Food Fight

House Agriculture ranking member Charles Stenholm, D-Texas, told CongressDaily Friday that -- despite the House Agriculture Committee's rejection Thursday of his amendment to reduce state food stamp administration payments by $2 billion over the next five years to fund emergency food programs, crop insurance and other farm programs -- he will pursue the matter within the House.

And Stenholm said he will seek allies in the Senate and the Clinton administration if House leaders prove unwilling to take it up.

Although the CBO has told him it must rule that his amendment is technically an unfunded mandate, Stenholm believes he will find allies in the House and Senate who agree with him that it is not an unfunded mandate -- because welfare reform has allowed states to get money for administrative costs that the federal government would not have paid previously.

Stenholm called the GOP unwillingness to send his amendment to the Rules Committee "an unfortunate kneejerk reaction" and said he is "flabbergasted" House GOP leaders did not want to try to solve the problem -- since Agriculture Chairman Smith stated he agreed with Stenholm's views on the "merits" of the case.

A House Appropriations Committee aide confirmed appropriators believe they face a crisis in funding crop insurance subsidies. The aide said the problem is particularly difficult because the administration has budgeted $150 million in FY98 discretionary spending on crop insurance -- but agents are lobbying for a higher level of payment that would cost $200 million.

Stenholm said crop insurance agents and the administration disagree over how much the agents should be paid for their work because Congress last year took the Risk Management Agency out of the Agriculture Department's Farm Service Agency, which traditionally has kept farmers' yield records that are the basis for insurance calculations.

Stenholm said he was "very disappointed" in the decision to separate the two agencies, which was made "with the full cooperation of those who believe in total privatization even if it costs the taxpayers more money."

The FSA is the "appropriate" place to keep the records, Stenholm said, because no one has figured out what will happen to farmers' records if an insurance company or agent goes out of business. But if the agents are to keep the records they must be properly paid, he added.