Agriculture and Related Agencies: FY2012 Appropriations

Jim Monke, Coordinator
Specialist in Agricultural Policy

The Agriculture appropriations bill provides funding for all of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) except the Forest Service, plus the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and, in alternating years, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

Separate FY2012 Agriculture appropriations bills have been passed by the House and Senate; a final conference agreement is pending. FY2012 has begun under a short-term continuing resolution through November 18, 2011.

In the House, the Agriculture appropriations subcommittee marked up its FY2012 bill by voice vote on May 24, 2011. The following week, the full appropriations committee reported the bill (H.R. 2112, H.Rept. 112-101) by voice vote, after adopting several amendments. On June 16, 2011, the House passed H.R. 2112 by a vote of 217-203 after adopting 22 amendments and removing 4 provisions by point of order.

In the Senate, the full Appropriations subcommittee marked up an FY2012 Agriculture appropriations bill (H.R. 2112, S.Rept. 112-73) by a vote of 28-2 on September 7, 2011. On November 1, 2011, the Senate passed H.R. 2112 by a vote of 69-30 as part of a “minibus” appropriation that includes Agriculture and two other appropriations bills. Twelve amendments were adopted on the floor for the Agriculture portion of the minibus.

The House-passed bill would cut discretionary Agriculture appropriations to $17.25 billion, a reduction of $2.7 billion (-14%) from FY2011 levels, and following a 15% cut in FY2011. Much of the floor debate related to funding reductions for the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) feeding program (-11%), food safety (-10%), and international food aid (-31%); preventing USDA payments to Brazil in relation to the U.S. loss in the WTO cotton case; and programs promoting locally produced food (USDA’s “know-your-farmer-know-your-food” initiative).

The Senate-passed bill would cut discretionary Agriculture appropriations to $19.8 billion, a cut of -0.8% below FY2011 levels. The Senate bill is $2.7 billion more than the House bill in its discretionary total (excluding CFTC from the House bill for comparison). The Senate bill’s discretionary total is greater than the House bill primarily in the following areas: domestic nutrition programs (+$645 million, mostly for WIC), foreign assistance (+$544 million), FDA (+$350 million), agricultural research (+$320 million), rural development (+$180 million), and fewer rescissions and farm bill limitations (+$430 million). In addition to the amounts above, the Senate bill contains $376 million of disaster assistance for conservation and forestry.

The House bill for FY2012 contains nearly $2 billion in rescissions and limitations on mandatory farm bill programs. The Senate bill contains about $1.5 billion of such rescissions and limitations. These actions are used to score savings that help meet the discretionary budget allocations and help avoid deeper cuts to regular discretionary accounts. The FY2012 bill has about the same $2 billion level of rescissions and limitations as the FY2011 appropriation. Had the FY2012 House proposal not maintained this level of reductions—which is significantly greater than in past years—even larger cuts might have been required to the regular discretionary accounts. The FY2012 bills propose a unusually high reduction to mandatory farm bill programs ($1.4 billion in the House bill, $1.1 billion in the Senate bill), including about $1 billion from conservation programs.


Date of Report: November 3, 2011
Number of Pages: 82
Order Number: R41964
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

Agriculture and Related Agencies: FY2012 Appropriations

Jim Monke, Coordinator
Specialist in Agricultural Policy

The Agriculture appropriations bill provides funding for all of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) except the Forest Service, plus the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and, in alternating years, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

An FY2012 Agriculture appropriations bill has been passed by the House and a separate version has been reported by the Senate Appropriations Committee and amended on the Senate floor. FY2012 has begun under a short-term continuing resolution through November 18, 2011.

In the House, the Agriculture appropriations subcommittee marked up its FY2012 bill by voice vote on May 24, 2011. The following week, the full appropriations committee reported the bill (H.R. 2112, H.Rept. 112-101) by voice vote, after adopting several amendments. On June 16, 2011, the House passed H.R. 2112 by a vote of 217-203 after adopting 22 amendments and removing 4 provisions by point of order.

In the Senate, the full Appropriations subcommittee marked up an FY2012 Agriculture appropriations bill (H.R. 2112, S.Rept. 112-73) by a vote of 28-2 on September 7, 2011. Floor consideration of the bill began on October 18, 2011, as part of a “minibus” (S.Amdt. 738, in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 2112) that includes Agriculture and two other appropriations bills. Cloture was approved on October 21, and further action is expected the week of October 31.

The House-passed bill would cut discretionary Agriculture appropriations to $17.25 billion, a reduction of $2.7 billion (-14%) from FY2011 levels, and following a 15% cut in FY2011. Much of the floor debate related to funding reductions for the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) feeding program (-11%), food safety (-10%), and international food aid (-31%); preventing USDA payments to Brazil in relation to the U.S. loss in the WTO cotton case; and programs promoting locally produced food (USDA’s “know-your-farmer-know-your-food” initiative).

The Senate bill, as amended to date on the floor, would cut discretionary Agriculture appropriations to $19.8 billion, a cut of -0.8% below FY2011 levels. The Senate-reported bill is $2.7 billion more than the House bill in its discretionary total (excluding CFTC from the House bill for comparison). The Senate bill’s discretionary total is greater than the House bill primarily in the following areas: domestic nutrition programs (+$645 million, mostly for WIC), foreign assistance (+$544 million), FDA (+$350 million), agricultural research (+$320 million), rural development (+$180 million), and fewer rescissions and farm bill limitations (+$430 million). In addition to the amounts above, the Senate bill contains $376 million of disaster assistance for conservation and forestry.

The House-passed bill for FY2012 contains nearly $2 billion in rescissions and limitations on mandatory farm bill programs. The Senate-reported bill contains about $1.5 billion of such rescissions and limitations. These actions are used to score savings that help meet the discretionary budget allocations and help avoid deeper cuts to regular discretionary accounts. The FY2012 bill has about the same $2 billion level of rescissions and limitations as the FY2011 appropriation. Had the FY2012 House-passed proposal not maintained this level of reductions— which is significantly greater than in past years—even larger cuts might have been required to the regular discretionary accounts. The FY2012 bills propose a unusually high reduction to mandatory farm bill programs ($1.4 billion in the House bill, $1.1 billion in the Senate bill), including about $1 billion from conservation programs.


Date of Report: October 28, 2011
Number of Pages: 82
Order Number: R41964
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

The Pigford Cases: USDA Settlement of Discrimination Suits by Black Farmers

Tadlock Cowan
Analyst in Natural Resources and Rural Development

Jody Feder
Legislative Attorney

On April 14, 1999, Judge Paul L. Friedman of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia approved a settlement agreement and consent decree in Pigford v. Glickman, a class action discrimination suit between the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and black farmers. The suit claimed that the agency had discriminated against black farmers on the basis of race and failed to investigate or properly respond to complaints from 1983 to 1997. The deadline for submitting a claim as a class member was September 12, 2000. As of October 2011, 15,645 (69%) of the 22,720 eligible class members had final adjudications approved.

Many voiced concern over the structure of the settlement agreement, the large number of applicants who filed late, and reported deficiencies in representation by class counsel. A provision in the 2008 farm bill (P.L. 110-246) permitted any claimant who had submitted a late-filing request under Pigford and who had not previously obtained a determination on the merits of his or her claim to petition in federal court to obtain such a determination. A maximum of $100 million in mandatory spending was made available for payment of these claims, and the multiple claims that were subsequently filed were consolidated into a single case, In re Black Farmers Discrimination Litigation (commonly referred to as Pigford II).

On February 18, 2010, Attorney General Holder and Secretary of Agriculture Vilsack announced a $1.25 billion settlement of these Pigford II claims. However, because only $100 million was made available in the 2008 farm bill, the Pigford II settlement was contingent upon congressional approval of an additional $1.15 billion in funding. After a series of failed attempts to appropriate funds for the settlement agreement, the Senate passed the Claims Resolution Act of 2010 (H.R. 4783) to provide the $1.15 billion appropriation by unanimous consent on November 19, 2010. The Senate bill was then passed by the House on November 30 and signed by the President on December 8 (P.L. 111-291).

Like the original Pigford case, the Pigford II settlement provides both a fast-track settlement process and higher payments to potential claimants who go through a more rigorous review and documentation process. A moratorium on foreclosures of most claimants’ farms will remain in place until after claimants have gone through the claims process. On May 13, 2011, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued preliminary approval of the settlement agreement, but the court has not yet granted final approval. If and when that occurs, claim forms will become available, and eligible individuals will have six months to file a claim. Because no payments will be made until the merits of all claims have been heard and because the deadline for filing claims has not yet been established, it is unclear when payments to successful claimants will be made.

This report highlights some of the events that led up to the original Pigford class action suit and the subsequent Pigford II settlement. The report also outlines the structure of both the original consent decree in Pigford and the settlement agreement in Pigford II. In addition, the report discusses the number of claims reviewed, denied, and awarded under Pigford, as well as some of the issues raised by various parties under both lawsuits.


Date of Report: October 24, 2011
Number of Pages:13
Order Number: RS20430
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

Agriculture and Related Agencies: FY2012 Appropriations

Jim Monke, Coordinator
Specialist in Agricultural Policy

The Agriculture appropriations bill provides funding for all of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) except the Forest Service, plus the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and, in alternating years, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). Appropriations jurisdiction for the CFTC is split between two subcommittees—the House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee and the Senate Financial Services Appropriations Subcommittee.

An FY2012 Agriculture appropriations bill has been passed by the House and a separate version has been reported by the Senate Appropriations Committee. But final agreement is still pending, and FY2012 has begun under a short-term continuing resolution through November 18, 2011.

In the House, the Agriculture appropriations subcommittee marked up its FY2012 bill by voice vote on May 24, 2011. The following week, the full appropriations committee reported the bill (H.R. 2112, H.Rept. 112-101) by voice vote, after adopting several amendments. On June 16, 2011, the House passed H.R. 2112 by a vote of 217-203 after adopting 22 amendments and removing 4 provisions by point of order.

In the Senate, the full Appropriations subcommittee marked up an FY2012 Agriculture appropriations bill (H.R. 2112, S.Rept. 112-73) by a vote of 28-2 on September 7, 2011.

The House-passed bill would cut discretionary Agriculture appropriations to $17.25 billion, a reduction of $2.7 billion (-14%) from FY2011 levels, and following a 15% cut in FY2011. Much of the floor debate related to funding reductions for the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) feeding program (-11%), food safety (-10%), and international food aid (-31%); preventing USDA payments to Brazil in relation to the U.S. loss in the WTO cotton case; and programs promoting locally produced food (USDA’s “know-your-farmer-know-your-food” initiative). Other more notable non-money amendments that were adopted would prevent funding of blender pumps for higher mixtures of ethanol, prevent funding related to the RU-486 abortion pill (proposed relative to the USDA telemedicine program, but also affecting the FDA), prevent food aid to North Korea, and prevent implementation of USDA policy on climate change adaptation.

The Senate-reported bill would cut discretionary Agriculture appropriations to $19.8 billion, a cut of -0.8% below FY2011 levels. The Senate-reported bill is $2.7 billion more than the House bill in its discretionary total (excluding CFTC from the House bill for comparison). The Senate bill’s discretionary total is greater than the House bill primarily in the following areas: domestic nutrition programs (+$645 million, mostly for WIC), foreign assistance (+$544 million), FDA (+$350 million), agricultural research (+$320 million), rural development (+$180 million), and fewer rescissions and farm bill limitations (+$430 million).

The House-passed bill for FY2012 contains nearly $2 billion in rescissions and limitations on mandatory farm bill programs. The Senate-reported bill contains about $1.5 billion of such rescissions and limitations. These actions are used to score savings that help meet the discretionary budget allocations and help avoid deeper cuts to regular discretionary accounts. The FY2012 bill has about the same $2 billion level of rescissions and limitations as the FY2011 appropriation. Had the FY2012 House-passed proposal not maintained this level of reductions— which is significantly greater than in past years—even larger cuts might have been required to the regular discretionary accounts. The FY2012 bills propose a unusually high reduction to mandatory farm bill programs ($1.4 billion in the House bill, $1.1 billion in the Senate bill), including about $1 billion from conservation programs.


Date of Report: October 7, 2011
Number of Pages: 79
Order Number: R41964
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

Dairy Farm Support: Legislative Proposals in the 112th Congress

Dennis A. Shields
Specialist in Agricultural Policy

The question of how federal policies deal with financial stress encountered by dairy farmers has led many in Congress to reconsider federal policy for supporting them. In the 112th Congress, several Members have introduced legislation for alternatives to current federal programs, which expire in 2012. Proposed dairy legislation has the potential to eliminate some dairy programs, modify others, or replace them with a new approach to dairy farm support.

The Dairy Security Act of 2011 (H.R. 3062, Peterson et al.) would replace the current dairy product price supports and the income support program (Milk Income Loss Contract or MILC) with a new program that delivers farm payments triggered by low margins (milk price minus feed costs). To discourage excess milk production during times of low margins, producers participating in the margin program would be subject to the Dairy Market Stabilization Program. When the stabilization program is activated (only during times of low margins), producers would not receive the market revenue for milk produced in excess of a portion of the farm’s base production amount. Instead, that revenue would be sent to the federal government to be used for purchasing dairy products to increase demand. A variation of the plan, the Dairy Pricing Reform and Farmer Protection Act of 2011 (S. 1715, Gillibrand) would make margin payments available, but the penalty for overproduction would not apply in areas where dairy product production is expanding faster than milk output. For both bills, farmers who elect not to participate in the margin program could manage their own income and price risk with strategies of their choosing.

Reauthorizing and enhancing the MILC program is also under consideration. MILC payments are made to producers when the farm milk price drops below a target price of $16.94 per hundredweight. The Dairy Producer Income Protection Act of 2011 (S. 1714, Gillibrand) would boost the target price using the Consumer Price Index. The MILC program has been criticized for offering only limited protection against low milk prices for large farms because payments are limited up to a certain level of production.

The Dairy Advancement Act of 2011 (S. 1682, Casey) would also maintain the MILC program but offer a subsidy for the purchase of an existing dairy margin insurance policy (Livestock Gross Margin for Dairy) as an alternative for producers. The bill would also increase product price reporting and provide loan guarantees for processors to acquire new equipment and technologies.

Proposed legislation would also affect federal milk marketing orders (FMMOs), which regulate minimum farm prices of milk in many regions. The Federal Milk Marketing Improvement Act of 2011 (S. 1640, Casey) would require use of milk costs of production to determine minimum milk prices under the FMMOs in order to increase milk prices and dairy farm returns. The remaining bills take a different approach, focusing instead on changing how order minimum prices are determined, moving from the current end-product pricing method to one that uses competitive pay prices (actual market transaction data for farm milk).

Many in the industry, including both producers and processors, have concluded that some change is needed in FMMOs, although the degree of desired change varies substantially. Several proposals would require USDA to carefully study any proposed change before implementation due to the complexity of the system and potential impacts. The industry is not unified on how to address income support policy. Cost considerations, familiarity with existing and proposed programs, and expectations on how producers might benefit by size of farm are likely factors in how dairy policy is developed in the 112th Congress.


Date of Report: October 28, 2011
Number of Pages: 13
Order Number: R42065
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.