By Denise Ross

In my most recent newspaper column I wrote about the prospects for permanent drought aid, or a Disaster Title, becoming a reality. My take is that were it not for the entire Farm Bill being on the ropes, a Disaster Title would be moderately controversial but would pass.

But the entire Farm Bill is on the ropes, and, therefore, a Disaster Title is unlikely to materialize. And if not now, will there be a next time?

If the farm bill weren’t teetering on the brink, a disaster title might be one of those compromises that would pass with grumbles from those who don’t like spending the money. But with the whole farm bill more than six months behind schedule, The Washington Post reports that the House, Senate and White House have started squabbling over how to extend the 2002 farm bill provisions, making a return to 1949 farm policy more of a possibility than anyone cares to contemplate. 

Sen. John Thune badly wants a Disaster Title to pass into federal law, understandably so given the role drought aid has played in his political career. Thune said:

Help for those in states where crops and livestock are subject to destruction year after year simply can’t be negotiated away — and won’t be.

Others are just as adamant that a Disaster Title would be a boondoggle. One is Michelle Perez of the Environmental Working Group.

Obviously, something’s wrong there. Somebody needs to go out and figure out why farmers are failing every other year.

(Scroll down to see the EWG’s map about who’s getting ad hoc disaster checks from the feds more years than not. The Dakotas are well represented.)

On Tuesday, President Bush put a Disaster Title in even more peril, telling Congress to cut the Farm Bill’s price tag.

Negotiations have been messy as lawmakers from the House and Senate are squabbling over how to pay for the legislation and are facing a tight deadline. Current law expires Friday …

Is this Mount Rushmore 2002 all over again? Is it worse?

Spread the word

Hide Sites