<< Reduce USDA?s 2,700 county office locations by 50 percent>>
Essential services are no longer being provided. The former SCS (Soil Convservation Service) has been combined with other agencies and renamed the NRCS as a cost saving measure. The goals of the SCS are no longer being met, and the primary goal of the SCS has apparently been abandoned. With current loss of topsoil rates in the US we could be looking at the destruction of the american farm industry within 50 years. In some communities it would be possible to reduce the number of field offices but I highly doubt the 50% number and would rather see a number from the GAO. With a reduction in the number of field office will comes a loss of services and potential damage to the long term future of the US. These offices were deployed as a result of the dust bowl in the 30's and have a goal of preventing similar disasters in our farming communities.
<<Eliminate the Export Enhancement Program (EEP)>>
Currently worldwide the US has on average subsidized prices for wheat. Without these subsidies the american wheat market would be destroyed and nearly all wheat farming in this country would cease. American strategic planners feel that this would harm US interests in negotiations if we become dependent on foreign sources of food. But hey, lets save a buck and become someones wheat gimp like we are OPEC's oil gimp.
<<Reform Milk Marketing Orders>>
I don't know anything about this and I don't consider your source impartial so I won't conceed the point.
<<Eliminate the Sugar Subsidy>>
Absolutely, they have been trying to get rid of it for years, the sugar lobby is quite powerfull though.
<<Eliminate the Market Access Program (MAP)>>
The MAP program insures the US farm industry stays competitive on the world stage and in business. This program is essential from a strategic defense perspective in that without it our farming industry would be eliminated by cheaper overseas imports and in a time of war without internal sources the US could be put into a position of compromise to avoid starving.
<<Eliminate Electrification and Telephone Subsidies Provided by the Rural Utilities Service (RUS)>>
Oh I was hoping you would bring the REA up. So you don't live in a rural community so why should you care if they have electrical or phone service right? Guess what, although the number of rural communities has decreased the need for the low interest loans provided to the rural coop electrical and telephone utilties has not. Believe it or not, this program has been scaled back and the 1million dollars a year it costs is a pittance to ensure that rural communities have access to electricity and telephone service.
<<Eliminate the Peanut Subsidy>>
Don't know enough about this, and again your source is NOT impartial.
<<Who's laughing now?>>
Me, at you.
<<I've proven I have the facts in my court while you've just made a lot of noise.>>
You haven't proven anything other than you believe everything that is written and can cut and paste from a website. Why don't you go talk to a farmer some day and become familiar with the real facts and not one sided looks at only the numbers. Looking at strictly numbers on any budget in the government you can't justify any of them, it's not until you examine the reasons for the spending that you become educated, something you haven't achieved.
<<Now it's your turn to response. I want to know exactly where the Dept. of Ag. is UNDERFUNDED, as you so claim. Put up or shut up.>>
Yet, the USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service has allowed imports of meat and poultry from 35 countries without verification that their Salmonella testing is equivalent to the US, spurring a recent Congressional vote to halt meat imports by March of 2000.(47) These failures are, in part, due to underfunding at the USDA and other food safety agencies.
http://www.coalitionforconsumerrights.org/studies/OnTheTable.htm
DeWaal and others contend the system is too inefficient, and that years of underfunding have left the FDA with a food safety program that is little more than a recall agency for contaminated foods.
http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9704/03/food.safety/
Discussion of test unreliability: During discussion of tests, two valid concerns were expressed: the unreliability of present tests, and the variability of results from lab to lab. Reliable tests are a concern to PARA because to clean up the herds, we need tests showing that a cow is truly Johne's negative or positive with a high level of confidence. The reason why such tests are not available is because of chronic underfunding of research.
http://www.crohns.org/media/pr151098.htm
In addition, the Committee has not fully funded the President's request for the Rural Community Advancement Program (RCAP), underfunding direct loans for water and wastewater and for community facilities. These loans provide the community infrastructure needed to improve the quality of life of rural Americans, and often finance the vital ingredient for diversifying the rural economy. The Committee bill would result in an estimated 35 fewer water and wastewater facilities serving 50,000 rural residents, and 75 fewer rural health clinics, police and fire stations, and child care facilities being built. Furthermore, for the RCAP program to be adaptable to unique local economic development needs, as envisioned in its 1996 Farm Bill authorization, the Senate should strike the Committee's limitation on the flexibility to transfer funds among programs and allow the program to be implemented as authorized.
http://clinton4.nara.gov/textonly/OMB/legislative/sap/105-2/S2159-s.html
Over the last decade, many USDA offices and Agriculture Departments of Land Grant Universities have been underfunded. This underfunding has created an environment that is ripe for inappropriate, scientifically-insupportable, and even unlawful events.
http://www.neosoft.com/~colburn/pabill.html
The Administration strongly opposes a number of reductions to important conservation and environmental programs contained in the Committee bill, which would reduce benefits to all Americans by cutting or eliminating key activities proposed to be carried out through the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). The bill and report include highly objectionable language prohibiting NRCS funds from being used for climate change, biomass, urban resources partnerships, most of the American Heritage Rivers (AHR) initiative, or the Community Federal Information Partnership. These actions would harm local community development and environmental restoration efforts. The AHR is an interagency initiative that applies coordinated Federal resources to benefit all river communities, helps communities evaluate their needs and identify funding sources, and cuts red tape so they can promptly implement priority practices. In addition, NRCS soil databases provide the foundation for the Nation's vital soil carbon sequestration efforts. The Committee's action could limit the ability of all USDA agencies that rely on NRCS data to advance valuable research on the effects of climate change on agriculture and potential ways for farmers to adapt to climate change.
These restrictions, coupled with the $70 million reduction to the request for NRCS conservation operations salaries and expenses, would result in a significant step backwards in efforts to improve land stewardship capabilities of farmers and ranchers. Furthermore, the Administration strongly objects to the Committee's reduction in authorized mandatory funding for the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) to $174 million. This represents a cut of $26 million from current law and $151 million from the President's request. This program is vitally important in assisting farmers and ranchers in improving their agricultural operations while benefiting all Americans through cleaner water and air, and it is an important component of the Clean Water Action Plan. Coupled with the Committee's funding only $9 million of the requested $48 million increase in discretionary funds for the Plan, this reduction would severely impede progress on cleaning up our Nation's waters. We urge the House to eliminate the EQIP reduction and fully fund the Administration's request for the Clean Water Action Plan.
http://www.agiweb.org/gap/legis106/approps_ag2001.html
By far the biggest long term underfunding of the USDA is the cut's in research $$'s over the past decade. This research is fundemental to the long term growth and development of new farming techniques and understanding of natural forces. This research is something private companies are unwilling and/or unable to accomplish on their own because of the lack of long term rewards to the private sector, but this research does provide long term benefits to society at large. It is very unfortunate that we have shortsighted politicians in this country that will sell our future out for the present.
<<Also, please tell me Ravhin, why don't you want to trim off this Dept.'s fat?>>
Oh I'm not opposed to eliminating ineffecienies, but I'm opposed to people like you campaigning for the elimination of programs you are undeducated about.
<<Impartial, yeah I bet. There must not be ANY connection between big business and the gov't there. U.S. history has shown time and again the gov't can be swayed, bought, influenced, or whatever by any idiot with a load of $$, or someone with a strong public opinion.>>
Name one drug that was approved for sale in the US because it's approval was purchased? Guess what, you will be unable to. You have NO understanding of how the FDA works.
<<I'm not saying that the FDA should neccesarily eliminated, but not run by the gov't. It should be a private business, or collection of business' that check out what goes in you. Big daddy government is too nortorious to trust with something so vital to all those who rely on it.>>
History is littered with the dead bodies of what happens when you trust private enterprise with critical issues of Life and community safety. Profits become more important than the lives at issue. Corporations number one issue will always be the bottom line even in the case of human life. If you think corporations can be trusted with drug approval maybe you should do some research on thalidamide, a drug the FDA was able to prevent being sold but that was sold in Europe and Canada.
Facebook
Twitter