Jon Kyl: “reducing overall Federal spending on farm programs is important if we are to succeed in reducing the Federal budget…”

“reducing overall Federal spending on farm programs is important if we are to succeed in reducing the Federal budget deficit. The current budget-reconciliation package includes $39 billion in savings, including $3 billion from agriculture programs. To achieve these savings, the Senate Agriculture Committee cuts farm spending by implementing an-across-the-board 2.5 percent reduction in payments for all farm commodities. I wholeheartedly support these cuts in farm spending. However, I cannot support waiving the Budget Act to consider the Grassley Dorgan amendment to impose more restrictive payment limits on farm commodities. This amendment is being offered as a substitute to the cost savings achieved by the fair, across-the-board reductions currently in the package. Substituting the Grassley-Dorgan payment limits is eerily reminiscent of the flawed formula in the highway bill: Instead of all States bearing the burden equally, the farm cuts would be achieved on the backs of Arizona farmers and other farmers of capital intensive crops in the West and South. The advocates of the Grassley-Dorgan amendment claim that reducing payment limits preserves the family farm. What they meant to say is that it preserves family farms in North Dakota, Iowa, and other Midwestern States that grow certain commodities: namely grains and oilseeds such as corn, wheat, and soybeans. Family farmers in Arizona farm cotton.…”