Skip to content
Sign up free
News

Sustainable agriculture a low priority for Congress

By Chris Hinyub

2-minute read

We know that both parties have a love affair with military spending. This point has never  been so plainly demonstrated as it was last Friday night, when Congress approved a 6-month Continuing Resolution to overcome a budget impasse. The budget that was approved to keep the federal government running not only took 4 billion from domestic programs to spend on additional “defense,” it inordinately stole from programs that serve organic and sustainable farmers. While agricultural programs could provide a real chance for sustainable job growth, they're never deemed a high priority.

Here is a rundown of how agriculture will be affected by the new budget:

Funding for the National Sustainable Agriculture Information Service (ATTRA), a program that provides information and technical assistance to sustainable farmers, educators and county Extension agents, was never restored after being eliminated in an earlier bill.

The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC) petitioned for continued federal support for ATTRA when Congress released the 6 month draft CR last Tuesday. It was then that NSAC said in a press release:

“The justification for cutting ATTRA appears to be a misperception that it is an earmark. Indeed, like earmarks, many Senators and Members of Congress request funding for ATTRA every year, as they do for many programs. However, unlike earmarks for projects in specific congressional districts, ATTRA is a nationwide program, authorized in the 2008 Farm Bill, and it has been included in presidential budgets through many administrations over several decades. As provided in the Farm Bill, it is funded through a cooperative agreement between USDA and a national non-profit organization with expertise in sustainable agriculture and information delivery. NSAC strongly objects to cutting this exemplary program that for over 20 years has provided important research-based information to people nationwide annually, many of whom have no other reliable source of information.”

Spending on conservation programs such as the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) and the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) were greatly reduced. This means that for the remainder of fiscal year 2011, the USDA's largest working lands program will be short $500 million in its continuing efforts to improve the soil, water, and air quality of farms in sensitive areas. Sustainable farmers will also find it more difficult to maintain existing conservation systems.

What's harder to justify is the fact that the government would break the terms of the five-year CSP contracts that farmers had already signed in '09 and '10, and even attempt to get a refund on some payments. Those who signed up for the program in 2011 will be subject to the reneging as those folks won't receive their first payments until the next fiscal year.

Organic advocates will be happy to learn that the Organic Transitions Integrated Research Program was saved at the last minute after it was targeted for elimination, although, it will see a 20 percent reduction in funding. The National Organic Program is also here to stay.

Tags: News

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Get IVN’s Free Weekly Newsletter:Get IVN’s Free Newsletter

Get IVN’s Free Weekly Newsletter:Get IVN’s Free Newsletter

Nonpartisan Issues. Diverse Perspectives.

Check your inbox and click the link to confirm.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

Sustainable agriculture a low priority for Congress

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us