WASHINGTON, D.C. — A coalition of 49 organizations representing a broad variety of interests sent a joint letter to Congress urging legislators to not cut crop insurance from an upcoming omnibus appropriations bill.

The letter stressed the importance of the crop insurance programs to both farmers and the nation, especially in a year when many farmers were reliant on that protection due to adverse weather. A legislative deal, which temporarily includes crop insurance cuts, would erase $3 billion over the next 10 years from the federal deficit by dropping the guaranteed rate of return for select insurance companies from 14.5 to 8.9 percent.

“The crop insurance program is the lynchpin of the farm safety net and is crucial to the economic security of rural America,” read the coalition’s letter. “The crop insurance provision contained in the budget would gut the private sector delivery of the crop insurance program by cutting the target rate of return by 38 percent.

“Under the current target rate of return, crop insurance companies have realized negative net returns since 2011. Further reducing the target rate would only drive the industry further into the red.”

Members of the Senate and House agriculture committees have said they will vote against the budget agreement, arguing that they already made changes to the crop insurance program in the most recent farm bill. The budget agreement was reached in late October and signed by President Barack Obama in early November. The crop insurance program has contributed more than $12 billion towards reducing government spending since the 2008 farm bill,” continues the letter, “which well-surpasses the funding added to the program in 2014.”

National Farmers Union President Roger Johnson said the cuts would translate into further consolidation within the crop insurance sector and would severely limit the choices for farmers to obtain the safety net.

“We appreciate the deal struck during the budget negotiations between majority leadership and House and Senate agriculture committee leadership. As Congress negotiates an omnibus spending bill, we are urging them to keep their promise to leave the farm bill intact and not make cuts to the federal crop insurance program,” he said.

Some do not believe the reactions, however. The Environmental Working Group (EWG) released a statement which claims the proposed cuts to crop insurance would not be as dire as some make it out to be. “The $3 billion cut amounts to $300 million a year split between the 17 companies chosen by the government to sell heavily subsidized crop insurance policies. It’s ludicrous to claim that a $300 million annual drop in profits spread across these 17 companies would cripple the federal crop insurance program and end the rural economy,” it stated.

“The truth is, these companies will be guaranteed a little less profit and the commissions they pay to insurance agents might be a bit less. But the federal crop insurance program will be fine and farmers won’t pay a penny more for their insurance policies.”

The EWG goes on to say the cuts would actually bring the profits of crop insurance and their parent companies more in line with rates of return in the private insurance market, and that lawmakers should resist attempts by the crop insurance industry to shift the $3 billion cut to other programs.

The joint letter to Congress notes the agriculture community is strongly committed to the belief that balancing the federal budget is important, which is why the industry supported the passage of last year’s farm bill.

“This commitment is very important to our members and to everyone involved in agriculture,” said Johnson. “Just like we opposed this unwarranted cut to crop insurance, our members will also strongly oppose cuts to other important titles of the farm bill, such as additional cuts to conservation, energy and nutrition.”