Resource Conservation Title: Comparison of Current Law with Farm Bills Passed by the House and Senate

Publication Date: February 2002

Publisher: Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

Author(s):

Research Area: Agriculture, forestry and fishing

Type:

Abstract:

The most recent farm bill is the Federal Agricultural Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-127), popularly called the FAIR Act. Most conservation authorities in the FAIR Act expire at the end of FY2002. Both chambers of Congress have passed different versions of a new farm bill that will include future conservation programs and policies. There is pressure on the conference committee fro m supporters of agriculture to resolve these differences quickly before farmers make spring planting decisions. The FY2002 budget resolution, currently in effect, provides an additional $73.5 billion dollars in budget authority over the next 10 years for all agricultural spending, on top of the current baseline of about $97 billion, and the Administration often has stated that it will support that level of budget authority.

The House approved H.R. 2646 on October 5, 2001, after several days of debate. Perhaps the most contentious issue was an alternative conservation proposal, called the Kind-Boehlert amendment, which would have transferred an additional $1.9 billion annually from commodity to conservation programs. It was defeated. The Senate approved S.Amdt. 2471, offered by Senator Daschle, after several days of debate at the end of the first session and early in the second session. The Daschle Amendment includes all the conservation provisions in S. 1731, a clean bill filed by the Senate Agriculture Committee, and other proposals. During the Senate debate several amendments to conservation amendments were adopted.

This report compares Title II of H.R. 2646 and Title II of S.Amdt. 2471 with current law in two tables. The first table compares the provisions to current law. The second table compares proposed annual funding levels for each program.

Provisions in the conservation titles of the two bills have many similarities. Both bills would extend most existing conservation programs that expire at the end of FY2002. Both would greatly increase total conservation budget authority above current levels, and fund almost all the programs through the Commodity Credit Corporation. Funding for some programs, such as the Environmental Quality Incentives Program and the Farmland Protection Program, would increase significantly. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the current baseline for all mandatory conservation programs through FY2011 to be $21.4 billion. H.R. 2646, according to CBO, would increase this to $37.2 billion, while S.Amdt. 2471 would increase it to $42.7 billion. (CBO assumes the legislation is in effect for 10 years and is not amended.)

Key differences include the period of authorization. H.R. 2646 provides authorization through FY2011, while S.Amdt. 2471 provides authorization through FY2006. The House bill primarily reauthorizes existing programs, usually at lower funding levels than the Senate bill, and enacts few new programs, while the Senate bill makes more numerous and significant changes to existing programs and to conservation policies, and also creates many more new programs.