|
Showing 1 - 6 of
6 matches in All Departments
The federal government has long provided credit assistance to
farmers, in response to insufficient lending in rural areas or a
desire for targeted lending to disadvantaged groups. One federal
lender is the Farm Service Agency (FSA) in the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA). It issues direct loans to farmers who cannot
qualify for regular credit, and guarantees repayment of loans made
by other lenders. Thus, FSA is called a lender of last resort. Of
about $240 billion in total farm debt, FSA provides about 2%
through direct loans, and guarantees about another 4% of loans.
Another federally related lender is the Farm Credit System (FCS), a
cooperatively owned, federally chartered lender with a statutory
mandate to serve agriculture-related borrowers. FCS makes loans to
creditworthy farmers, and is not a lender of last resort. FCS
accounts for about 39% of farm debt. Commercial banks are the
largest farm lender and hold 44% of total farm debt.
The potential of terrorist attacks against agricultural targets
(agroterrorism) is increasingly recognized as a national security
threat, especially after the events of September 11, 2001.
Agroterrorism is a subset of bioterrorism, and is defined as the
deliberate introduction of an animal or plant disease with the goal
of generating fear, causing economic losses, and/or undermining
stability. Attacks against agriculture are not new, and have been
conducted or considered by both nation-states and substate
organizations throughout history. The results of an agroterrorist
attack may include major economic crises in the agricultural and
food industries, loss of confidence in government, and possibly
human casualties. Humans could be at risk in terms of food safety
or public health, especially if the chosen disease is transmissible
to humans (zoonotic). Public opinion may be particularly sensitive
to a deliberate outbreak of disease affecting the food supply.
Public confidence in government could be eroded if authorities
appear unable to prevent such an attack or to protect the
population's food supply. Agriculture has several characteristics
that pose unique problems for managing the threat. Agricultural
production is geographically disbursed in unsecured environments.
Livestock are frequently concentrated in confined locations, and
then transported and commingled with other herds. Pest and disease
outbreaks can quickly halt economically important exports. Many
veterinarians lack experience with foreign animal diseases that are
resilient and endemic in foreign countries. Agriculture and food
production generally have received less attention in
counter-terrorism and homeland security efforts. But more recently,
agriculture has garnered more attention in the expanding field of
terrorism studies. Laboratory and response systems are being
upgraded to address the reality of agroterrorism.
The desire by many to redesign farm policy and reallocate the
remaining farm bill baseline-in a sequestration and deficit
reduction environment-is driving much of the farm bill debate this
year. Several high-profile congressional and Administration
proposals for deficit reduction have specifically targeted
agricultural programs with mandatory funding. The political
dynamics of sequestration and broader deficit reduction goals leave
open difficult questions about how much and when the farm bill
baseline may be reduced. In this context, Congress faces difficult
choices about how much total support to provide for agriculture,
and how to allocate that support among competing constituencies.
Funding to write the next farm bill is based on Congressional
Budget Office (CBO) baseline projections of the cost of farm bill
programs, and on varying budgetary assumptions about whether
programs will continue. The CBO baseline is an estimation
(projection) at a particular point in time of what federal spending
on mandatory programs likely would be under current law. In May
2013, CBO projected that the current farm bill programs, if they
were to continue beyond the 2008 farm bill, would cost $973 billion
over the next 10 years (FY2014-FY2023). This baseline estimate
already has been reduced by $6.4 billion over the same period
because of the sequestration ordered on March 1, 2013. When new
bills are proposed that affect mandatory spending, their impact (or
"score") is measured as a difference from the baseline. This
baseline and scoring process sets the mandatory budget for
considering a new farm bill. The Senate-reported farm bill, S. 954,
would reduce spending by $17.9 billion (-1.8%); and the
House-reported bill, H.R. 1947, would reduce it by $33.4 billion
(-3.4%). CBO noted that if sequestration was repealed and the
baseline was increased by the $6.4 billion adjustment that has been
taken, then the farm bill proposals would reduce spending by $24
billion (Senate) and $40 billion (House) over the next 10 years.
Moreover, some popular 2008 farm bill programs do not have a
baseline to continue, and will require additional budgetary offsets
if they are included in a new farm bill.
|
You may like...
Loot
Nadine Gordimer
Paperback
(2)
R398
R330
Discovery Miles 3 300
Morbius
Jared Leto, Matt Smith, …
DVD
R179
Discovery Miles 1 790
|