The 2008 Farm Bill: Major Provisions and Legislative Action

The 2008 Farm Bill:
Major Provisions and Legislative Action
Updated November 6, 2008
Renée Johnson, Coordinator,
Geoffrey S. Becker, Tom Capehart, Ralph M. Chite,
Tadlock Cowan, Ross W. Gorte, Charles E. Hanrahan,
Remy Jurenas, Jim Monke, Jean M. Rawson, Randy Schnepf
Resources, Science, and Industry Division
Joe Richardson
Domestic Social Policy Division
Donald J. Marples, Mark Jickling, and N. Eric Weiss
Government and Finance Division

The 2008 Farm Bill:
Major Provisions and Legislative Action
The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-246, “2008 farm
bill”) was enacted into law on June 18, 2008. It contains 15 titles covering support
for commodity crops, horticulture and livestock production, conservation, nutrition,
trade and food aid, agricultural research, farm credit, rural development, energy,
forestry, and other related programs. It also includes provisions that make certain
changes to tax laws, in order to offset some new spending initiatives in the final bill.
The enacted bill succeeds the most recent 2002 farm bill (P.L. 107-171) and is to
guide most federal farm and food policies through 2012. Many provisions of the
2002 farm bill expired in September 2007, but were extended under a series of
temporary extensions prior to final enactment of the 2008 bill.
The enacted 2008 farm bill continues and/or modifies most existing farm and
commodity programs, and also creates new programs and provisions. For farm
commodities, the bill generally continues the framework of the 2002 farm bill,
revises payment limitations (tightening certain limits and relaxing others), adjusts
support prices for some commodities, and creates a new revenue support program,
in addition to the traditional direct, counter-cyclical, and marketing loan programs
for major supported crops. The bill also adds new stand-alone titles containing
provisions to address horticulture and livestock issues, including new mandatory
funding for specialty crop block grants and to support organic production; and
provisions to address meat and poultry inspection, country-of-origin labeling, and
livestock competition. Other provisions include changes to the current crop
insurance program, a new provision for ongoing disaster assistance, and expanded
borrowing opportunities for beginning and socially disadvantaged farmers.
The bill’s nutrition title increases food stamp benefits and sets new standards
that will make more households eligible, and also raises funding for fresh fruits and
vegetables in most domestic food programs. For research, the bill requires the
reorganization of USDA’s research, extension, and economic agencies. For most
other titles — conservation, international trade and food aid, rural development,
forestry, and energy — the enacted law reauthorizes, expands, and/or modifies many
of the existing programs, creates new programs and initiatives, and allows some
programs to expire.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates the total cost of the 2008
farm bill (i.e., baseline plus new spending, using its March 2007 baseline) at just
under $284 billion in total budget authority over five years (FY2008-FY2012).
About $42 billion (15%) in projected spending will support commodity crops, $189
billion (67%) will support the cost of domestic nutrition programs, $24 billion (9%)
will support conservation programs, and $22 billion (8%) will support crop
insurance. Another $14 billion is expected to be spent on supplemental disaster
assistance, trade, horticulture and livestock production, rural development, research,
forestry and energy, and other programs. Offsets from tax provisions and proceeds
from the credit, crop insurance, and commodity program titles are estimated at $10
billion (FY2008-FY2012).

Area of ExpertiseNameTelephone
Report Coordinator/OverviewRenée Johnson7-9588
Food and Feed Grain SupportJim Monke7-9664
Ralph M. Chite (dairy)7-7296
Other Commodity Support ProgramsRemy Jurenas (sugar)7-7281
Randy Schnepf (cotton)7-4277
Payment Limits
Planting FlexibilityJim Monke7-9664
Farm Credit
Crop Insurance; Disaster AssistanceRalph M. Chite7-7296
ConservationRenée JohnsonTadlock Cowan7-95887-7600
EnergyTom Capehart7-2425
Agricultural Trade and Food AidCharles E. Hanrahan7-7235
Specialty Crops; also AgriculturalJean M. Rawson7-7283
Research, Extension, & Economics
Meat and Poultry Inspection; MarketingGeoffrey S. Becker7-7287
and Regulatory Programs; Food Safety
Rural DevelopmentTadlock Cowan7-7600
ForestryRoss Gorte7-7266
Domestic Food Assistance and NutritionJoe Richardson7-7325
Revenue-Raising Tax ProvisionsDonald J. Marples7-3739
Small Business Disaster ResponseN. Eric Weiss7-6209
Commodity Futures Trading CommissionMark Jickling7-7784
(CFTC) reauthorization
Portions of this report were originally written by retired CRS specialists Jasper
Womach, Jeffrey Zinn, and David Brumbaugh.

Overview ........................................................1
Congressional Action...............................................1
2008 Farm Bill Policy Setting....................................1
Budgetary Considerations...................................2
Trade Negotiations and Commitments.........................3
The Administration’s Policy Recommendations..................3
Other Recommendations/Proposals............................4
Legislative Development........................................4
Brief Overview of Provisions....................................5
Projected Cost................................................8
2008 Farm Bill Implementation...................................8
Summary of the 2008 Farm Bill Provisions.............................10
Title I: Commodity Programs...................................11
Grains, Oilseeds, and Cotton Support.........................11
Sugar ..................................................15
Title II: Conservation..........................................16
Land Retirement/Easement Programs.........................17
Working Lands Programs..................................18
New Conservation Programs................................19
Title III: Trade...............................................20
Food Aid...............................................20
Trade ..................................................21
Title IV: Nutrition............................................22
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program....................23
The Emergency Food Assistance Program.....................23
Other Programs..........................................24
Title V: Credit...............................................25
Farm Service Agency......................................25
Farm Credit System.......................................25
Title VI: Rural Development...................................26
Title VII: Agricultural Research.................................27
Research Management.....................................28
Funding ................................................29
Title VIII: Forestry............................................29
Title IX: Energy..............................................30
Title X: Horticulture and Organic Agriculture.......................31
Title XI: Livestock............................................33
Competition and Marketing.................................33
Country-of-Origin Labeling.................................34
Inspection, Registries, and Grading...........................34
Other Provisions.........................................35
Title XII: Crop Insurance and Disaster Assistance Programs...........36
Crop Insurance Program...................................36
Other Disaster Assistance Programs..........................37
Title XIII: Commodity Futures..................................38

Socially Disadvantaged and Limited Resource Producers..........39
Agricultural Security......................................40
Title XV: Trade and Tax Provisions..............................40
Supplemental Agricultural Disaster Assistance..................40
Tax Provisions...........................................41
Major Provisions of the Enacted 2008 Farm Bill (P.L. 110-246) Compared
with Previous Law and the House- and Senate-Passed Bills (H.R. 2419)..43
Title I: Commodities..........................................43
Grains, Cotton, Peanuts, and Minor Commodities...................43
Definitions ..............................................43
Base Acres and Program Yields..............................47
Prohibition on Small Payments..............................48
Producer Agreement......................................48
Planting Flexibility........................................49
Direct Payments..........................................50
Counter-cyclical Payments..................................51
Revenue-based Counter-cyclical Payments.....................53
Nonrecourse Marketing Loans and Other Recourse Loans.........56
Payment Limits..........................................63
Adjusted Gross Income Limitation...........................66
Administrative Provisions..................................67
Dairy Price Support Program................................71
Dairy Forward Pricing Program..............................72
Dairy Export Incentive Program.............................72
Dairy Indemnity Program...................................73
Dairy Promotion and Research Program.......................73
Federal Milk Marketing Orders..............................73
Mandatory Dairy Commodity Price Reporting..................74
Sugar ......................................................74
No Net Cost Directive.....................................74
Price Support Levels, Loans and Payments.....................74
Marketing Allotments and Allocations........................75
Trade-Related Provisions...................................76
Title II: Conservation..........................................77
Program Definitions and Funding............................77
Highly Erodible and Wetland Conservation....................77
Comprehensive Conservation Enhancement Program.............78
Conservation Reserve Program..............................79
Wetlands Reserve Program.................................81
Conservation Security Program..............................82
Environmental Quality Incentives Program.....................84
Farmland Protection Program...............................88
Grassland Reserve Program.................................89
Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program..........................91
Other Conservation Programs...............................91
New Conservation Programs................................94
Title III: Agricultural Trade and Aid..............................99
P.L. 480 Food Aid........................................99
Other Food Aid Programs.................................104

Other Trade Provisions...................................106
Provision Regarding .....................................107
Title IV: Nutrition...........................................107
Reauthorization .........................................107
Food Stamp Program.....................................108
Fruits and Vegetables.....................................113
The Emergency Food Assistance Program....................114
Commodity Supplemental Food Program.....................115
Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations.............115
Senior Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program....................115
Community Food Projects.................................115
Geographic Preference (Purchase of Locally Produced Foods).....116
Special Initiatives........................................117
Title V: Agricultural Credit...................................119
USDA Farm Ownership Loans.............................119
USDA Farm Operating Loans..............................121
Administrative Provisions.................................122
Farm Credit System......................................124
Title VI: Rural Development..................................126
Defining Rural Eligibility.................................126
Rural Infrastructure: Water and Waste Disposal................126
Rural Broadband and Telecommunications Development........128
Agricultural-Based Rural Economic Development..............130
Regional Economic Development and Planning................131
Rural Entrepreneurship and Business Investment Programs.......132
Community Development Programs.........................133
Other Rural Development Provisions........................135
Title VII: Agricultural Research................................136
Structure and Funding of Research, Education, and Extension.....136
Provisions Affecting Certain Research Institutions .............139
Organic Agricultural Research..............................142
Specialty Crops Research..................................143
Bioenergy Research......................................143
Other Research Provisions.................................145
Extended Program Authorizations...........................150
Repeal of Program Authorizations...........................151
Title VIII: Forestry..........................................152
Cooperative Forestry Programs.............................152
Other Forestry Provisions.................................153
Title IX: Energy............................................155
Farm and Community Energy Systems.......................155
Biofuel Feedstocks.......................................157
Biofuel Research and Education............................159
Other Renewable Energy Provisions.........................162
Title X: Horticulture and Organic Production......................162
Marketing and Trade Promotion, Consumer Access.............162
Organic Agriculture Production.............................164
Pest and Disease Control..................................165
Food Safety Provisions...................................167
Disaster Assistance......................................167
Specialty Crop Sector Data Collection.......................167

Title XI: Livestock...........................................169
Livestock Mandatory Reporting............................169
Meat and Poultry Inspection...............................169
Seafood Grading and Inspection............................170
Country of Origin Labeling (COOL).........................170
Agricultural Fair Practices Act.............................171
Packers and Stockyards Act................................171
Animal Pest and Disease Programs..........................172
National Animal Identification System.......................173
Other Commodity-Specific Provisions.......................174
Title XII: Crop Insurance & Disaster Assistance Programs...........174
Timing of Crop Insurance Payments and Receipts..............174
Reimbursement of Administrative and Operating Expenses.......175
Premiums and Fees......................................175
Standard Reinsurance Agreement and Risk-Sharing.............176
Program Integrity (Waste, Fraud, and Abuse)..................177
Risk Management Research and Development.................177
Small Business Disaster Loan Program.......................178
Title XIII: Commodity Futures.................................179
Title XIV: Miscellaneous......................................179
Section 32 Funding for Nutrition Programs....................179
Socially Disadvantaged and Limited Resource Producers.........180
Pigford Discrimination Decision............................182
Agricultural Biosecurity...................................182
Food Safety Commission..................................184
Foods from Cloned Animals...............................185
Invasive Species.........................................185
Animal Welfare Act......................................186
Other APHIS-Related Provisions...........................187
Miscellaneous Rural Development Provisions.................188
Other Miscellaneous Title Provisions........................189
Title XV: Revenue & Offsetting Cost Provisions...................191
Supplemental Agriculture Disaster Assistance.................191
Customs User Fees.......................................192
Other Revenue and Tax-Related Provisions...................192
Tax-Related Conservation Provisions........................194
Tax-Related Energy Provisions.............................196
Agricultural Tax Provisions................................198
Other Provisions........................................201
Appendix: 2007-2008 Farm Bill Debate Timeline......................204
List of Tables
Table 1. 2002 Farm Bill Actual Spending (FY2002-FY2007 est.) and the
March 2007 CBO Baseline (FY2008-FY2013).......................2
Table 2. CBO Estimated Costs for the 2008 Conference Agreement on the
Farm Bill (FY2008-FY2012).....................................9

The 2008 Farm Bill:
Major Provisions and Legislative Action
Roughly every five years, Congress debates legislation governing federal farm
and food policy. The 2002 farm bill (P.L. 107-171) covered a wide range of
programs including commodity price and income support, farm credit, agricultural
conservation, research, rural development, and foreign and domestic food programs,
among others. In 2007, both the House and Senate completed committee and floor
action on their respective versions of the new farm bill. However, conference
negotiations were initially delayed because of differences between committee
leadership and the Administration’s position, largely over tax-related provisions
needed to offset new spending in the bill. Many provisions of the 2002 farm bill
expired in September 2007, but were continued under a series of temporary
extensions to allow more time to resolve differences between the House- and Senate-
passed bills.
On May 8, 2008, House and Senate farm bill conferees announced the details
of a completed conference agreement (H.R. 2419, the Food, Conservation, and
Energy Act of 2008). The following week, both chambers completed floor action
and approved the final conference agreement on the 2008 farm bill. The Bush
Administration vetoed the legislation, but both the House and Senate voted to
override the veto. On May 22, the 2008 farm bill was enacted into law (P.L. 110-
234). However, the newly enacted law contained only 14 of the 15 farm bill titles
because an enrolling error resulted in one title of the bill being omitted from the
version that was sent to the White House. To resolve this issue, both the House and
Senate passed a version of the 2008 farm bill with all 15 original bill titles (H.R.
6124). The President vetoed H.R. 6124 on June 18. That same day, both the House
and Senate voted to override the veto and the bill became law (P.L. 110-246),
replacing P.L. 110-234.
Congressional Action
2008 Farm Bill Policy Setting
The 2007/2008 farm bill debate differed from the 2002 debate in some
important ways. First, the 2008 farm bill faced potentially significant budgetary and
spending constraints, while the 2002 farm bill was crafted during a period of budget
surplus. Second, the 2008 farm bill debate was set against a backdrop of an ongoing
multilateral negotiation, which targeted farm subsidies and challenged U.S. support
and legal programs under existing trade rules. Third, the Bush Administration
submitted its own detailed proposal for the new farm bill, whereas for other recent

farm bills the Administration had not issued specific recommendations. Fourth,
many other groups, including both traditional and non-agricultural interests, also
submitted specific recommendations that ranged from maintaining the status quo to
making dramatic policy changes.
Budgetary Considerations. As with all federal programs, the farm bill
debate was influenced by budgetary constraints imposed by Congress. Recent federal
deficits raised concerns with respect to reauthorization or expansion of current farm
programs. Prior to congressional consideration of a new farm bill, budget projections
showed a lower baseline budget for agriculture programs, mainly because high
commodity prices had caused projections of future farm program spending to fall
sharply below previous projections. The Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO’s)
March 2007 baseline budget served as the official benchmark for the FY2008 budget
resolution and for scoring the budgetary impacts of the new farm bill. The CBO
baseline assumed continuation of current farm bill policies under expected economic
conditions. The budget resolution set the actual spending constraints for the
agriculture committees as they drafted a new farm bill.
In May 2007, Congress approved the FY2008 budget resolution, which adopted
the baseline budget as the fiscal parameter for the next farm bill. It also included a1
$20 billion reserve fund (above baseline) for new farm bill spending over five years.
However, any new spending was required to be deficit-neutral, meaning that it would
have to be offset with equivalent reductions in other federal spending for existing
mandatory programs, or by raising revenues. Large increases in the market prices of
corn and other commodities since the summer of 2006 contributed to a lower March
2007 baseline for farm program spending. For example, the March 2007 baseline
projected spending for commodity support payments under current law to be $42.4
billion for the FY2008-FY2013 period, about $30 billion lower than actual spending
in the previous six years (Table 1). Baseline estimates for mandatory conservation
and nutrition programs for the next six years were higher compared to the previous
six years.
Table 1. 2002 Farm Bill Actual Spending (FY2002-FY2007 est.)
and the March 2007 CBO Baseline (FY2008-FY2013)
(outlays in $ millions)
Commodi ty Conservation Exports F ood Tot a l
Baseline (FY08-FY13)42,44626,4962,005225,845296,792
Actual (FY02-FY07)72,93418,3231,648178,158271,063
Baseline vs. Actual-30,488+8,173 +357 +47,687+25,729
Source: Compiled by CRS from various Congressional Budget Office (CBO) baselines for 2007. The
FY2008-2013 baseline is as of March 2007 and does not include the cost of the 2008 farm bill. The report
section titled “Projected Cost” provides cost estimates of the 2008 farm bill.

1 Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2008, Deficit-Neutral Reserve Fund
for the Farm Bill (H.Rept. 110-153, conference report, Section 307).

Trade Negotiations and Commitments. The farm bill debate was also
influenced by obligations concerning the design and size of farm subsidies under the
World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on Agriculture, as well as by the U.S.
position in the Doha Round of multilateral negotiations.
Agreement in the Doha Round was expected to converge in 2007 with the
expiration of the 2002 farm bill, and to occur well before the June 30, 2007,
expiration of Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), which provides for expedited
congressional consideration of trade agreements. Some policymakers wanted a Doha
Round agreement so that the next farm bill could be made consistent with new farm
trade rules; others argued that the United States should not unilaterally change its
own subsidy programs ahead of any multilateral trade agreement. Progress on the
Doha Round stalled in 2006 and again in 2008, and criticisms and legal challenges
by some WTO member countries of current U.S. farm programs have continued.2
The Administration’s Policy Recommendations. In January 2007, the
Bush Administration released its own detailed recommendations for the farm bill that
aimed to substantially alter many aspects of the current commodity support system
and other existing farm bill programs.3 The Administration’s stated approach for
designing its 2007 farm bill recommendations was to take a “reform-minded and
fiscally responsible approach to making farm policy more equitable, predictable and
protected from challenge.”4 In part, this referred to the perceived need to more
evenly distribute federal program spending and benefits across a larger share of the
U.S. farm community, as well as the perceived need to modify current farm programs
to better comply with WTO obligations and limit future legal challenges from other
countries. Some of these same concerns were voiced in recommendations and
proposals by other organizations and interest groups.
The Administration’s proposed changes would have also faced potential funding
obstacles, given budget constraints for the 2008 farm bill. Nevertheless, President
Bush repeatedly threatened to veto any legislation that included certain revenue and
tax-related provisions being considered by Congress, as well as legislation that failed
to implement certain policy changes, including cuts in farm income subsidies, among
other policy issues and concerns.5 Also during the debate, the Administration

2 For more information, see CRS Report RL33144, WTO Doha Round: The Agricultural
Negotiations; CRS Report RL33697, Potential Challenges to U.S. Farm Subsidies in the
WTO; and CRS Report RL33853, Canada’s WTO Case Against U.S. Agricultural Support.
3 USDA, USDA’s 2007 Farm Bill Proposals, January 31, 2007, at [
documents/07finalfbp.pdf]. Reports and other related materials are at [http://www.usda.
gov/wps/portal/!ut/p/_s.7_0_A/7_0_1UH?navid=FARM_BILL_FORUMS]. Also see CRS
Report RL33916, The USDA 2007 Farm Bill Proposal: Possible Questions.
4 USDA, “Johanns Unveils 2007 Farm Bill Proposals,” Release No. 0020.07, January 31,

2007, at [].

5 Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Statement of Administration Policy, H.R. 2419,
at [] (House, May 25,

2007) and [] (Senate,

Nov. 6, 2007).

recommended that Congress consider a one- or two-year extension of the current
farm bill and take up a new farm bill in the next session.6
On May 21, President Bush vetoed the conference agreement on H.R. 2419. A
second bill containing all 15 original farm bill titles, H.R. 6124, was again vetoed on
June 18. Among the reasons cited by the Administration for the veto were Congress’
inclusion of certain revenue and tax-related provisions in both bills. The
Administration was also concerned that the legislation did not include certain policy
reforms in farm income subsidies, and was concerned about possible incompatibility
with U.S. obligations under the WTO, among other policy issues. Doha Round
negotiations are continuing, however. If agreement is reached, then implementing
legislation could require changes in some farm bill programs and limit spending on
farm support.
Other Recommendations/Proposals. The 2007/2008 farm bill debate
differed from the 2002 debate in the number and scope of proposals seeking a range
of changes to existing programs, as well as the addition of new ones. Many of these
recommendations gained support within and outside Congress. In addition to the
Administration proposal, several organizations and interest groups released their own
farm bill recommendations. These included state organizations, national farm
groups, commodity associations, conservation and rural development organizations,
nutrition program advocates, and several non-traditional interest groups. These
policy recommendations represented diverse interests seeking objectives ranging
from maintaining current programs to substantially altering or eliminating them.
Some recommendations were incorporated into bills introduced by some Members
of Congress during the debate, who sought to directly challenge the existing farm
legislation and programs through comprehensive and broad-based proposed
legislative changes. Others in Congress were reluctant to change current programs
because they are strongly supported by the long-time beneficiaries.
Legislative Development
In anticipation of the 2007 farm bill, both the House and Senate Agriculture
Committees conducted hearings in Washington DC and across the country during
2006, and continued to hold hearings early in 2007.7 Early in 2007, the chairmen of
both the House and Senate Agriculture Committees indicated their intention to
complete work on a new farm bill prior to the August 2007 recess, with full
congressional action by September. The House Agriculture Committee conducted
its markup of its version of the farm bill (H.R. 2419) in mid-July, and completed
House floor action on July 27, 2007. The Senate Agriculture Committee approved
its version (S. 2302) in October and, on December 14, the Senate completed floor
action on its bill, which was offered as a substitute amendment to the House bill
(H.R. 2419).

6 For information about what could have happened if a new farm bill was not enacted and
various provisions of the 2002 farm bill were to expire, see CRS Report RL34154, Possible
Expiration of the 2002 Farm Bill.
7 Information on House and Senate Agriculture Committee hearings is at [http://agriculture.] and [].

Conference negotiations were initially delayed because of differences between
committee leadership and the Administration, and also differences between the
House and Senate on how to resolve approaches to finance new spending above
baseline using tax provisions not usually associated with farm bills. During this time,
many provisions in the 2002 farm bill were set to expire in September 2007. Certain
provisions were extended until March 15, 2008, under the Consolidated
Appropriations Act for FY2008 (P.L. 110-161). Following this extension, Congress
approved a series of additional temporary extensions, including a one-month
extension and four consecutive short-term extensions lasting through May 23, 2008.8
Conferees began official meetings in April 2008.
On May 8, 2008, House and Senate farm bill conferees announced the details
of a completed conference agreement (H.R. 2419, the Food, Conservation, and
Energy Act of 2008). On May 14, 2008, the House passed the conference agreement
on the 2008 farm bill by a vote of 318-106. On May 15, the Senate passed the same
bill by a vote of 81-15. Concurrently, on May 14, both the House and Senate passed,
by voice vote, the final temporary extension of current law lasting until the earlier of
May 23, 2008, or the date the 2008 farm bill was signed into law.
On May 21, 2008, the Bush Administration vetoed the legislation. The House
voted to override the veto by a vote of 316-108 also on May 21, followed by a Senate
veto override by a vote of 82-13 the next day. On May 22, the 2008 farm bill was
enacted into law (P.L. 110-234). However, an enrolling error resulted in one title of
the bill (Title III, Trade) being omitted from the version that was sent to the White
House. The newly enacted law contained 14 of 15 farm bill titles. To resolve this
issue, both the House and Senate passed a version of the 2008 farm bill with all 15
original bill titles (H.R. 6124). The President vetoed H.R. 6124 on June 18, 2008.
That same day both the House (80-14) and the Senate (317-109) voted to override the
veto and the bill became law (P.L. 110-246), replacing P.L. 110-234. A timeline
showing a chronology of major events is provided at the end of this report.
Brief Overview of Provisions
The enacted 2008 farm bill contains 15 titles covering support for commodity
crops, horticulture and livestock production, conservation, nutrition, trade and food
aid, agricultural research, farm credit, rural development, energy, forestry, and other
related programs. It also includes tax-related provisions that make certain changes
to tax laws in order to offset new spending initiatives in the rest of the bill. The 2008
farm bill replaces many of the provisions of the 2002 farm bill (P.L. 107-171) and
guides most federal farm and food policies through 2012.
The 2008 farm bill includes five new titles that were not in the 2002 farm bill,
covering horticulture and livestock products, crop insurance and disaster assistance,
commodity futures, and various tax and trade provisions. The text box shows the
titles of the 2008 farm bill and briefly describes some title provisions.

8 March 12 (P.L. 110-196), April 17 (P.L. 110-200), April 24 (P.L. 110-205), May 1 (P.L.
110-208), and May 14 (P.L. 110-231). Information about what could have happened if the
new farm bill was not enacted and provisions of the 2002 farm bill had expired is discussed
in CRS Report RL34154, Possible Expiration (or Extension) of the 2002 Farm Bill.

The 2008 Farm Bill: Titles and Respective Programs and Policies
!Title I, Commodities: Income support to growers of selected commodities, including
wheat, feed grains, cotton, rice, oilseeds, peanuts, sugar, and dairy. Support is largely
through direct payments, counter-cyclical payments, and marketing loans. Other
support mechanisms include government purchases for dairy, and marketing quotas
and import barriers for sugar.
!Title II, Conservation: Environmental stewardship of farmlands and improved
management practices through land retirement and working lands programs, among
other programs geared to farmland conservation, preservation, and resource protection.
!Title III, Agricultural Trade and Food Aid: U.S. agriculture export and
international food assistance programs, and various World Trade Organization (WTO)
!Title IV, Nutrition: Domestic food and nutrition and commodity distribution
programs, such as food stamps and supplemental nutrition assistance.
!Title V, Farm Credit: Federal direct and guaranteed farm loan programs. Also
specifies loan eligibility rules and other policies.
!Title VI, Rural Development: Business and community programs for planning,
feasibility assessments, and coordination activities with other local, state, and federal
programs, including rural broadband access.
!Title VII, Research: Agricultural research and extension programs, including
biosecurity and response, biotechnology, and organic production.
!Title VIII, Forestry: USDA Forest Service programs, including forestry
management, enhancement, and agroforestry programs.
!Title IX, Energy: Bioenergy programs and grants for procurement of biobased
products to support development of biorefineries and assist eligible farmers, ranchers,
and rural small businesses in purchasing renewable energy systems, as well as user
education programs.
!Title X, Horticulture and Organic Agriculture: A new farm bill title covering fruits,
vegetables, and specialty crops and organic agriculture.
!Title XI, Livestock: A new farm bill title covering livestock and poultry production,
including provisions that amend existing laws governing livestock and poultry
marketing and competition, country-of-origin labeling requirements for retailers, and
meat and poultry state inspections, among other provisions.
!Title XII, Crop Insurance and Disaster Assistance: A new farm bill title covering
crop insurance and assistance previously included in the miscellaneous title (not
including the supplemental disaster assistance provisions in the Trade and Tax title).
!Title XIII, Commodity Futures: A new farm bill title covering reauthorization of the
Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and other changes to current law.
!Title XIV, Miscellaneous: Other types of farm programs and assistance not covered
in other bill titles, including provisions to assist limited-resource and socially
disadvantaged farmers, agricultural security, and other provisions.
!Title XV, Trade and Tax Provisions: A new title covering tax-related provisions
intended to offset spending initiatives for some programs, including those in the
nutrition, conservation, and energy titles. The title also contains other provisions,
including the new supplemental disaster assistance and disaster relief trust fund.

For commodities (Title I), the enacted 2008 farm bill generally continues the
framework of the 2002 farm bill, but with changes to program eligibility criteria and
payment limitations, and adjustments to target prices and loan rates for some
commodities, covering the 2008 through 2012 crop years. The bill creates a new
Average Crop Revenue Election (ACRE) program beginning in crop year 2009. It
also adds new provisions to address horticulture and livestock issues, and creates two
new titles to address these sectors (Title X and Title XI). The bill provides
mandatory funding for specialty crop block grants and adds new provisions
supporting pest and disease programs, new funding for growth of farmers’ markets
and for transitioning producers to organic production, and price reporting and organic
data collection, among other provisions. New animal agriculture provisions include
changes to existing laws governing livestock and poultry marketing and competition,
and changes in country-of-origin labeling requirements and meat and poultry
The nutrition title (Title IV) reauthorizes and increases funding for most farm
bill authorized programs. It increases benefits and makes more households eligible
under in the Food Stamp program, which the farm bill conferees have renamed the
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance program. The 2008 farm bill also provides new
spending to increase purchases of commodities for The Emergency Food Assistance
Program (TEFAP), expands the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable program, and adds funding
for the Senior Farmers’ Market Nutrition program (SFMNP). The bills’ international
food aid and trade provisions (Title III) reauthorize funding for USDA’s international
food aid export market development, export credits, and export guarantees, and also
address barriers to U.S. agriculture exports.
Under the conservation (Title II), energy (Title IX), rural development (Title
VI), and forestry titles (Title VIII), the 2008 farm bill reauthorizes, expands, and
modifies many existing programs, creates new programs and initiatives, and allows
some programs to expire. The bill also reauthorizes, expands, and modifies many of
the existing provisions under the research title (Title VII) by requiring the
reorganization of USDA’s research, extension, and economic agencies.
The 2008 farm bill expands borrowing opportunities under USDA’s Farm
Service Agency loan program (Title V). It also creates a new farm bill title to modify
crop insurance (Title XII), which provides significant savings to offset the cost of
new spending in other parts of the bill. Provisions in the bill also provide ongoing
disaster assistance (Title XV) and address agricultural security and animal quarantine
inspections (Title XIV).
The bill includes revenue and offsetting cost provisions that are outside the
jurisdiction of the agriculture committees. These provisions make certain changes
to tax laws that are intended to offset additional spending in the farm bill, and were
added by both chambers to comply with current pay-go budget rules (Title XV). The
2008 farm bill also includes the reauthorization of and modifications to the
Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).
The report section titled “Summary of the 2008 Farm Bill Provisions” provides
more detailed discussions of the major provisions in the final conference agreement
and in the House and Senate versions of the farm bill.

Projected Cost
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates the total cost of the 2008 bill
(i.e., baseline plus new funding, using the March 2007 baseline) at $284 billion over
FY2008-FY2012 and $604 billion over FY2008-FY2017 (Table 2).9 The costs
discussed in this report are mandatory outlays that do not require appropriations
actions. The farm bill also authorizes discretionary programs that require
appropriators to allocate funds and thus are not reflected in the table.
Table 2 provides a title-by-title breakdown of CBO spending estimates for the
enacted 2008 farm bill, covering both FY2008-FY2012 and FY2008-FY2017. The
overwhelming share (more than 95%) of estimated total net outlays for programs
included in the farm bill is anticipated to be spent on programs and activities covered
by the nutrition (67%), the commodities (15%), the conservation (9%), and crop
insurance titles (8%). Of the $284 billion in projected total five-year net outlays for
programs under the farm bill — including revenue and cost-offset provisions in the
bill — about $42 billion in projected spending will support commodity crops, $189
billion will support the cost of food stamps and commodity assistance, $24 billion
will support conservation programs, and $22 billion will support crop insurance. For
FY2008-FY2012, the enacted bill also includes nearly $4 billion in new spending for
supplemental disaster assistance (included under Title XV). Another $10 billion is
expected to be spent on trade, horticulture and livestock production, rural
development, research, forestry and energy, and other programs.
Tax-related provisions — particularly from customs user fees and corporate
estimated tax payments in the bill — along with cost savings from some farm bill
programs, are expected to generate additional funding to offset any new spending.
CBO estimates that offsets in the bill total more than $10 billion over five years
(FY2008-2012) (Table 2), which includes tax-related provisions, and proceeds from
the credit, crop insurance, and commodity program titles. Disaster assistance and
programs under the nutrition and conservation titles account for the majority of the
new spending in the bill.
2008 Farm Bill Implementation
Many of the program changes included in the 2008 farm bill will require action
by USDA to develop regulations and guidelines. How USDA interprets these
changes and follows through with modifications at the program level will likely be
subject to additional scrutiny over the coming year, especially since many of these
legislative changes must be made by dates specified in the farm bill.

9 Estimates reflect the cost of the bills’ mandatory programs only. The bills also include
authorization of appropriations for discretionary programs not included in these estimates.
The March 2007 baseline is used because the House, the Senate, and the conferees
structured their provisions in relation to this baseline. If the March 2008 baseline were used,
the bill’s cost would be at least $4 billion over FY2008-FY2017.

Table 2. CBO Estimated Costs for the

2008 Conference Agreement on the Farm Bill (FY2008-FY2012)

(outlays in million $)
F Y 2008-F Y 2012 F Y 2008-F Y 2017
BaselineCBO ScoreTotalBaselineCBO ScoreTotal
( c hange) ( c hange)
Commodities (Title I)43,354(1,726)41,62887,179(1,658)85,521
Conservation (Title II)21,3922,72024,11250,6994,00054,699
Trade/Food Aid (Title III)1,823301,8533,715(78)3,637
Nutrition (Title IV)a 186,0052,897188,902397,1319,218406,349
Credit (Title V)(1,046)(378)(1,424)(2,321)(306)(2,627)
Rural Development (Title VI)7212219472149221
Research (Title VII)290313211,290(907)383
Forestry (Title VIII)0383804545
Energy (Title IX)4160264343836879
Horticulture/Organic (Title X) — 402402 — 938938
Livestock (Title XI) — 11 — 11
Crop Insurance (Title XII)25,718(3,860)21,85852,743(5,591)47,152
Commodity Futures (Title XIII) — 00 — 00
Miscellaneous (Title XIV)b 6,338446,38213,668(138)13,530
Disaster Assistance (Title XV) — 3,8073,807 — 3,8073,807
Tax/Other (Title XV) — (4,798)(4,798) — (10,429)(10,429)
283,987 (66) 283,921 604,218 (107) 604,111
Source: Compiled by CRS using the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) March 2007 baseline and CBO score of the
conference agreement for H.R. 2419, the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008; also Senate Finance Committee,
Estimated Revenue Effects of the Conference Agreement for Title XV of H.R. 2419, Fiscal Years 2008-2018, 08-2 068 R10
(Preliminary), May 13, 2008. May not add due to rounding.
a. New outlays for the expanded Fresh Fruit and Vegetable program required in the nutrition title, $274 million
(FY2008-FY2012) and $1.020 billion (FY2008-FY2017), are not reflected in this table because they are effectively
offset with money from permanent appropriations under Section 32, mandated in Title XIV.
b. Excludes estimates for crop insurance provisions previously included as part of the farm bill’s miscellaneous provisions.
Requirements and/or regulatory guidelines will be needed to implement various
newly enacted or modified program provisions. For example, these include the new
revenue-based counter-cyclical program and new requirements on producer payment
limits (Title I); new mandatory country-of-origin labeling for certain livestock, and
poultry, and other products, as well as new state meat and seafood inspections (Title
XI); and new mandatory provisions for fruit and vegetable crops and organic
agriculture (Title X). The farm bill’s new Supplemental Agricultural Assistance
programs (Title XV) will require regulations to implement, with the biggest
implementation issue involving the timeliness of payments under the crop disaster
assistance portion of the programs. In addition, the farm bill’s research title (Title
VII) takes major step in consolidating programs and planning in USDA’s agricultural
research, education, and economics mission area, which will merge three existing
USDA agencies.
The farm bill's nutrition title (Title IV) makes changes to several existing
nutrition programs but requires little or no federal guidance as to their
implementation because they are "self-executing" (e.g., change or remove a specific
dollar amount specified in law), call for minimal revisions to existing rules, or are

state/local options. However, some initiatives, like the fresh fruit and vegetable
program, may be revisited in the 111th Congress when it takes up a scheduled
reauthorization of child nutrition laws. Other programs and provisions throughout
the farm bill — covering conservation, forestry, energy, and rural development,
among others — will also require new requirements and regulatory guidelines to
In June, 2008, USDA announced its plans for developing implementation
structures and procedures for the 2008 farm bill.10 As part of this plan, USDA began
working on a timeline for various priority items and regulatory development,
identifying responsible implementing agencies and also cross-cutting issues, working
with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on the rulemaking process, and
identifying action items for immediate action, among other steps. Earlier media
reports, however, have USDA asserting it might need more money beyond the $50
million that Congress provided to implement the new farm bill;11 other reports
suggest that technology needs at USDA could slow delivery of these enacted program
In October 2008, USDA representatives told key congressional committee staff
that implementation of the 2008 farm bill would involve the development of more
than 150 individual regulations.13 An estimated 40 regulations are will be developed
by USDA’s Farm Service Agency (FSA); an estimated 24 regulations would be
required within a short turnaround, given that Congress had specified that regulations
be developed within 90 days of bill enactment. USDA representatives indicated that
there could be delays in the rulemaking process because of the “massive workload”
required and possible backlog in Federal Register publications.14
Summary of the 2008 Farm Bill Provisions
The following is a discussion of the major provisions in the 2008 farm bill. As
with any omnibus bill covering many issues and laws, the 2008 farm bill may contain
technical inconsistencies that are likely to be rectified in a later law. The effects of
these inconsistencies are not reflected in the following side-by-side.
Following the discussion is a detailed side-by-side comparison summarizing the
major provisions in the 2008 farm bill and comparing the enacted bill provisions with

10 USDA, "USDA Implementation of the 2008 Farm Bill (as of June 17, 2008)." Information
provided to House Agriculture Committee staff.
11 J. Hagstrom, "USDA Says It Needs More Cash to Implement Farm Bill," National Journal,
June 26, 2008.
12 S. Wyant, "USDA Forges Ahead with Farm Bill Implementation," High Plains Journal,
June 5, 2008, at [
13 USDA, "Farm Bill Implementation Status report for Congressional Staff,” October 3,

2008. Information provided to House Agriculture Committee staff.

14 Statements during a briefing to House Agriculture Committee staff, October 3, 2008.

previous law and provisions in the House- and Senate-passed bills. USDA’s
Economic Research Service (ERS) also has published a side-by-side comparison of
the 2008 and the 2002 farm bills, as enacted.15
Title I: Commodity Programs
Grains, Oilseeds, and Cotton Support. The enacted 2008 farm bill
generally continues the farm commodity price and income support framework of the
2002 farm bill. It revises payment limitations by tightening some limits and relaxing
others, and adjusts target prices and loan rates for some commodities. It continues the
direct payment, counter-cyclical payment, and marketing loan programs for the 2008
through 2012 crop years. The enacted bill also creates a pilot revenue-based
counter-cyclical program beginning with the 2009 crop year. It also has a pilot
program for planting flexibility, restrictions on base acres developed for residential
use, and a new provision that eliminates benefits to farms with fewer than 10 acres.
For direct payments, the payment rates per commodity remain the same as under
the 2002 farm bill, but the overall formula contains a 2% reduction in direct
payments for crop years 2009-2011. This is accomplished by changing the ratio of
base acres on which direct payments are made from 85% to 83.3% of base acres. The
85% ratio is restored for the 2012 crop year to maintain baseline for the next farm bill
at a higher level. The reduction to 83.3% does not affect the counter-cyclical
payment formula. The final bill also adopts House and Senate provisions that
eliminate making advance direct payments in the 2012 crop year and thereafter. This
provision delays payment of 22% of the direct payment amount from December to
the following October, thus into a new fiscal year and allowing the farm bill to score
budget savings of about $1.1 billion in FY2012. Farmers will have to wait longer, but
will receive their full payment.
Support levels for counter-cyclical payments and marketing loans are adjusted
with many crops receiving notable increases, and support for cotton being reduced
slightly. Several commodity groups felt that their support levels were not high
enough relative to other commodities in the 2002 farm bill, and did not receive
counter cyclical support ever or as often (e.g., wheat, soybeans). For counter-cyclical
payments, six out of 10 commodities have an increase in their target price (wheat,
sorghum, barley, oats, soybeans and minor oilseeds), one has a small decrease
(cotton), and four are new in 2009 (dry peas, lentils, small chickpeas, large
chickpeas). For marketing loans, eight out of 20 commodities have an increase in
their loan rate (wheat, barley, oats, minor oilseeds, graded wool, honey, cane sugar,
beet sugar), two have a decrease (dry peas, lentils), and one is new in 2009 (large
The 2008 farm bill does not change the “beneficial interest” rules, and thus
continues to allow farmers to lock in their loan deficiency payments (LDP) when
market prices are low, continue to own the commodity, and sell it at a future and
possibly higher market price. Policy makers want farmers to continue to have the

15 USDA, ERS, The 2008 Farm Bill Side-By-Side Comparison, at [

flexibility to market their commodities in response to market signals and benefit from
the program, but advocates for change point out that if farmers can sell their crop for
more than the support price, then government support should be unnecessary. The
Bush Administration had identified this as one of its priorities for commodity title
For the new revenue counter-cyclical option — the Average Crop Revenue
Election (ACRE) program — the final bill adopted the Senate approach, but with
significant modifications. Compared to the Senate-passed bill, the ACRE program
starts a year earlier in 2009 with less change to its interaction with direct payments
and marketing loans. The House-passed farm bill offered a pilot revenue
counter-cyclical program based on national-level revenues, while the Senate-passed
bill offered a state-level revenue counter-cyclical pilot program beginning in 2010
that replaced direct payments with a “fixed payment” and offered only recourse
Farmers will choose either the traditional price-triggered counter-cyclical
program or the new revenue-based ACRE option. Participants in the ACRE program
will continue to receive direct payments, but at a 20% reduced rate. Participants will
also continue to be eligible for nonrecourse marketing loans, but with a 30% lower
loan rate. To receive an ACRE payment, two triggers need to be met. First, the
actual state revenue for a supported crop during the crop year must be less than the
state-level revenue guarantee amount. Second, an individual farm’s actual revenue
for a supported crop during the crop year must be less than the farm’s benchmark
revenue. Benchmark yields at the state and farm levels are Olympic averages
(dropping the highest and lowest price) of the most recent five years. Price
guarantees are averages of the marketing year price (or the marketing loan rate
reduced by 30%, if greater) for the most recent two years. If both triggers are met,
an individual farm will receive an ACRE payment that is based on the state-level
difference between actual revenue and the ACRE guarantee per acre multiplied by
a percentage (83.3% or 85% depending on the crop year) of the farm’s planted
acreage, but pro-rated based on the individual farm’s yield history compared to the
state’s yield history.
The White House has criticized the ACRE program because its two-year price
guarantee feature will incorporate the historically high recent market prices into the
guarantee, and consequently possibly require large payments to farmers if market
prices decline from their currently record high levels in 2007 and 2008. The White
House has argued that the CBO score does not reflect the magnitude of this
possibility because market prices in the baseline are assumed to remain high.
The 2008 farm bill also includes a pilot planting flexibility program for fruits
and vegetables for processing, while continuing the overall restriction on planting
fruits and vegetables on base acreage. The pilot program begins in 2009, and allows
farmers in seven midwestern states to plant base acres to cucumbers, green peas, lima
beans, pumpkins, snap beans, sweet corn, and tomatoes grown for processing. Their
base acres are temporarily reduced for the year (resulting in lower direct and
counter-cyclical payments), but restored for the next crop year. The states include
Minnesota (34,000 acres), Wisconsin (9,000 acres), Michigan (9,000 acres), Illinois
(9,000 acres), Indiana (9,000 acres), Ohio (4,000 acres), and Iowa (1,000 acres).

The farm bill includes a Senate provision that eliminates base acres on land that
had been subdivided into multiple residential units or other non-farming uses. Prior
rules have eliminated base only for land developed for nonagricultural commercial
or industrial use.
The farm bill also eliminates payments to farms with fewer than 10 base acres
of all crops, except for farms owned by socially disadvantaged or limited-resource
farmers and ranchers. The acreage approach is different than a House provision
which set a minimum threshold of $25 per type of payment. The Senate had no
similar provision.
The bill requires USDA to reconcile social security numbers of program
recipients with a Social Security database twice a year to assure program
beneficiaries are alive, and to issue regulations describing how long a deceased
person’s estate may continue to qualify for program benefits. This is less specific
than the Senate provision, which specified a two-year period. This provision is in
response to a 2007 GAO report showing that farm commodity payments continue to
be paid to deceased farmers or their estates beyond the two-year regulation.
Payment Limits. Two types of payment limits exist. One sets the maximum
amount of farm program payments that a person can receive per year. The other sets
the maximum amount of income that an individual can earn and still remain eligible
for program benefits (a means test).
Regarding the limit on the amount of payments, the enacted 2008 farm bill
continues the $40,000 limit on direct payments and $65,000 limit on counter-cyclical
payments. The counter-cyclical limit will apply to both traditional and revenue
counter-cyclical payments. The final bill does not place any limit on marketing loan
benefits, and thus they are now unlimited. In the 2002 farm bill, marketing loan
benefits were limited to $75,000 per farm per year, but use of commodity certificates
and forfeiture were unlimited, thus creating equity issues.
The 2008 farm bill still allows doubling of those limits by having a spouse, but
eliminates the “three-entity rule” that formerly allowed an alternative means of
doubling by having multiple farms with different ownership arrangements. Along
with elimination of the three-entity rule, the conference agreement requires “direct
attribution” of program benefits to a living person. If a program payment cannot be
traced to a living person within four levels of ownership, the payment to the original
entity owning the farm is reduced proportionately.
Under the 2002 farm bill, the limit on payments was commonly regarded as
$360,000 per farm per year.16 Given the elimination of limits on the marketing loan
program, an equivalent comparison to the 2008 farm bill is difficult. The limit on
direct and counter-cyclical payments continues to be $210,000 per farmer couple per17

16 Calculated as follows: $40,000 + $65,000 + $75,000 = $180,000 (doubled to $360,000).
17 Calculated as follows: $40,000 + $65,000 = $105,000 (doubled to $210,000).

Regarding the adjusted gross income (AGI) limit, the 2008 farm bill adopts a
slightly different approach than the 2002 farm bill or the House or Senate bills.
Formerly, the AGI limit had an exception if a certain proportion of AGI (e.g., 75%)
was earned from farming sources. The 2008 farm bill eliminates the exception and
creates two new measures of AGI: adjusted gross nonfarm income, and adjusted
gross farm income.
First, if a three-year average of nonfarm AGI exceeds $500,000, then no
program benefits are allowed (direct, counter-cyclical and marketing loan). Second,
if a three-year average of farm AGI exceeds $750,000, then no direct payments are
allowed (but counter-cyclical and marketing loan benefits are allowed for these
higher-income farmers). Program participants can have income from both sources,
but the caps for each type are “hard” caps (that is, there are no exceptions to the cap
as with “soft” caps, except that the cap on farm AGI applies only to direct payments).
For example, if a full-time farmer has nonfarm AGI over $500,000, their program
payments are eliminated regardless of their farm income. A taxpayer’s AGI may also
be between $750,000 and $1.25 million and still receive program benefits if the
income is split in such a way to remain below the caps on farm and nonfarm income.
Moreover, the 2008 farm bill adopts a Senate provision that allows AGI of a married
couple to be divided as if separate tax returns were filed. While in principle this
provision could allow doubling of the AGI limits, the income needs to be legitimately
allocated between the spouses, likely by Social Security numbers or equivalent
For more information on the commodity programs above and payment limits,
see CRS Report RL34594, Farm Commodity Programs in the 2008 Farm Bill.
Dairy. Two federal programs that support milk prices and dairy farm income
were among the farm bill programs set to expire in 2007 — the dairy price support
program (DPSP) and the Milk Income Loss Contract (MILC) program. In the past
under the DPSP, USDA had been required to indirectly support the farm price of
milk, most recently at $9.90 per cwt. (100 pounds), which it has done by purchasing
surplus butter, nonfat dry milk, and cheese at specified minimum prices. The 2008
farm bill continues the DPSP through December 2012, but modifies the program by
specifying, in the law itself, the minimum purchase prices for these manufactured
dairy products. If net removals (essentially, USDA’s surplus purchases) for 12
consecutive months exceed statutory limits, USDA may reduce product purchase
prices, under the final law.
Under expiring law, the MILC program had paid participating farmers 34% of
the difference between a target price of $16.94 per cwt. and the monthly market price
for farm fluid milk in New England, when the market price is below the target. Per
farm payments had been limited to the first 2.4 million lbs. of annual milk
production. The enacted 2008 farm bill extends the program, but generally increases
the payment factor to 45% of the price differential for the period from October 1,
2008, through August 31, 2012, as proposed by the Senate. Conferees also increased
the production limit for payments to 2.985 million pounds, compared with a Senate
proposal that would have raised the limit to 4.15 million pounds. Furthermore, the
$16.94 per cwt. payment rate must be adjusted to reflect feed cost increases above

trigger levels specified in the enacted farm bill. CBO has estimated the total net
five-year increase in outlays for the bill’s key dairy provisions at $386 million.
A third ongoing federal dairy policy tool, federal milk marketing orders, require
dairy processors to pay a minimum price for farm milk depending on its end use (i.e.,
the type of product produced). Federal orders are permanently authorized, but a
number of issues were brought to the attention of Congress for the farm bill debate.
Dairy processors had been seeking a change in statute to exempt them from paying
the federal milk marketing order minimum price whenever they forward contract
prices with dairy farmers. The 2008 farm bill authorizes farmers to voluntarily enter
into forward price contracts until September 30, 2012, with none to extend beyond
September 30, 2015. The legislation contains safeguards designed to ensure that
dairy farmers are not compelled by processors to participate in the program. The
final bill also establishes, subject to the availability of appropriations, a commission
to review and evaluate federal milk marketing order policies and procedures, and in
the meantime revises the formal hearing procedures used to consider amendments to
the orders.
Other dairy-related provisions in the enacted bill bring Alaska, Hawaii, the
District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico into the dairy research and promotion (check-
off) program; lower the promotion program’s assessment rate for imported products
to 7.5 cents per cwt.; extend the dairy indemnity program; and provide for new
USDA directives related to dairy product price reporting. For more information, see
CRS Report RL34036, Dairy Policy and the 2008 Farm Bill.
Sugar. The sugar program is designed to guarantee the price received by
growers and processors of sugar beets and sugarcane, but at no cost to the U.S.
Treasury. To accomplish this, USDA limits the amount of sugar that processors can
sell domestically under “marketing allotments” and restricts imports, in order to keep
market prices above support levels. This way, the incentive exists for sugar cane18
processors and beet refiners to repay nonrecourse price support loans extended by
USDA rather than hand over processed sugar as payment (commonly referred to as
loan forfeitures).
To address the potential for a U.S. sugar surplus caused by unrestricted imports
from Mexico under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and from
other countries under other free trade agreements, and the resulting loan forfeitures,
the 2008 farm bill mandates a sugar-for-ethanol program. USDA is now required to
purchase U.S.-produced sugar roughly equal to excess imports, if necessary to
maintain market prices above support levels. The sugar purchased must then be sold
to bioenergy producers for processing into ethanol. USDA’s Commodity Credit
Corporation will provide open-ended funding for this program. Other provisions

18 A type of loan where farmers or processors pledge a commodity as collateral to obtain a
loan from the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) at a commodity-specific, per-unit loan
rate. The borrower may repay the loan, with interest, within a specified period and regain
control of the commodity. Alternatively, the commodity can be forfeited to the CCC with
no penalty if market prices fall below the loan rate at the end of the term. The government
takes no recourse beyond accepting the commodity as full settlement of the loan.

increase the raw sugar and refined beet loan rates by 4%-5% by FY2012, mandate an
85% domestic market share for the U.S. sugar producing sector, and remove some
of the discretionary authority that USDA exercises to administer import quotas.
Though CBO scored some savings for the ethanol program, it projects the sugar
program will cost about $650 million over five years. The Bush Administration
opposed the program, arguing that instead of reform, its provisions “actually increase
government intervention to drive up sugar prices.” It asserted that the sugar-for-
ethanol component will operate at a “huge loss” as excess sugar supply is auctioned
off to ethanol processors.19
For more background, see CRS Report RL34103, Sugar Policy and the 2008
Farm Bill.
Title II: Conservation
The 2008 farm bill reauthorizes almost all 2002 farm bill conservation
programs, modifies several programs, and creates several new conservation
programs. CBO-estimated new spending on the conservation title — not including
estimated conservation-related revenue and cost-offset provisions in the bill — is
projected to increase by $2.7 billion over 5 years and $4.0 billion over 10 years.
Total mandatory spending (new spending plus baseline) for the conservation title is
projected at $24.3 billion over 5 years (FY2008-FY2012) and $55.2 billion over 10
years (FY2008-FY2017).
Conservation programs administered by USDA can be broadly grouped into
land retirement programs and so-called “working lands” programs. In general, land
retirement and easement programs take land out of crop production and provide for
program rental payments and cost-sharing to establish longer term conservation
coverage, in order to convert the land back into forests, grasslands, or wetlands.
Working lands programs provide technical and financial assistance to assist farmers
to improve land management practices. Major land retirement and easement
programs include the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) and the Conservation
Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP), the Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP), the
Grasslands Reserve Program (GRP), and the Farmland Protection Program (FPP),
among other programs. Major working lands programs include the Environmental
Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), the (renamed) Conservation Stewardship
Program (CSP), the Agricultural Management Assistance (AMA) program, and the
Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program (WHIP), among others.
Changes to existing programs address eligibility requirements, program
definitions, enrollment and payment limits, contract terms, evaluation and ranking
criteria, and other administrative issues. In general, the conservation title includes
certain changes that expand eligibility and the delivery of technical assistance under
most programs to cover more broadly, for example, forested and managed lands,
pollinator habitat and protection, and identified natural resource areas, among other

19 White House, Office of the Press Secretary, “Fact Sheet: Congress’ Farm Bill Is Bad for
American Taxpayers,” May 9, 2008, available at [

2008/05/print/20080509.html ].

expansions. Producer coverage across most programs is also expanded to include
beginning, limited resource, and socially disadvantaged producers; speciality crop
producers; and producers transitioning to organic production. The enacted bill also
creates new conservation programs to address emerging issues and priority resource
areas, and also new subprograms under existing programs.
The majority of the agriculture and farmland conservation groups have
responded favorably to the expanded provisions and increased funding for programs
in the conservation title of the 2008 farm bill. However, a few wildlife groups have
expressed concern about changes that were made to some provisions during the
conference negotiations, which they perceive as providing fewer benefits for the
protection of wildlife and wildlife habitat. Among the concerns expressed by these
groups are the reduction in the CRP acreage enrollment cap, easing of the
requirements under the so-called sodsaver provision, limitations on the types of lands
eligible under WHIP, and the new permanent disaster fund, which could encourage
marginal land plantings, among other concerns.
Land Retirement/Easement Programs. The largest conservation program
in terms of total annual funding is the CRP. The enacted bill caps CRP enrollment
at 32 million acres, down from its previous cap of 39.2 million acres. The managers
report on the conference agreement states this reduction is “not ... an indicator of
declining or reduced support for CRP;” however, in other sections of the report
USDA is encouraged to assist producers who are transitioning from land retirement
to working lands conservation. The bill makes certain program changes, including
allowing for USDA to address state, regional, and national conservation initiatives;
expanding the program to cover beginning and socially disadvantaged farmers/
ranchers; allowing for certain types of managed grazing and installation of wind
turbines on enrolled lands (but at reduced rates); requiring that program participants
manage lands according to a conservation plan; requiring USDA to survey annually
the per-acre estimates of county cash rents paid to CRP contract holders; clarifying
the status of alfalfa grown as part of a rotation practice; and establishing cost-sharing
rates for certain types of conservation structures. The bill also modifies the pilot
program that allows for wetland and buffer acreage to enroll in CRP, subject to state
acreage and maximum size limitations.20
The bill increases the WRP maximum enrollment cap to over 3.014 million
acres (up from a previous cap of 2.275 million acres), and expands eligible lands to
include certain types of private and tribal wetlands, croplands, and grasslands, as well
as lands that meet the habitat needs of specific wildlife species. The 2008 farm bill
authorizes a new Wetlands Reserve Enhancement Program, to establish agreements
with states similar to that for CREP, which includes a Reserved Rights Pilot program
to explore whether reserving grazing rights is compatible with WRP. The bill makes
certain program changes, including changing the payment schedule for easements;
specifying criteria for ranking program applications; requiring that USDA conduct
an annual survey starting with FY2008 of the Prairie Pothole Region in the northern

20 Acreage in CREP — a subprogram within CRP — would be excluded from the CRP
county acreage cap in order to encourage greater program participation.

Great Plains area; and requiring USDA to submit a report to Congress on long-term
conservation easements under the program.
For GRP, the enacted bill adopts a new acreage enrollment goal of an additional

1.2 million acres by 2012, with 40% of funds for rental contracts (10-, 15-, and 20-

year duration) and 60% for permanent easements. The bill modifies terms and
conditions of GRP contracts and easements to permit fire presuppression and
addition of grazing-related activities, such as fencing and livestock watering. It does
not include a Grassland Reserve Enhancement provision, as proposed in the House.
For FPP, the bill makes several technical changes to the program, covering the
program’s administrative requirements, appraisal methodology, and terms and
conditions, among other issues. The farm bill conferees did not to rename FPP as the
“Farm and Ranchland Protection Program,” as the program is often referred to by
USDA. The bill provides additional budget authority for FPP of $773 million
Working Lands Programs. EQIP and CSP are the two largest USDA
working lands programs, and received additional budget authority under the 2008
farm bill. The enacted bill did not adopt a Senate proposal that would have closely
coordinated CSP and EQIP under the so-called Comprehensive Stewardship
Incentives Program.
For EQIP, the enacted bill expands the program to cover practices that enhance
soil, surface and ground water, and air quality, and conserve energy; it also covers
grazing land, forestland, wetland, and other types of land and natural resources that
support wildlife. The bill sets aside 5% of EQIP spending for beginning farmers and
ranchers and 5% for socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers, providing up to
90% of the costs of implementing an EQIP plan for these farmers. It also provides
payments to assist tribal or native corporation members, and producers transitioning
to organic production. The bill lowers the EQIP payment limit to $300,000 (down
from $450,000) in any six-year period per entity, except in cases of special
environmental significance, including projects involving methane digesters, as
determined by USDA. Projects with organic production benefits are capped at
$20,000 annually or $80,000 in any six-year period. The enacted bill retains the
requirement that 60% of funds be made available for cost-sharing to livestock
producers, including incentive payments for producers who develop a comprehensive
nutrient management plan.
The bill modifies EQIP’s Conservation Innovation Grants program to cover air
quality concerns associated with agriculture (including greenhouse gas emissions).
It also replaces the Ground and Surface Water Conservation Program within EQIP
with a new Agricultural Water Enhancement Program (AWEP) to address water
quality and quantity concerns on agricultural land, highlighting certain priority areas
and providing additional mandatory funds for the program. The bill provides
additional budget authority for EQIP of $3.4 billion (FY2008-2012).

For CSP, the enacted bill replaces the Conservation Security Program with a
new and renamed Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP).21 The new CSP,
beginning in 2009, will continue to encourage conservation practices on working
lands, but will be different than the former program in that it eliminates the three-tier
approach, removes 10-year contracts, and requires direct attribution of payments,
among other changes, thus requiring that USDA promulgate new rules for the
program. The bill sets a target of enrolling more than 13 million acres annually in
the new program, with individual producer payments limited to $200,000 per entity
in any five-year period. The types of eligible lands are expanded to include priority
resource concerns, as identified by states; certain private agricultural and forested
lands; and also some nonindustrial private forest lands (limited to not more than 10%
of total annual acres under the program). Technical assistance will also be provided
to specialty crop and organic producers, along with pilot testing of producers who
engage in innovative new technologies. Supplemental payments may be available
to producers who engage in certain types of crop rotations. Program payments may
not be used for the design, construction, or maintenance of animal waste storage or
treatment facilities or associated waste transport or transfer devices.
Among other programs, the 2008 farm bill reauthorizes WHIP at current
funding levels, but limits program eligibility to focus on lands “for the development
of wildlife habitat on private agricultural land, nonindustrial private forest land, and
tribal lands,” thus potentially excluding some previously covered areas. It also
allows USDA to provide priority to projects that address issues raised by state,
regional, and national conservation initiatives. The bill raises the limit on cost-share
payments to 25% for long-term projects under WHIP and limits total payments to
$50,000 per year. The bill also authorizes increased funding for several programs,
including the Grassroots Source Water Protection Program and the Small Watershed
Rehabilitation Program; it also provides additional mandatory funding for AMA and
includes Hawaii as an eligible state under that program.
New Conservation Programs. The 2008 farm bill expands the range of
USDA conservation activities and creates several new programs, including a program
expanding conservation activities in the Chesapeake Bay region, a new state grants
program, a provision to limit production on native sod, and provisions promoting
market-based approaches to conservation.
The new Chesapeake Bay Watershed Program applies to all tributaries,
backwaters, and side channels, including watersheds, draining into the Chesapeake
Bay, but gives priority to the Susquehanna, Shenandoah, Potomac, and Patuxent
Rivers. The bill authorizes $438 million in total mandatory funding for FY2009-
FY2012. The Voluntary Public Access and Habitat Incentives Program (also referred
to as the “Open Fields” program) authorizes state grants to encourage landowners to
provide public access for wildlife-dependent recreation, subject to a 25% reduction
for the total grant amount if the opening dates for migratory bird hunting in the state
are not consistent for residents and non-residents. The bill provides $50 million in
mandatory funds for FY2009-FY2012 for the program. The so-called sodsaver
provision makes producers that plant an insurable crop (over 5 acres) on native sod

21 Funding is made available for contract under the former CSP program.

ineligible for crop insurance and the noninsured crop disaster assistance program for
the first five years of planting. The enacted 2008 farm bill states that this provision
may apply to virgin prairie converted to cropland in the Prairie Pothole National
Priority Area, if elected by the state. Finally, the bill includes a provision intended
to facilitate the participation of farmers and landowners in emerging environmental
services markets, such as water and air quality, habitat protection, and carbon storage.
The farm bill directs USDA to establish a framework for developing consistent
standards and processes for quantifying environmental services from the agriculture
and forestry sectors, but does not authorize funding for this effort.
For more detailed information, see CRS Report RL34557, Conservation
Provisions of the 2008 Farm Bill. For more information on individual conservation
programs and past conservation funding, see CRS Report RL33556, Soil and Water
Conservation: An Overview. For more information on conservation programs and
funding, see CRS Report RL32940, Agricultural Conservation Programs: A
Title III: Trade
The 2008 farm bill reauthorizes, in Title III of the farm bill, programs that
provide international food aid and that promote U.S. commercial agricultural exports.
A relatively few export programs are terminated, while selected others receive
increased funding.
Food Aid. The United States is the world’s largest provider of food aid,
accounting for about 60% of total global food aid over the last decade. The bill
extends P.L. 480 food aid programs through 2012 and changes the title of the
underlying act from Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act to Food for
Peace Act. The bill also removes export market development as an objective of the
programs under the statute. P.L. 480 Title II is the largest U.S. food aid program.
The bill authorizes $2.5 billion to be appropriated annually for P.L. 480 Title II,
which provides U.S. commodities for emergency relief and non-emergency
(development) projects overseas. Were Congress to make the full appropriation, that
amount would represent a substantial increase over the average annual appropriation
of $1.2 billion in recent years. Although authorized in the farm bill, P.L. 480 Title
II is administered by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).
The 2008 farm bill increases the amounts of P.L. 480 funds that can be allocated
to various food aid program activities. It increases the amount available for
administrative and distribution expenses of food aid project implementing
organizations from between 5% to 10% to between 7.5% and 13% of the funds
available for Title III. The bill also provides $4.5 million for FY2009-2001 to study
and improve food aid quality issues. The limit on funding available for pre-
positioning of commodities overseas to help expedite delivery is increased from its
2002 farm bill level of $2 million to $10 million each fiscal year. The bill also
reauthorizes a program of assistance for stockpiling and rapid transportation,
delivery, and distribution of shelf-stable, prepackaged foods and increases the
program’s funding from $3 million to $8 million each fiscal year. For monitoring
and evaluation of Title II non-emergency programs, the bill provides up to $22

million annually, not more than $8 million of which could be used for USAID’s
Famine Early Warning System (FEWS).
Both the House- and Senate-passed versions of the farm bill had contained hard
earmarks for non-emergency or development food aid. The farm bill retains an
earmark for development food aid (termed a “safe box”) beginning at $375 million
in FY2009 and ending at $450 million in FY2012. The safe box designation can only
be waived if the President determines that an extraordinary food emergency exists
and that resources available from the Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust (see below)
have been exhausted, and if the President has submitted a request to Congress for
additional appropriations equal to the reduction in safe box and Emerson Trust levels.
Private voluntary organizations (PVOs) argued for the safe box, maintaining that it
would give them assurances of supply of the commodities they rely on to carry out
development projects. The Administration opposed the safe box concept, saying that
it would deprive it of the flexibility needed to respond to emergency food aid needs.
The 2008 farm bill reauthorizes other smaller programs that provide food aid
to countries promoting the development of market-oriented agricultural sectors (Food
for Progress, FFP) or for school feeding and nutrition programs (the McGovern-Dole
International School Feeding and Child Nutrition Program). USDA administers
these smaller food aid programs. The bill reauthorizes FFP without lifting the cap
on CCC-funded transportation of commodities (an action that the Senate farm bill
had recommended), which effectively determines the volume of commodities that
can be provided. For the McGovern-Dole program, the bill provides an additional
$84 million of CCC funds to remain available until expended. The House-passed
bill, however, had proposed changing the funding basis of McGovern-Dole from
discretionary to mandatory and increasing spending from $140 million in FY2009 to
$300 million in FY2012. The final enacted bill also reauthorizes the Bill Emerson
Humanitarian Trust, providing a reserve of commodities and cash that can be used
to provide food aid in the event of unanticipated emergency food needs.
The final bill authorizes $60 million of CCC funds to carry out a pilot program
for local or regional purchase of agricultural commodities for food aid programs for
FY2009-2012. Under current law, the United States can use P.L. 480 funds only to
purchase U.S. commodities. The Administration’s proposal for local/regional
purchase, its only farm bill food aid proposal, would have provided for up to 25% of
the funds available for P.L. 480 Title II to be allocated to this purpose. In FY2007,
that would have amounted to up to $447 million. Local or regional purchases, the
Administration argued, would make the U.S. response to emergencies more timely
and cost-effective. Opponents of the proposal, however, maintained that it would
undermine the coalition of producers, shippers, and charitable organizations that
support U.S. food aid and would result in less U.S. food aid being provided.
Congress’s rejection of the local/regional purchase proposal is one of the reasons
listed by the Administration for its veto of the farm bill.
Trade. The 2008 farm bill extends USDA’s export market development
programs through FY2012. Although both the House- and Senate-passed farm bills
had proposed increased funding for the Market Access Program (MAP), the bill
maintains funding at the FY2007 level — $200 million annually. Similarly, the bill
maintains funding for the Foreign Market Development Program (FMDP) — $34.5

million annually — over the life of the bill. MAP promotes mainly high value farm
exports, while FMDP promotes mainly bulk or generic commodity exports. The bill
revises the export credit guarantee programs to bring them into compliance with a
WTO dispute settlement decision in the U.S.-Brazil cotton case that the United States
lost. Changes include elimination of the 1% cap on origination fees for export credit
guarantees and repeal of legislative authority for the supplier credit program (a short-
term credit guarantee) and the intermediate export credit guarantee program (3-10
years). The 2008 farm bill repeals authority for the Export Enhancement Program
(EEP), a direct export subsidy. The Administration requested repeal of EEP because,
it argued, the program had been inactive since 1995 and repealing it would be in line
with the U.S. effort to eliminate all export subsidies in ongoing multilateral trade
negotiations. Additional funding is provided for the Technical Assistance for
Specialty Crops (TASC) program, which focuses on eliminating sanitary and
phytosanitary (food safety) barriers to U.S. agricultural exports.
Finally, the 2008 farm bill includes a provision requiring USDA to establish a
softwood lumber importer declaration program. Importers will report their lumber
imports, allowing data to be collected, verified, and reconciled, to assure
implementation of the U.S.-Canada Softwood Lumber Agreement. The Senate had
included a sense-of-the-Senate resolution encouraging the President to ensure lumber
imports consistent with that bilateral agreement.
For background information on farm bill trade and food aid programs, see CRS
Report RL33553, Agricultural Export and Food Aid Programs; for a discussion of
food aid and the farm bill, see CRS Report RL34145, International Food Aid and the
2008 Farm Bill; for a discussion of export programs and the farm bill, see CRS
Report RL34227, Agricultural Exports and the 2008 Farm Bill.
Title IV: Nutrition
The farm bill’s nutrition title accounts for well over half of all spending on
programs and activities covered by the bill, with the overwhelming majority
financing the Food Stamp program. The most significant issues in (and provisions
of) this title address the administration of, eligibility for, and benefits under the Food
Stamp program, funding for The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP), and
support for a program of making free fresh fruits and vegetables available in schools.
The enacted 2008 farm bill includes provisions that extend expiring authorities
in covered programs (generally, through FY2012) and increase spending for most
programs above what would be expected under prior law (above the “baseline”). The
nutrition title covers the Food Stamp program, TEFAP, the fresh fruit and vegetable
program in schools, the Senior Farmers’ Market Nutrition program, programs in lieu
of food stamps in Puerto Rico and American Samoa and on Indian reservations, rules
governing procurement of food for school meal programs, and various special
nutrition projects. Under previous law, these programs would cost nearly $40 billion
a year and be expected to grow to almost $50 billion in FY2017.
Total spending on these and other nutrition programs (including amounts offset
by other savings) is boosted by an estimated $3.2 billion (outlays) over 5 years
(FY2008-FY2012) and $10.2 billion over 10 years (FY2008-FY2017).

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. The largest share of the
new spending mandated by the nutrition title results from changes that increase food
stamp benefits and establish new standards to make more households eligible under
the Food Stamp program. The farm bill also renames the existing program as the
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Added food stamp spending
is estimated to total $2.3 billion over 5 years and $7.82 billion over 10 years — 73%
and 77%, respectively — of the title’s total new spending. The major food stamp
!boost the minimum amount of income that is disregarded when
benefits are calculated by increasing and then indexing the “standard
deduction,”resulting in a small, but growing, general benefit increase
in addition to regular increases for food-price inflation (around $4
a month in FY2009);
!increase and then index the minimum monthly benefit guarantee,
setting at it at 8% of the indexed maximum benefit for one person
(raising it from the current $10 to at least $14 in FY2009);
!disregard all income spent on dependent care when calculating
benefits (removing existing caps on this disregard); and
!substantially loosen eligibility rules relating to assets by indexing the
dollar limits on allowable liquid assets and disregarding all
retirement savings/plans and education savings.
Other provisions (1) continue inflation-indexed funding for nutrition assistance
grants (in lieu of food stamps) to Puerto Rico and American Samoa, (2) extend the
authority to operate a Food Distribution Program on Indian reservations, (3) simplify
some administrative processes (like reporting requirements), (4) expand the
availability of “transitional” benefits for those leaving public assistance programs,
(5) give the federal government a great deal more flexibility in imposing penalties on
retail food stores that violate food stamp rules, (6) add disqualification penalties for
those selling food bought with food stamp benefits and those using benefits to obtain
cash for container deposits, and (7) require greater federal scrutiny and oversight of
state efforts to “privatize” and expand the use of computers in their administration
of food stamps. The overwhelming majority of food stamp provisions represent
policy changes that were included in both the House and Senate bills (although
budget limits forced changes), or that were non-controversial. However, a number
of significant initiatives were not adopted, generally for policy rather than cost
reasons. These notably included a House proposal to place major limits on state
privatization of food stamp administration, and the Senate’s provisions loosening
eligibility rules for able-bodied adults without dependents and eventually permitting
the use of food stamp benefits to buy dietary supplements.
The Emergency Food Assistance Program. The nutrition title’s second-
largest share of new spending is for TEFAP, with estimated additional outlays of
$526 million over FY2008-FY2012 and $1.26 billion over FY2008-FY2017 (17%
and 12%, respectively, of the title’s total estimated cost). Closely following the
provisions of both the House and Senate bills, this provision in the final law greatly
increases mandatory funding of food purchases for the program to levels well above
the current requirement to acquire $140 million a year. Required commodity buys
are expanded by (1) an immediate infusion of $50 million in FY2008 and (2) raising

annual mandatory purchases to $250 million in FY2009 (indexed annually for food-
price inflation in later years).
Other Programs. Another major initiative in the nutrition title is a dramatic
increase in funding for the fresh fruit and vegetable program in schools. In FY2008,
approximately $20 million is available for this effort. The bill boosts mandatory
outlays by $274 million (FY2008-FY2012) and $1 billion (FY2008-FY2017),
representing some 10% of total new spending.
In addition to the changes in major programs noted above, the 2008 farm bill (1)
includes limited authority for schools in school meal programs to use geographic
preference for locally grown and raised agricultural products when procuring food,
(2) increases mandatory funding for the Senior Farmers’ Market Nutrition program
(from $15 million a year to $20.6 million a year), (3) continues and expands support
for community food projects, (4) provides money for an initiative to use the
(renamed) Food Stamp program to promote health and nutrition, and (5) authorizes
(and, in some cases, funds) several projects related to food distribution efforts, school
gardens, “hunger-free community” initiatives, provision of whole grain products to
schools, and an urban food enterprise center.
In all but a very few cases (e.g., privatization and dietary supplement
provisions), there were no important policy differences between the House- and
Senate-passed versions of the farm bill. However, the bills diverged greatly in the
amount of new spending they proposed. For example, the FY2008-FY2012
estimated cost (outlays) of the House bill’s nutrition title was $4.2 billion versus the
Senate’s $5.3 billion. The bills also differed in funding priorities. The House
devoted 78% of new funding to new food stamp spending, 14% to extra funding for
TEFAP, and 7% to expanding the fresh fruit and vegetable program. In contrast, the
Senate bill provided 66% of its projected funding to new food stamp spending, along
with 10% for TEFAP and 21% for the fruit and vegetable initiative. The House and
Senate measures further differed in another matter. The House would have made its
policy amendments part of permanent law, producing a 10-year (through FY2017)
cost estimate of $11.5 billion. On the other hand, most of the Senate’s significant
revisions (e.g., increased food stamp benefits) were scheduled to terminate after
FY2012, resulting in a much lower 10-year cost estimate than the House or than
would have been the case with permanent changes (outlays totaling $6.7 billion).
Finally, the House and Senate bills provided for different extensions of expiring
authorities (like the authorization of appropriations for food stamps). The House
extended these authorities through FY2012, while the Senate opted for indefinite
extension in most cases. The final 2008 farm bill deals with funding level issues and
issues of allocation among programs as discussed earlier in this section, makes all
policy changes permanent law (as in the House version), and generally extends
expiring authorities through FY2012 (as in the House version).
For more information, see CRS Report RL33829, Domestic Food Assistance:
The Farm Bill and Other Legislation in the 110th Congress.

Title V: Credit
Farm bills usually contain provisions that modify the permanent statutes for two
government-related farm lenders. First, the USDA Farm Service Agency (FSA) is
a federal government lender of last resort that makes direct loans or guarantees loans
made by commercial lenders to farmers who cannot qualify for commercial loans.
Second, the Farm Credit System (FCS) is a private lender with a statutory
requirement, and limitation, to lend to farmers and certain farm-related businesses.
For more information, see CRS Report RS21977, Agricultural Credit: Institutions
and Issues.
Farm Service Agency. The 2008 farm bill (1) further prioritizes and
subsidizes Farm Service Agency lending for beginning and socially disadvantaged
farmers, (2) increases lending limits per individual to $300,000 (up from $200,000)
for each of the direct farm ownership and direct operating loan programs, and (3)
extends and expands the guarantee program for seller-financed land loans. It creates
a conservation loan guarantee program for conservation projects. Regarding “term
limits” on guaranteed operating loans, which require farmers to graduate from FSA
credit to commercial lenders, the enacted 2008 farm bill extends the suspension of
the enforcement of “term limits” until December 31, 2010. It also creates a pilot
program of “individual development accounts” for beginning farmers and ranchers.
The Pigford Decision. The 2008 farm bill adopts a Senate provision that
would permit any claimant in the Pigford decision (a 1999 suit based on past
discrimination against minority farmers applying for USDA loans) who has not
received compensation to petition in civil court to obtain such compensation. The
total amount of payment and debt relief would be limited to $100 million. USDA
would be restricted from beginning a foreclosure if the borrower can show
foreclosure is related to a Pigford claim. A similar provision is also included in the
House-passed bill. See CRS Report RS20430, The Pigford Case: USDA Settlement
of a Discrimination Suit by Black Farmers.
Farm Credit System. In recent years, FCS has sought to expand its lending
authority beyond traditional farm loans and into more rural housing and non-farm
businesses. Commercial banks oppose expanding FCS lending authority, saying that
the availability of commercial credit in rural areas is not constrained, and that FCS’s
government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) status provides an unfair competitive
advantage. The enacted bill, like the House and Senate bills, does not allow any
expansion of Farm Credit System lending authority. It does address technical
changes in the payment of insurance premiums by FCS banks to the FCS Insurance
Corporation, and expands the list of borrowers eligible to own Bank for Cooperatives
voting stock. For more information, see CRS Report RS21977, Agricultural Credit:
Institutions and Issues.

Title VI: Rural Development
More than 88 programs administered by 16 different federal agencies target rural
economic development. The Rural Development Policy Act of 1980 (P.L. 96-355)
named USDA the lead federal agency for rural development. USDA administers
most of the existing rural development programs and has the highest average of
program funds going directly to rural counties (approximately 50%). Three mission
agencies, Rural Housing Service, Rural Business-Cooperative Service, and Rural
Utilities Service, administer the various loan and grant programs. More information
on these programs is in CRS Report RL31837, An Overview of USDA Rural
Development Programs.
The enacted 2008 farm bill reauthorizes and/or amends rural development loan
and grant programs and authorizes several new provisions. The bill adopts the
Senate measure to redefine “rural” with certain modifications, most notably, striking
the housing density criterion; however, it also directs USDA to conduct rulemaking
to develop restrictions on areas where housing density is greater than 200 units per
square mile. The bill does not change current law with respect to rural eligibility for
water and waste water disposal loans and grants and the community facility program.
The bill requires USDA to prepare a report assessing the various definitions of
“rural” and the effect these various definitions have on programs administered by
USDA Rural Development.
Although both the House and Senate farm bills included mandatory funding for
several programs, the enacted 2008 farm bill reduced that spending, while in some
cases adding discretionary authorization. The enacted bill provides $194 million
(FY2008-FY2012) in mandatory spending for rural development programs. This is
a reduction from up to $550 million proposed in the House- and Senate-passed bills.
The bill provides mandatory spending for a one-time funding of backlogged water
and wastewater applications ($120 million); a Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance
program ($13 million in mandatory and $40 million annually in discretionary
spending); and Value-Added Product Grants ($15 million in mandatory spending).
The bill provides no mandatory funding for rural health care facilities or the
construction of child care facilities, although such funds were proposed by the
Other provisions authorized in the enacted bill include support for locally
produced agricultural food products22 and grants for assisting employment
opportunities for disabled individuals in rural areas. The enacted bill also establishes
a new Rural Collaborative Investment Program and provides support for several
water and wastewater programs, and adopts the Senate proposed measure to
authorize a new interest rate structure for water and wastewater projects based on an
index of outstanding municipal obligations. The bill also adopts other Senate
provisions that authorize assistance to the Housing Assistance Council and
reauthorize the Rural Business Investment Program, as well as the appropriate
technology transfer to rural areas program (ATTRA). The bill deletes the House

22 A provision in the Senate bill to authorize artisanal cheese centers was deleted in

measure reauthorizing the Rural Strategic Investment Program, and deletes both
House and Senate proposals providing guaranteed loans and grants to improve rural
health care facilities.
The enacted bill adopted several House and Senate provisions to assist rural
broadband development. The bill reauthorizes the Access to Broadband
Telecommunications Services in Rural Areas and grants to broadcasting systems;
directs the Secretary to develop a comprehensive national broadband strategy for
rural areas; and authorizes a new National Center for Telecommunications
Assessment. The bill also reauthorizes the Distance Learning and Telemedicine
program and includes a provision to make library connectivity a feature of the
program. However, the farm bill deleted various House- and Senate-passed
proposals and grant programs targeting broadband service.
The 2008 farm bill reauthorizes several rural development and grant programs,
including the Rural Economic Area Partnership; the National Rural Development
Partnership; SEARCH grants; and Rural Business Opportunity Grants. The bill also
reauthorizes the Delta Regional Authority and the Northern Great Plains Regional
Authority. In addition to these two reauthorized commissions, the bill creates three
new regional development authorities: the Southeast Crescent Regional Commission,
the Southwest Border Regional Commission, and the Northern Borders Economic
Development Commission (included under the Title XIV, Miscellaneous). The bill
also includes a provision directing USDA to conduct studies on rural transportation
issues and on rural electric power generation.
For more information, see CRS Report RL34126, Rural Development and
Provisions of the 2008 Farm Bill.
Title VII: Agricultural Research
Under the mission area called Research, Extension, and Economics (REE), the
USDA is responsible for conducting agricultural research at the federal level, and for
providing partial support for cooperative research, extension, and post-secondary
agricultural education programs in the states. The USDA’s intramural activities are
carried out by the Agricultural Research Service (ARS), Economic Research Service
(ERS), National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), and National Agriculture
Library (NAL). The federally funded extramural activities are managed by the
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES). For more
information on these agencies’ activities, see CRS Report RL33327, Agricultural
Research, Education, and Extension: Issues and Background.
The issues confronting Congress concerning federal agricultural research can
be generally categorized under two topics: the structure of the management
organization and the level of research funding, both of which are long-standing
issues. Congress addressed the management issue in the 2002 farm bill by directing
USDA to examine and report on the structure of Agricultural Research Service
(ARS) management and the merits of establishing a National Institute of Food and
Agriculture (possibly modeled after the National Institutes of Health). With respect
to funding, there has long been a struggle under persistent budget constraints to
obtain increased appropriations even sufficient to keep up with inflation. With farm

commodity support as a model, the research community has attempted to obtain a
portion of its money in mandatory funds, with less reliance on discretionary
The USDA task force report, National Institute for Food and Agriculture: A
Proposal, was issued July 2004.23 The proposal was presented to Congress in
USDA’s 2007 Farm Bill Proposals.24 While the USDA task force was conducting
its review, the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges
(NASULGC) developed a proposal called Create Research, Extension, and Teaching
Excellence for the 21st Century (CREATE-21).25 CREATE-21 was presented to
Congress as H.R. 2398 and S. 1094.
The research provisions in the individual House and Senate farm bills drew
heavily on the recommendations of the USDA and NASULGC.26
Research Management. The enacted 2008 farm bill represents an amalgam
of the research reorganization provisions in the House and Senate bills. The bill
creates an umbrella coordinating entity known as the Research, Extension, and
Education Office (REEO) in Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education,
and Economics, and designates the Under Secretary as the Chief Scientist of USDA.
The new REEO will contain six divisions, each with its own director, representing
the broad range of subject areas addressed by agricultural research, extension, and
education programs.
The division directors are expected to work with the National Agricultural
Research, Extension, Education, and Economics Advisory Board to coordinate all of
the mission area’s activities across the Department, including intramural research
(ARS, ERS, NASS) and extramural research. CSREES, which currently is
responsible for managing extramural research, will be eliminated as an agency and
will become the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA). The conferees
intend NIFA to be an independent, scientific, policy-setting agency for the food and
agricultural sciences whose primary role is to administer competitive grants.
The enacted bill ends the National Research Initiative (NRI) and the Initiative
for Future Agriculture and Food Systems (IFAFS) as distinct competitive grant
programs, and establishes within NIFA an Agriculture and Food Research Initiative
(AFRI) to award competitive grants for fundamental and applied research, extension,
and education. The farm bill authorizes annual appropriations of $700 million for
AFRI, representing the combined level of authorized and mandatory funding that the

23 National Institute for Food and Agriculture: A Proposal, report of the Research,
Education, and Economics Task Force of USDA, July 2004. The report is available at
[ ht t p: / / Resear c h/ Resear m] .
24 A link to the USDA farm bill research proposal is at [
!ut/p/_s.7_0_A/7_0_1UH?contentidonly=true&contentid=2007_Farm_Bill_T itle7.xml].
25 Available at [].
26 A more complete examination of the issues and legislative proposal is in CRS Report
RS22693, Agricultural Research, Education, and Extension in the 2007 Farm Bill.

NRI and IFAFS were authorized to receive in previous years (appropriators have
prohibited the use of mandatory funds for IFAFS since 2002). The Under Secretary
(chief scientist) is required to submit a unified annual budget covering all activities
of the REEO and NIFA. The budget is to represent the balance of several factors,
including fundamental and applied research, funding for research capacity and
infrastructure, and increased support for Hispanic-serving agricultural colleges and
universities, for non-land grant colleges of agriculture, and for the University of the
District of Columbia.
Funding. Apart from mandatory funding of $230 million over five years for
a Specialty Crop Research Initiative, and $78 million in mandatory funding for the
Organic Research and Extension Initiative (included in the Horticulture and Organic
Agriculture title), the 2008 farm bill authorizes annual appropriation of such sums
as necessary for research, extension, and education programs, much the same as in
the previous farm bill. The House bill would have preserved mandatory funding of
$200 million for competitive grants under a merged NRI/IFAFS program for
For more information, see CRS Report RL34352, Agricultural Research,
Extension, and Education: Farm Bill Issues.
Title VIII: Forestry
Farm bills typically deal with forestry both directly (usually in a forestry title)
and indirectly (for example, by including forests and forestry practices in more
general conservation programs). For a description of existing programs, see CRS
Report RL31065, Forestry Assistance Programs.
The enacted 2008 farm bill includes a forestry title (Title VIII) with several
sections addressing statewide forest resource planning. One section establishes
“national private forest conservation priorities” as (1) conserving and managing
working forest landscapes for multiple values and uses; (2) protecting forests from
threats and restoring appropriate forest types; and (3) enhancing public benefits from
private forests. Other sections require statewide assessments and strategies for forest
resources (with periodic revision). The bill creates a new Forest Resource
Coordinating Committee, requires the competitive allocation of a portion of state
assistance funding (based on how the statewide assessments and strategies fulfill the
national priorities), and allows up to 5% of state assistance funding for competitively
allocated innovative projects to address the national priorities. The bill also creates
a new community forest and open space conservation grant program for local entities
to protect forests threatened with conversion to non-forest uses, and creates an
Emergency Forest Restoration Program to provide assistance for restoration efforts
for forests damaged by natural disaster.
The 2008 farm bill extends, through 2012, the authorizations for the Office of
International Forestry, the Rural Revitalization Technologies Program, the
Renewable Resources Extension Act, and the Healthy Forest Reserves Program (with
minor changes) under the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 (P.L. 108-148, 16
U.S.C. Sec. 501, et seq.). The bill also amends existing law to restrict imports of
illegally logged wood. A separate subtitle — Cultural and Heritage Cooperation

Authority — provides for tribal-Forest Service cooperative relations and assistance.
The bill authorizes a competitive grant program to Hispanic-serving institutions to
increase diversity in forestry and related fields, and allows contract modification
options for certain Forest Service timber sales.
The enacted bill includes forestry-related provisions other than in the forestry
title. In Title II (Conservation), numerous programs were modified to include
forestry among approved conservation activities. In Title III (Trade), it requires
USDA to required to establish a softwood lumber importer declaration program, for
import data to be collected, verified, and reconciled to assure implementation of the
U.S.-Canada Softwood Lumber Agreement. In Title IX (Energy), two programs were
created to use woody biomass for energy production. In Title XV (Tax Provisions),
the agreement authorizes a new type of tax-exempt private bond whose proceeds are
used to finance forest conservation. It also modifies income tax deductions for
qualified timber gains, and includes several provisions to modernize and clarify the
tax treatment of timber real estate investment trusts (REITs).
See also CRS Report RL33917, Forestry in the 2008 Farm Bill.
Title IX: Energy
Interest in renewable energy has grown rapidly since late 2005 due, in large part,
to a strong rise in domestic and international fuel prices and a dramatic acceleration
in domestic biofuel production (mostly ethanol). Many policymakers view
agriculture-based biofuels as both a catalyst for rural economic development and a
response to growing energy import dependence. Renewable energy’s role in the 2002
farm bill was contained in the farm bill’s energy title (Title IX), which concentrated
on grants, loan, and loan guarantees to foster research on agriculture-based renewable
energy, to share development risk, and to promote the adoption of renewable energy
systems. USDA’s Bioenergy Program (Sec. 9006 of P.L. 107-171) — funding for
which expired in FY2006 — had been the primary exception in that it provided
incentives to expand actual production of bioenergy.
The enacted 2008 farm bill expands and extends the provisions in the energy
section of the 2002 farm bill, and provides additional funding. The bill makes
numerous changes to the programs in the energy title. For example, the bill
combines the so-called Section 9006 program with the Energy Audit and Renewable
Energy Development Program under the new Renewable Energy for America
Program. The bill also creates new programs, including a Biomass Crop Assistance
Program to provide financial assistance to producers for growing biomass crops and
developing conversion facilities, and the Agricultural Bioenergy Feedstock and
Energy Efficiency Research and Extension Initiative to provide for competitive
grants to fund projects with a focus on supporting on-farm biomass crop research and
extension. This latter initiative is under the bill’s research title (Title VII) and
includes other bioenergy research programs.
The enacted bill continues programs for federal purchase of biobased products
under the Biobased Markets Program. The bill includes a Senate-proposed provision,
Biorefinery Assistance, which provides grants and loan guarantees for construction
and retrofitting of biorefineries for the production of advanced biofuels. The bill also

provides for grants for constructing demonstration-scale biorefineries, and loan
guarantees for the development and construction of commercial-scale biorefineries
that use technologies that are either pre-commercial or commercially available. The
bill provides for the repowering of existing biorefineries. It incorporates the Biomass
Research and Development Act of 2000 as part of the bill’s energy title and will fund
projects that address the critical need for integrated research and technology
development in the area of biofuels. It continues the Biodiesel Fuel Education
Program with an expanded list of entities targeted. Also, among the miscellaneous
provisions (Title XV), the ethanol production tax credit is lowered from 51 to 46
cents per gallon beginning in the first year following that in which ethanol production
of 7.5 billion gallons is achieved. Finally, the 2008 farm bill establishes the
cellulosic biofuel producer credit of $1.01 per gallon with special provisions for
small cellulosic ethanol producers.
Mandatory spending for the enacted bill’s agriculture-based energy programs
are projected at about $600 million (FY2008-FY2012) and $900 million (FY2008-
FY2017). This reflects a reduction compared to funding levels proposed in the
House- and Senate-passed bills. The House bill had authorized more than $3 billion
in new mandatory funding and more than $1 billion in discretionary funding for
provisions of the energy title; the Senate bill authorized more than $1 billion in new
mandatory funding and more than $2 billion in discretionary funding. Both the
House and the Senate sought to fund these provisions through various revenue and
cost offset provisions in both bills, although in very different ways.
For more information on agriculture and bioenergy, see CRS Report RL34130,
Renewable Energy Policy in the 2008 Farm Bill; CRS Report RL32712, Agriculture-
based Renewable Energy Production; CRS Report RL33290, Fuel Ethanol:
Background and Public Policy Issues; and CRS Report RL33572, Biofuels
Incentives: A Summary of Federal Programs.
Many of the federal programs that currently support renewable energy
production in general, and agriculture-based energy production in particular, are
outside the purview of USDA and have legislative origins outside of the farm bill.
For example, the energy act signed into law in December 2007 (P.L. 110-140) covers
a wide range of topics with extensive attention to biofuels. In particular, it includes
a dramatic expansion of the renewable fuels mandate to 36 billion gallons by 2022
with carve-outs for biodiesel (1 billion gallons by 2012), cellulosic ethanol (16
billion gallons by 2022), and corn-starch ethanol (15 billion gallons by 2015).
Legislative proposals focused on renewable energy are summarized in CRS Report
RL33831, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Legislation in the 110th
Title X: Horticulture and Organic Agriculture
Sales of specialty crops, such as fruits, vegetables, and tree nuts, account for
nearly one-third of U.S. crop cash receipts and one-fifth of U.S. agricultural exports,
according to USDA. When floriculture, greenhouse, and nursery crop sales are
included, total specialty crops account for nearly 50% of all U.S. farm crop cash
receipts. However, specialty crop producers are not eligible for commodity income
support programs; also, few provisions in the farm bill’s 2002 conservation, trade,

research, and nutrition titles specifically addressed the specialty crop industry. For
more information, see CRS Report RL33520, Specialty Crops: 2008 Farm Bill
The enacted 2008 farm bill contains a new Horticulture and Organic Agriculture
title (Title X). Among the key provisions is reauthorization of the specialty crop
block grant program established by the Specialty Crops Competitiveness Act of 2004
(P.L. 108-465). Under this program, each state receives a grant to support marketing
research and promotion to enhance the competitiveness of specialty crops grown in
the state. The 2004 act authorized appropriations to support the program (it received
$7 million in each of FY2006-FY2008). The enacted 2008 farm bill provides
mandatory funding in the amounts of $10 million for FY2008, $49 million for
FY2009, and $55 million annually in FY2010 through FY2012.
Another key provision affecting specialty crops includes mandatory funding of
$207 million through FY2012 to (1) establish cooperative agreements with state
departments of agriculture for early plant pest detection activities; (2) establish a
threat identification and mitigation program for foreign pests and diseases; and (3)
provide funds and technical assistance to specialty crop producers to develop audit-
based certification systems to lessen the risks of pest emergence and movement. The
2008 farm bill also provides $20 million over four years to establish centers where
the specialty crop industry can obtain pest- and disease-free plant source material,
and authorizes appropriations to establish a Pest and Disease Revolving Loan Fund
to help local governments purchase equipment for the speedy removal of trees that
must be destroyed to stop the spread of a pest or disease infestation.
The enacted bill also contains several provisions to encourage the consumption
of fresh fruits and vegetables. One provides $33 million through FY2012 to expand
the existing Farmers’ Market Promotion Program, with a requirement that 10% of the
funds be used to make it possible for beneficiaries of federal nutrition programs to
use their electronic benefits cards at farmers’ markets. Another provides $5 million
to establish a Healthy Urban Food Enterprise Development Center designed to help
make affordable, nutritious fresh foods more readily available in low-income
communities and neighborhoods. Finally, the bill contains provisions to increase the
amount of fresh fruits and vegetables to be purchased for USDA nutrition programs
(see Title IV, Nutrition programs).
Another major component of Title X of the 2008 farm bill includes provisions
supporting organic agriculture. The bill reauthorizes the National Organic Cost-share
Program27 and provides a one-time transfer of $22 million in FY2008 (available until
expended) to help defray farmers’ costs for obtaining certification under the National
Organic Program; the amount that an individual farmer can receive in cost-share
assistance is raised from $500 to $750. The conference report also includes $5
million in mandatory funding for data collection on organically grown crops,
authorizes the appropriation of an additional $25 million over five years for that
purpose, and requires USDA to spend $3.5 million of the total to collect and

27 In the 2002 farm bill, Congress established this program and provided a one-time transfer
of $5 million in mandatory funds to help transition farmers to organic production.

distribute up-to-date price data for the organic market. Another provision authorizes
increased appropriations to support the administrative work of the National Organic
Program office. Title II (Conservation) contains a provision making producers who
want to convert from conventional to organic farming eligible for cost-share and
technical assistance under the Environmental Quality Incentives Program.
See also CRS Report RL31595, Organic Agriculture in the United States:
Program and Policy Issues.
Title XI: Livestock
Competition and Marketing. Rapid changes have occurred in recent
decades in the structure and business methods of agriculture in general and of animal
agriculture in particular. Production and marketing have been moving toward fewer
and larger operations (sometimes referred to as consolidation or concentration), and
toward vertical integration, although the pace of these changes has varied widely
across the sectors. Debate has revolved around the impact of such changes on farm
prices, on the traditional system of independent, family-based agriculture, on
consumers, and on global competitiveness. Inherent in these questions is the role
government should play in monitoring and regulating agricultural markets. For more
information see CRS Report RL33958, Animal Agriculture: 2008 Farm Bill Issues.
The enacted 2008 farm bill contains a new title on Livestock (Title XI) that
scales back much of the language in the Senate-passed bill aimed at more closely
regulating livestock and poultry markets. For example, conferees deleted Senate
language that would have prohibited most major packers from owning, feeding, or
controlling livestock except within 14 days of slaughter. Also deleted was a Senate
provision to establish at USDA a new Special Counsel for Agricultural Competition
to investigate and prosecute violations of competition laws. Title XI of the enacted
2008 farm bill changes the Agricultural Fair Practices Act to alter the definitions of
associations and handlers. Not included in the enacted bill were various Senate
provisions intended to strengthen USDA’s oversight and enforcement of the act.
Also not included in the enacted bill were Senate provisions to give USDA stronger
enforcement authorities over live poultry dealers, among other provisions, under the
Packers and Stockyards Act (P&SA), which governs market competition in the meat
packing sectors. In their place, conferees added language requiring an annual report
detailing investigations into possible violations of the P&SA.
Also narrowed was Senate language governing contractual arrangements
between producers and integrators. Under the final farm bill, a poultry or swine
grower — a more limited definition of a contract producer than in the original Senate
bill — has the right to cancel a production contract within 3 business days of
execution, unless a later date is specified in the contract. In lieu of Senate language
limiting the conditions under which a contractor could require a producer to make
additional capital investments, the 2008 farm bill stipulates that the possibility of
such an investment be conspicuously stated in the contract. Several other provisions
retained, in somewhat modified form, in the enacted bill are intended to give
producers additional protections when disputing contract terms.

The enacted bill contains provisions intended to improve electronic reporting
under the Livestock Mandatory Price Reporting program administered by USDA’s
Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS), and to study the effects of requiring pork
processing plants to report wholesale pork price information.
Country-of-Origin Labeling. The 2002 farm bill (Sec. 10816 of P.L.
107-171) required retailers to provide country-of-origin labeling (COOL) for fresh
produce, red meats, peanuts, and seafood by September 30, 2004. Congress twice
postponed implementation for all but seafood; COOL now must be implemented by
September 30, 2008. Exempted from COOL are COOL-processed versions of these
products, and dining-out establishments. There has been vigorous debate over
whether this new program is desirable and necessary, its purposes, and its likely
impacts on farmers, processors, retailers, and consumers. Opponents of mandatory
COOL prefer a voluntary or market-driven program or at least some relaxation of the
COOL law’s compliance language. Supporters have continued to seek Congress’s
and USDA’s assurance that the mandatory program will be implemented
expeditiously. For a more detailed description of current law, requirements and
issues see CRS Report RS22955, Country-of-Origin Labeling for Foods.
The 2008 farm bill implements the mandatory program on its current schedule,
and adds goat meat, chicken (which competes with red meats in the market and
which, unlike red meats, primarily are domestically produced), ginseng, pecans, and
macadamia nuts as covered commodities. However, for red meats, it creates several
new types of label categories that are intended to facilitate and simplify compliance
in specifying the country or countries of the products. For all covered commodities,
the bill also seeks to ease recordkeeping and verification requirements, and lower
noncompliance penalties.
Inspection, Registries, and Grading. The 2008 farm bill includes
provisions covering state-inspected meat and poultry, reportable meat and poultry
registries, and catfish grading and inspection, among other provisions.
Federal law has prohibited state-inspected meat and poultry plants from
shipping their products across state lines, a ban that many states and small plants
have long sought to overturn. Limiting state-inspected products to intrastate
commerce is unfair, many state agencies and state-inspected plants have argued,
because the 27 current state-operated programs by law already must be, and are, “at
least equal” to the federal system. Those who have opposed allowing state-inspected
products in interstate commerce argued that state programs are not required to have,
and do not have, the same level of safety oversight as the federal, or even the foreign,
plants. Both the House and Senate farm bills contained language to enable state-
inspected plants to sell products in interstate commerce, but under divergent policy
Conferees adopted the Senate’s version, whereby state-inspected plants with 25
employees or fewer may opt into a new program that subjects them to federal laws
and oversight, for which they may gain the federal mark of inspection and the ability
to ship interstate. They would still be inspected by state employees, but these
employees would be under the supervision of a federal official who will oversee
training, inspection, compliance, and other activities. States would receive at least

60% reimbursement of their costs (compared with 50% under the existing federal-

state program provisions, which also continues). The Senate language was a
compromise package acceptable to both supporters and opponents of the House-
passed language, which among other things could have enabled many plants currently
under federal inspection to apply for state inspection and continue to ship interstate.
Opponents of the House option feared that many would seek to leave the federal
system if they believed they could receive more lenient oversight by the states. (For
background, see CRS Report RL34202, State-Inspected Meat and Poultry: Issues for
Conferees modified a provision in the Senate but not the House bill to require
USDA to establish “reportable food registries” for meat and poultry and their
products, whereby establishments would have to report whenever there is a
probability of such foods causing adverse health consequences. (The FDA
amendments legislation passed in 2007 (P.L. 110-85) establishes a similar registry
for FDA-regulated foods.) The enacted farm bill amends the meat and poultry laws
to require an establishment to promptly notify USDA if it has reason to believe that
an adulterated or misbranded product has entered commerce. Another adopted
provision requires meat and poultry establishments to prepare and maintain written
recall plans.
Conferees modified Senate bill language to provide for two new USDA
initiatives affecting farm-raised domestic catfish: a voluntary grading program
administered through the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS), and mandated
safety inspection of such products by Food Safety and Inspection Service (i.e.,
making catfish an amenable species along with the major meat and poultry species).
The House bill lacked this language. The final version provides for catfish grading
as a voluntary fee-based program, with producers of other seafood species eligible
to petition USDA for a similar service. Conferees agreed to extend mandatory
inspection to catfish processors, further authorizing FSIS to take into account the
conditions under which catfish are raised and transported. Although other fish and
shellfish are not covered by the final amendment, conferees noted in their
accompanying report that the Secretary of Agriculture has standing authority to add
species if appropriate.
The conference report states the intent of Congress “that catfish be subject to
continuous inspection and that imported catfish inspection programs be found to be
equivalent under USDA regulations before foreign catfish may be imported into the
United States.” Language in the bill itself instructs the Secretary to define the term
“catfish.” However, the 2002 farm bill (P.L. 107-171, Sec. 10806) had amended the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to limit the acceptable definition to one family
of catfish (“Ictaluridae”), effectively prohibiting the labeling of certain Asian-grown
fish as catfish. So, the scope of the regulatory definition developed by the Secretary
of Agriculture could be of some interest.
Other Provisions. Conferees deleted two provisions in the Senate bill. One
provision would have established a Congressional Bipartisan Food Safety
Commission that would have been required to report, within one year, on
recommendations for modernizing food programs. The provision was intended to be
in response to recent food safety incidents linked to both imported and domestic

foods, which have brought into focus the question of whether there is a need for
changes in federal food safety oversight. At issue is whether the current system has
the statutory authorities, resources, and structural organization to protect consumers
from unsafe food. The second deleted provision would have prohibited FDA from
issuing a final risk assessment or from lifting the voluntary moratorium until
completion of newly mandated studies on the safety and market impacts of
introducing products from cloned animals. The provision was intended to be in
response to FDA’s request issued in late 2008 that companies refrain voluntarily
from marketing meat and milk from cloned animals or their progeny until it can
complete a final assessment of their safety (see CRS Report RL33334, Biotechnology
in Animal Agriculture: Status and Current Issues).
See also CRS Report RL33958, Animal Agriculture: 2008 Farm Bill Issues.
Title XII: Crop Insurance and Disaster Assistance Programs
The enacted 2008 farm bill contains a new title covering crop insurance and
disaster assistance programs (Title X). In addition, the enacted bill contains other
provisions authorizing “Supplemental Agricultural Disaster Assistance,” provided
for under the bill’s Title XV (Trade and Tax Provisions).
Crop Insurance Program. The federal crop insurance program is designed
to protect crop producers from unavoidable risks associated with adverse weather,
weather-related plant diseases, and insect infestations. Although the scope of the
crop insurance program has widened significantly over the past 25 years, the
anticipated goal that it would replace ad hoc disaster payments has not been
The crop insurance program is permanently authorized and hence does not
require consideration in the farm bill. Some policymakers expressed interest in
expanding the crop insurance program in the context of the farm bill and/or
complementing it with a permanent disaster payment program. However, many
viewed the crop insurance program as a potential target for program cost reductions,
where savings could be used to fund new initiatives in various titles of the farm bill.
The Administration and others contend that the private companies should be required
to absorb more of the program losses, and that the reimbursement rate for their
operating expenses needs to be reduced as a means of reducing federal costs. The
insurance companies and many farm groups are concerned that significant reductions
in federal support will negatively impact the financial health of the crop insurance
industry and possibly jeopardize the delivery of crop insurance, particularly in high-
risk areas.
Like the House- and Senate passed farm bills, the enacted 2008 farm bill
contains several revisions to the crop insurance program, many of which are designed
to reduce program costs. For the enacted crop insurance title, CBO has estimated net
savings of $3.9 billion over five years (FY2008-2012), compared with estimated
savings of $4.0 billion in the House bill and $3.7 billion in the Senate bill.
Approximately $2.8 billion of the estimated savings in the enacted bill (as in the
House and Senate bills) is achieved through changes in the timing of premium
receipts from farmers, and payments to the companies, which has no effect on overall

subsidies to participating farmers or insurance companies. A portion of the five-year
savings is realized by requiring insurance companies and farmers to share more in
program costs. The enacted bill increases the administrative fees paid by farmers for
catastrophic crop insurance coverage (and for participation in the separate noninsured
assistance program) to new levels that are higher than both the House and Senate
bills. The bill also reduces reimbursement rates to private companies for their
administrative and operating expenses by 2.3 percentage points. Conferees did not
include a House provision that would have required the insurance companies to share
more of their underwriting gains with the federal government.
Among its other provisions, the crop insurance title of the 2008 farm bill also
(1) requires USDA to ensure that premiums are established at a level so that total
premiums equal total indemnity payments over time; (2) allows USDA to
periodically renegotiate its standard reinsurance agreement, which contains the
obligations and financial terms of the relationship between the government and the
participating private crop insurance companies; (3) reduces available mandatory
funding for reimbursing private initiatives for the research and development of new
crop insurance products, and revises the manner in which reimbursements are
provided; and (4) provides $36 million in mandatory funding over 10 years for
USDA to enhance its activities to reduce waste, fraud, and abuse within the crop
insurance program.
For more background information on crop insurance, see CRS Report
RL34207, Crop Insurance and Disaster Assistance in the 2008 Farm Bill.
Other Disaster Assistance Programs. Title XII includes other disaster
assistance provisions, including the addition of the Small Business Disaster Response
and Loan Improvements Act of 2008 (Subtitle B). This subtitle makes significant
changes to the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) response to disaster. SBA
has responsibility for making disaster loans to individuals and non-agricultural
businesses (15 U.S.C. 636(b)). Hurricane Katrina, and the SBA response, which was
widely viewed as slow and flawed, prompted may suggestions from Members and
others on how to improve the disaster loan system. In general, this act requires SBA
to implement new planning, management oversight, and reporting procedures and
authorizes private lending to supplement the disaster loans that SBA makes directly.
SBA will continue to make six types of disaster loans for damages that were not
covered by insurance:
!Personal property disaster loans (maximum $40,000) are made to
individuals to replace or repair personal property such as cars and
furniture. Home owners and renters may apply.
!Real property disaster loans (maximum $200,000) are made to home
owners to repair or replace primary residences.
!Physical disaster loans (maximum $1.5 million) are made to
businesses and nonprofits, regardless of size, to repair or replace real
property, inventory, machinery, equipment, fixtures, etc. not covered
by insurance.
!Economic injury disaster loans (maximum $1.5 million) are made to
businesses to provide operating funds following a disaster. The act

makes nonprofits eligible for these economic injury disaster loans
and adds ice storms and blizzards to the list of disasters that can
trigger these loans.
!Military reservist economic injury disaster loans (maximum $1.5
million) are made to businesses to help them overcome problems
caused by a key employee being called to active military duty.
!GO Loans (Gulf Opportunity Pilot Loans, maximum $150,000),
which were made to certain small businesses affected by Hurricane
The act provides for SBA-guaranteed private disaster loans to supplement the
current system of direct SBA disaster loans. Lenders in the SBA’s Preferred Lender
Program would be eligible to participate. The SBA would guarantee 85% of loans,
subject to a maximum loan size of $2 million. Following a major disaster, the SBA
can also hire private contractors to assist in processing disaster loan applications.
In the event of a major disaster with extraordinary levels of damage or
disruption (such as Hurricane Katrina), SBA may make economic injury disaster
loans to small businesses affected by the disaster regardless of location, but priority
may be given to small businesses within the disaster area. Usually, only businesses
within a disaster area are eligible.
The enacted farm bill also requires SBA to create an Immediate Disaster
Assistance Program, providing loans to small businesses affected by a disaster with
a maximum amount of $25,000 and an 85% SBA guarantee. SBA may defer
payments on existing disaster loans for up to four years for those taking out new
disaster loans. SBA is also required to assign at least 800 employees to the Office
of Disaster Assistance and 1,000 employees to the Disaster Cadre. In FY2007, the
SBA had 2,300 employees working on disaster loans; the Administration requested

921 employees for these functions for FY2009.

Title XIII: Commodity Futures
Title XIII of the enacted 2008 farm bill includes provisions that reauthorize
appropriations for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) for
FY2008-FY2013. The bill also makes several amendments to the Commodity
Exchange Act to (1) clarify CFTC jurisdiction over retail financial contracts based
on foreign currencies, (2) make the CFTC’s anti-fraud authority applicable to certain
off-exchange or over-the-counter derivatives contracts, (3) increase civil monetary
and criminal penalties for violations, (4) permit cross-margining of accounts in
security futures and options, and (5) establish CFTC regulation over certain
exchange-like trading facilities that are currently exempt from most regulation.
The last section is the most controversial, and deals with an issue — sometimes
referred to as the “Enron loophole” — that Congress has addressed several times
since 2000.28 These provisions of the bill would apply to electronic markets, other

28 For more information, see CRS Report RL34555, Speculation and Energy Prices:

than regulated futures exchanges, where contracts based on energy commodities,
metals, and other non-agricultural and non-financial commodities are traded. Under
current law, such markets (or electronic trading facilities) are required to notify the
CFTC of their operations, but are generally exempt from substantive regulation
provided that small public investors are not permitted to trade there.
Under the enacted bill, if the CFTC determined (according to criteria set forth
in the bill) that such an electronic market played a significant role in the price-setting
process (that is, if market participants looked to prices generated there as a guide to
their own transactions in the underlying commodities), the market would become
subject to a set of regulatory “core principles.” These principles amount to a
regulatory regime roughly comparable to (but somewhat less extensive than) CFTC
regulation of futures exchanges. Markets where “significant price discovery”
contracts are traded will be required to prevent price manipulation, monitor trading,
report daily figures on price and trade volume, guard against conflicts of interest, and
disclose large positions held by individual traders. Failure to comply with these
principles would give the CFTC grounds to suspend or revoke the market’s
Title XIV: Miscellaneous
The miscellaneous provisions in the 2008 farm bill cover various provisions that
are discussed in other sections of this report, including in the research, energy, and
rural development title sections. Below is a discussion of the first two subtitles,
covering socially disadvantaged and limited resource producers (Subtitle A) and
agricultural security (Subtitle B). The title also includes other miscellaneous
provisions (Subtitle C), some of which are not separately detailed in this report.
Socially Disadvantaged and Limited Resource Producers. Several
provisions in the enacted bill address outreach and assistance for socially
disadvantaged farmers and ranchers and limited-resource farmers and ranchers,
producers targeted by Section 2501 of the 1990 farm bill. Both the House- and
Senate-passed farm bills contained this provision. Other farm bill titles in the bill
contain similar provisions for the Section 2501 program, including conservation
(Title II), farm credit (Title V), rural development (Title VI), agricultural research
(Title VII), and crop insurance and disaster assistance (Title XII).
The enacted bill specifies that the Technical and Outreach Assistance Program
is to be used to enhance the coordination, outreach, education, and assistance
authorized under various USDA programs, and provides $75 million in mandatory
funding through FY2012. The bill requires USDA to document the number, location,
and economic contributions of socially disadvantaged and limited-resource farmers
and ranchers. As part of the efforts to address the needs of socially disadvantaged
and limited-resource farmers and ranchers, the bill also authorizes a new USDA
Office of Advocacy and Outreach to carry out the Section 2501 program, and also to
oversee the Minority Farmer Advisory Committee and carry out the functions of the

28 (...continued)
Legislative Responses, and CRS Report RS22912, The Enron Loophole.

Office of Outreach and Diversity previously handled by the Office of Assistant
Secretary for Civil Rights. The bill also authorizes a new Office of Small Farms and
Beginning Farmers and Ranchers, to be subsumed into the Office of Advocacy and
The bill also addresses the so-called Pigford decision regarding the 1999 class
action discrimination suit against USDA. Both the House- and Senate-passed farm
bills contained this provision. The bill provides that Pigford claimants who have not
had their cases determined on the merits may, in a civil action, obtain such a
determination. The enacted bill further specifies steps USDA must take with regard
to settling the claim and provides mandatory funding of $100 million for FY2008 to
pay for successful claims.
Agricultural Security. The 2008 farm bill creates an Office of Homeland
Security within USDA to coordinate the department’s agroterrorism and agricultural
disease efforts and to be a liaison with other federal agencies. It also creates an
agricultural biosecurity communications center, and a competitive grant program for
agricultural biosecurity and countermeasures development.
Regarding foreign animal diseases, the enacted bill adopts the Senate provision
that would compel USDA to issue a permit to Department of Homeland Secutiry
(DHS) to possess and work with live foot and mouth disease (FMD) virus at the
proposed and yet-to-be-built National Bio- and Agro-Defense Facility, subject to
compliance with USDA rules for handling “select agents.” For more information,
see CRS Report RL34160, The National Bio- and Agro-Defense Facility: Issues for
Title XV: Trade and Tax Provisions
Supplemental Agricultural Disaster Assistance. During the
congressional debate on the omnibus farm bill, some policymakers wanted to make
permanent in the farm bill some level of disaster payments to supplement the crop
insurance program. Consequently, Title XV authorizes a new $3.8 billion trust fund
to cover the estimated cost of making agricultural disaster assistance available on an
ongoing basis over the next four years (FY2008-FY2011) through five new
The largest of the new farm disaster assistance programs authorized through the
2008 farm bill is a supplemental revenue assistance payment program for crop
producers. The program is designed to compensate eligible producers for a portion
of crop losses that are not eligible for an indemnity payment under the crop insurance
program (i.e., the portion of losses that is part of the deductible on the policy). An
eligible producer can receive a payment equal to 60% of the difference between a
target level of revenue and the actual total farm revenue for the entire farm. The
target level of revenue will be based on the level of crop insurance coverage selected
by the farmer, thus increasing if a farmer opts for higher levels of coverage. To be
eligible for a payment, a producer must be in or contiguous to a county that has been
declared a disaster area by either the President or the Secretary of Agriculture.

Payments are limited so that the disaster program guarantee level cannot exceed 90%
of what income likely would have been in the absence of a natural disaster.29
The producer also must have at least the minimum level of crop insurance
(CAT) coverage for insurable crops and participate in the NAP program for
non-insurable crops. The statute makes an exception for the 2008 crop year by
allowing producers who did not purchase crop insurance or NAP coverage in advance
to be eligible for the program, as long as they pay the equivalent administrative fee
for coverage within 90 days of enactment (September 16, 2008). Final payments for
2008 crop losses cannot be determined until late 2009, since a portion of the disaster
payment formula is based on the national average market price of the commodity,
which is determined at the end of the marketing year. For example, the 2008
marketing year for corn and soybeans ends September 30, 2009.
In addition to the supplemental crop revenue assistance payment program
described above, the 2008 farm bill also authorizes and funds four smaller disaster
programs also through FY2011: (1) Livestock Indemnity Payments, which
compensate ranchers at a rate of 75% of market value for livestock mortality caused
by a disaster; (2) Livestock Forage Disaster Program, to assist ranchers who graze
livestock on drought-affected pastureland or grazing land; (3) Emergency Assistance
for Livestock, Honey Bess and Farm Raised Fish, which will provide up to $50
million to compensate these producers for disaster losses not covered under other
disaster programs; and (4) the Tree Assistance Program, for orchardists and nursery
growers who can receive a payment to cover 70% of the cost of replanting trees or
nursery stock following a disaster (up to $100,000 per year per producer).
For more information on crop insurance and disaster assistance, see CRS Report
RL34207, Crop Insurance and Disaster Assistance in the 2008 Farm Bill, and CRS
Report RS21212, Agricultural Disaster Assistance.
Tax Provisions. The tax portions (Title XV) of the 2008 farm bill differ
markedly from those in either the House- or the Senate-passed versions of the bill.
The enacted bill’s tax cuts consist of six groups, respectively containing provisions
for revenue, an agriculture disaster reserve fund, conservation, energy, agriculture,
and other provisions.
The single largest revenue-raising provision in the 2008 farm bill involves a
change in the estimated tax payment of corporations. This provision increases the
estimated tax payments of corporations due in the July through September 2012 by
a factor of 7.75 percentage points, and raises approximately $4.5 billion in revenue
through 2012. Other revenue-raising provisions limit the excess farming losses of
certain taxpayers and modify the incentives related to alcohol fuels.
The single largest revenue-losing provision in the 2008 farm bill pertains to the
agriculture disaster reserve fund, discussed above. Other revenue-losing provisions

29 For a more detailed description of the authorized payment formula, see the full page text
box in CRS Report RL34207, Crop Insurance and Disaster Assistance in the 2008 Farm

reduce the depreciable life of race horses 2 years or younger (from seven years to two
years), increase the credit for cellulosic biofuel (to $1.01 per gallon less the amount
of small-producer ethanol credit claimed and the alcohol mixture credit claimed for
ethanol), and create a qualified forest conservation bond pilot program.
The enacted farm bill contains tax-related and revenue provisions related to
conservation, energy, and agricultural provisions, among other revenue provisions.
For example, among the conservation provisions, the bill authorizes a new type of
tax-exempt private bond whose proceeds are used to finance $500 million in forest
conservation; it also modifies income tax deductions for qualified timber gains.
The farm bill also includes several provisions which loosen the rules associated
with the tax treatment of timber real estate investment trusts (REITs). For example,
the allowable size of a REIT’s taxable REIT subsidiary was expanded to 25% of
REIT assets; the treatment of mineral royalty income as REIT qualified income; the
reduction in the excise tax safe-harbor holding period from 4 years to 2 years for
timber property sold to a qualified organization exclusively for conservation
Although the enacted farm bill contains many of the provisions from the Senate-
passed bill and one of the two tax provisions in the House-passed bill, it does not
include the largest single revenue-raising provision from either bill. The Senate bill
included a provision designed to curtail the use of tax shelters, involving the
codification of the judicial “economic substance” doctrine that has developed in court
cases related to tax shelters.30 In general terms, the doctrine denies the use of tax-
reducing items, such as tax deductions and credits, generated by transactions that do
not result in a meaningful change in the taxpayer’s economic position. The House
bill included a provision designed to curb what is sometimes termed “treaty
shopping” — situations where a foreign firm with a U.S. subsidiary routes payments
from its U.S. subsidiary through a subsidiary in another country so as to take
advantage of tax-treaty benefits. These provisions were not included as part of the
enacted 2008 farm bill.

30 For additional information on the tax provisions of the House and Senate farm bills, see
CRS Report RS22759, Farm Legislation and Taxes in the 110th Congress.

Major Provisions of the Enacted 2008 Farm Bill (P.L. 110-246)
Compared with Previous Law and the House- and Senate-Passed Bills (H.R. 2419)
arm Security and Rural Investment ActFarm, Nutrition, and Bioenergy Act ofFood and Energy Security Act of 2007”Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of
2002” [7 U.S.C. 7901 note]2007” [Sec. 1][Sec. 1]2008” [P.L. 110-246]
ricultural Act of 1949: 7 U.S.C. 1421Agricultural Act of 1949: same as priorNo comparable definition.No comparable definition.
eq. as in effect before the suspensionslaw, with the addition of reference to
der the 1996 farm bill (Federalsuspensions under the 2002 farm bill and
ricultural Improvement and ReformSec. 1502(b) of this act. [Sec. 1001(1)]
iki/CRS-RL34696t, P.L. 104-127). [7 U.S.C. 7901(1)]
s.or comparable definition.No comparable definition.Average Crop Revenue Payment: AAverage Crop Revenue Election
leakpayment made to producers underPayment: Adopts Senate definition, with
average crop revenue paymentchange of name. [Sec. 1001(1)]
://wikiprovisions. [Sec. 1001(1)]
httpse acres: the number of base acresBase acres: the number of base acres ofBase acres: same as House definition,Base acres: Adopts House provision,
tablished by the owner of the farma covered commodity on a farmexcept covered commodity does notwith special mention of peanuts. [Sec.
der base acre provisions. [7 U.S.C.established under the 2002 farm bill (7include peanuts. [Sec. 1001(2)] Same1001(2)] Same definition for peanuts.
Same definition for peanuts. [7U.S.C. 7911, 7952), as in effect the daydefinition for peanuts. [Sec. 1301(1)][Sec. 1301(1)]
S.C. 7951(1)]before enactment of this act, subject to
adjustment. [Sec. 1001(2)]
comparable definition.Comparable United States Quality:No comparable definition.No comparable definition.
upland cotton classified as Middling 1
3/32-inch cotton, micronaire of 3.7 to
4.2, strength 30 grams per tex, uniformity
of 83. [Sec. 1001(3)]
ent: a payment toCounter-cyclical payment: a payment toCounter-cyclical payment: a payment toCounter-cyclical payment: Adopts
cers on a farm under counter-producers on a farm under traditional orproducers on a farm under traditionalSenate provision. [Sec. 1001(3)] Same
clical payment provisions. [7 U.S.C.revenue-based counter-cyclical paymentcounter-cyclical payment provisions.definition for peanuts. [Sec. 1301(2)]

Same definition for peanuts. [7provisions. [Sec. 1001(4)][Sec. 1001(3)] Same definition for
S.C. 7951(2)]peanuts. [Sec. 1301(2)]

modity: wheat, corn, grainCovered commodity: same as prior law,Covered commodity: same as prior law,Covered commodity: Adopts Senate
rghum, barley, oats, upland cotton,except adds peanuts. [Sec. 1001(5)]except differentiates between long anddefinition. Includes wheat, corn, grain
oybeans, and other oilseeds. [7medium grain rice, and adds pulse crops.sorghum, barley, oats, upland cotton,
S.C. 7901(4)][Sec. 1001(4)]long grain rice, medium grain rice, pulse
crops, soybeans, and other oilseeds. [Sec.
ent: a payment made toDirect payment: same as prior law. [Sec.Direct payment: same as prior law. [Sec.Direct payment: Adopts Senate
cers on a farm under direct1001(6)]1001(5)] Same definition for peanuts.definition. [Sec. 1001(5)] Same
ment provisions. [7 U.S.C. 7901(5)][Sec. 1301(3)]definition for peanuts. [Sec. 1301(3)]
fective price: for a coveredEffective price: same as prior law. [Sec.Effective price: same as prior law. [Sec.Effective price: Adopts Senate
modity for a crop year, the price1001(7)]1001(6)] Same definition for peanuts.definition. [Sec. 1001(6)] Same
lated by USDA under counter-[Sec. 1301(4)]definition for peanuts. [Sec. 1301(4)]
clical payment provisions to determine
ether payments are required for that
iki/CRS-RL34696ear. [7 U.S.C. 7901(6)]
g/wtra long staple cotton: cotton that (A)Extra long staple cotton: same as priorExtra long staple cotton: same as priorExtra long staple cotton: Adopts House
s.orced from pure strain varieties oflaw. [Sec. 1001(8)]law. [Sec. 1001(7)]provision. [Sec. 1001(7)]
leakarbadense species or any hybrid of
://wikipecies, or other similar types of extrag staple cotton having characteristics
httpor various end uses for which
pland cotton is not suitable, and
own in irrigated or other designated
S. cotton-growing regions; and (B) is
d on a roller-type gin or, other
thorized gin for experimental purposes.
.S.C. 7901(7)]
comparable definition.Far East Price: the Friday throughNo comparable definition.No comparable definition.
Thursday average price quotation for the
three lowest-priced growths of upland
cotton, as quoted for Middling (M)
1 3/32-inch cotton, delivered C/F Far
East. [Sec. 1001(9)]
commodity: wheat, corn, grainLoan commodity: same as prior law,Loan commodity: same as HouseLoan commodity: Adopts Senate
rghum, barley, oats, upland cotton,except differentiates feed barley and maltdefinition, except does not differentiatedefinition, but differentiates graded wool
tra long staple cotton, rice, soybeans,barley; differentiates long, medium, andtypes of barley; does not include smalland nongraded wool. Includes wheat,

r oilseeds, wool, mohair, honey, dryshort grain rice; and includes peanuts.grain rice directly (although included incorn, grain sorghum, barley, oats, upland
tils, and small chickpeas. [Sec. 1001(10)]definition of medium grain rice);cotton, extra long staple cotton, long
.S.C. 7901(8)]excludes peanuts which are treatedgrain rice, medium grain rice, soybeans,
separately; and includes large chickpeas.other oilseeds, graded wool, nongraded
[Sec. 1001(8)]wool, mohair, honey, dry peas, lentils,
small chickpeas, and large chickpeas.
[Sec. 1001(8)]
comparable definition.No comparable definition.Medium grain rice: includes short grainMedium grain rice: Adopts Senate
rice. [Sec. 1001(9)]definition. [Sec. 1001(9)]
eed: sunflower seed, rapeseed,Other oilseed: sunflower seed, rapeseed,Other oilseed: same as House definition,Other oilseed: Adopts House definition.
ola, safflower, flaxseed, mustard seed,canola, safflower, flaxseed, mustard seed,except adds camelina. [Sec. 1001(10)][Sec. 1001(10)]
designated by the Secretary, anothercrambe, sesame seed, or, if designated by
eed. Crambe and sesame seed werethe Secretary, another oilseed. [Sec.
P.L. 108-7, Division A, Sec.1001(11)]
iki/CRS-RL34696[7 U.S.C. 7901(9)]
g/went acres: 85% of the base acresPayment acres: same as prior law. [Sec.Payment acres: same as prior law. [Sec.Payment acres: Generally, 85% of base
s.orr the covered commodity on which1001(12)]1001(11)] Same definition for peanuts.acres for the covered commodity for
leakments and counter-cyclical[Sec. 1301(5)]direct and counter-cyclical payments.
://wikiments are made. [7 U.S.C. 7901(10)] e definition for peanuts. [7 U.S.C.Exception: 83.3% of base acres for directpayments only for crop years 2009-2011.
http[Sec. 1001(11)] Same definition for
peanuts. [Sec. 1301(5)]
ent yield: in general, the yieldPayment yield: the yield established forPayment yield: same as HousePayment yield: Adopts Senate
tablished under Sec. 1102 for a covereddirect payments and counter-cyclicaldefinition, except does not includedefinition, and includes yields established
modity. “Updated payment yield”payments for a farm for a coveredpeanuts. [Sec. 1001(12)] Same definitionfor new commodities in Sec. 1102. [Sec.
s the yield established to calculatecommodity and peanuts under the 2002for peanuts. [Sec. 1301(6)]1001(12)] Same definition for peanuts.
nter-cyclical payments. [7 bill as in effect on the day before[Sec. 1301(6)]
Same definition for peanuts. [7the date of the enactment of this act.
S.C. 7951(7)][Sec. 1001(13)]
generally, an owner, operator,Producer: same as prior law. [Sec.Producer: same as prior law. [Sec.Producer: Adopts Senate definition.
dlord, tenant, or sharecropper that1001(14)]1001(13)] Same definition for peanuts.[Sec. 1001(13)] Same definition for
ares in the risk of producing a crop and[Sec. 1001(7)]peanuts. [Sec. 1301(7)]

titled to share in the crop available
r marketing from the farm, or would
ve shared had the crop been produced.
rower of hybrid seed, the

istence of a hybrid seed contract and
er program rules shall not adversely
ect the ability to receive a payment. [7
S.C. 7901(12)] Same definition for
anuts. [7 U.S.C. 7951(8)]
comparable definition.No comparable definition.Pulse crop: dry peas, lentils, smallPulse crop: Adopts Senate definition.
chickpeas, and large chickpeas. [Sec.[Sec. 1001(14)]
the Secretary of Agriculture.Secretary: same as prior law. [Sec.No comparable definition.No comparable definition.
.S.C. 7901(13)] Same definition for1001(15)]
anuts. [7 U.S.C. 7951(9)]
ate: each of the U.S. States, the DistrictState: same as prior law. [Sec. 1001(16)]State: same as prior law. [Sec. 1001(15)] State: Adopts Senate definition. [Sec.
Columbia, the Commonwealth ofSame definition for peanuts. [Sec.1001(15)] Same definition for peanuts.
iki/CRS-RL34696erto Rico, or U.S. territory/possession..S.C. 7901(14)] Same definition for1301(8)][Sec. 1301(8)]
g/wanuts. [7 U.S.C. 7951(10)]
leakrget price: the price per unit of aTarget price: same as prior law. [Sec.Target price: same as prior law. [Sec.Target price: Adopts Senate definition.
vered commodity used to determine1001(17)]1001(16)] Same definition for peanuts.[Sec. 1001(16)] Same definition for
://wikiment rate for counter-cyclical[Sec. 1301(9)]peanuts. [Sec. 1301(9)]
httpments. [7 U.S.C. 7901(15)] Same
finition for peanuts. [7 U.S.C.
: when used in aUnited States: same as prior law. [Sec.United States: same as prior law. [Sec.United States: Adopts Senate definition.
ographical sense, all of the States. [71001(18)]1001(17)] Same definition for peanuts.[Sec. 1001(17)] Same definition for
S.C. 7901(16)] Same definition for[Sec. 1301(10)]peanuts. [Sec. 1301(10)]
anuts. [7 U.S.C. 7951(12)]
comparable definition.United States Premium Factor: theNo comparable definition.United States Premium Factor: Adopts
percentage by which the difference in thethe House definition. [Sec. 1001(18)]

U.S. loan schedule premiums for Strict
Middling (SM) 1 1/8-inch cotton and for
M 1 3/32-inch exceeds the difference in
the applicable premiums for comparable
international qualities delivered C/F Far
East. [Sec. 1001(19)]

se Acres and Program Yields
se acres: for each covered commodityBase acres: no choice of updating baseBase acres: same as House bill, exceptBase acres: Adopts Senate provision.
a farm, base acres are established byacres or payment yields, except requiresprovides for adjustment to include pulse[Sec. 1101(a)-(c)(1)] Same provision for
ner’s choice of (1) average ofUSDA to provide base acre adjustmentscrops, camelina, or newly designatedpeanuts. [Sec. 1302(a)-(c)(1)]
2001 plantings, or (2) the sum ofwhen a CRP contract ends. [Sec. 1101]oilseed acreage. [Sec. 1101(a)-(c)(1)]
oduction flexibility contract acreageSame provision for peanuts. [Sec.
der 1996 farm bill plus average oilseed1302(a)-(c)(1)]
e from 1998-2001.
modation for peanut acres, double
ng, and CRP acres. Base cannot
ceed total crop land. Payment acres =
of base acres. [7 U.S.C. 7911]
se acres for peanuts also based on the
2001 period. [7 U.S.C. 7952]
iki/CRS-RL34696parable provision.No comparable provision.Required reduction of base acres:Adopts Senate provision, with
g/wsuspend direct, counter-cyclical, andaverage crop revenue payments andmodification. Reduction in base acres isrequired for land that issubdivided and
s.orreduce base acres for land that is nodeveloped for multiple residential units
leaklonger used for farming. Specifically,or other nonfarming uses unless the
://wikiland that has been developed forcommercial or industrial use or has beenproducersdemonstrate that the landremains devoted to commercial
httpsubdivided and developed for multipleagriculture production or is likely to be
residential units or other nonfarmingreturned to agricultural use.” [Sec.
uses” unless producer demonstrates the1101(c)(2)] Same provision for peanuts.
land is devoted exclusively to agricultural[Sec. 1302(c)(2)]
production. [Sec. 1101(c)(2)] Same
provision for peanuts. [Sec. 1302(c)(2)]
comparable provision.No comparable provision.Requires USDA to track reconstitutionsAdopts Senate provision. [Sec.
of land and report to Congress to ensure1101(c)(3)] Same provision for peanuts.
that commercial or residential land is not[Sec. 1302(c)(3)]
eligible for payments. [Sec. 1101(c)(3)]
Same provision for peanuts. [Sec.
ent yield: for each coveredNo provision to change payment yield;Payment yields: Establishes paymentPayment yields: Adopts Senate
modity on a farm, a direct paymentpayment yields are continued from prioryields for designated oilseeds, camelina,provision. [Sec. 1102]

d is the yield established for the 1995law by definition.or pulse crops using 1998-2001 farm
e yield for oilseeds is the averageyields, adjusted back to the national

1998-2001, adjusted back to theaverage from 1981-85. [Sec. 1102]
tional average from 1981-85.
ent yield may be
updated yield using specified
rmulas. [7 U.S.C. 7912] Payment
for peanuts are established using
2001 period. [7 U.S.C. 7952]
comparable provision.No comparable provision.Apportion base acres for long grain andAdopts the Senate provision. [Sec. 1108]
medium grain rice based on average
acreage planted to each type of rice in the
applicable state during the 2003-2006
crop years to make counter-cyclical
payments. Producers may elect to use
farm-level planting history. Established
totals of base acres, payment acres, and
iki/CRS-RL34696yields are maintained. [Sec. 1107]
g/whibition on Small Payments
leakparable provision.No payments under $25: no paymentNo comparable provision.No direct, counter-cyclical, or average
://wikiwill be made if the total direct paymentto a producer on a farm for all coveredcrop revenue election payments will bemade on farms with less than a total of 10
httpcommodities is less than $25. [Sec.bases acres, except for limited resource
1102(e)] Same provision is made foror socially disadvantaged farms.
counter-cyclical payments [Sec. 1102(e)],Requires USDA to report on the effect of
and revenue-based counter-cyclicalthe provision. [Sec. 1101(d)] Same
payments. [Sec. 1104(i)]provision for peanuts. [Sec. 1302(d)]
Report language instructs USDA to allow
for aggregation of farms when
implementing the 10-acre requirement.
ibility for payments requiresSame as prior law. [Sec. 1105(a)]Same as prior law, except adds provisionAdopts House provision, except adds a
oducers to comply with conservation,that land cannot be used for a residentialprovision that land cannot be used for a
tland, and planting flexibilityuse (including land subdivided andresidential use, and requires farmers in
irements; use base acres fordeveloped into residential units or otherthe ACRE program to report production.
ricultural or conserving use, and notnonfarming uses, or that is otherwise no[Sec. 1106(a)] Same provision for
r nonagricultural commercial orlonger intended to be used in conjunctionpeanuts. [Sec. 1305(a)]

strial use; control noxious weeds andwith farming (like Sec. 1101(c)(2)).

intain sound agricultural practices. [7[Sec. 1105(a)] Same provision for
S.C. 7915(a)] Same provision forpeanuts. [Sec. 1305(a)] Same provision
anuts. [7 U.S.C. 7955(a)]for Average Crop Revenue (ACR)
program, except does not require
compliance with planting flexibility
provisions since ACR has its own
planting flexibility rules. Requires USDA
to certify entities receiving payments are
producers. [Sec. 1402(a)]
equirements for transfer of interestSame as prior law. [Sec. 1105(b)-(e)]Same as prior law, except adds that noAdopts Senate provision, and applies to
e acres. Requires acreage reports. penalty shall be assessed for inaccurateACRE program. [Sec. 1106(b)-(e)] Same
otects interests of tenants andacreage report unless producersprovision for peanuts. [Sec. 1305(b)-(e)]
arecroppers and provides for sharing ofknowingly and willfully falsified the
ments on a farm on an equitablereport. [Sec. 1105(b)-(e)] Same
sis. [7 U.S.C. 7915(b)-(e)] Sameprovision for peanuts. [Sec. 1305(b)-(e)]
iki/CRS-RL34696ision for peanuts. [7 U.S.C. 7955(b)-Same provision for Average Crop
g/wRevenue program. [Sec. 1402(b)-(e)]
s.ornting Flexibility
://wikiy crop may be planted on base acres,cept restrictions are placed on plantingSame as prior law, and incorporatespeanuts as a covered commodity. [Sec.Same as prior law, but the exceptionallows planting mung beans and pulseAdopts Senate provision. [Sec. 1107(a)-(c)] Same provision for peanuts. [Sec.
http fruits, vegetables, and wild rice on1106(a)-(c)]crops. [Sec. 1106(a)-(c)] Same provision1306]
se acres. Penalties apply if the fruitfor peanuts. [Sec. 1306(a)-(c)] Same
d vegetable restriction is violated.provision for Average Crop Revenue
ovides an exception for lentils, mungprogram. [Sec. 1403(a)-c)]
s, and dry peas. Exceptions
ided for farms and producers with a
tory of double-cropping or history of
owing fruits and vegetables (except
d counter-cyclical payments
ced acre for acre for the year).
.S.C. 7916] Same provision for
anuts. [7 U.S.C. 7956]
comparable provision.Establishes a pilot Farm Flex project forSame as House provision for traditionalCreates a pilot program beginning in
planting tomatoes for processing on up todirect and counter-cyclical program2009 in seven midwestern states to allow
10,000 base acres in Indiana during theparticipants, except applies only to 2008planting of fruits and vegetables for
2008-2012 crop years. Base acresand 2009 crop years. [Sec. 1106(d)]processing on base acres. Limited to
temporarily reduced for each acre ofNo comparable provision for peanut basecucumbers, green peas, lima beans,

tomatoes, and are protected for futureacres in Sec. 1306.pumpkins, snap beans, sweet corn, and
use. [Sec. 1106(d)]tomatoes grown for processing. States
For participants in the ACR program,include Minnesota (34,000 acres),
establishes pilot Farm Flex project forWisconsin (9,000 acres), Michigan
planting any fruit or vegetable for(9,000 acres), Illinois (9,000 acres),
processing on up to 10,000 acres inIndiana (9,000 acres), Ohio (4,000 acres),
certain states (IL, IN, IA, MI, MN, OH,and Iowa (1,000 acres). Base acres are
WI). Available for the 2010-2012 croptemporarily reduced for the year, but are
years. Base acres temporarily reducedrestored for the next crop year and
for each acre of fruit and vegetables, andconsidered planted” for any future base
protected for future use. [Sec. 1403(d)]calculations. [Sec. 1107(d)]
ents: available to producersDirect payments: continues prior law toDirect payments: continues prior law toDirect payments: Continues prior law to
farms with payment yields and basecover 2008-2012 crop years. [Sec.cover 2008-2012 crop years. Excludescover 2008-2012 crop years.
iki/CRS-RL34696. Covers 2002-2007 crop years. [71102(a)]participants in the ACR program under[Sec.1103(a)] Direct payment for peanuts
g/wS.C. 7913(a)] Direct payments foruts authorized separately. [7 U.S.C.Sec. 1401. [Sec. 1103(a)] Directpayments for peanuts authorizedcontinued separately [Sec. 1303(a)]
s.orseparately. [Sec. 1303(a)]
://wikient rates: eat, bushel (bu.), $0.52Same as prior law; incorporates peanutsinto same section. [Sec. 1102(b)]Same as prior law, except differentiatesbetween long grain rice and mediumAdopts Senate provision. [Sec. 1103(b)]Separate provision for peanuts. [Sec.
httprn, bu., $0.28grain rice (both at $2.35 per cwt.). [Sec.1303(b)]
ain sorghum, bu., $0.351103(b)] Peanuts, ton, $36 [Sec.
ey, bu., $0.241303(b)]
ts, bu., $0.024
land cotton, lb., $0.0667
ce, cwt., $2.35
ybeans, bu., $0.44
her oilseeds, lb., $0.0080
.S.C. 7913(b)]
uts, ton, $36 [7 U.S.C. 7953(b)]
ent amount = Payment rate, timesSame as prior law. [Sec. 1102(c)]Same as House provision. [Sec. 1103(c)] Same as prior law, except a ratio of
base acres, times direct paymentSeparate provision for peanuts [Sec.83.3% of base acres is used for crop
ld. [7 U.S.C. 7913(c)] Same formula1303(c)]years 2009-2011. [Sec. 1103(c)] Separate
r peanuts. [7 U.S.C. 7953(d)]provision for peanuts. [Sec. 1303(c)]
ing: Generally paid after October 1Timing: Same as prior law, except (1)Same as House provision. [Sec. 1103(d)]Adopts Senate provision. [Sec. 1103(d)]
the calendar year of the year ofapplies to peanuts in the same section,Separate provision for peanuts [Sec.Separate provision for peanuts [Sec.

rvest. Advance payments up to 50%and (2) the 22% advance payment option1303(d)]1303(d)]
er reduced to 22% by P.L. 109-171)applies only to crop years 2008-2011. No
inning as early as December 1 of theadvance payment for crop year 2012 and
dar year before harvest, at thethereafter. [Sec. 1102(d)]
ion of the producer. [7 U.S.C.
For peanuts: generally, before
tober 1 of the year of harvest. Similar
ance payments. [7 U.S.C. 7953(e)]
ents: if theCounter-cyclical payments: same asCounter-cyclical payments: same asCounter-cyclical payments: continues
ective price for a covered commodityprior law, except it covers 2008-2012prior law, except it covers 2008-2012prior law to cover 2008-2012 crop years.
an the target price, a payment iscrop years. [Sec. 1103(a)]crop years. Excludes participants in the[Sec.1104(a)] Counter-cyclical payments
ailable to producers on farms withACR program. [Sec. 1104(a)] Counter-for peanuts continued separately [Sec.
ment yields and base acres. Coverscyclical payments for peanuts authorized1304(a)]
iki/CRS-RL346962007 crop years. [7 U.S.C.separately. [Sec.1304(a)]
g/w Counter-cyclical payments foruts authorized separately. [7 U.S.C.
://wikifective price: the higher of (1) thetional season average market price orSame as prior law, except applies topeanuts and clarifies that effective priceSame as prior law, except computed forrice using prices by type of rice. [Sec.Adopts Senate provision. [Sec. 1104(b)] Adopts Senate provision for peanuts.
http) national average loan rate plus thefor rice and barley are to be computed1104(b)] Same as prior law for peanuts.[Sec. 1304(b)]
ment rate. [7 U.S.C. 7914(b)]notwithstanding separate loan rates by[Sec. 1304(b)]
me provision for peanuts. [7 U.S.C.type of rice or barley. [Sec. 1103(b)]
rget prices for 2004-2007 crop years:Target prices:Target prices:Target prices:
eat, bu., $3.92Wheat, bu., $4.15Wheat, bu., $4.202008 crop year (same as prior law,
rn, bu., $2.63Corn, bu., $2.63Corn, bu., $2.63except cotton lower) [Sec. 1104(c)(1)]
ain sorghum, bu., $2.57Grain sorghum, bu., $2.57Grain sorghum, bu., $2.63Wheat, bu., $3.92
ey, bu., $2.24Barley, bu., $2.73Barley, bu., $2.63Corn, bu., $2.63
ts, bu., $1.44Oats, bu., $1.50Oats, bu., $1.83Grain sorghum, bu., $2.57
land cotton, lb., $0.7240Upland cotton, lb., $0.70Upland cotton, lb., $0.7225Barley, bu., $2.24
ce, cwt., $10.50Rice, cwt., $10.50Long grain rice, cwt., $10.50Oats, bu., $1.44
Medium grain rice, cwt., $10.50Upland cotton, lb., $0.7125
ybeans, bu., $5.80Soybeans, bu., $6.10Soybeans, bu., $6.00Long grain rice, cwt., $10.50
her oilseeds, lb., $0.1010Other oilseeds, lb., $0.1150Other oilseeds, cwt., $12.74Medium grain rice, cwt., $10.50
Peanuts, ton, $495 [Sec. 1103(c)]Dry peas, cwt., $8.33Soybeans, bu., $5.80
Lentils, cwt., $12.82Other oilseeds, cwt., $10.10

ifferent target prices applied to 2002-Small chickpeas, cwt., $10.36Peanuts, ton, $495 [Sec. 1304(c)]
ears). [7 U.S.C. 7914(c)]Large chickpeas, cwt., $12.82
uts, ton, $495 [7 U.S.C. 7954(c)][Sec. 1104(c)]2009 crop year (same as 2008, except
Peanuts, ton, $495 [Sec. 1304(c)]four new crops: dry peas, lentils, small
and large chickpeas) [Sec. 1104(c)(2)]
Wheat, bu., $3.92
Corn, bu., $2.63
Grain sorghum, bu., $2.57
Barley, bu., $2.24
Oats, bu., $1.44
Upland cotton, lb., $0.7125
Long grain rice, cwt., $10.50
Medium grain rice, cwt., $10.50
Soybeans, bu., $5.80
Other oilseeds, cwt., $10.10
Dry peas, cwt., $8.32
iki/CRS-RL34696Lentils, cwt., $12.81
g/wSmall chickpeas, cwt., $10.36
s.orLarge chickpeas, cwt., $12.81
leakPeanuts, ton, $495 [Sec. 1304(c)]
://wiki2010-2012 crop years (increases for
httpwheat, sorghum, barley, oats, soybeans,and minor oilseeds) [Sec. 1104(c)(3)]
Wheat, bu., $4.17
Corn, bu., $2.63
Grain sorghum, bu., $2.63
Barley, bu., $2.63
Oats, bu., $1.79
Upland cotton, lb., $0.7125
Long grain rice, cwt., $10.50
Medium grain rice, cwt., $10.50
Soybeans, bu., $6.00
Other oilseeds, cwt., $12.68
Dry peas, cwt., $8.32
Lentils, cwt., $12.81
Small chickpeas, cwt., $10.36
Large chickpeas, cwt., $12.81
Peanuts, ton, $495 [Sec. 1304(c)]

ent amount = target price minusSame as prior law. [Sec. 1103(d)-(e)]Same as prior law. [Sec. 1104(d)-(e)]Adopts Senate provision. [Sec. 1104(d)-
ective price (if the difference is greaterSame formula for peanuts. [Sec. 1304(d)-(e)] Adopts Senate provision for peanuts.
0), times 85% of base acres, times(e)][Sec. 1304(d)-(e)]
nter-cyclical payment yield. [7 U.S.C.
Same formula for peanuts.
.S.C. 7954(d)-(f)]
ing: generally, after the end of theTiming: generally, the later of (1) theTiming: generally, beginning October 1Adopts Senate provision, with
-month marketing year. Advanceend of the 12-month marketing year, orafter the end of the marketing year. modification. [Sec. 1104(f)] Same
ments are available; for the 2007 crop(2) October 1 of the same calendar yearAdvance payments same as in House bill.provision for peanuts. [Sec. 1304(f)]
e advance payment of 40% ofas the end of the marketing year. [Sec. 1104(f)] Same provision for
pected payment after first 6 months ofAdvance payments for 2008-2010 croppeanuts. [Sec. 1304(f)]
rketing year (for 2002-2006, twoyears: one advance payment of 40% after
ance payments, each 35% of thefirst 6 months of marketing year. No
pected payment, in October of harvestadvance payments after 2010 crop year.
d after February 1 of the next[Sec. 1103(f)]
iki/CRS-RL34696dar year). [7 U.S.C. 7914(f)] Same
g/wision for peanuts. [7 U.S.C. 7954(g)]
s.ored Counter-cyclical Payments
://wikiparable provision.Revenue-based Counter-CyclicalPayments (RCCP): an alternative toAverage Crop Revenue (ACR)program: an alternative to traditionalAverage Crop Revenue Election(ACRE) program: Adopts Senate
httptraditional counter-cyclical payments. direct payments, counter-cyclicalapproach, with significant modifications.
Covers crop years 2008-2012. Producerspayments, and nonrecourse marketingAn alternative to traditional counter-
have one opportunity to elect RCCPloans for covered commodities andcyclical payments for covered
option soon after enactment. Traditionalpeanuts. Producers have one opportunitycommodities and peanuts, with a
counter-cyclical payments remain theto elect ACR option: for 2010-12 cropreduction in direct payments and
default if no election is made. [Sec.years, 2011-12. or 2012. Traditionalmarketing loan rates for participants.
1104(a)]programs remain the default if noProducers can enter any year of the 2009-
election is made. [Sec. 1401(a)]2012 crop years, but cannot return to the
traditional counter-cyclical program.
[Sec. 1105(a)]
— No comparable provision. (Continue — Fixed payment component = $15 — Continue traditional direct payments,
using traditional direct payments.)per acre times 100% of base acres. [Sec.but reduce them by 20% for ACRE
1401(b)(2)]participants. [Sec. 1105(a)(1)]
Revenue-based payment if national Revenue-based component if actualRevenue-based payment based on a
actual revenue per acre is less than thestate revenue is less than a guaranteedtwo-part trigger: (1) if actual state
national target revenue per acre for thelevel for the covered commodity. [Sec.revenue is less than a guaranteed state

covered commodity. [Sec. 1104(b)]1401(b)(3)]level for the covered commodity, and (2)
if actual farm revenue is less than a farm
ACRE benchmark for the covered
commodity. [Sec. 1105(b)]
— No comparable provision. (Continue — Recourse loans available on actual Continue using nonrecourse
using traditional marketing loanproduction of a covered commodity. marketing loan program, but reduce loan
program.)Loans must be repaid in full; traditionalrates by 30% for ACRE participants.
nonrecourse loans, loan deficiency[Sec. 1105(a)(1)]
payments, and marketing loan gains
unavailable. [Sec. 1401(f)]
National actual revenue per acre =Actual state revenue per acre = actualActual state revenue per acre = actual
national average yield for the year timesstate yield, times the ACR harvest price. state yield, times the national average
the higher of (1) national season averageActual state yield is the actual quantitymarket price. Actual state yield is the
market price, or (2) loan rate. An all-riceproduced in the state during the cropactual quantity produced in the state
iki/CRS-RL34696and all-barley loan rate will be used foryear, divided by planted acres. ACRduring the crop year, divided by planted
g/wthose commodities. [Sec. 1104(c)]harvest price is the harvest price used tocalculate revenue under Federal Cropacres. National average market price isthe greater of the national average price
s.orInsurance program. [Sec. 1401(c)]received during the 12-month marketing
leakyear, or the marketing loan rate after
://wikibeing reduced by 30%. [Sec. 1105(c)]
httpNational target revenue per acre:Average crop revenue guarantee perACRE program guarantee per acre =
Wheat, $149.92/acreacre = 90% times the expected state yield90% times the benchmark state yield,
Corn, $344.12/acreper planted acre, times the average of thetimes the ACRE program guarantee
Grain Sorghum, $131.28/acrepre-planting price for the crop year andprice. The benchmark state yield is a 5-
Barley, $153.30/acrethe preceding 2 crop years. The expectedyear Olympic average state yield. The
Oats, $92.10/acrestate yield for a crop year is projectedACRE program guarantee price is a 2-
Upland cotton, $496.93/acrefrom a trend using 1980-2006 data. Theyear average of the national average
Rice, $548.06/acrepre-planting price is the price used tomarket price, as defined above. The
Soybeans, $231.87/acrecalculate revenue under the Federal CropACRE program guarantee cannot change
Other oilseeds, $129.18/acreInsurance program, and cannot decreasemore than 10% from the previous year.
Peanuts, $683.83/acreor increase more than 15% from theIf more than 25% of a state’s acreage is
[Sec. 1104(d)]preceding year. [Sec. 1401(d)]irrigated and 25% is non-irrigated,
separate guarantees shall apply. [Sec.
National payment yield:1105(d)]
Wheat, 36.1 bu./acre
Corn, 114.4 bu./acreActual farm revenue per acre = actual
Grain Sorghum, 58.2 bu./acrefarm yield, times the greater of the
Barley, 48.6 bu./acrenational average price received during

Oats, 49.8 bu./acrethe 12-month marketing year or the
Upland cotton, 634 lb./acremarketing loan rate after being reduced
Rice, 51.28 cwt./acreby 30%. [Sec. 1105(e)]
Soybeans, 34.1 bu./acre
Other oilseeds, 1167.6 lb./acreFarm ACRE benchmark revenue per
Peanuts, 1.496 ton/acreacre = the 5-year Olympic average farm
[Sec. 1104(e)]yield, times the ACRE program
guarantee price; plus the crop insurance
National payment rate = National targetpremium per acre. [Sec. 1105(f)]
revenue per acre minus national actual
revenue per acre (if difference greater
than 0), divided by national payment
yield. [Sec. 1104(f)]
Payment amount = National paymentRevenue-based payment amount = thePayment amount = the product of (1)
rate, times 85% of base acres, timesaverage crop revenue program guaranteethe lesser of (a) the ACRE program
iki/CRS-RL34696payment yield. [Sec. 1104(g)]minus the actual state revenue (if theguarantee minus actual state revenue or
g/wdifference is greater than 0), times 85%(b) 25% of the ACRE program guarantee,
s.orof the base acres on the farm for thetimes (2) 83.3% (2009-2011) or 85%
leakcovered commodity, times the ratio of theactual production history (APH) on the(2012) of the acreage planted of thecovered commodity (not to exceed base
://wikifarm divided by the expected state yield,times 90%. This formula multiplies aacres of the commodity), times (3) the 5-year Olympic average farm yield divided
httpstate-level payment rate per acre timesby the 5-year Olympic average state
85% of base acres, then pro-rates theyield. This formula multiplies a state-
payment based on the farms yieldlevel payment rate per acre (up to a
history compared to the expected statemaximum of 25% of the guarantee level)
yield; the payment is then reduced bytimes a percentage of planted acreage,
10%. [Sec. 1401(e)]then pro-rates the payment based on the
farms yield history compared to the
state’s yield history. [Sec. 1105(g)]
Timing: Generally, later of (1) end of theTiming: Beginning October 1 after theTiming: Beginning October 1 after the
12-month marketing year, or (2) Octoberend of the marketing year for both theend of the marketing year. No advance
1 of the same calendar year as the end offixed payment and the revenue-basedpayments. [Sec. 1105(b)(3)]

the marketing year. Advance paymentscomponent. No advance payments. This
for 2008-2010 crop years: 40% ofdelays the ACR direct payment
expected payment after the first 6 monthscomponent one year compared to
of marketing year. No advance paymentstraditional direct payments. [Sec.
after 2010 crop year. [Sec. 1104(h)]1401(b)(4)]

e Marketing Loans and Other Recourse Loans
e marketing loans: availableSame as prior law, except it covers 2008-Same as prior law, except it covers 2008-Generally continues prior law to cover
r any amount of a loan commodity2012 crop years, and includes peanuts.2012 crop years, and excludes2008-2012 crop years. [Sec.1201]
ced in crop years 2002-2007.[Sec. 1201(a)-(d)]participants in the ACR program. [Sec.Nonrecourse marketing loans for peanuts
dresses commingled commodities, and1201] Nonrecourse marketing loans forcontinued separately [Sec. 1307(a)(1)-
ires compliance with conservationpeanuts authorized separately. [Sec.(3)] Deletes House and Senate provisions
d wetlands requirements. [7 U.S.C.1303(a)(1)-(4)]for commingled commodities and
Nonrecourse marketing loans forpeanuts.
uts authorized separately. [7 U.S.C.
r peanuts, nonrecourse marketing loansSame as prior law, except it covers 2008-For peanuts, same as House provisionFor peanuts, adopts Senate provisions,
ailable in crop years 2002-2007. May2012 crop years, and payment for peanut[Sec. 1307(a)(5)-(6), (8)], except itincluding payments for peanut storage,
obtained through marketingstorage costs is not authorized. [Sec.authorizes payment of storage, handling,except storage payments begin with 2008
ive or association approved by1201(e)]and associated costs, and does so in suchcrop year. [Sec. 1307(a)(4)-(7)]
iki/CRS-RL34696DA. Storage to be provided on a non-a way that handling and associated costs
g/wriminatory basis and under anyditional requirements. Payment ofare not deducted from a producer’s loan,but instead advanced when peanuts are
s.orut storage costs authorized for 2002-placed under loan and repaid when
leak. [7 U.S.C. 7957(a)(4)-(7)]peanuts are redeemed. [Sec. 1307(a)(7)]
://wiki rates for 2004-2007 crop years:Loan rates:Loan rates:Loan rates:
httpeat, bu., $2.75Wheat, bu., $2.94Wheat, bu., $2.942008 crop year (same as prior law)
rn, bu., $1.95Corn, bu., $1.95Corn, bu., $1.95Wheat, bu., $2.75
ain sorghum, bu., $1.95Grain sorghum, bu., $1.95Grain sorghum, bu., $1.95Corn, bu., $1.95
ey, bu., $1.85Malt barley, bu., $2.50Barley, bu., $1.95Grain sorghum, bu., $1.95
Feed barley, bu., $1.90Barley, bu., $1.85
ts, bu., $1.33Oats, bu., $1.46Oats, bu., $1.39Oats, bu., $1.33
land cotton, lb., $0.52Base quality upland cotton, lb., $0.52Base quality upland cotton, lb., $0.52Base quality upland cotton, lb., $0.52
tra long staple cotton, lb., $0.7977Extra long staple cotton, lb., $0.7977Extra long staple cotton, lb., $0.7977Extra long staple cotton, lb., $0.7977
ce, cwt., $6.50Long grain rice, cwt., $6.50Long grain rice, cwt., $6.50Long grain rice, cwt., $6.50
Medium & short grain rice, cwt., $6.50Medium grain rice, cwt., $6.50Medium grain rice, cwt., $6.50
ybeans, bu., $5.00Soybeans, bu., $5.00Soybeans, bu., $5.00Soybeans, bu., $5.00
her oilseeds, lb., $0.0930Other oilseeds, lb., $0.1070Other oilseeds, cwt., $10.09Other oilseeds, cwt., $9.30
y peas, cwt., $6.22Dry peas, cwt., $5.40Dry peas, cwt., $5.40Dry peas, cwt., $6.22
ntils, cwt., $11.72Lentils, cwt., $11.28Lentils, cwt., $11.28Lentils, cwt., $11.72
all chickpeas, cwt., $7.43Small chickpeas, cwt., $8.54Small chickpeas, cwt., $7.43Small chickpeas, cwt., $7.43
Large chickpeas, cwt., $11.28Graded wool, lb., $1.00
aded wool, lb., $1.00Graded wool, lb., $1.10Graded wool, lb., $1.20Nongraded wool, lb., $0.40
ngraded wool, lb., $0.40Nongraded wool, lb., $0.40Nongraded wool, lb., $0.40Mohair, lb., $4.20

air, lb., $4.20Mohair, lb., $4.20Mohair, lb., $4.20Honey, lb., $0.60 [Sec. 1202(a)]
ney, lb., $0.60Honey, lb., $0.60Honey, lb., $0.72 [Sec. 1202(a)]Peanuts, ton, $355 [Sec. 1307(b)]
ifferent loan rates applied to 2002-Peanuts, ton, $355.00 [Sec. 1202(a)]Peanuts, ton, $355 [Sec. 1307(b)]
ears.) [7 U.S.C. 7932(b)]2009 crop year (same as 2008, except
uts, ton, $355 [7 U.S.C. 7957(b)]one new crop (large chickpeas) and
decreases for dry peas and lentils.
Wheat, bu., $2.75
Corn, bu., $1.95
Grain sorghum, bu., $1.95
Barley, bu., $1.85
Oats, bu., $1.33
Base quality upland cotton, lb., $0.52
Extra long staple cotton, lb., $0.7977
Long grain rice, cwt., $6.50
Medium grain rice, cwt., $6.50
Soybeans, bu., $5.00
iki/CRS-RL34696Other oilseeds, cwt., $9.30
g/wDry peas, cwt., $5.40
s.orLentils, cwt., $11.28
leakSmall chickpeas, cwt., $7.43
Large chickpeas, cwt., $11.28
://wikiGraded wool, lb., $1.00
httpNongraded wool, lb., $0.40Mohair, lb., $4.20
Honey, lb., $0.60 [Sec. 1202(b)]
Peanuts, ton, $355 [Sec. 1307(b)]
2010-2012 crop years (increases for
wheat, barley, oats, minor oilseeds,
graded wool, and honey)
Wheat, bu., $2.94
Corn, bu., $1.95
Grain sorghum, bu., $1.95
Barley, bu., $1.95
Oats, bu., $1.39
Base quality upland cotton, lb., $0.52
Extra long staple cotton, lb., $0.7977
Long grain rice, cwt., $6.50
Medium grain rice, cwt., $6.50
Soybeans, bu., $5.00

Other oilseeds, cwt., $10.09
Dry peas, cwt., $5.40
Lentils, cwt., $11.28
Small chickpeas, cwt., $7.43
Large chickpeas, cwt., $11.28
Graded wool, lb., $1.15
Nongraded wool, lb., $0.40
Mohair, lb., $4.20
Honey, lb., $0.69 [Sec. 1202(c)]
Peanuts, ton, $355 [Sec. 1307(b)]
justment of loans: establish a singleSame as prior law. [Sec. 1202(b)]Same as prior law. [Sec. 1202(b)]Same as prior law. [Sec. 1202(d)]
rate in each county for each kind of
ther oilseeds” [7 U.S.C. 7932(c)]
comparable provision.Establish a single county loan rate forSame as House provision [Sec. 1202(d)]No comparable provision.
iki/CRS-RL34696corn and grain sorghum in each county;
g/westablish a single national average loanrate for corn and grain sorghum. [Sec.
s.or 1202(c)(1)]
://wikiparable provision.Administer the applicable loan,marketing loan, counter-cyclical andSame as House provision, except doesnot specifically apply to counter-cyclicalNo comparable provision.
httprelated programs using a single loan rateprogram. [Sec. 1210(e)]
for corn and grain sorghum that is
identical in each individual county. Any
adjustment for location based on
transportation shall be the same for corn
and grain sorghum in each individual
county. Allows adjustments for grade,
type, and quality. [Sec. 1202(c)(2)]
thorizes adjustments in the loan ratesAmends prior law by excepting cottonSame as House provision, except theAdopts the Senate provision, with
r any commodity based on differencesand rice from the general provision forexception applies only to cotton, removesmodifications to composition of private
rade, type, quality, location, and otheradjustment, with separate adjustmentwarehouse location differentials, andsector consultative committee. [Sec.
. Allows county loan rates as lowrules for cotton and rice. Encouragesrequires private sector consultation for1210] Same basic provision for peanuts.
95% of the U.S. average, if it does notprivate sector consultation for cotton. cotton. [Sec. 1210(a)-(d), (f)] Same as[Sec. 1308]

ease outlays; prohibits adjustment ofFor rice, prohibits adjustments except forprior law for peanuts. [Sec. 1308]
erage loan rate. [7 U.S.C. 7282]grade and quality. [Sec. 1505]

lish quality grades for dry peas asNo comparable provision.Establishes grading basis for pulse cropsNo comparable provision; however the
eed peas; for lentils as U.S. numberbased on a grade not less than gradestatement of managers calls for USDA
tils; and for small chickpeas as U.S.number 2 or other factors, including fairregulations that reflect number 2 quality.
mber 3 small chickpeas that dropand average crop quality (adjusted to
ow a 20/64 screen. [7 U.S.C. 7932(d)]reflect normal discounts for less than
number 2 quality). [Sec. 1202(c)]
of loans: 9 months after the daySame as prior law. [Sec. 1203]Same as prior law. [Sec. 1203] SameAdopts the Senate provision. [Sec. 1203]
an is made; no extensions. [7provision for peanuts. [Sec. 1307(c)]Same provision for peanuts. [Sec.
S.C. 7933] Same term for peanuts. [71307(c)]
S.C. 7957(c)]
repayment: loans may be repaid atSame as prior law, except delineatesSame as prior law, except delineates longAdopts Senate provision, except adds an
of (1) the loan rate pluslong, medium, and short grain rice. [Sec.and medium grain rice. [Sec. 1204(a)]option that the repayment rate is based on
est, or (2) a rate determined by1204(a)]Same provision for peanuts. [Sec.a 30-day average. [Sec. 1204(a)] Adopts
that will minimize forfeitures,1307(d)]Senate provision for peanuts. [Sec.
iki/CRS-RL34696mulation of stocks, storage costs,1307(d)(1)]
g/wrket impediments, and discrepanciesefits across States and counties.
s.orcludes upland cotton, rice, ELS cotton,
leakfectionery and each other kind of
://wikinflower seed (other than oil sunflower[7 U.S.C. 7934(a)] Same
httpision for peanuts. [7 U.S.C. 7957(d)]
pland cotton and rice, repaymentSame as prior law, except delineatesSame as prior law, except delineates longAdopts Senate provision. [Sec. 1204(b)]
y be at the lesser of the loan rate pluslong, medium, and short grain rice. [Sec.and medium grain rice. [Sec. 1204(b)]
est, or the prevailing world price for1204(b)]
mmodity adjusted to U.S. quality
d location. [7 U.S.C. 7934(b)]
r ELS cotton, repayment must be at theSame as prior law. [Sec. 1204(c)]Same as prior law. [Sec. 1204(c)]Same as prior law. [Sec. 1204(c)]
rate plus interest. [7 U.S.C. 7934(c)]
evailing world market prices for cottonSame as prior law, except specifies thatSame as prior law, except delineates longAdopts the Senate provision. [Sec.
d rice are determined and announcedthe Far East price be used to determineand medium grain rice. [Sec. 1204(d)]1204(d)]

er USDA regulations, adjusted tothe prevailing world market price.
uality and location. [7 U.S.C.[Sec.1204(d)]

evailing world market price for uplandProvides for adjustment to prevailingNo comparable provision.Adopts the House provision, without
ton adjusted if (a) it is less than 115%world market prices for rice and uplandreference to Comparable United States
the loan rate; and (b) the Fridaycotton. For rice, for U.S. quality andQuality. [Sec. 1204(e)(1)-(2)(A)]
ough Thursday average price for thecondition. For upland cotton, for U.S.
est priced U.S. growth for Middlingquality and location (premiums for
32-inch cotton delivered C.I.F.Comparable United States Quality and
ern Europe is greater than thereduction to United States Premium
iday through Thursday average price ofFactor higher than Middling 1 3/32-inch;
lowest-priced growths of uplandand costs to market the commodity. [Sec.
, as quoted for Middling (M) 11204(e)]
2-inch cotton delivered C.I.F.
hern Europe. [7 U.S.C. 7934(e)(1)]
evailing world market price for uplandAdjusts prevailing world market price forSame as House provision, except theAdopts the Senate provision.
ton further adjusted based on dataupland cotton further to minimize loanfurther adjustment is to U.S. quality and[Sec.1204(e)(2)(B)]
ding U.S. share of world exports,forfeitures and accumulation of stocks,location. With respect to transition, uses
iki/CRS-RL34696el of export sales and shipment, andimprove marketing, and ensurethe terminsufficient” current-crop price
g/wer data USDA determines relevant. [7competitiveness and transition betweenquotations, rather thanless than three”
s.orS.C. 7934(e)(2)]current-crop and future-crop pricecurrent-crop price quotations in the
leakquotations. [Sec. 1204(f)]House bill. [Sec. 1204(e)]
://wikir confectionary and other kinds ofnflower seeds (other than oil sunflowerSame as prior law. [Sec. 1204(g)]Same as prior law. [Sec.1204(f)]Same as prior law. [Sec. 1204(f)]
https may be repaid at the lesser of
) the loan rate plus interest, or (2) the
ayment rate for oil sunflower seed. [7
S.C. 7934(f)]
r dry peas, lentils, and small chickpeas,Same as prior law. [Sec. 1204(h)]For pulse crops, loans shall be repaid atNo comparable provision.
s shall be repaid at the quality gradesthe quality grades for the applicable
r the applicable commodity specified incommodity as specified in Sec. 1202(c).
.S.C. 7932(d). [7 U.S.C. 7934(g)][Sec. 1204(g)]
ide payment of storage for uplandEnds the practice of paying for uplandRequires payment of cotton storage costsAdopts Senate provision to pay cotton
tton, as allowed under generalcotton storage, handling and other costsin same manner and at same rates as wasstorage costs, except a 10% reduction
thorities of the CCC. [7 C.F.R.starting with the 2011 crop. [Sec. 1510]provided for the 2006 crop, effective forapplies to 2008-2011 crop years, and a
)]2008-12 crop years. [Sec. 1204(h)]20% reduction in the 2012 crop year.
[Sec. 1204(g)]
comparable provision.No comparable provision.No comparable provision.Provides USDA authority to temporarily,
an on a short-term basis only, adjust the

repayment rates in the event of a severe
disruption to marketing, transportation or
related infrastructure. [Sec. 1204(h)]
Same for peanuts. [Sec. 1307(d)(2)]
payments (LDP):Same as prior law, except for 2008-2012Same as House provision, except that forAdopts House provision. [Sec. 1205]
ailable to producers who agree tocrop years. [Sec. 1205]the 2008 crop year the payment rate isSame provision for peanuts. [Sec.
rego marketing loans. LDP computedestablished as of the date that producers1307(e)]
multiplying the payment rate (thelose beneficial interest. [Sec. 1205]
ount that the loan rate exceeds the rateSame provision for peanuts. [Sec.
hich a marketing loan may be repaid)1307(e)]
r the commodity times the quantity of
modity produced. Loan
iciency payments available for
rn pelts or hay and silage, even
ugh they are not eligible for marketing
iki/CRS-RL34696s. ELS cotton is not eligible.
g/wyment rate determined using the rate in
s.orect as of the date that producers
leakest payment (producers do not needse beneficial interest). [7 U.S.C.
://wiki ] Same provision for peanuts. [7S.C. 7957(e)]
yments in lieu of LDP for grazedSame as prior law. [Sec. 1206]Same as prior law. [Sec. 1206]Same as prior law. [Sec. 1206]
e of wheat, barley, oats, or
[7 U.S.C. 7936]
eting Loan Provisions forSame as prior law, except uses Far EastSame as House provision, exceptAdopts the Senate provision. [Sec.
d Cotton: imposes a special importprice. Special import quota defined.specifies the price of American cotton1207(a)]
ota on upland cotton when U.S. pricesLimits imports under quota to 10 weeksdelivered to a definable and significant
ceed Northern European prices byof consumption by domestic mills. [ market.” [Sec. 1207(a)]
re than 1.25¢ for 4 weeks. [7 U.S.C.1207(a)]
mited global import quota is imposedSame as prior law. [Sec. 1207(b)]Same as prior law. [Sec. 1207(b)]Same as prior law. [Sec. 1307(b)]

upland cotton when U.S. prices
erage 130% of the previous 3-year
erage of U.S. prices [7 U.S.C. 7937(c)]

comparable provision.Provides Economic AdjustmentProvides Economic AdjustmentAdopts the Senate provision, with
Assistance to Users of Upland Cotton viaAssistance to Users of Upland Cotton viamodification. Effective August 1, 2008,
marketing certificates or cash paymentsassistance of/lb. to domestic users ofthrough July 31, 2012 at/lb.; payment
of 4¢/lb. to domestic upland cotton usersupland cotton for uses of all cottonrate drops to 3¢ on August 1, 2012. [Sec.
for all cotton uses regardless of origin forregardless of origin for the same1207(c)]
acquisition, construction, installation,purposes as the House provision.
modernization, development, conversion,Effective August 1, 2008, through June
or expansion of land, plant, buildings,30, 2013; payment rate drops to on
equipment, facilities, or machinery.July 1, 2013, which terminates future
Effective through July 31, 2013. [Sec.funding. [Sec. 1207(c)]
ecial competitiveness program for ELSSame as prior law. [Sec. 1208]Same as prior law, except it does notAdopts the Senate provision. [Sec. 1208]
provides marketing certificates orspecify form of payment (cash or
h payments available to domesticcertificates). [Sec. 1208]
ers and exporters whenever the world
iki/CRS-RL34696rket price for the lowest priced ELS
g/wtton is below the prevailing U.S. price
s.orr a competing growth of ELS cotton for
leakweek period; and the lowest pricedmpeting growth of ELS cotton is less
://wiki 134% of the loan rate for ELSton. Effective May 13, 2002, through
httply 31, 2008. [7 U.S.C. 7938]
rse loans for high moisture feedSame as prior law. [Sec. 1209]Same as prior law. [Sec. 1209]Same as prior law. [Sec. 1209]
ains and seed cotton: for farms that
rmally harvest corn or sorghum in a
h moisture condition, recourse loans
ailable at rates set by the USDA.
rse loans for seed cotton.
ayment at loan rate plus interest. [7
S.C. 7939]
comparable provision.Requires a deadline for peanut loanNo comparable provision.No comparable provision.

repayment no later than June 30 of the
year subsequent to the year in which the
peanuts were harvested. Loan not
redeemed by the deadline are deemed
forfeited. [Sec. 1210]

comparable provision.Authorizes quality incentive paymentsSimilar to House provision, except it hasAdopts the Senate provision, with
for healthy oilseeds with special traits tofewer requirements for proposals, doesmodifications, and adds compliance and
enhance human health. Provides fornot specify multi-year contracts, andpenalty provisions. Authorization of
discretionary appropriations of such sumsprovides for protection of proprietarysuch sums as necessary for FY2009-
as necessary. Crop years 2009-2013. information. Does not specify crop2012. [Sec. 1605]
USDA to solicit proposals; successfulyears, but authorizes discretionary
applicants enter contracts with producersappropriations of $400 million for the
and are reimbursed after premiums paidperiod FY2008-12. [Sec. 1705]
to producers. [Sec. 1211]
ent Limits
lishes payment limits on directContinues limits for direct payments andContinues limits for direct payments andContinues prior law limits for direct
ments, counter-cyclical payments,counter-cyclical payments, as amendedcounter-cyclical payments, as amendedpayments and counter-cyclical payments.
d certain marketing loan benefits underbelow. Deletes payment limit forbelow. Deletes payment limit forDeletes payment limit for marketing loan
ood Security Act of 1985, asmarketing loan program. Establishesmarketing loan program. Establishesprogram. Establishes direct attribution to
iki/CRS-RL34696ended, to a “person as broadlydirect attribution to natural person;direct attribution to natural person;natural person; eliminates 3 entity rule.
g/wined below [7 U.S.C. 1308-1308-3(a)]eliminates 3 entity rule. [Sec. 1503]eliminates 3 entity rule. [Sec. 1703(a)][Sec. 1603(a)]
s.oron: defined as an individual, partnerPerson:a natural person, and does notPerson: same as House definition. [Sec.Person: adopts the House definition.
leak general partnership or joint venture,include a legal entity.” [Sec. 1503(b)(1)]1703(b)(2)][Sec. 1603(b)(1)]
://wikist, corporation, joint stock company,ited partnership, association,
httparitable organization, State agency, or
ubdivision (except cooperative
cer associations). [7 U.S.C.
comparable definition.Legal entity: an entity created underLegal entity: same as House definition.Legal entity: adopts the House
federal or state law that (1) owns land or[Sec. 1703(b)(2)]definition. [Sec. 1603(b)(1)]
an agricultural commodity, or (2)
produces an agricultural commodity.
comparable definition.No comparable definition.Family member: “an individual toFamily member:a person to whom a
whom a member in the farming operationmember in the farming operation is
is related as lineal ancestor, linealrelated as lineal ancestor, lineal
descendant, sibling, or spouse.” [Sec.descendant, sibling, spouse, or otherwise
1703(b)(1)]by marriage.” [Sec. 1603(b)(1)]
aximum amount of payments perMaximum amount of payments perMaximum amount of payments perMaximum amount of payments per
on for the sum of allyear to a person or legal entity for theyear to a person or legal entity for theyear to a person or legal entity for the

vered commodities (except peanuts,sum of all covered commodities, exceptsum of all covered commodities, exceptsum of all covered commodities, except
ol, mohair, and honey):peanuts:peanuts:peanuts:
Direct payments: $40,000 Direct payments: $60,000 Direct payments and fixed ACR Direct payments: $40,000
payment: $40,000 — Direct payments under ACRE:
$40,000 minus the reduction required of
an ACRE participant in Sec. 1105(a)(1).
Counter-cyclical payments: $65,000 Counter-cyclical payments: $65,000 — Counter-cyclical payments and Counter-cyclical payments: $65,000
[Sec. 1503(a)(1)-(2)]revenue-based ACR payment: $60,000 ACRE payments: $65,000 plus the
reduction in the direct payment limit.
Marketing loan gains/LDP: $75,000 — Marketing loan gains/LDP: no limit. — Marketing loan gains/LDP: no limit — Marketing loan gains/LDP: no limit
.S.C. 1308(b)(1), (c)(1), (d)(1)][Sec. 1503(b)(2)][Sec. 1703(b)(2)][Sec. 1603(b)(2)]
aximum payment amount per year toMaximum payment amount per year toMaximum payment amount per year toMaximum payment amount per year to
iki/CRS-RL34696on for the sum of peanuts, wool,hair, and honey:a person or legal entity for peanuts:a person or legal entity for peanuts:a person or legal entity for peanuts:
s.or Direct payments: $40,000 Direct payments: $60,000 Direct payments and fixed ACR Direct payments: $40,000
leakpayment: $40,000 — Direct payments under ACRE:
$40,000 minus the reduction required of
://wikian ACRE participant in Sec. 1105(a)(1).
Counter-cyclical payments: $65,000 Counter-cyclical payments: $65,000 — Counter-cyclical payments, and Counter-cyclical payments: $65,000
[Sec. 1503(a)(1)-(2)revenue-based ACR payment: $60,000 ACRE payments: $65,000 plus the
reduction in the direct payment limit.
Marketing loan gains/LDP: $75,000 — Marketing loan gains/LDP: no limit — Marketing loan gains/LDP: no limit — Marketing loan gains/LDP: no limit
.S.C. 1308(b)(2), (c)(2), (d)(2)][Sec. 1503(b)(2)][Sec. 1703(b)(2)][Sec. 1603(b)(2)]
parable provision.Direct attribution: the total amount ofDirect attribution: same as HouseDirect attribution: Adopts the Senate
direct and counter-cyclical payments areprovision, except payments to a legalprovision. [Sec. 1603(b)(3)]

attributed to a person by taking intoentity are reduced proportionately based
account direct and indirect ownership inon the ownership shares of a person or
a legal entity. Payments made directly toentity that exceeds the limit.
a person will be combined with the[Sec. 1703(b)(3)]
persons pro rata share of payments to a
legal entity. Payments to a legal entity
shall not exceed the limits above, and
shall be attributed to persons with an

ownership interest. Attribution of
payments to legal entities shall be traced
through four levels of ownership
(ownership of an entity by a person or
another entity). If after four levels of
ownership, the payment has not been
allocated to a natural person, the payment
to the first-level entity shall be reduced
on a pro-rata basis. For joint ventures and
general partnerships, payments shall not
exceed the multiple of the limits for the
number of persons and legal entities
comprising the joint venture or general
partnership. [Sec. 1503(b)(2)]
yments to minor children generally areContinue prior law rules for minorSame as House provision. Adopts House provision. [Sec.
iki/CRS-RL34696ributed to parents; marketing coops arechildren, marketing cooperatives, trusts[Sec. 1703(b)(3)]1603(b)(3)]
g/wt subject to the limits; trusts and estatesand estates, and cash rent tenants. [Sec.
s.oralify under certain rules; cash rent1503(b)(2)]
leaknts that make a significantntribution of management but not of
://wikior and equipment are ineligible;ses are treated together except under
httptain conditions. [7 U.S.C. 1308(e)]
d political subdivisions areMakes federal agencies, states andSame as House provision, except has noSame as House provision, except replaces
ed to receive payments under thepolitical subdivisions ineligible fornew exception for state and local7 U.S.C. 1308(f) with new paragraph (g)
finition of person. Payment limits dopayments, but tenants on suchgovernments to receive payments tothat allows states and political
t apply to land owned by a publicgovernment-owned land may receivemaintain a public school. Such ansubdivisions to receive payments to
tity to maintain a public school. payments. An exception allows states andexemption remains in prior law provisionmaintain a public school. A separate
.S.C. 1308(f)]political subdivisions to receive payments(7 U.S.C. 1308(f)), which is redesignatedpayment limit of $500,000 on total direct,
to maintain a public school, but paymentas subparagraph (g). [Sec. 1703(b)(3)]counter cyclical, and ACRE payments
limits apply [Sec. 1503(b)(2)]. However,applies to each state, except for states
existing law (7 U.S.C. 1308(f)) remainswith less than 1.5 million population.
in effect, which exempts states and[Sec. 1603(b)(3)]
political subdivisions from payment
limits to maintain a public school.
tity rule: no person may receiveRepeals the 3-entity rule. RequiresSame as House provision. [Sec. 1703(c)]Adopts House provision. [Sec. 1603(c)]

yments from more than three entities innotification to USDA, including names
ich the person holds substantialand social security number or tax

eficial interest. [7 U.S.C. 1308-1(a)]identification number. [Sec. 1503(c)]
uires a person or entity to be activelyContinues prior law provisions and addsSame as House provision. [Sec. 1703(d)]Adopts House provision. [Sec. 1603(d)
ged in farming based onan exception that if one spouse is
tributions of land, labor, equipment,determined to be actively engaged, the
d management, and requires profits beother spouse shall be determined to meet
mensurate and at risk. [7 U.S.C.requirements of personal labor or active
personal management. [Sec. 1503(d)]
ualifies a person from payments inDisqualifies a person or entity for a 2-5Same as House provision, except addsAdopts Senate provision. [Sec. 1603(e)]
ear if the person adopted ayear period for evasion of payment limitjoint and several liability for members of
heme or device to evade paymentrules. Benefits denied on a pro-rata basisan entity regarding amounts payable to
its. [7 U.S.C. 1308-2]according to ownership. USDA, and authority for USDA to
[Sec. 1503(b)(2)]release a person from liability if they
cooperate. [Sec. 1703(e)]
iki/CRS-RL34696 comparable provision.Prior law shall apply to payments madefor the 2007 crop year. [Sec. 1503(e)]Same as House provision. [Sec. 1703(g)]Prior law shall apply to payments madefor the 2007 and 2008 crop years. [Sec.
g/w 1603(h)]
leakusted Gross Income Limitation
://wiki firm cap (a cap without exceptions).Sets a firm AGI cap of $1 million (noNo firm cap.Divides AGI into two parts: farm AGI
httpexceptions) to be eligible to receiveand non-farm AGI; both are averages
direct and counter-cyclical payments,over a 3 year period.
marketing loan gains or LDPs, and Sets a firm cap of $500,000 non-
conservation benefits. Applies throughfarm AGI to receive any
the 2012 crop year. [Sec. 1504(b)(1)]commodity program benefits,
MILC, noninsured crop assistance,
or disaster payments.
Sets a firm cap of $750,000 farm
AGI to receive direct payments
(but counter-cyclical, ACRE and
marketing loan benefits may
continue if farm AGI exceeds
$750,000). [Sec. 1604(a)]
ft cap of $2.5 million AdjustedSets a soft AGI cap of $500,000, unlessSets a gradually-declining soft AGI capNo comparable provision.

oss Income Limitation (AGI) over a 3-66.66% of the 3-year average AGI isfor direct payments, counter-cyclical
average for individuals or entities toderived from farming, ranching, orpayments, and marketing loan gains or
ible to receive program payments.forestry operations. Applies through theLDPs, unless 66.66% of the 3-year

mit may be exceeded if at least 75% of2012 crop year. [Sec. 1504(b)(1)]average AGI is derived from farming,
GI is derived from farming,ranching, or forestry operations:
hing, or forestry operations. Applies — $2.5 million in crop year 2008,
ments, counter-cyclical — $1 million in 2009, and
yments, marketing loan benefits, and $750,000 in 2010-2012
nservation program payments for the[Sec. 1704(c)]
07 crop years. [7 U.S.C. 1308-3a]
I cap for conservation programs sameAGI cap for conservation programs sameFor conservation programs, continuesFor conservation programs, sets a soft
for commodity for commodity programs.prior law level of $2.5 million AGI, withcap of $1 million non-farm AGI, unless
exception for 75% of AGI derived frommore than 66.66% of AGI is farm AGI.
farming, ranching or forestry. [Sec.Provides USDA discretion to waive the
1704(c)]limit forenvironmentally sensitive land
of special significance.” [Sec. 1604(a)]
determines types of income asDefines certain types of income asSame as House provision, except doesAdopts Senate provision, with additional
iki/CRS-RL34696rived from farming, ranching orfarming, ranching or forestry. Includesnot limit sale of equipment to non-dealersand expansion for the inclusion of
g/wrestry income. [7 U.S.C. 1308-production of crops, livestock or rawforestry products; sale of land or rights;and does not reference depreciableequipment; includes income from waterlivestock, insurance indemnities. Specifies that sale of inputs to farmers
s.orsale of equipment but not as a dealer;or hunting rights; includes packing andcan be included if more than 66.66% of
leakrental of land; supplying inputs andshedding in processing and storing; andincome is from farming. Generally, not
://wikiservices to farmers; processing, storingand transporting agricultural products.includes government payments fromcommodity and conservation exclude anything reported on IRSSchedule F. [Sec. 1604(a)]
http[Sec. 1503(b)(3)][Sec. 1704(c)]
comparable provision.No comparable provision.Allows the allocation of AGI among theAdopts the Senate provision. [Sec.
individuals filing a joint tax return, under1604(a)]
certain conditions. [Sec. 1704(b)]
ministrative Provisions
thorizes use of funds, facilities, andSame as prior law. [Sec. 1501]Same as prior law. [Sec. 1701(a)-(d)]Same as prior law. [Sec. 1601(a)-(d)]

thorities of the Commodity Credit
rporation (CCC) to carry out Title I.
minations by USDA shall be final.
lows promulgation of regulations, and
justing expenditures if they will exceed
owable support levels under the
uguay Round Agreements. [7 U.S.C.

vanced direct and counter-cyclicalNo comparable provision.Same as prior law, applied to the 2008Adopts Senate provision. [Sec. 1601(e)]
ments are taxable in the year receivedfarm bill. [Sec. 1701(e)]
er than when producer has option to
e payment). [7 U.S.C. 7991(d)]
spends the permanent price supportSame as prior law, except applies toSame as House provision, except doesAdopts House provision. [Sec. 1602]
thority of the Agricultural Adjustment2008-2012 crop years, and milk throughnot mention peanuts in paragraph (a).
t of 1938 and the AgriculturalDecember 31, 2012. [Sec. 1502][Sec. 1702]
justment Act of 1949 for the 2002-07
ps (covered commodities, peanuts,
d sugar), and for milk through
ber 31, 2007. [7 U.S.C. 7992]
empts producers from liability forSame as prior law. [Sec. 1506]Same as prior law. [Sec. 1709]Same as prior law. [Sec. 1606]
deficiencies in collateral to secure
y nonrecourse loan. [7 U.S.C. 7284]
iki/CRS-RL34696thorizes the use of commoditySame as prior law. [Sec. 1507]Same as prior law. [Sec. 1710]Same as prior law, except terminates
g/wtificates, including to repay marketingauthority to use commodity certificates to
s.ors. [7 U.S.C. 7286]repay loans after the 2009 crop year.
leak[Sec. 1607]
://wikiquires that assignment of paymentsSame as prior law. [Sec. 1508]Same as prior law. [Sec. 1711]Same as prior law. [Sec. 1608]
httpst be done in accordance with USDA
ations. [7 U.S.C. 7995]
quires tracking of program benefitsSame as prior law. [Sec. 1509]No comparable provision.Same as prior law. [Sec. 1609]
der commodity and conservation titles
e made directly or indirectly to
ividuals and entities. [7 U.S.C. 7997]
ohibits publication of cotton price Strikes the prior law prohibition on theSame as House provision. [Sec. 1714]Adopts House and Senate provision.
recasts in any governmental report, orpublication of cotton price forecasts.[Sec. 1610]
lletin. [12 U.S.C. 1141j] [Sec. 1511]
s payments to estates of deceasedRequires reports to Congress of deceasedProhibits any agricultural payment to anyGenerally adopts the House approach.
mers [7 U.S.C. 1308(e)(2)(B)(ii)], butpersons that received payments for moredeceased individual or estate after twoRequires regulations that describe the
out reference to a time period. than two crop years following death.program years after the date of death. circumstances allowing payments to a
regulations establish a 2-yearEstablishes deadlines for notification ofRequire annual reports to Congress ondeceased person to settle and estate, and
riod for estates to qualify. [7 C.F.R.death, and denies payments and recoupthe number and amount of payments toto stop payments for those ineligible.
losses for failure to comply. Reconciledeceased individuals and the length ofReconcile tax identification numbers with

tax identification numbers with Internaltime the estate has been open. [Sec.IRS data twice a year to determine living
Revenue Service (IRS) data twice a year11073]status. [Sec. 1611]
to determine living status. [Sec. 1512]
ovide incentive payments to producersNo comparable provision.Provides incentive payments to producersAdopts Senate provision, except
hard white wheat on up to 2 millionof hard white wheat of at least $20¢/bu.authorizes discretionary appropriations
res. Total mandatory funding of $20and at least $2/acre on up to 2.9 millionrather mandatory funding. [Sec. 1612]
for the 2003-2005 crop years. acres. Mandatory funding of $35 million
.S.C. 7999]for the 2008-12 crop years. [Sec. 1706]
comparable provision.No comparable provision.Authorizes compensation up to 50% ofAdopts Senate provision. [Sec. 1613]
the cost of fungicides to control wheat
scab in durum wheat. Authorize $10
million per year for FY2008-12, subject
to appropriation. [Sec. 1707]
iki/CRS-RL34696ovides farm storage facility loans underDA regulations via the generalNo comparable provision.Establishes a storage facility loanprogram for producers of grains,Adopts Senate provision, withmodification to security and lien
g/wthorities of the CCC. For commoditiesoilseeds, pulse crops, hay, renewablerequirements. [Sec. 1614]
s.orr than sugar, maximum term of loanbiomass, and other storable commodities
leakears and $100,000 per borrower. [7(other than sugar) to construct or upgrade
://wikiF.R. 1436]storage and handling facilities. Providesfor 12-year terms and $500,000
httpmaximum loans, as well as security and
eligibility requirements. [Sec. 1708]
thorizes cotton classification servicesRevises the authorization for cottonRevises the authorization for cottonAdopts the Senate provision, with
ailable to producers of cotton, andclassification services through FY2012 toclassification services for an indefinitemodification. [Sec. 14201]
r the collection of fees andinclude leasing of property exceeding 5time period, including consultation with
ations to pay for such services.years. [Sec. 11302]the cotton industry, investment of funds,
.S.C. 473a]and long term lease of property.
Provides authorization for appropriations.
[Sec. 1712]
ines cotton-producing state, forRevises definition of cotton-producingSame as House provision. [Sec. 1713]Adopts the House provision. [Sec.
rposes of a cotton research andstate to explicitly include Kansas,14202]
omotion, using a historical measure ofVirginia, and Florida beginning with the
ction. [7 U.S.C. 2116(f)]2008 crop. [Sec. 11301]
structs USDA to appoint committees ofNo comparable provision.For combined or consolidated areaAdopts the Senate provision, with
ers in a fair and representativecommittees, requires 3-11 members thatmodification for USDA to develop

nner. [16 U.S.C. 590h(b)(5)(B)(ii)]are representative of the area and elected,procedures to main representation of
and ensures representation of sociallysocially disadvantaged farmers. [Sec.
disadvantaged farmers. [Sec. 1715]1615]
thorizes USDA to collect commodityNo comparable provision.Prohibits USDA from charging fees forAdopts Senate provision. [Sec. 1616]
sessments from proceeds of marketingthe collection of commodity assessments
nce loans, if assessment is requiredin its agreement with the State. [Sec.
der state law. [7 U.S.C. 7416a]1716]
parable provision.No comparable provision.Requires that, if USDA approves aAdopts the Senate provision, with
document containing signatures ofmodification. [Sec. 1617]
applicants, it shall not subsequently
determine the document to be inadequate
or invalid. [Sec. 1717]
comparable provision.No comparable provision.Requires USDA to modernize the FarmRequires a report by an outside party that
iki/CRS-RL34696Service Agency information technologysystems to ensure timely and efficientdescribes USDAs technology problemsand a plan to improve service. [Sec.
g/wprogram delivery. [Sec. 1718]1618]
leak comparable provision.No comparable provision.Requires USDA to consolidate geospatialAdopts the Senate provision, with
database systems into a single system thatmodification to limit disclosure of
://wikiis readily available to all agencies withininformation. [Sec. 1619]
httptwo years of enactment. [Sec. 1719]
parable provision.No comparable provision.Allows the CCC to lease space for USDARequires a report on the cost of leasing
agencies if the space is jointly occupiedprocedures of the General Services
by the agencies. [Sec. 1720]Administration compared to USDA. [Sec.
parable provision.No comparable provision.Provides payments to “geographicallyAdopts the Senate provision, with
disadvantaged farmers in insular areas,modification. [Sec. 1621]

Alaska, and Hawaii for transporting a
commodity or input more than 30 miles.
Reimbursement based on federal salary
differentials defined elsewhere, with
maximum of 25% transportation cost.
Authorizes $15 million of discretionary
appropriations annually. [Sec. 6021]

parable provision.No comparable provision.No comparable provision.Provides $50 million of mandatory funds
from the CCC to implement Title I. [Sec.
lishes a “Commission on theNo comparable provision.Repeals the authorization for the paymentAdopts the Senate amendment to repeal
plication of Payment Limitations forlimits commission. [Sec. 1721(a)]the commission. [Sec. 1623(a)]
riculture.” [7 U.S.C. 7993]
thorizes market loss assistance andNo comparable provision.Repeals market loss assistance and otherAdopts the Senate amendment to repeal
er emergency assistance to personsemergency assistance to persons thatthe continued assistance. [Sec. 1623(b)]
ere eligible to receive assistancefailed to receive assistance under earlier
t did not receive assistance before aauthorities. [Sec. 1721(b)]
tain date. [7 U.S.C. 8000]
iry Price Support Program
g/wdatory support for farm price of milkMandates the direct support of cheese,Similar to the House bill. Adopts House provision. [Sec. 1501(b)]
s.or9.90 per hundredweight (cwt.).nonfat dry milk, and butter at specified[Secs. 1601(a)-(b)]
leakogram authority expired on Decemberprices for five years (through December
t was extended until March31, 2012). This is a change from
://wiki P.L. 110-161. [7 U.S.C.supporting the farm price of milk. [Secs.
http 1401(a)-(b)]
rm support price of $9.90 indirectlySpecifies minimum purchase prices of: Similar to the House bill.Adopts House provision. [Sec. 1501(c)]
intained by USDA offer to purchaseblock cheese, $1.13/lb.; barrel cheese,[Secs. 1601(b)-(c)]
tter, cheese, and nonfat dry milk from$1.10/lb.; butter, $1.05/lb.; and nonfat
sors at prices determined bydry milk, $0.80/lb (same levels currently
that allow buyers to pay farmersused to support the farm price at $9.90
east the support price. [7 U.S.C.per cwt.) Allows USDA sale of acquired
products when market prices rise to
110% of purchase price. [Sec. 1401(b)]
more than twice annually, USDA canAllows reduction of mandated purchaseNo comparable provision.Adopts House provision. [Sec. 1501(d)]

ust the purchase prices of butter andprices when USDA acquisitions exceed
nfat dry milk (reduce one and raise thespecified levels. [Sec. 1401(c)]
er) in order to minimize acquisitions.
.S.C. 7981d]

ilk Income Loss Contract Payments
e 2002 farm bill mandated a newExtends the MILC program for fiveIncreases, through August 31, 2012, theFor the period October 1, 2008 through
nter-cyclical payment program, theyears, through September 30, 2012, at thepayment rate to 45%, and raises the capAugust 31, 2012,increases the payment
Income Loss Contract (MILC)current target price of $16.94/cwt. on eligible annual production to 4.15 mil.factor to 45%, and the annual eligible
ogram. When the monthly fluid milkPayment rate remains at 34% of anylbs. per farm. Payment rate andpayment quantity to 2.985 million
ce falls below $16.94/cwt., all dairydeficiency between the market price andproduction cap would return to 34% andpounds. After that, payment factor and
ers are paid an amount equal to 34%the target price, and eligible production2.4 mil. lbs. for the last month ofpayment quantity revert to 34% and 2.4
the difference between $16.94 and thecontinues to be capped at 2.4 mil. lbs. perprogram authority in September 2012.million pounds, respectively. The $16.94
er market price. Payments per farmfarm per year. [Sec. 1406][Sec. 1602]per cwt. payment rate must be adjusted to
limited to 2.4 million lbs. of annualreflect feed cost increases above trigger
ction. MILC authority expiredlevels, as specified in the final law.
pt. 30, 2005, but several subsequent[Sec. 1506]
tensions continue it through March 15,
[7 U.S.C. 7982]
iki/CRS-RL34696iry Forward Pricing Program
g/we FY2000 omnibus appropriations actAuthorizes a dairy forward pricingSimilar (but not identical) to the HouseAdopts House provision. [Sec. 1502]
s.orthorized a pilot dairy forward pricingprogram similar to the pilot program ofbill. [Sec. 1606]
leakram implemented from mid-20002000-2004. Price paid by milk handlers
://wikitil its required expiration date ofber 31, 2004. It exemptedunder the contracts are deemed to satisfythe minimum price requirements of
httpndlers from having to pay farmers thefederal milk marketing orders. Applies
hen the forwardonly to milk purchased for manufactured
ntract price turns out to be lower. products (Classes II, III, and IV), and
.S.C. 627]excludes milk purchased for fluid
consumption (Class I). Allows for new
contracts until September 30, 2012, but
no contract can extend beyond
September 30, 2015. [Sec. 1402]
iry Export Incentive Program
ovides cash bonus payments to U.S.Extends DEIP through December 31,Extends DEIP through December 31,Adopts House provision. [Sec. 1503]

ry exporters, subject to World Trade2012, with a reference to the Uruguay2012. [Sec. 1603(a)]
ganization obligations to limit exportRound Agreements Act. [Sec. 1403]
sidies. No DEIP bonuses have been
arded since FY2004. Legislative
thority expires March 15, 2008.
tended to counter foreign (mostly EU)

iry subsidies. [15 U.S.C. 713a-14(a)]
iry Indemnity Program
thorizes payments to dairy farmersExtends the Dairy Indemnity ProgramSimilar to the House bill. [Sec. 1603(b)]Adopts House provision. [Sec. 1505]
en a public regulatory agency directsfthrough December 31, 2012. [Sec. 1405]
oval of their raw milk from the
rket because of contamination by
sticides, nuclear radiation or fallout, or
ic substances and other chemical
idues. Expires March 15, 2008.
.S.C. 450l]
iry Promotion and Research Program
e Dairy Producer Stabilization Act ofExtends promotion and research programExtends program authority through Sep.Adopts House provision with changes to
iki/CRS-RL34696thorized a generic dairy productomotion, research, and nutritionauthority through Sep. 30, 2012. Amendsthe 1983 Act to require producers in all30, 2012. Does not address the issueinvolving the import assessment.reduce the assessment rate on importedproducts to 7.5¢/cwt. Authorizes USDA
g/wucation program, funded by a50 states, the District of Columbia, and[Sec. 1604]to issue regulations on time and method
s.orndatory 15¢/cwt assessment on milkPuerto Rico to pay the 15¢/cwt. [Sec.of importer payments. [Sec. 1507]
leakced/marketed in the 48 contiguous1407]
. Assessment extended to imports
://wiki Sec. 1505 of 2002 farm bill. Import
httpsessment never collected because the
clusion of some states was considered
nsistent with WTO rules. Expires
15, 2008. [7 U.S.C. 4501-4514]
ilk Marketing Orders
eral milk marketing order rules issuedCreates a Federal Milk Marketing OrderCreates a Federal Milk Marketing OrderCreates a Federal Milk Marketing Order
USDA place requirements on the firstReview Commission to review andReview Commission, with same overallReview Commission with 14 members
yers or handlers of milk, includingevaluate the current federal and similarfunctions and purposes as the House bill,appointed by USDA; objectives of the
ing at least minimum prices for thestate order systems. The 18-memberbut with some differences in thecommission are similar to but modified
lk depending on its end use. Perm-Commission is to consider legislative andappointment of members and issues to befrom the House version. [Sec. 1509]

ent federal authority to regulate theadministrative options for: ensuring thestudied. [Sec. 1608]
ndling of milk was first provided in thecompetitiveness of farmers and
ricultural Adjustment Act of 1933,processors, and simplifying and
d subsequently revised by the Agri-streamlining the federal order system.
ltural Marketing Agreement Act ofReport is due within two years of the first
amended. [7 U.S.C. 601 et seq.]meeting. [Sec. 1409]

en USDA amends federal orders, itRevises order amendment procedures byAlso revises amendment procedures byIncludes elements of both bills with
st issue a notice of a hearing at leastplacing time constraints on USDA atestablishing a timetable for certainregard to the time constraint provisions,
ee days prior to the hearing.various steps of the amendment process. actions, but with some differences.avoidance of duplication, and use of feed
.S.C. 608c(17)][Sec. 1404][Sec. 1605] and fuel costs for hearings involving
adjustments to make allowances.
[Sec. 1504]
late April 2007, USDA announced anRequires USDA, within 90 days ofSimilar to the House bill, except that theAdopts Senate provision. [Sec. 1508]
or in nonfat dry milk prices reported toenactment, to submit a report to Congressreport is to be filed with the House and
by manufacturers over the previouson price reporting procedures for nonfatSenate Agriculture Committees. [Sec.
onths. The error contributed todry milk, and the effect these procedures1607)
er farm milk prices than wouldhave had on marketing order pricing
erwise have been the case.since July 1, 2006. [Sec. 1408]
andatory Dairy Commodity Price Reporting
iki/CRS-RL34696iry Market Enhancement Act of 2000uires manufacturers to report toNo comparable provisions.Requires manufacturers to report salestransactions daily. Requires USDA toAuthorizes USDA to establish anelectronic reporting system (subject to
g/w the price, quantity, and moisturepublish the data each reporting day andavailable funds), after which increased
s.ortent of dairy products sold. [7 it with other dairy marketfrequency in mandatory reporting of
leakstatistics on a quarterly basis. dairy product sales would be required.
://wiki[Secs. 1609 and 1610]Provides for quarterly audits of submittedinformation and comparison with related
httpdairy market statistics. [Sec. 1510]
t Directive
uires USDA to the maximum extentRetains current no-net-cost requirement.Similar to the House bill. [Secs. 1501Continues no-cost requirement found in
acticable to operate the sugar[Secs. 1301 and 1303(b)]and 1504(b)]prior law. [Secs. 1401, 1403] Requires
nrecourse loan program at no net cost USDA to operate sugar-for-ethanol
avoiding sugar forfeitures to the CCC.program (in Energy title) to ensure this
.S.C. 7272 (g), 7 U.S.C. 1359bb (b),no-cost directive is met. [Sec. 9001]
.S.C. 1359cc (b)(2)]
ice Support Levels, Loans and Payments
raw cane and refined beet sugar loanIncreases raw cane sugar and refined beetIncreases raw cane sugar loan rate toIncreases raw cane sugar loan rate to
es at 18.0¢ and 22.9¢/lb throughsugar loan rates to 18.5¢/lb. and 23.5¢/lb19.0¢/lb. by FY2013, in 1/ increments18.75¢/lb. in FY2012 and FY2013, in
pands loan eligibility to in-for FY2009 through FY2013. [Sec. 1301] beginning in FY2010. Increases beet1/ increments beginning in FY2010.
s sugars and syrups at 80% of thesugar loan rate, to be set at 128.5% of theSets refined beet sugar loan rate at

plicable loan rates. Makesraw cane rate in effect each year (e.g.,22.9¢/lb. in FY2009. Starting in
nrecourse loans available to processorsreaching 24.42¢/lb. in FY2013). [Sec.FY2010, sets beet sugar rate equal to
der certain conditions. Sets 9-month1501]128.5% of the raw cane rate in effect,
ayment term for such loans. [7 U.S.C.(e.g., rising to 24.1¢/lb. in FY2012 and
FY2013). Continues other provisions
found in prior law. [Sec. 1401]
thorizes CCC to accept bids fromContinues in-kind authority. StipulatesSimilar to the House bill. [Sec. 1501]Continues in-kind authority and adds
gar processors to purchase USDA-that planted beets or cane diverted fromHouse/Senate provision. [Sec. 1401]
ned sugar in conjunction with reducedproduction can only be used as bioenergy
ction of new sugar crops. [7 U.S.C.feedstock. [Sec. 1301]
DA now pays storage rates of/cwt.No comparable provision.Requires (only through crop year 2011)Adopts Senate provision. [Sec. 1405]
r raw cane and 10¢ per cwt. for refinedUSDA minimum storage payment rates
ugar that has been forfeited underof 10¢/cwt. and 15¢/cwt. on forfeited raw
iki/CRS-RL34696onrecourse loan program. [15cane and refined beet sugar. [Sec. 1503]
g/wS.C. 714b & 714c; 7 CFR Part 1423]
s.orthorizes CCC to provide financing toNo comparable provision.Retains authority, but stipulates that loansContinues prior law and adds Senate
leaksors of domestic sugar to constructshall not require any prepayment penalty. provision. [Sec. 1404]
://wikipgrade storage and handling[Sec. 1402][Sec. 1502]
arketing Allotments and Allocations
avert loan forfeitures, USDA limitsContinues purpose and structure ofSimilar to the House bill. Continues marketing allotment authority
ount of sugar processors can sellmarketing allotments and allocations, but[Sec. 1504(a)-(d)]and adopts House/Senate provisions
year (according to a nationalchanges some key provisions. Changesrequiring USDA to set OAQ at not less
verall allotment quantity” (OAQ)formula to require USDA to set OAQ atthan 85% of estimated U.S. human
ided between cane and beet sectors,not less than 85% of estimated humanconsumption, and eliminating allotment
allocated to individual processors). food and beverage sugar use. Eliminatessuspension trigger. [Sec. 1403(a)-(d)]
e OAQ must accommodate WTO andallotment suspension provision.
FTA import commitments (1.532[Sec. 1303(a)-(d)]
n short tons). If imports are larger,
s authority to implement
tments is suspended. [7 U.S.C.
d 1359dd]
rects USDA to reassign unused rawRequires that any reassignment of unusedSimilar to the House bill. [Sec. 1504(e)]Adopts House/Senate change to prior
e and beet sugar marketing allocationscane and beet allocations to imports [inlaw. [Sec. 1403(e)]

to other cane states and beetthe fourth step] must be met by imports
sors, respectively; second to cane of raw cane sugar.” [Sec. 1303(e)]
sors within each state; third to
les of sugar in CCC’s inventory; and
th to imports. [7 U.S.C. 1359ee]
gar Provision Related to Bioenergy Programs see section on Energy Programs (below)
ade-Related Provisions
accord with a 1994 trade commitment,Makes no changes to import quotaMakes no changes to import quotaMakes no change to current U.S. trade
DA sets an annual global sugar importcommitments found in various tradecommitments.commitments.
ota of not less than 1.256 mil. shortagreements and laws.
s. USTR allocates the quota among
ible countries, and also administers
erential sugar import quotas for free
iki/CRS-RL34696reement partner countries. fective January 1, 2008, Mexico can
g/wip duty free an unlimited amount of
s.orgar to the U.S. market.
quires USTR in 2002-07 to reallocateRepeals requirement for reallocatingSimilar to the House bill.Adopts House/Senate repeal provision.
://wikid country quota allocations to othersugar import quota shortfalls. [Sec. 1504(i)][Sec. 1403(i)]
httpota-holding countries with sugar to[Sec. 1303(i)]
[7 U.S.C. 1359kk]
has discretion to increase the sizeRequires USDA to set quotas for rawSimilar to the House bill.Adopts House/Senate provision on
global raw cane and refined sugarcane and refined sugar at the minimum[Sec. 1504(j)]setting initial import quotas at minimum
port quotas when domestic sugarlevel necessary to comply with U.S. tradelevels and laying out steps to be followed
pplies are inadequate to meet U.S.agreement obligations. In cases of sugarto increase imports in the event of a sugar
and at reasonable prices. [Chaptershortages, supplies are to be increasedshortage. [Sec. 1403(j)]
, additional note 5, of the U.S.first by reassigning allotment deficits to
monized Tariff Schedule; 19 CFRimports of raw cane sugar, second by
t 2001, Subpart A]increasing the refined sugar quota, and
third by increasing raw cane sugar quota.
[Sec. 1303(i)]
protect domestic sugar prices, USDARequires USDA to establishorderlyNo comparable provision.Deletes House “shipping patterns”
ulated the flow of sugar imports fromshipping patterns for major suppliers ofprovision.

ge quota holders (through 2005).sugar to the U.S. market. [Sec. 1303(i)]

e U.S.-Mexican agreement on bilateralNo comparable provision.Expresses sense of Senate that U.S. &Deletes Senate provision.
rket access for sugar and high-fructoseMexican governments should coordinate
syrup created an industry andtheir sugar policies to be consistent with
vernment task force to addressU.S. international commitments, to avoid
s that might arise after thedisruptions of each countrys sweetener
ination of tariffs on sweeteners onmarkets (sugar and high-fructose corn
uary 1, 2008. [Exchange of Letterssyrup). [Sec. 1505]
ween USTR and Mexico’s Secretariat
conomy, July 27, 2006]
e U.S. withdrew from the InternationalRequires the Secretary of Agriculture toSimilar to the House bill.Adopts House provision. [Sec. 1402]
gar Organization (ISO) in 1992work with the Secretary of State to[Sec. 1504]
se of opposition to the allocation ofrestore U.S. membership in the ISO
untry contributions to ISOs budget.within one year. [Sec. 1302]
iki/CRS-RL34696ogram Definitions and Funding
s.or the Food Security Act ofNo provisions. Adds definitions of beginning farmer orAdopts Senate provision with changes.
leakSA) (P.L. 99-198, or the 1985rancher, Indian tribe, nonindustrialRemoves the test of net worth. Adopts
m bill), as amended, defines 18 terms.(Note: some terms added by the Senateprivate forest land, sociallythe 1990 farm bill definition of a socially
://wiki.S.C. 3801]bill in this section are defined for specificdisadvantaged farmer or rancher, anddisadvantaged farmer or rancher, with
httpconservation programs, as noted below.) technical assistance. Authorizes USDAchanges to define farm, integrated pest
to employ a test of net worth or othermanagement, person and legal entity, and
measure to qualify. [Sec. 2001] livestock. [Sec. 2001]
the FSA, as amended,Extends reauthorization through FY2012Extends reauthorization through FY2012Extends reauthorization through FY2012
thorizes mandatory funding throughwith funding specified for CSP, FPP,with funding specified for CSP, FPP,with the following in additional new
2007 to carry out various conservationEQIP, and WHIP. [Sec. 2401(a)]EQIP, WHIP, GRP, and the Voluntarybudget authority: CSP ($1.1 billion);
rams. [16 U.S.C. 3841]Public Access and Habitat IncentivesEQIP ($3,393 million); and FPP ($773
Program. [Sec. 2401(a)]million). [Sec. 2701]
te: Authorized funding levels for
rious programs is provided in
vidual program sections below.
ghly Erodible and Wetland Conservation
. 1211-1212 of the FSA, as amended,No comparable provision.Adds a second level of review by theAdopts Senate provision, providing for
kes violators of the conservationstate or district director, with technicalreview of good faith determinations
mpliance program ineligible for certainconcurrence from USDAs Naturalrelated to highly erodible land
ogram benefits, with some exceptionsResources Conservation Service (NRCS)conservation. [Sec. 2002]

m full loss of eligibility. [16 U.S.C.if the Secretary has determined that this
d 3812f]exception should apply. [Sec. 2101]
. 1221-1222 of the FSA, as amended,No comparable provision.Add a second level of review by the stateAdopts Senate provision, providing for
kes swampbuster ineligible for certainor district director, with technicalreview of good faith determinations
ogram benefits, with some exceptionsconcurrence from NRCS if the Secretaryrelated to wetland conservation.
m full loss of eligibility. [16 U.S.C.has determined that this exemption[Sec. 2003]
d 3822h]should apply. [Sec. 2201]
prehensive Conservation Enhancement Program
e 1990 farm bill amended Sec. 1230 ofNo comparable provision. (Note:Deletes Section 1243 in prior law, andDoes not reauthorize the CCEP. The
to establish a program laterAmendments to Sec. 1243 describedmoves some provisions, amended, intoHealthy Forest Reserve Program is
med the Comprehensivebelow in the “other conservationthis (and other) sections. Extends CCEPretained in the forestry title [Sec. 8205];
nservation Enhancement Programprograms” subsection .)through FY2012. Makes changes thatthe county acreage cap is addressed
CEP). The CCEP, which includes thereduce administrative burdens, streamlineelsewhere [Sec. 2708]. The agreement
iki/CRS-RL34696nservation Reserve Program (CRP),lands Reserve Program (WRP), andthe application process, and promotepartnerships. Deletes EQIP from CCEPadopts a provision to exclude CREPacreage and continuous CRP acreage
g/wvironmental Quality Incentivesand adds the Healthy Forests Reservefrom the 25% cap if the county
s.orram (EQIP), promotes long-termProgram. Adds a new exception wherebygovernment concurs, and further
leakotection for environmentally sensitiveUSDA may exceed the enrollmentspecifies this provision is separate and
://wikis through easements and technical/ancial assistance. [16 U.S.C. 3830] limitation when a state or local regulationprohibits agricultural water use, requiringdistinct from the existing waiverauthority. [Sec. 2106] Additional
httpUSDA to enroll the land within 180 daysguidance is provided in the Managers
te: Administration of CCEP, theof receiving a request and pay a rentalstatement.
bject of Sec. 1243, is described below.rate that reflects the rate prior to
implementing the regulation. [Sec. 2301]
e 1990 farm bill amended Sec. 1243 ofAmends administration provisions byAmends to streamline applicationAdopts House provision with changes
to authorize administration ofmoving sections on acreage enrollmentprocess, add new endangered speciesand names the initiative the Cooperative
. Provisions include avoidinglimits, tenant protection, and obtainingprovisions, and establish newConservation Partnership Initiative
plication of required conservationtechnical assistance. Establishes a newpartnerships and cooperation projects for(CCPI). [Sec. 2707] Allows USDA to
s, limiting enrollment under CRP andCooperative Conservation Partnershipspecial projects (up to 5 years) withmake consider local circumstances, goals,
P to 25% of the cropland in a county,Initiative to carry out projects/initiativesmultiple producers and eligible partnersand objectives, and provides for
ecting the interests of share croppersusing competitive (2-5 years) grants. to address state conservationadjustments to provide producers
d tenants, allowing approved sourcesSpecifies 14 criteria to be used inrecommendations. Specifies five projectpreferential enrollment in the applicable
ide technical assistance, and usingreviewing applications and 9 projectpurposes, lists application contents, andprogram as part of the special project.
to 5% of the funds from thepriorities. Specifies duties of participantidentifies USDAs duties and prioritiesApplies to all USDA conservation
ndatory funded conservation programsand USDA. Specifies program will bewhen selecting projects (including 14programs except CRP, WRP, FPP and
oster cooperation throughfunded with 10% of funds for CSP,priority water project areas); also requiresGRP. The stated intent is to provide for
nerships. [16 U.S.C. 3844]EQIP, and WHIP. The federal share formonitoring and evaluation. Specifiesapplications that include innovative

each project will be at least 75% of costs;funding of 10% of the mandatory fundscombinations of covered initiative
90% of the funds will be allocated at theallocated to each state (except CRP, CSP,programs, and applications that might
state level (incentives and bonusWRP, and the new Conservationwork in tandem with the enhancement
payments may be used for specifiedStewardship Program), with 75% ofprograms under CRP or WRP. Additional
purposes). Limits administrative costs tofunds for intra-state and 25% for multi-guidance is provided in the Managers
5% of any grant. [Sec. 2403] state projects. [Sec. 2405]statement.
nservation Reserve Program
d) of the 1985 farm billExtends authorization through CY2012;Extends authorization through CY2012.Extends authorization through CY2012,
) authorizes the CRP; the program isretains current acreage enrollment limitRetains current acreage enrollment limit. and allows USDA to address issues under
rrently authorized through CY2007 at(39.2 million acres). [Sec. 2101(a-b)]Adds pollinator habitat to the generalState, regional, and national conservation
.2 million acres. [16 U.S.C. 3831(a-d)]purposes. Expands eligible land toinitiatives. Caps enrollment at 32 million
include some types of marginal pasture-acres [Sec. 2103]. Clarifies that alfalfa
land and land enrolled in a new floodedgrown as part of a rotation practice is a
farmland program. [Sec. 2311(a-c)]commodity for crop history purposes.
iki/CRS-RL34696[Secs. 2101-2102, 2105] Provides for
g/wpollinator habitats. [Secs. 2706, 2708]
s.or) of the FSA, as amended,Deletes states but retains Chesapeake BaySimilar to the House bill; also adds to theAdopts House provision to include all
leakts priority areas as the Chesapeake Bayregion. [Sec. 2101(b)]list the prairie pothole region, the GrandStates that make up the Chesapeake Bay
://wikiion (PA, MD, VA) , the Great Lakesgion, and Long Island Sound. [16Lake St Marys Watershed, and theEastern Snake Plain Aquifer. [Sec.Region as the Conservation Priority Area.[Sec. 2104]
httpS.C. 3831f]2311(d)]
) of the FSA, as amended,Extends program through CY2012. [Sec.Extends program through CY2012;Adopts Senate provision with changes.
thorizes a one million acre pilot2101(e)]expands eligibility to include certainamendment. Enrollment is capped at
ogram within the CRP for wetlands andshallow water areas and certain 100,000 acres in any State and 1 million
ffer areas. [16 U.S.C. 3831h]agricultural drainage water treatmentacres total. Adds conforming changes to
collection areas, and expands the eligiblethe Emergency Forestry Conservation
buffer acreage. Directs USDA toReserve Program. Expands enrollment
establish the maximum size of the bufferof wetland and buffer acreage to include
acreage to be enrolled along with eligibleland that had been cropped during 3 of
lands. Increases the maximum wetland10 crop years prior to 2002 and after
size to 40 contiguous acres and makes all1990 and is subject to a natural overflow
acres eligible for payment. [Sec. 2311(e)]of a prairie wetland. [Sec. 2106]
the FSA, as amended,Allows managed haying and grazing toAllows managed haying and grazing toAdopts House provision with changes,
ecifies a duty of participants is limitingcontrol invasive species, and adds detailcontrol invasive species and permitsallowing for routine grazing, including
mmercial uses, including haying andon allowed uses, enrolled lands, andmanaged haying and grazing that is a partgrazing to control invasive species.
azing on enrolled lands; allowsadjustments to annual contract payments.of a conservation plan. [Sec. 2311(h)]Additional guidance is provided in the

naged haying/grazing under certain[Sec. 2101(f)]Managers statement. [Sec. 2108] Grants
mstances. [16 U.S.C. 3832a(7)]management on land” should not result
in a reduced payment, if done in
accordance with the contract. [Sec. 2107]
the FSA, as amended,Requires USDA to conduct and makeSimilar to the House bill; also requiresRequires USDA to survey annually the
tablishes a framework for calculatingavailable an annual survey of dryland andUSDA to give preference to local ownersper acre estimates of county cash rents
l rental payments. [16 U.S.C.irrigated cropland cash rental rates in allor operators when considering competingpaid to contract holders, and requires that
counties with more than 20,000 acres ofoffers providing equivalent benefits.USDA give priority to offers from local
crop and pasture land. [Sec. 2101(g)][Sec. 2311(j)]residents if conservation benefits are
equivalent among offers. [Sec. 2110 ]
the FSA, as amended,Allows USDA to terminate any contractAllow USDA to terminate a contract if aAdopts House provision. [Sec. 2111]
s USDA to terminate CRP contractsafter 5 years, but prohibits terminatingretired or disabled producer has endured
ears if contract was in effectcontracts for land enrolled under afinancial hardship because of taxes on
ore 1/1/95. [16 U.S.C. 3835e]continuous signup. [Sec. 2101(i) and (j)] rental payments. [Sec. 2311(k)]
iki/CRS-RL34696parable provision.No comparable provision.No comparable provision.Specifies a 50% federal share of cost
g/wsharing payments relating to trees,
s.orwindbreaks, shelterbelts, and wildlife
leakcorridors. [Sec. 2109]
://wikie 2002 farm bill amended Sec. 1244(a)Facilitates the transfer of CRP land fromNo comparable provision. Adopts House provision with
http the FSA to authorize USDA to providea retiring owner to a beginning / socially-modifications. [Sec. 2111]
entives to beginning farmers/ranchersdisadvantaged producer to return land to(Note: Support for socially disadvantaged
d Indian tribes to participate in con-production, and allows new owner toand limited resource farmers/ranchers are
rvation programs. [16 U.S.C. 3844(a)]begin land improvements or start organicin other bill sections.)
certification process one year before CRP
contract expires. [Sec. 2101(h)]
comparable provision.No comparable provision.Creates new Flooded Farmland ProgramDeletes this section and modifies CRP
for the Prairie Pothole region within theand WRP to accomplish the intent of the
CRP. Allows continuous enrollment.Senate amendment, including expanding
Eligible land parcels must exceed 5 acres,eligible lands under the CRP pilot
been incapable of production preceding 3program for wetlands and buffer areas
crop years, have a cropping history, and[Sec. 2106] and expands eligible lands
have no natural outlet. [Sec. 2312]under WRP. [Sec. 2201]
comparable provision.No comparable provision.Creates new Wildlife Habitat ProgramDeletes this section and modifies CRP to
for CRP participants with establishedaccommodate the intent of the Senate
softwood pine stands using managementamendment. Additional guidance is

practices that benefit wildlife (contractsprovided in the Managers statement.
up to 5 years). Program ends September
30, 2011. [Sec. 2313]
etlands Reserve Program
e 1996 farm bill amended Sec. 1237(a)Adds to the purposes to create and toNo comparable provision.Amends purposes to restore, protect, or
the FSA to authorize WRP, stating itsenhance wetlands, and to purchaseenhance wetlands on private or tribal
rpose to restore and protect wetlands.floodplain easements. [Sec. 2102(a)]lands. [Sec. 2201]
.S.C. 3837a]
the FSA, as amended,Sets maximum enrollment at 3.605Sets annual fiscal year enrollment goal ofSets maximum enrollment at 3.041
aximum enrollment at 2.275million acres. Sets an annual fiscal year250,000 acres, with no enrollment aftermillion acres. Sets annual fiscal year
n acres, with an annual calendarenrollment goal of 250,000 acres, ofFY2012. [Sec. 2321] enrollment goal of 250,000 acres through
rollment goal of 250,000 acres.which not more than 10,000 acres may beFY2012. [Sec. 2202-2203]
.S.C. 3837b]flood plain easements. [Sec. 2102(b)]
iki/CRS-RL34696New section adds language authorizingWRP from FY2008-12. [Sec. 2402(h)]
s.or the FSA, as amended,Adds riparian areas to eligible wetlands,Expands eligible lands under WRP to
leaklishes requirements for eligibleand makes eligible floodplain landinclude cropland or grassland that was
s through 2007. [16 U.S.C. 3837c]flooded in the past calendar year or atused for agricultural production prior to
://wikileast twice in the past 10 years, and landflooding from the natural overflow of a
httpthat contributes to flood water storage,closed basin lake or pothole. [Sec. 2203]
flow, or erosion control. [Sec. 2102(c)] Adds terms tomeet habitat needs of
specific wildlife species.” [Sec. 2204]
the FSA, as amended,Expands ineligible lands to includeNo comparable provision.Expands ineligible lands to include
tifies ineligible land to include landsfloodplains where restoration practicesfarmed wetland or converted wetland,
eady planted to timber in the CRP. [16would not be productive or the land istogether with the adjacent land that is
S.C. 3837e]already protected. [Sec. 2102(d)]functionally dependent on the wetlands,
except wetlands converted before
December 23, 1985. [Sec. 2203]
(f) of the FSA, as amended,Limits compensation to lowest of 4Limits compensation to lowest of 3Adopts House provision with changes,
compensation to be paid in cash (inoptions: percentage of the fair marketoptions: an amount necessary torevising the process for determining the
ments) and not to exceed thevalue; percentage of market valueencourage enrollment; a limit for avalue of easements and contracts by
arket value, as reduced by thedetermined by a survey; a geographicgeographic area; or a landowner’s offer. requiring USDA to provide the lowest
ement. [16 U.S.C. 3837a(f)]cap; or a landowners offer. AllowsCompensation may be in 1 to 30amount of compensation based on a
USDA to use non-federal contributions topayments. [Sec. 2322(b)(3-4)]comparison of the fair market value of
administer program [Sec. 2102(e)]the land, a geographic cap, or an offer

made by the landowner. Provides that
easements with values less than $500,000
be paid out over 1-30 years; easements
with values greater than $500,000 are to
be paid out over 5-30 years. [Sec. 2208]
Provides for the repeal of payment
limitations (exception for State
agreements for new Wetlands Reserve
Enhancement Program. [Sec. 2209]
(c) of the FSA, as amended,Adds new additional criteria for rankingNo comparable provision.Adopts House provision. [Sec. 2207]
ree considerations USDA is to useoffers (conservation benefits; cost-
en considering offers for WRPeffectiveness; and offer of a financial
tracts. [16 U.S.C. 3837c(c)]contribution) and conservation benefits
of floodplain lands. [Sec. 2102(f)]
iki/CRS-RL34696(c)(4) of the FSA, asReplaces provision with a new languageAuthorizes a Wetlands ReserveAdopts Senate provision authorizing
g/wended, waives limits for public entitiesayments through the wetlandon Wetland Reserve Enhancementprogram, where states contribute funds soEnhancement Program (WREP). Makesa conforming change to allow paymentsWREP for agreements with States similarto CREP. Authorizes a Reserved Rights
s.ord environmental enhancementas to increase payments. [Sec. 2102(g)]for 30-year contracts. [Sec. 2322(c)]Pilot program. [Sec. 2205-2206]
leakrams. [16 U.S.C. d(c)(4)]
://wikiparable provision.No comparable provision.Requires a report to House and SenateAdopts Senate provision. [Sec. 2210]
httpAgriculture Committees by 1/1/2010 on
the implications of long-term easements
on USDA resources. [Sec. 2322(d)]
nservation Security Program
e 2002 farm bill amended the FSA toEstablishes a new CSP for FY2012-2017. Authorizes through FY2012 a new CSPDefines program terms for the new CSP.
lish the Conservation SecurityEligible producers must submit an offeras a conforming amendment, andAdopts elements of the Senate provision.
ram (CSP) for FY2003-11. Definesaddressingat least one priority resourcereauthorizes current CSP for existingExpands eligible lands to include
ible producers and eligible lands andof concern to a minimum level ofcontracts only. Future CSP contractsnonindustrial private forest land (limited
cluded lands (land enrolled inmanagement intensity.” Eligible landwould be replaced by a Comprehensiveto not more than 10% of total annual
ltiyear land retirement programs andexcludes incidental forest land. LimitsStewardship Incentives Programacres under the program). Permits 5-year
d not in crop production at least 4 ofprogram to one type of contract of 5consisting of a Conservation Stewardshipextension of contracts. Excludes under
g 6 years). Specifies termsyears; describes five elements to be in allProgram with similar provisions of thethe program, land used for cropland that
r 3 tiers of conservation contracts. contracts, but eliminates list of topics toexisting CSP and EQIP. Eligible landhad not been planted, considered to be
tifies topics that may be addressed inbe addressed. Prohibits termination ofmust have been planted to crops 4 ofplanted, or devoted to crop production
tracts. Contracts are 5 years under tiercontracts, without penalty, by a producerpreceding 6 years. Specifies contract arefor 4 of the 6 years prior to the date of
d 5 to 10 years under tiers 2 and 3.who is required to modify a contract.for 5 years, with renewal under certainenactment of the act (unless the land had

ies circumstances and requirementsAllows contracts to be renewed for oneconditions. Allows for terminating andpreviously been enrolled in CRP; had
r modifying, terminating, and renewingadditional 5 year period. Adds newchanging contracts. Specifies how tobeen maintained in a long term crop
tracts. Contracts may be renewed forprovisions on evaluating offers fromevaluate contract offers, producer duties,rotation; or was incidental land needed
o 10 years. Defines 15 termsorganic producers. Defines twelve termsenhancement terms, and supple-mentalfor efficient operation). [Sec. 2301]
aining to the program. that are new terms or differ from priorpayments. Defines 15 terms. [Secs.
.S.C. 3838]law. [Sec. 2103(a)] 2391 and 2341]
1238A(d-3) of the FSA, asLimits program to 1 type of contract of 5Defines eligible land and eligibleAdopts Senate provision with
ended, specifies terms for 3 tiers ofyears and describes 5 elements to be inproducers; land must have been plantedmodifications. Authorizes supplemental
servation contracts. Identifies topicsall contracts, but eliminates list of topicsto crops 4 of preceding 6 years. Contentspayments for producers who adopt a
ay be addressed in be addressed. Contracts could noof contracts are specified and are for 5beneficial crop rotation that provide
ntracts are 5 years under tier 1, and 5longer be terminated, without penalty, byyears, with renewal if certain conditionssignificant conservation benefits and are
ears under tiers 2 and 3. Specifiesa producer who is required to modify aare met. Specifies considerations innot limited to a particular crop, cropping
mstances and requirements forcontract. Contracts may be renewed forevaluating contract offers, producersystem, or region of the country. Allows
difying, terminating, and renewing1 additional 5 year period. Newduties, enhancement terms, andfor on-farm conservation research and
tracts. Contracts may be renewed forprovisions on evaluation of offers andsupplemental payments. Adds provisionsdemonstration activities and pilot-testing
iki/CRS-RL34696o 10 years [16 U.S.C. 3838a(d-e)]coordination with organic certificationon terminating and changing contracts. as part of contract offers. Allows for
g/ware added. [Sec. 2103(a)] [Sec. 2341] contract modification. [Sec 2301]
s.or of the FSA, as amended,Alters duties of the Secretary to includeAlters duties of the Secretary to allow forProvides that state acreage allocations be
leakecifies that duties of the Secretaryidentification of priority resources ofcontinuous enrollment (allowing abased on each state’s proportion of
://wikide making payments early in eachcal year, the components of paymentsconcern at the state level (limited to 5concerns in any geographic area of aproducer to apply at any time during theyear), providing assistance to producers,eligible acres to the total eligible acresnationwide (available to all producers,
httpr each tier, annual payment limits forstate). Limits total payments under aand maintaining contract and paymentnot only specific watersheds/geographic
tier ($20,000 for tier 1, $35,000 forcontract to $150,000 (5 years); allowsinformation that will support programregions), allowing for input from USDA.
r 2, and $45,000 for tier 3), minimumfor the environmental needs associatedmonitoring and evaluation, and enablingDirects USDA to adopt continuous
irements for practices, andwith agriculture to be considered in statespecialty crop producers to participate. enrollment, but allows for USDA to
uirements for implementingallocations; requires USDA to compileSpecifies an acreage allocation, limitingdetermine when to rank applications.
ations [16 U.S.C. 3838c]data of specified program contract andpayments to $240,000 (6-year). Directs USDA to provide technical
payment topics. [Sec. 2103 (a)][Secs. 2391 and 2341] assistance to specialty crop and organic
producers. Directs USDA to encourage
producers who are transitioning from
land retirement programs to enroll in
CSP and other working lands programs.
Limits payments to $200,000 in any 5-
year period. [Sec. 2301]
comparable provision.No comparable provision. Provides for enrollment of up to 79.628Deletes Senate provision. Enrolls an
million acres and attempted annualadditional 12.8 million acres annually
enrollment of 13.273 million acres,FY2008-2017. [Sec. 2301]

nationwide and at a average annual cost

of $19 per acre. Provides for small farm
participation, and allocates to each state
each year the lesser of 20,000 acres or
2.2% of the eligible land. [Sec. 2341]
comparable provision.No comparable provision.Requires regulations to be issued withinDeletes Senate provision. Directs USDA
180 days of enactment. [Sec. 2341]to promulgate regulations. [Sec. 2301]
the FSA, as amended,Prohibits any new contracts under theProhibits any new contracts under theAdopts Senate provision. The Manager’s
thorizes mandatory funding for theterms of the 2002 CSP, such that no newterms of the 2002 CSP, such that no newreport states that the bill provides for a
P at $1.954 billion for FY2006-10 andCSP contracts may be entered into afterCSP contracts may be entered into after$1.1 billion increase in budget authority
n from FY2006-15. [16October 1, 2007 (although payments mayOctober 1, 2007 (although payments mayabove current baseline (FY2008-2017).
S.C. 3841(a)(3)]be continued until contracts expire). Forbe continued until contracts expire).Provides such sums as necessary to carry
contracts signed before 10/1/07, providesAuthorizes $2.3 billion in mandatoryout existing CSP contracts. [Sec. 2701]
a total of $1.5 billion in mandatoryfunding for contracts entered into before
funding for FY2007-12, and $1.9 billionthe date of enactment, (available until
iki/CRS-RL34696for FY2012-17. For contract signed afterspent) and an unspecified amount for the
g/w10/1/11, provides $0.5 billion forFY2012 and $4.6 billion for FY2012-17. new CSP (enrollment in the new programis measured in acres rather than dollars).
s.or[Sec. 2401(b)][Sec. 2401(a)(3-4)]
://wikivironmental Quality Incentives Program
httpe 1996 farm bill amended Sec. 1240 ofAdds forest management and organicAdds forest management to the statementAdds forest management to purposes,
to authorize EQIP, stating itstransition to the program purposes. of program purposes, and recognizesand adds language regarding forest lands
rpose as promoting production andRevises the descriptions of 2 of the 5pollinators and fuels management in theon EQIP program plan and duplication.
vironmental quality as compatiblepurposes to recognize energyamplifying statements. [Secs. 2351,[Secs. 2505-2506] Adopts the Senate
als, and optimizing environmentalconservation and conservation on forest2352, and 2354] Adds aquaculture to theprovisions with an amendment to modify
efits by working in 5 specified areas. lands. [Sec. 2105(a)] Adds forestry,eligible land” definition; forestry iseligible land. [Sec. 2502] Allows for
.S.C. 3839aa] Defines 6 terms:forest management practices, andadded to the “land managementtechnical assistance to farmers that
ginning farmer or rancher, eligiblecoordinated implementation to the “landpractice” definition; adds conservationpromote pollinator habitats, and farmers
, land management practice,management practice” definition. Addsplanning practices to “practices;” definestransitioning to organic farming, among
estock, practice, and structuralalpacas and bison to the “livestockproducer” to include custom feedingactivities. [Sec. 2501] Further clarifies
definition. Adds definitions ofbusinesses and contract growers; andduties of the Secretary. [Sec. 2507]
“integrated pest management andadds firebreaks tostructural practice.”
socially disadvantaged farmer or[Sec. 2352]
rancher. [Sec. 2105(b)]
c) of the FSA, as amended,Reauthorizes through FY2012. ExpandsReauthorizes through FY2012. ExpandsReauthorizes through FY2012. Limits
thorizes EQIP through FY2010. types of eligible practices to includepermitted practices to includepayments to 75% of costs. [Sec. 2503]
ible practices are defined. Contractsorganic certification using technicalconservation planning. Limits contractsLowers individual payment limits from

ears. [16 U.S.C. 3839aa-services from approved providers, andto a maximum of 5 years. Removes$450,000 to $300,000 during any 6-year
improved energy efficiency, renewableprohibitions on bidding down. [Sec.period , except in cases of special
energy systems. [Sec. 2105(c)]2353(a-c)]environmental significance (including
projects involving methane digesters),
allowing USDA to raise the limit to not
more than $450,000. [Sec. 2508]
Directs USDA to develop criteria for
evaluating applications to address
national, State, and local conservation
priorities, allowing for prioritization and
grouping of applications based on cost-
effectiveness, how address the designated
resource concern(s), how best fulfills the
purpose of EQIP, and if improves conser-
vation practices or systems. [Sec. 2504]
iki/CRS-RL34696 the FSA, asSets the federal cost share at 90% forSets the federal cost share at 90% forAdopts Senate proposal. [Sec. 2503]
g/wended, allows limited resource andsocially disadvantaged producers.socially disadvantaged producers.
s.orinning producers to receive not moreProvides increased federal cost-share ofAllows for advanced payments to
leak a 90% federal cost share. [16 U.S.C.90% for using gasifier technology forcertain purposes. [Sec. 2105(d-e)]purchase materials and contracting. [Sec.2353(c)]
://wiki the FSA, as amended,Expands purposes for incentiveExpands purposes receiving specialAdopts House provision. [Secs. 2503.
httpovides incentive payments to performpayments: (1) receiving technicalemphasis to include predator species2706 and 2708] Includes special rule
d management practices, with specialservices from approved third partyprotected under the Endangered Speciesthat USDA may accord significance to
phasis given to practices that promoteproviders, (2) developing aAct, gray wolves, grizzly bears, andpractices promoting residue, nutrient, air
ecified goals. [16 U.S.C. 3839aa-2(e)]comprehensive nutrient managementblack bears. [Sec. 2353(c)(3)]quality, pest, and invasive species
plan, and (3) implementing energymanagement; pollinator habitat; and
efficiency and renewable energy animal carcass management technology.
projects. Pollinator habitats will receiveThe conference report recognizes as
special emphasis. [Sec. 2105(f)]consistent with the purposes of EQIP
options to deter predators protected by
the Endangered Species Act, and also
delisted populations.
) of the FSA, as amended,Extends through FY2012 the 60% ofSimilar to the House bill. Extends through FY2012 the 60% of
ires that 60% of payments go topayments to livestock production[Sec. 2353] payments to livestock production
actices related to livestock productionrequirement. [Sec. 2105(g)(2)]requirement. [Sec. 2503]

irement. [16 U.S.C. 3839aa-2(g)]

comparable provision. Requires USDA to reserve at least 5% ofAmends the cost-share rate exception forAdopts Senate provision for advance
program funds for beginning and sociallybeginning and socially disadvantagedpayments for beginning, socially
disadvantaged producers for at least 90farmers or ranchers to allow variabledisadvantaged and limited resource
days after the program funds have beenpayment, not to exceed 90%, andfarmers or ranchers and deletes
made available. [Sec. 2105(g)]authority to provide advance paymentsSenate provision for guaranteed loan
up to 30% for the purchase of materialseligibility. Adopts Senate provision with
or contracting. [Sec. 2353] an amendment for cost-share rates and
advance payments for beginning, socially
disadvantaged, and limited resource
farmers or ranchers. [Sec. 2503]
comparable provision. No comparable provision.Gives priority to improving waterDeletes Senate provision.
conservation and air quality, under
certain conditions. Requires participants
to have/expect at least $15,000 in gross
sales from farming. [Sec. 2353(c)(6)]
g/w comparable provision. Expands eligibility to market agenciesand custom feeders. [Sec. 2105(h)]Expands ‘producer eligibility to includea custom feeding business and a contractAdopts Senate provision with anamendment to modify eligible land.
s.orgrower or finisher. [Sec. 2352] [Sec. 2502]
://wiki of the FSA, as amended,es higher priority for participation inIdentifies 5 priorities for programapplications. Specifies a streamlinedAdds a higher priority for improvingconservation practices or systems inAdopts House provision with changes toprioritize State, regional, or local
http to producers using cost-effectiveevaluation process for operations withplace at the time of the contract offer.resource concerns, and to allow for the
servation practices and practices thatsubstantial and sound environmental[Sec. 2354]grouping of applications of similar
dress national conservation priorities. management systems involving a limitedagriculture operations. [Sec. 2502]
.S.C. 3839aa-3]number of practices. [Sec. 2105(i)]
the FSA, as amended,Adds to the planning requirements theIncludes forestry language similar toAdopts House forestry provision [Sec.
fines the general contents of aneed to be consistent with forest plans,House bill, but also allows a producer2502], but strikes Senate provision on
cer’s EQIP plan, and calls onand allows as an acceptable planorganization to act on behalf of itsproducer organizations.

to avoid duplication with otherconsideration of an air or water qualitymembership in submitting applications or
nservation plans. [16 U.S.C. 3839aa-5]permit that meet regulatory requirementsconducting similar activities to facilitate
as an acceptable plan. [Sec. 2105(k)]program participation. [Sec. 2356] Also
establishes a Chesapeake Bay Watershed
Conservation Program under EQIP to
assist producers in applying conservation
practices on agricultural/nonindustrial
private forestland in the Bay watershed to
address natural resource concerns related
to agriculture, funded at $165 million for

FY2008-12. [Sec. 2361]
of the FSA, as amended,Lists 3 criteria that must be met beforeNo comparable provision.Deletes House provision.
ovides for USDA funding, information,USDA can provide assistance for
d training to develop and implementpractices with a primary purpose of water
nservation plans. [16 U.S.C. 3839aa-6]conservation. [Sec. 2105 (l)]
of the FSA, as amended byAdds to the Conservation InnovationAdds to the Conservation InnovationAdopts House provisions related to forest
arm bill, provides for aGrants provisions under EQIP. Adds Grants provisions under EQIP. Addsresource management and air quality.
mpetitive grants program within EQIP,detail on qualities of eligible projects,nonindustrial private forest lands to theProvides $37.5 million annually
a matching basis, to implementestablishes a pilot program forlist of potential recipients of innovative(FY2009-2012) to implement air quality
vative conservation practices;conservation planning in the Chesapeaketechnologies. Adds two items to the listplans. [Sec. 2509] The conference
amples listed are using market systemsBay watershed, and adds a newof examples: (1) transfers of innovativereport states conservation programs
ollution reduction, and usingsubsection to assist producers who aretechnologies to nonindustrial privateshould recognize the use of innovative
ovative practices, such as storingmeeting state and local regulatory airforest land in production, and (2)technology such as enhanced efficiency
bon in soil; no funding is specified. quality requirements. Provides fundingassistance for specialty crop production.fertilizers.
iki/CRS-RL34696.S.C. 3839aa-8] from EQIP: $30 million (FY2008) rising[Sec. 2358]
g/wto $75 million (FY2012), with specifiedfunds for air quality and for organic and
s.orspecialty crop producers. [Sec. 2105(m)]
://wiki the FSA, as amended byarm bill, creates a Ground andReplaces GSWCP with a Regional WaterEnhancement Program to address waterMaintains GSWCP and provides anincrease in funding from $60million toReplaces GSWCP with the AgriculturalWater Enhancement Program (AWEP)
httprface Water Conservation Programquality, make eligible governmental$65 million annually. Provides fundingunder EQIP. Provides mandatory
SWCP) within EQIP for activities thatentities (including irrigation and waterfor each state that received funding underfunding: $73 million annually (FY2009-
esult in a net savings of ground ordistricts) and Indian tribes, and tothe program in previous years (simple2010), $74 million (FY2011), and $60
rface water; lists 6 types of eligibleimplement program on a regional scaleaverage of funds provided for FY2002-million annually (FY2012 and each year
ities (improve irrigation systems, forthrough cooperative agreements. 2007 or the amount provided in 2007,thereafter). Recognizes the purpose as
ample), and provides mandatoryExpands the list of eligible activities andwhichever is greater), except for statesaddressing water quality/quantity
nding of $25 million in FY2002,requires the Secretary to identify priorityover the Ogallala Aquifer, which willconcerns on agricultural land, with the
owing to $60 million annually inareas. Lists 5 priority areas, whichreceive not less than the greater of $3role of AWEP partners as leveraging
2004-07. [16 U.S.C. 3839-aa-9]together may receive no more than 50%million or the average of funds providedfederal funds and encouraging producers
of the available funds. Establishes afor FY2002-2007. Provides at least $20to address these concerns. The Managers
process for soliciting/selecting proposalsmillion for the Eastern Snake Plainreport emphasizes the importance of
and developing implementationAquifer. [Sec. 2359]addressing groundwater management in
agreements. Provides mandatory fundsthe Ogallala region, promoting water use
of $60 million annually through FY2012efficiency projects, converting irrigated
(limits administrative expenses to nofarming operations to a dryland farming;
more than 3% of the total). [Sec. 2106] and providing assistance to construct
onfarm reservoirs/irrigation ponds in
drought-stricken areas. Identifies six

priority areas: The Eastern Snake Plain
Aquifer region, Puget Sound, the
Ogallala Aquifer, the Sacramento River
watershed, Upper Mississippi River
Basin, the Red River of the North Basin,
and the Everglades. [Sec. 2510] Follows
same payment limits as under EQIP.
[Sec. 2508] Provides for a transition
period for the existing GSWCP through
September 30, 2008. [Sec. 2903]
the FSA, as amendedLists the Klamath River basin as one ofNo comparable provision. Deletes House provision.
the 2002 farm bill, provides $50the 5 listed priority areas under the
n to carry out water conservationRegional Water Enhancement Program.(Note: The Klamath Basin is listed as 1 of
ities in the Klamath River basin[Sec. 2106 (b)(2)]14 priority areas in the Partnerships and
R, CA) [16 U.S.C. 3839aa-9(c)(2)]Cooperation Program; see above.)
g/w comparable provision. No comparable provision. Adds program at end of EQIP to assistfarmers who are converting to organicAdopts Senate provision. Includesorganic practices as eligible management
s.orproduction (with contracts of 3-4 years). systems and limits payment to an
leakPayments are limited to $20,000 per year.aggregate of $80,000 in any 6-year
://wiki[Sec. 2360] period. [Secs. 2501 and 2503]
http the FSA, as amended,Authorizes EQIP funding: $1.25 billionAuthorizes EQIP funding: $1.27 billionProvides additional budget authority.
thorizes EQIP funding, rising from(FY2008), $1.6 billion (FY2009), $1.7annually (FY2008-09), $1.3 billion eachAuthorizes EQIP funding: $1.2 billion
in FY2002 to $1.3 billion inbillion (FY2010), $1.8 billion (FY2011),(FY2010-FY2012). [Sec. 2401(a)(7)](FY2008); $1.337 billion (FY2009);
2010. [16 U.S.C. 3841(a)(6)]and $2 billion (FY2012). [Sec. 2401(d)] $1.45 billion (FY2012); $1.588 billion
(FY2011); and $1.75 billion (FY2012).
[Sec. 2701]
land Protection Program
e 1996 farm bill amended Sec. 1238HReauthorizes program, and renames toReauthorizes the program. ModifiesReauthorizes the program through 2012,
the FSA to authorize the FarmlandFarm and Ranchland Protection Programdefinition of eligible forest land, andbut does not rename program. Changes
otection Program (FPP), defining(FRPP). Expands eligible land definitionmakes eligible other land that is neededadministrative requirements, appraisal
ible entity, land, Indian tribes, andto include historic and archaeologicalfor efficient administration of anmethodology, and terms and conditions
rams. [16 U.S.C. 3838h-i] Theresources. States will be certifiedeasement. Changes purpose of programof cooperative agreements. Adopts
ram, as amended, provides for the(reviewed every 3 years) to participatefrom protecting topsoil toprotectingterms/conditions for cooperative
rchase of conservation easements toand receive program funds based on 4agricultural use and related conservationagreements similar to Senate provision.
otect topsoil by limiting the landslisted requirements. States may spend upvalues.” Adds new requirements forClarifies the purpose of the program as
nagricultural uses subject to a pendingto 10% of funds for administrative costs. cooperative agreements with participants,protecting land for agricultural use by

fer. The federal cost may not exceedLists terms and conditions for agreementscost-sharing, and protection of the federallimiting nonagri-cultural uses. Adopts
the value of the easement; thewith eligible entities (reviewed every 3investment. Allows USDA to enter intoSenate provision to modify the definition
lue of a charitable donation by theyears). Provides that USDA may requirecooperative agreements with eligibleof eligible land to include forestland and
ller may not exceed 25% of the valuea contingent right to enforce easement,entities under certain circumstances, andother land that contributes to the econo-
the easement. If multiple applicationsand requires the use of a conservationrequires the protection of federal invest-mic viability of an operation. Establishes
parable, USDA may not use costplan for highly erodible cropland. ment through an executory limitation. a certification process similar to the
ne to determine which ones will beRetains a federal contingent right ofLimits the amount USDA can share inHouse bill for all eligible entities. To
ed. enforcement or executory limitation in anthe costs of purchasing the easement tobecome certified, entities must have the
easement to ensure its enforcement. 50% of the appraised fair market valueauthority and resources to enforce
Provides cost-share assistance forand establishes minimum amountseasements, polices in place that are
purchasing an easement, but assistanceentities pay based on the amount ofconsistent with the purposes of the
may not exceed 50% of the appraised fairlandowner contributions. Requiresprogram, and clear procedures to protect
market value of the easement. The fairappraisals based on uniform standards ofthe integrity of the program. Includes a
market value is determined by anprofessional appraisal practice or anylimit on impervious surfaces consistent
appraisal using an industry-approvedother industry- approved standard. with agricultural activities, and clarifies
method. [Sec. 2110][Sec. 2371] agreement terms for certified and non-
iki/CRS-RL34696certified entities. [Sec. 2401-2402]
s.or the FSA, as amended,Mandatory funding for the renamed FarmMandatory funding for the FPP isProvides additional budget authority.
leakthorizes mandatory funding for theP at; $50 million in FY2002, $100and Ranchland Protection Program isauthorized at; $125 million in FY2008,authorized at $97 million annually fromFY2008 through FY2012. [Sec.Authorizes FPP funding: $97 million(FY2008); $121 million (FY2009);
://wiki in FY2003, $125 million ind FY2005, $100 million in$150 million in FY2009, $200 million inFY2010, $240 million in FY2011, and2401(a)(5)]$150 million (FY2010); $175 million(FY2011); and $200 million (FY2012).
httpd $97 million in FY2007. $280 million in FY2012. [Sec. 2401(c)][Sec. 2701]
.S.C. 3841(a)(4)]
assland Reserve Program
e 2002 farm bill amended Sec. 1238NSets the GRP enrollment ceiling at anAdds definitions: eligible entity, eligibleAdopts an acreage enrollment goal of an
the FSA to authorize the Grasslandsadditional 1.34 million acres, with at leastland, and permanent conservationadditional 1.22 million acres by 2012.
ve Program (GRP), setting60% of these acres to be enrolled usingeasement. Eligible entity and authorityIncludes 10-, 15-, and 20-year rental
ximum enrollment for at 2.0 million30 year rental agreements and easements.would allow for USDA to entercontracts and permanent easements.
(all enrolled parcels in at least 40[Sec. 2104(a) and (b)]cooperative agreements with entities toDeletes House priority for 60% of
tiguous acres). Requires 40% of landpurchase easements. Provides for GRPacreage in long term contracts; retains
rolled in 10-20 year, and 60% in 30enrollment options through a 30 yearlaw that 60% of funds would be
reements. [16 U.S.C. 3838n]contract, 30 year easement, anddedicated to easements, while 40% of
permanent easement. [Sec. 2381]funds would be dedicated to short term
contracts. Adopts Senate definition of
eligible entity, authority, and eligible
land (with technical corrections). Adopts
a priority for enrollment of CRP land

with a modification to clarify that the
priority applies upon expiration of the
CRP contract. [Sec. 2403]
comparable provision. Allows USDA to transfer certain landAllows USDA to transfer certain landAdopts House provision regarding the
currently in the CRP into the GRP, butcurrently in the CRP to be transferred tomethod for determining fair market value
limits the total in any calendar year to noa permanent easement under GRP, butwith a technical correction. [Sec. 2403]
more than 10% of GRP acres enrolled. limits the total transferred in any calendar
Requires USDA pay the lowest of fouryear to 10% of the total funding available
specified ways to calculate fair marketfor the GRP in that year. [Sec. 2381]
value. [Sec. 2104(c)]
of the FSA, as amended,No comparable provision.Specifies landowner duties and USDAAdopts Senate provisions with changes.
ecifies the duties and requirements ofconsiderations in evaluating offers. [Sec. 2403]
downers in the GRP, terms ofSpecifies how to determine compensation
ements and agreements, and howlevels and technical assistance. Specifies
iki/CRS-RL34696s are to be evaluated. [16terms/conditions that apply to GRP
g/wS.C. 3838o]contracts/easements, such as permittedand prohibited uses, minimum require-
s.orments for cooperative agreements, and
leakother considerations. [Sec. 2381]
://wikiparable provision.Authorizes a Grasslands ReserveNo comparable provision.Deletes House provision.
httpEnhancement Program. [Sec. 2104 (d)]
(a) of the FSA, as amended,Requires USDA to transfer the title of anProvides authority for USDA to enterAdopts the Senate amendment provision
ws USDA to transfer the title of aneasement to a private organizations or ainto cooperative agreements with eligiblefor cooperative agreements between
ement in the GRP to a state or privatestate. [Sec. 2104 (e)]entities for those entities to purchase,USDA and eligible entities with a
ganization. [16 U.S.C. 3838q(a)]own, enforce, and monitor easements. modification to the language specifying
[Sec. 2381]that eligible entities shall assume costs of
administering and enforcing easements.
Adopts a requirement for a contingent
right of enforcement. [Sec. 2403]
the FSA, as amended,No comparable provision. Total GRP funding limited to $240Deletes Senate provision.

its funding for the GRP to a total ofmillion for FY2008-12, with no acreage
illion from FY2003-07. [16 (Note: Sets acreage enrollment limit inenrollment limit. [Sec. 2401(a)(6]
S.C. 3841(a)(5)]GRP provisions, but no funding limit.)

ildlife Habitat Incentives Program
e 1996 farm bill amended Sec. 1240NReauthorizes WHIP through FY2012;Reauthorizes WHIP through FY2012;Limits program eligibility to focus on
the FSA to authorize Wildlife Habitatallows additional funds to be used toincreases portion of funds for long-termlands ‘’for the development of wildlife
centives Program (WHIP), providingmeet regulatory requirements thatagreements from 15% to 25% of funding;habitat on private agricultural land,
t-sharing to landowners who improvereduces the economic scope of therequires USDA to give priority tononindustrial private forest land, and
bitat, with up to 15% of the total madeproducer’s operation;” increases portionprojects that foster the goals of state,tribal lands.” Raises limit on cost-share
ailable in any years for agreements thatof funds for long-term agreements fromregional, and national fish and wildlifepayments for long-term projects to 25%
ger than 15 years. 15% to 25% of funding. [Sec. 2112]conservation plans. [Sec. 2393]and limits total payments to $50,000 per
.S.C. 3839bb-1]year. Allows USDA to provide priority
to projects that address issues raised by
State, regional, and national conservation
initiatives. [Sec. 2602]
the FSA, as amended,Mandatory funding for WHIP isSimilar to the House bill.Reauthorizes program through FY2012 at
thorizes mandatory funding raisingauthorized at $85 million annually[Sec. 2401(a)(8)]current levels. [Sec. 2701]
iki/CRS-RL34696 $15 million to $60 million betweenthrough FY2012. [Sec. 2401(e)]
g/w04, and $85 million annuallyY2005-07). [16 U.S.C. 3841(a)(7)]
leaker Conservation Programs
://wikie 2002 farm bill amended the FSA toReauthorizes discretionary funding forReauthorizes discretionary funding forReauthorizes the program through 2012.
httpovide grants to implement a Farmprogram through FY2012. [Sec. 2111]program through FY2012. [Sec. 2396][Sec. 2402]
ility Program. Authorizes
ationssuch sums as are
cessary through FY2007. [16 U.S.C.
e 1996 farm bill amended Sec.Extends authorization of appropriationsExtends authorization of appropriationsExtends authorization of appropriations
the FSA to authorize thethrough FY2012. [Sec. 2108]through FY2012. [Sec. 2392]through FY2012. [Sec. 2601]
nservation of Private Grazing Land
ram. Authorizes appropriations of
illion annually through FY2007.
.S.C, 3839bb(e)]
e 2002 farm bill amended Sec. 1240OAuthorizes $20 million annually inAuthorizes $20 million annually inAdopts Senate provision. [Sec. 2603]

the FSA to authorize a Grassrootsdiscretionary funds (FY2008-12) anddiscretionary funding (FY2008-12).
urce Water Protection Program toone-time funding of $10 million in[Sec. 2394]
sist state rural water associations thatmandatory funding to remain available
erate wellhead and groundwateruntil spent. [Sec. 2107]

ection programs. Authorizes
propriations of $5 million annually
ough FY2007. [16 U.S.C. 3839bb-2]
e 2002 farm bill amended Sec. 1240PExtends authorization of appropriationsExtends authorization of appropriationsReauthorizes program, and authorizes $5
the FSA to authorize a Great Lakesthrough FY2012. [Sec. 2109]through FY2012; specifies program willmillion annually FY2008-2012.
ram for Soil Erosion and Sedimenthelp implement recommendations of a[Sec. 2604]
ntrol, and provides $5 millioncollaborative restoration strategy, giving
lly through FY2007. [16 U.S.C.priority to certain projects. [Sec. 2395].
the Federal CropAdds Hawaii and Virginia to the list ofReauthorizes the program throughAdopts House provision with changes to
surance Act authorizes an Agriculturaleligible states. Allocates 50% of funds toFY2012; adds Idaho to the list of eligibleinclude Hawaii as an eligible State.
anagement Assistance (AMA) programUSDAs NRCS; 10% to Agriculturalstates. [Sec. 2601]Provides an additional $25million in
r listed states that have historic lowMarketing Service (for organicmandatory funding (FY2008-2012).
rticipation rates in the Federal Cropcertification assistance); and 40% to the[Sec. 2801]
iki/CRS-RL34696surance Program. [7 U.S.C. 1524(b)]Risk Management Agency. [Sec. 2201]
g/w. 1528-1537 of the 1981 farm billAmends RC&D program to provide aSimilar to House provision, clarifyingAdopts Senate provision. [Sec. 2805]
s.orgriculture and Food Act of 1981, P.L.designated coordinator to assist eachthat an area plan must be developed
leak7) authorizes the Resourceapproved area. Eliminates requirementthrough a locally led process, and that the
://wikinservation and Development ProgramC&D) to develop and implement ato submit a program evaluation to theHouse and Senate Agricultureplanning process, and that the planningprocess must be conducted by a local
httpional plan to address conservation,Committees before June 30, 2005. council. Provides for a coordinator to
ter/land management, or community[Sec. 2202]improve technical assistance to councils,
elopment. [16 U.S.C. 1528-1527]as designated by USDA. [Sec. 2605]
) of the Watershed ProtectionAuthorizes $50 million annually inAuthorizes such sums as necessary inAdopts House provision and provides
d Flood Prevention Act (P.L. 106-472)mandatory funding (FY2009-12);discretionary funding annually (FY2008-$100 million in mandatory funding for
thorizes discretionary and mandatoryextends FY2007 discretionary funding12). [Sec. 2604]FY2009 to remain available until
ing for a Small Watershedlevel through FY2012. [Sec. 2203]expended. [Sec. 2803]
abilitation Program. [16 U.S.C. 1012]
e 2002 farm bill amended Sec.Annual funding for regional equity isAnnual funding for regional equity isAdopts Senate provision with changes.
the FSA to authorize araised to at least $15 million [Sec. 2404]raised to at least $15 million, and crop[Sec. 2703]

ram to promote regional equity,insurance payments are added to this
ing each state a total of at least $12calculation. Directs USDA to update
n annually from certain mandatorystate allocation formulas. [Sec. 2402]
rams. [16 U.S.C. 3841d]

e 2002 farm bill amended Sec. 1242 ofExpands use of third party providersExpands use of third party providersAdopts Senate provision with changes
to authorize delivery ofusing contracts. Specifies providersusing contracts. Directs USDA toregarding the delivery of technical
nical assistance directly or using ashould get at least prevailing marketdevelop national certification criteria andassistance. [Sec. 2706]
rd party provider and specifies howrates, calls for a review/update of allapprove established state standards.
iders are to be approved by USDA. technical assistance specifications,Provides funding through each
thorizes cooperative agreements withincluding the needs of specialty cropconservation program, specifies
n-federal entities to provide technicalproducers. [Sec. 2402] minimum and maximum contract terms,
sistance. [16 U.S.C. 3842]among other considerations. Includes
similar provisions for specialty crop
producers as the House bill. [Sec. 2404]
e 2002 farm bill amended Sec. 1244(a)Expands access to program incentives toRequires USDA to develop a streamlinedAdopts House provision with changes to
the FSA to authorize USDA to provideinclude socially disadvantaged andapplication process for conservationinclude certain acreage limitations and
entives to beginning farmers/rancherslimited resource farmers and ranchers. programs. Provides for Safe Harborexemptions, and also a pollinator
d Indian tribes to participate inRequires USDA to develop a streamlinedassurances to the landowner under theprotection provision. Requires USDA
nservation programs. [16 U.S.C.application process. [Sec. 2405] Endangered Species Act. Allowsreport to Congress on the completion of
iki/CRS-RL34696producers to apply for programs throughthe requirements not later than 1 year
g/wa producer organization. [Sec. 2405]after enactment. [Sec. 2708]
s.ore 1990 farm bill amended Sec. 1261Specifies STC have at least 12 producersAdds non-industrial private forest landAdopts House provision with changes to
leak the FSA to authorize state technicalrepresenting agriculture. Removesowners to the list of groups representedrequire USDA to develop standard
://wikimittees (STC), including membersd interests to be represented, outliningrequirement for persons knowledgeableabout conservation. Adds new provisionson the STC. Requires USDA to developstandard operating procedures to be usedcommittee operating procedures, updatesthe names of participating agencies, and
httpties, and specifying that committeescreating subcommittees issue the State technical committee in thedeletes the requirement for establishing
isory with no implementation orDescribes responsibilities in more generaldevelopment of technical guidelines forspecific issue-area subcommittees.
forcement authority. [16 U.S.C. 3861-terms. [Sec. 2408] the implementation of the conservationRequires that public notice be given for
provisions of this title. Makes local workmeetings of the State techni