In their budget, views and estimates letter to the House Budget Committee, the Agriculture Committee noted the following in support of their push for reductions to come from other spending areas:
Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and other spending estimates: “When comparing the CBO baseline used during the farm bill with CBO’s January 2016 baseline update, we estimate that anticipated taxpayer savings have increased. These savings are in addition to the almost $5 billion that agricultural policies have been sequestered since fiscal year 2013, accounting for a disproportionate 30% of the non-defense, non-Medicare mandatory sequester in fiscal year 2016.” Plus, the panel also pointed out, “Had the 2014 reforms not been enacted and the 2008 Farm Bill remained in effect, the Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI) estimates that farm policy spending would be $17.7 billion higher than it is today.”
Deficit picture would look different if all spending areas produced savings/taken reductions that ag has: “While additional, responsible savings might be achieved by our Committee in the future depending upon the outcome of an examination of the policies within our jurisdiction, truly meaningful deficit reduction will necessarily depend on contributions from beyond the jurisdiction of the Committee on Agriculture, where more than 98% of Federal spending resides. In fact, if the rest of the federal budget was reduced by the same percentage as the Commodity Title as estimated at passage of the 2014 Farm Bill, the entire federal budget would balance within the next 10 years with the surplus paying down debt held by the public by almost 50%.”
Farm income has plummeted: The combination of price declines for several crops and types of livestock is producing “an estimated 55% decline in net farm income from 2013 to 2015, the largest 2-year percent decline since the farm crisis of the 1920s. Yet, despite this economic turbulence in rural America, CBO’s January baseline projects that the Commodity Title of the farm bill is still slated to save taxpayer money relative to the repealed Direct Payment Program over the next 10 years.”
Crop insurance spending also is down: “Recent calls for cuts to crop insurance are especially ill-timed and unwise given falling crop insurance costs and Washington’s requirement on farmers to rely more upon risk management tools that they must help pay for under crop insurance. Despite the importance of crop insurance, the 2008 Farm Bill reduced crop insurance by an estimated $6.8 billion at the time; the renegotiation of the Standard Reinsurance Agreement further reduced the CBO baseline for crop insurance by more than $6 billion; and a recent re-rating of crop insurance led to even further reductions in crop insurance spending.”