U.S. prepared to cut its farm subsidies by 60 percent

[norml]

U.S. prepared to cut its farm subsidies by 60 percent By Sophie Walker and Doug Palmer
Sun Oct 9, 7:20 PM ET


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States is prepared to cut its most trade-distorting farm subsidies by 60 percent in the next five years and eventually eliminate them but wants deeper cuts by the European Union and Japan, U.S. Trade Representative Rob Portman (news, bio, voting record) said on Sunday.

Striking a deal to cut rich nations' agricultural supports and tariffs is seen as vital if world trade talks are to make progress in lowering barriers on goods and services globally and agree on a blueprint for doing so at a World Trade Organization meeting in Hong Kong in December.

Washington has been under pressure for weeks to come forward with a plan but U.S. negotiators have been loathe to move without more progress on how much other countries would cut their farm tariffs to open their markets to American farmers.

In an opinion piece to be published in the Financial Times on Monday, Portman said the United States wanted to see steep tariff cuts during the next five years, starting from 55 percent up to 90 percent in the highest tariffs in rich countries. In a second stage, tariffs should be brought down to zero, he said in the article, the text of which was obtained by Reuters in advance of publication.

Portman and other American trade officials will host a meeting on Monday in Zurich of their counterparts from the European Union, Brazil, India and a dozen other key World Trade Organization members.


snip


http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051009/ts_nm/trade_wto_agriculture_dc

[salin]

1. somehow I bet the cuts will disproportionately go to smaller farms

with the huge corporate "agribusiness" farms still taking the lions' share (proportionally) of aid.

[SoCalDem]

12. Exactly.. a reduction in subsidies to ADM

who didn't need it in the first place, will not have much of an effect, BUT the loss of a subsidy to a 70 yr old farmer who's hanging on by a fingernail will be the impetus to him to SELL his farm for peanuts TO ADM..

The agribusiness big "farms' will end up with MORE in the final analysis, which is probably why they "allowed" *² to do this in the first place..

[HereSince1628]

2. I am guessing they will hit conservation programs hardest

The geographically greatest human impact on the environment is agriculture and many ag support programs require farmers to comply with environmentally friendly farming practices.

As the republicans have strong dislike for anything looking like environmental regulation I expect these programs to get hit first.

[muriel_volestrangler]

3. There are strings, of course. What, you're surprised?

"The US has made what will be perceived as a significant offer, that puts pressure on the EU and allows it to claim the moral high ground," said Peter Hardstaff, policy director of the World Development Movement.

The US is offering developing countries a stark choice, Mr Hardstaff argued. In order to gain concessions on farm subsidies, poorer countries would have to agree to sweeping cuts on industrial tariffs and open their markets to service firms.

"It's a choice between short-term gain on agriculture and long-term development opportunities," Mr Hardstaff said.

Development experts have also warned against a "reshuffling of subsidies". Under the current negotiating framework, subsidies deemed "distorting" will be subject to the full rigour of any WTO agreement, but "non-distorting" subsidies are effectively exempt. In fact less than half of EU and American support to agriculture is now covered by effective WTO rules, and that share is shrinking.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,3604,1588886,00.html

[Laelth]

4. Very strange, indeed.

I find it unlikely that the BFEE would do anything to harm agribusiness and the US plains states (solidly R). Cutting farm subsidies would do that. Look for the R's to keep dragging their feet on this. Expect no treaty.

-Laelth


Edit:Laelth--clarity.

[Canuckistanian]

5. Let's see if Big Sugar subsidies are cut

I'll bet there'll be a secret increase for them.

[MadHound]

6. Another shot in the long war against small, family farmers

As if GM crops, soaring energy prices, NAFTA, and a whole host of other initiatives aren't enough, now they're looks to cut farm subsidies also.

This is just the latest in a long line of actions designed to promote corporate farming at the expense of small and organic farms. There has been a decided push in recent years to had over control of our food production to corporate America. While many farmers have continued to hang tough, it is unclear how much longer they can keep fighting the good fight.

If you don't want your food supply in the hands of corporate America, please, please, buy local, and write your reps.

[jwirr]

9. I heard from family in farm country that corn farmers are

chopping silage for their own needs and then plowing the rest under. They cannot afford the cost of energy to take it out. This will mean more bankruptcy and higher meat prices. What a mess.

[MadHound]

11. It depends on where your family is in farm country

Much of Missori, Illinois and Iowa were hit with a huge drought this year that wiped out most of the corn crop. Most of the farmers around here are putting their corn to silage for that reason, not due to energy costs. Might be why your family is also, but the costs of energy is also possible.

Either way, I hope your family weathers this storm. Energy prices are going to wipe out a lot of farmers, and the price for food is going to continue to increase across the board. Too much of our food supply is predicated on energy prices, since petroleum is horribly intertwined with most of the food that is produced. Organic farmers are faring better vis-a-vis energy prices since their operations aren't as energy intensive. However they are facing fun things like GM crops cross pollinating theirs, and some serious governmental setbacks. Corporate America doesn't want the competition from organics, so they are doing everything in their power to wipe out the organic sector. Sad, very sad.

[Toots]

7. Another form of outsourcing

I like paying less for food. This is one "big guvment" program I would like to keep. Stop making bullets and start producing more food.....Government should be there for it's people and if feeding the nation is not a vital concern then :shrug:

[Joey Liberal]

8. The Farmers asked for it by voting republican

I do not feel sorry for them at all..............Here in Oklahoma, which is a farming state, every single county voted for Bush in 2004. They deserve what they are about to get.

[Javaman]

10. Remember the U.S. subsidizes the crop, not the farmer...

This is going to help the agracorps. If we did what the Europeans do, which is subsidize the farmer, then it would be strictly a concern for the farmer. Given the way it's currently set up, the farmer always gets the short end of the deal.

If we tried switching to subsidizing the farmer, you would see the agracorps whine, squeal and flex their lobbing power. It would never happen.

All this does is kill the farmer and more than likely, force foreclosure and allow the agracorps to come in a buy up their land and allow the farmer to continue to farm it. Hence, the further ballooning of sharecropping and the continued rise of the corporate serf.

Realistically, there should be no subsidizing at all, here or in Europe. But the fact remains that agracorps hold such power now that cutting subsidies is a boon for them and a squeezing out of the farmer.