|
President Bush on Tuesday issued a statement explaining
his decision to veto the 2007 farm bill once it is passed
by Congress and again called for a one-year extension of
current law. Bush said the current farm bill proposal "undermines
our ability to open foreign markets to American agricultural
goods."
Here is the full text of his statement:
In January 2007, I was hopeful that leaders in Washington
could come together on a good farm bill. At that time, my
Administration had completed more than fifty listening sessions
across the country and developed a reform-minded farm bill
based on the thousands of comments received. Our proposal
would make wise use of the people's money by reforming farm
programs, funding emerging priorities and providing a safety-net
that better targets benefits for farmers.
I am deeply disappointed in the conference report filed
today as it falls far short of the proposal my Administration
put forward. If this bill makes it to my desk, I will veto
it.
Today's farm economy is very strong and that is something
to celebrate. It is also an appropriate time to better target
subsidies and put forth real reform. Farm income is expected
to exceed the 10-year average by fifty percent this year,
yet Congress' bill asks American taxpayers to subsidize
the incomes of married farmers who earn $1.5 million per
year. I believe doing so at a time of record farm income
is irresponsible and jeopardizes America's support for necessary
farm programs.
Congress claims that this bill increases spending by $10
billion, but the real cost is nearly $20 billion when you
include actual government spending that will occur if this
bill becomes law. Instead of fully offsetting the increased
spending, the bill resorts to a variety of gimmicks, such
as pushing commodity payments outside the budget window.
Adding nearly $20 billion in additional costs to the current
ten-year spending level of approximately $600 billion is
excessive, especially when net farm income is at a record
high and food prices are on the rise. My Administration
clearly identified numerous reforms as essential to justify
even a $10 billion increase in spending, yet this bill includes
none of those reforms in full.
Crop prices have averaged a twenty percent increase since
just last year. Still, Congress wants to raise payment rates
for most crops and create new subsidies which can be triggered
even at very high prices. The bill fails to stop the practice
of collecting subsidies even when crops are sold later at
a higher price; it restricts our ability to redirect food
aid dollars for emergency use in the midst of a global food
crisis; and it falls short of the Administration's conservation
proposals. By increasing trade-distorting subsidies, the
bill undermines our ability to open foreign markets to American
agricultural goods. The bill creates an egregious new sugar
subsidy program that will keep sugar prices high for domestic
consumers, while making taxpayers subsidize a handful of
sugar growers. These are just a few of the reasons why I
cannot support this bill.
In the absence of a good farm bill, I call on Congress to
extend current law for at least one year. The Administration's
reform-minded proposal would be preferable to current law,
but in light of the bill produced by conferees an extension
is now the better policy for American agriculture and American
taxpayers. It is a far superior option than supporting a
bill that increases farm subsidy rates, spends too much
and fails to reform farm programs for the future.
|
