This is a public-interest archive. Personal data is pseudonymized and retained under GDPR Article 89.

call?

FYI.

Fowarded from Suzy Friedman, Environmental Defense:

Things are going south on the conservation title of the Farm Bill and we
desperately need help from you to get the Senate conferees to fight for more
funding for key conservation programs.

On April 19, the Senate members of the Farm Bill conference committee
presented a conservation title offer to the House Farm Bill conferees that
is totally unacceptable.

The proposal dramatically cuts many key programs, with the very popular and
oversubscribed Farmland Protection Program, Wildlife Habitat Incentives
Program, and Water Conservation Program taking the hardest hits. Compared to
the original Senate Farm Bill, these important programs to curb urban
sprawl, help farmers stay in farming, and protect wildlife habitat and
imperiled species have been cut by 50-60 percent.

Also, the Senate proposal misses a key opportunity to increase conservation
funding. On April 18, the House of Representatives voted 265-158 to direct
its conferees to accept the original Senate language on payment limitations
and to direct a portion of the $1 billion in savings from that provision to
conservation. By failing to increase conservation funding from $17.1 billion
over ten years to at least $18 billion, the Senate has effectively taken a
position favoring lower conservation spending than what is supported by the
vast majority of the House. Also, the strength of the Senate bill's original
$4.4 billion per year conservation title was a main reason why it passed the
Senate in the first place. Senate conferees must not go against what the
majority in both the House and Senate want in the final Farm Bill.

We really need your help now. Please call Senate members of the Farm Bill
conference committee (See below for their numbers), and Senators Daschle and
Harkin in particular (even  if they are not your Senators). Tell them the
Senate proposal on  conservation of April 19 is totally unacceptable and
that the Senate 
conferees must immediately reinstate funding for key conservation programs
like the Farmland Protection Program, Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program,
and the water conservation program.

Contact information and talking points follow.

Please contact me if you have questions.

THANKS!!

Suzy

Suzy Friedman
Environmental Defense
202-387-3500 x3376 (v)
sfriedman@environmentaldefense.org
www.privatelandstewardship.org

Contact info for Senate Farm Bill Conferees:

Tom Harkin (D-IA), 202-224-9369
Patrick Leahy (D-VT), 202-224-4242
Kent Conrad (D-ND), 202-224-2043
Tom Daschle (D-SD), 202-224-2321
Richard Lugar (R-IN), 202-224-4814
Thad Cochran (R-MS), 202-224-5054
Jesse Helms (R-NC), 202-224-6342

TALKING POINTS:
I am very concerned that the Senate has presented an unacceptable
conservation title offer to the Farm Bill conferees.

The Senate's latest offer asks for a smaller investment in conservation
than is favored by the vast majority of members the House. On April 18, the
House voted 265-158 to cap subsidy payments and direct the $1 billion in
savings in part to conservation programs. The Senate proposal fails to
seize this opportunity to increase funding for conservation.

The Senate should immediately revise its proposal to direct $1 billion in
savings from payment caps to conservation programs, providing at least $18
billion in new conservation funding over ten years.

The Senate's offer proposes sharp and unacceptable cuts in environmentally
valuable programs, particularly the Farmland Protection Program, Wildlife
Habitat Incentives Program, and Water Conservation Program.

Compared to the original Senate Farm Bill, these important programs to halt
urban sprawl, help farmers stay in farming, and protect wildlife habitat
and imperiled species have been cut by 50 to 60 percent.

I urge you to reallocate any funding cuts more fairly between the
conservation programs and to utilize the savings from the payment
limitation program to boost overall conservation spending and substantially
raise investment in the Farmland Protection Program, Wildlife Habitat
Incentives Program, Water Conservation Program, and Conservation Reserve
Program.

Finally, I urge you to hold firm to a five-year Farm Bill, as was approved
by the full Senate in February.  A seven-year bill would reduce the
per-year investment and would have a devastating effect on conservation
objectives. 

The original Senate Farm Bill included far greater commodity spending than
is wise for the environment or taxpayers, but its conservation program gave
it some balance. But in negotiation the Senate has allowed its conservation
spending to dwindle unacceptably.

You can still deliver a conservation title worthy of support by directing
to conservation some of the funds saved by the payment limitation and by
re-allocating cuts from the original Senate bill.  Both measures should be
undertaken in a way that directs substantial increases to Farmland
Protection Program, Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program, Water Conservation
Program, and Conservation Reserve Program.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@hort.net with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE PRAIRIE
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index