Last weekend Marlene and I were driving through Iowa’s countryside and she noted, “water, water everywhere.” We talked about the water standing in fields throughout central Iowa. I noted that as much rain as our part of the state has received, southeast Iowa has had even more; that field work has been virtually non-existent down there since late-April.
“This is Iowa’s Gulf disaster,” she replied.
She’s right in a sense. As of two weeks ago, that part of the state had declared that the 2010 growing season was worse than either of the 2008 and 2009 seasons.
That sector of the state could be on the verge of total crop collapse, by the fact that row crops may not even get planted.
It makes one wonder, isn’t agriculture too important to fail?
We don’t expect the federal government to rush in and save Iowa with huge sump pumps to drain the water-logged fields; however, I’m thinking of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s intent of trimming another $6 billion from the federal crop insurance program.
The 2008 farm bill already sliced $6 billion in crop insurance supports, and before this round of cuts is fully-implemented, out comes the USDA’s Risk Management Agency implementing, starting in 2011, another $6 billion over the next decade.
Aside from being a financial threat for the small town insurance carriers who carry crop insurance, the reduction will likely make crop insurance less available for farmers who would have to go farther to find coverage. On top of that, without the federal funds, farmers will have to pay higher premiums to cover their livelihood. How much higher is only a guess at this point.
So why do this now? If AIG and megabanks, which carelessly brought this nation’s economy to its knees, were considered too big to fail, requiring multibillions of taxpayers’ dollars to keep them going, why are the people who feed and clothe this country not allowed the funds to keep them growing?
In rural Iowa we are often amused at how other Americans, generations removed from the farm, think their food comes from Hy-Vee, Safeway, ALDI, Wal-Mart stores. But it really isn’t funny, is it? Not when some of these same people are decision makers on policies such as federal crop insurance.
On June 10, the American Association of Crop Insurers issued a statement decrying this latest round of cuts.
“It means the destruction of the primary risk protection program for commercial American farmers,” the AACI’s statement said. “This would be sad in light of the recent hearings for the 2012 farm bill, which have demonstrated nationwide dependence upon the program and the need to make it work well for all crops around the nation.
“It would be ironic indeed if our government were to destroy a successful crop insurance program at the very moment that other nations all over the world are trying to replicate it.”
I can’t help but think of this as a destabilization of the rural economy. Farms and ag-related jobs across the country will be at risk. The U.S. has a low-cost food system that will be undermined.
The RMA said that $2 million of the “saved” costs will be channeled into conservation programs and the remaining $4 billion will be used for reducing the national deficit. Huh?
As of December 2009, the national deficit was $12.1 trillion. I know the government has to start somewhere with getting the deficit trimmed, but $4 billion over 10 years is a pittance compared to $12.1 trillion. American farmers have always been ready to stand and do their part for the country, but such a cut to the nation’s food-producing system seems backward.
In addition, the RMA told crop insurance agencies that it will cap its reimbursements to 80 percent of existing payments. That’s on top of the reimbursements as reduced by the 2008 farm bill. So the new cuts will go further.
This should anger farmers. We’ve written stories when farmers have verbalized their disgust when federal government policies tell them they should be willing to take less income for the greater good of the nation – that farmers’ skills in producing food had lost its value.
Now, the RMA is telling crop insurers, who have worked with their clients faithfully to deliver this safety net, that they must be willing to take the cuts – that their expertise is also of less value.
Why would these same policy makers want to apply such stress on the people who produce their steaks, chops, salads and fibers? To me, they should see ag as too important to fail, even if to preserve and assure food and clothing for themselves.