined below the trigger for Milk Income Loss Contract (MILC) payments to dairy farmers for the first time in two years. Payments have been triggered in all subsequent months to date, totaling $527 million as of July 30.

H.R. 2749: The Food Safety Enhancement Act
In recent years, major outbreaks of foodborne illnesses, product recalls, and reports about unsafe food imports have raised concerns over the U.S. food safety system. These concerns have increased the legislative effort to monitor and track the food supply. To try and address these concerns the House of Representatives recently brought H.R. 2749, the Food Safety Enhancement Act to a vote on the House floor. 
The House of Representatives passed H.R. 2749 despite my opposition on July 30, 2009. Unfortunately, this bill contains provisions that would have a significant impact on family farms while not advancing the cause of food safety, including:

• A flat $500 registration fee per facility -- a regressive tax that disproportionately impacts small scale producers engaged in on-farm value-added processing.
  
  

• Expensive and unworkable electronic tracing requirements for farmers who sell their products primarily into the wholesale market.
  
  

• Language that could do serious harm to wildlife and biodiversity, while failing to specify the positive role that conservation practices can play to address food safety concerns.
  
  

• The absence of specific guidance to ensure that new food safety standards are harmonized with certification requirements under the National Organic Program.

Rising Health Savings Costs
The high cost of health insurance is one of the leading problems facing individuals and small business owners, including farmers. To address this, I introduced the Patients’ Choice Act of 2009. The Patients’ Choice Act of 2009 transforms health care in America by strengthening the relationship between the patient and the doctor; using choice and competition rather than rationing and restrictions to contain costs; and ensuring universal, affordable health care for all Americans. The Patients’ Choice Act promotes innovative, State-based solutions, along with fundamental reforms in the tax code, to give every American, regardless of employment status, age, or health condition, the ability and the resources to purchase health insurance. The comprehensive legislation includes concrete prevention and transparency initiatives, long overdue reforms to Medicare and Medicaid, investments in wellness programs and health IT, and more. For additional information on the Patients’ Choice Act please visit http://www.house.gov/ryan/healthcare.

The President’s Fiscal Year 2010 (FY2010) Budget Proposal
In his address to Congress, the President said that the answers to America’s troubles “exist in our laboratories and our universities; in our fields and our factories; in the imaginations of our entrepreneurs and the pride of the hardest-working people on Earth.” But his specific policies, and the hard reality of the numbers that constitute his budget, clash with the rhetoric. The budget’s worst feature is its collection of heavy tax increases, imposed in the midst of an economic recession, weakening the prospects for sustained economic growth and job creation. These levies, totaling $1.4 trillion over 10 years, allegedly target “the wealthiest Americans,” but in fact will hit small businesses and investors, precisely the people whose enterprise is needed to restore the economy. Most of these so-called wealthy taxpayers are small business owners, who create 60 percent to 80 percent of the jobs in the U.S. The President’s “cap-and-trade” proposal heaps at least a $646-billion tax increase on families’ natural gas, electricity, home heating, and gasoline bills; and it will further erode job growth in the U.S. manufacturing sector, putting American companies at a further competitive disadvantage with China and other countries.

The budget shifts Department of Agriculture funding away from farm subsidies and directs them toward food welfare programs. The most significant changes in farm subsidies include a reduction of direct payments to farmers making more than $500,000; a reduction in crop insurance premium assistance; and the elimination of payments for cotton storage.

Stimulus Package 
President Obama signed H.R. 1, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, into law on February 17, 2009. H.R. 1 is an effort to jump-start our economy. I could not support this effort. I believe that the Stimulus Package is a trillion dollar spending bill that repeats the mistakes of flawed economic doctrines which deepened our depression in the 1930s and shackles future generations with crippling debt. At a time when our country is losing tens of thousands of jobs a week, H.R. 1 makes matter worse with a fiscal response that is slow, wasteful, and ineffectual. 

Sustained economic growth cannot come from Washington; but rather from the creativity and entrepreneurial spirit of the American people. With tremendous fear and uncertainty in the market, Congress can provide lasting tax certainty by dropping its promise to raise taxes at the end of next year on investment, savings, businesses, families, and workers. Fast-acting tax policies should focus on boosting incentives for expanding business operations and creating good-paying jobs. We should allow immediate expensing on all new investments and lower our job-killing corporate income tax – currently the second highest in the industrial world. Additionally, common sense regulatory reform that concentrates on openness and transparency should be enacted to address what got us into this mess in the first place.

Additional Information.
For more information on agriculture issues and priorities, please refer to the following web sites:

U.S. Department of Agriculture: www.usda.gov

The House Committee on Agriculture: www.agriculture.house.gov

The Ranking Member - House Committee on the Budget: http://budget.house.gov/republicans