By STEVE BINDER
Illinois Correspondent

(Editor’s note: This article was originally scheduled to run on page 10 last week; instead, another article written by Steve Binder was erroneously reprinted on that page. This article is still timely, however, and has been updated for this issue.)

WASHINGTON, D.C. — One thing made clear after federal lawmakers approved a debt ceiling agreement two weeks ago is that more cuts in agriculture funding are on the way.

How much ends up getting cut could boil down to how much influence the ag industry has with a newly created panel of 12 legislators, a super committee that will be charged with trimming an additional $1.5 trillion from the U.S. deficit – which now exceeds $14.3 trillion – during the next 10 years.

The debt agreement kept the United States from defaulting on its financial agreements, although Standard & Poor’s on Aug. 5 lowered the country’s triple-A bond rating down a notch to double-A plus.

It also called for immediate cuts of $900 billion in discretionary funding in addition to the $1.5 trillion in cuts the new committee must identify.

One key lawmaker who serves as chair of the Agriculture subcommittee in the House, Rep. Collin Peterson (D-Minn.), already has said he believes representation on the committee by ag-friendly lawmakers may be slim. He noted cuts already have been made to ag interests this year, totaling about $6 billion to the USDA’s budget, and roughly $6 billion last year.

The USDA operates on an annual budget of about $145 billion, with roughly 75 percent going to nutrition programs such as food stamps.

“The Ag Committee’s already cut twice. The cuts that they’ve been talking about, they’re talking three times as much as cuts in agriculture as they are in other areas, which I am not going to go along with,” he added.

Representatives from trade groups already acknowledge that some level of funding cuts are in store for the ag industry, and they are staking out positions of support for popular federal programs such as crop insurance.

J. Fred Giertz, an economist at the University of Illinois, said unless Congress agrees to address how entitlement programs are funded, it could be difficult for the committee to agree on spending cuts of $1.5 trillion later this year.

“If you take Social Security and Medicaid off the table, even if defense spending is put into the equation, it will be difficult to find as much to cut from that much of a smaller pie,” Giertz said. “And when it comes to agriculture, you don’t want to cut too much in the way of research because in the long run, our ability to provide food for a growing worldwide population will be essential.”

Lawmakers are in the beginning stages of discussing a new, five-year farm bill scheduled for approval sometime next year. Early discussions have focused on cutting anywhere from another $11 billion-$48 billion from ag programs over the next 10 years.
The U.S. annual budget is about $3.73 trillion; excluding Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, defense spending and interest on the debt, not quite 20 percent remains.

Peterson said his understanding of the debt agreement calls for the super committee to submit its recommendations for cuts to Congress by Nov. 23; Congress must act by Dec. 23.

Ag committees from both chambers, therefore, must make its recommendations for cuts to the super committee by Oct. 26.
In a letter to lawmakers, National Farmers Union President Roger Johnson said it is important that ag panels in Congress have a key role in deciding future cuts.

“The Senate and House agriculture committees must be allowed to determine how any further budget reductions are made,” Johnson wrote. “These committees have the expertise to best evaluate specific programs and to include any changes in the 2012 farm bill in a manner that does not disrupt long-term commitments reflected in current farm legislation.”