By Robert Pore
robert.pore@theindependent.com

"It's pretty clear we won't make the April 18 deadline," Nelson said. "We still have a number of challenges to overcome on priorities on issues, such as energy funding and funding for emergency disaster relief."

Both the House and Senate Wednesday passed a one-week extension of the current Farm Bill to April 25.

Rep. Adrian Smith, R-Neb., a member of the House Agriculture Committee, said he is frustrated about the additional extension of the Farm Bill deadline.

"Just a little over a month ago, Congress had to pass the second extension of the Farm Bill to avoid its expiration," he said.

Smith said it has been more than eight months since the House first passed the Farm Bill and nearly four months since the Senate passed its version.

"I'm frustrated the process has been stalled since December," Smith said. "Producers in Nebraska and throughout the country have begun planting without any certainty or promise of the supports they count on to continue their operations."

On July 27, 2007, the House passed its version of the Farm Bill (H.R. 2419) by a vote of 231-191. On Dec. 14, 2007, the Senate passed its version of the Farm Bill by a vote of 79-14.

But the House and Senate have yet to reach an agreement on a final bill.

"While there has been progress on ironing out the differences between the two bills, there are still disagreements over how to pay for increased spending contained in the bill," Smith said.

Nelson, a member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, which drafted the Senate's version of the Farm Bill, said it has been "very difficult" to get agreement between the Senate conferees and the House conferees, who have just recently been appointed.

"The ball is clearly still in the air," Nelson said. "My hope is that we will be able to get it resolved. It's less a partisan issue in Congress, but it's an issue with the White House threatening to veto virtually anything that the Senate and the House put together because whatever we do will exceed the baseline spending that the White House has put there."

With crop prices high, farmers' input costs soaring and food supplies tight, Nelson said the $4 billion emergency disaster assistance in the Farm Bill could be vital this year because of the volatility in the grain trade if weather poses an immediate threat to crop production.

"If that is not included in the bill, we know there will be some disaster, somewhere in the continental United States this year," he said.

In the past, when natural disaster impacted crop production, Congress had to muster up an ad hoc emergency disaster spending bill that was outside the budget.

The $4 billion emergency disaster assistance included in the proposed Farm Bill is budgeted to address any potential crop disaster that could happen in the future.

"It adds to the debt, it takes time and it involves a lot of politics in getting enough states included to get enough votes to pass," Nelson said. "So there's a lot of rewarding of people who are marginally affected in order to get money to those who are significantly impacted."

Nelson said along with the threat of a White House veto, there's a certain amount of conflict between urban and rural interests in the House about Farm Bill priorities.

"I'm also upset about a number of changes made to the Senate-passed Farm Bill and some of the changes that need to be made that haven't been," he said.

For example, Nelson is concerned that there's no cap on the amount of government money paid to farmers. He also said cuts to the Farm Bill energy title and rural development title are disappoint- ing.

"But I'm glad that a lot of the nutrition and conservation titles are receiving additional funding, though," Nelson said.