Expiring Farm Bill Programs Without a
Budget Baseline
Jim Monke
Specialist in Agricultural Policy
March 30, 2012
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R41433
CRS Report for Congress
Pr
epared for Members and Committees of Congress

Expiring Farm Bill Programs Without a Budget Baseline

Summary
The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-246, the 2008 farm bill) authorizes
most federal farm and food policies. Its authorizations generally expire at the end of FY2012, or
with the 2012 crop year for the farm commodity programs. People are discussing the future of
agricultural policy, and the House and Senate Agriculture Committees are preparing legislation
for a possible 2012 farm bill.
The farm bill provides the mandatory funding for many farm bill programs, including the farm
commodity programs and some nutrition, conservation, research, bioenergy, and rural
development programs. Funding to write the next farm bill will be based on the baseline
projection of the cost of these farm bill programs by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), and
on varying budgetary assumptions about whether programs will continue.
Some farm bill programs have baseline beyond the end of the 2008 farm bill, while others do not.
Those with continuing baseline essentially have built-in future funding if policymakers decide the
programs should continue in their current form. However, 37 programs that received mandatory
funds during the 2008 farm bill are not assumed to continue from a budgetary perspective
because they do not have a budgetary baseline beyond FY2012. If policymakers want to continue
these programs in the next farm bill, they will need to pay for the programs with offsets.
Depending on the approach used to estimate a cost to extend the 37 programs for five years, an
estimated $9 billion to $14 billion of offsets from other sources may be needed. This is nearly 3%
of the $507 billion five-year CBO baseline for farm bill programs (FY2013-FY2017), or 13% of
the $108 billion five-year baseline if the nutrition title is excluded. Finding this level of offsets
may be a difficult task in a tight budget environment, especially when many observers believe
that some of the farm bill baseline may be lost to deficit reduction.
The 37 provisions without baseline beyond FY2012 are spread among 12 of the 2008 farm bill’s
15 titles. The title with the most such provisions is the energy title (8), followed by conservation
(5), nutrition (5), and horticulture and organic agriculture (5). Just two of the provisions—the
agricultural disaster assistance program and the Wetlands Reserve Program, each with uncertainty
about future costs—account for about 80% of the value of programs without future baseline.
Congressional Research Service

Expiring Farm Bill Programs Without a Budget Baseline

Contents
Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 1
Programs Without Baseline After FY2012 ...................................................................................... 2
Programs Grouped by Title of the 2008 Farm Bill.................................................................... 3
Programs Grouped by Degree of Cost Uncertainty................................................................... 4
Programs Grouped by Duration of Use of Mandatory Funding................................................ 9

Tables
Table 1. Titles in the 2008 Farm Bill Containing Programs
Without Baseline After FY2012 ................................................................................................... 3
Table 2. Programs in the 2008 Farm Bill Without Budget Baseline After FY2012......................... 5

Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 10
Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................... 10

Congressional Research Service

Expiring Farm Bill Programs Without a Budget Baseline

Introduction
The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-246)—the 2008 farm bill—authorizes
and determines most federal farm and food policies.1 The farm bill also provides funding for
mandatory programs because they were paid for at the time the farm bill was enacted.2
The farm bill’s mandatory programs include the farm commodity programs, some nutrition and
conservation programs, and various smaller research, bioenergy, and rural development programs.
These amounts are shown in the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) budget scores and baseline
projections for mandatory spending (direct spending). CBO develops the baseline under the
supervision of the House and Senate Budget Committees.3
The CBO baseline projection is an estimate at a particular point in time of what federal spending
on mandatory programs likely would be under current law. The baseline serves as a benchmark or
starting point for the budget. When new provisions are introduced that affect mandatory spending,
their impact (or “score”) is measured as a difference from the baseline. Increases in cost above the
baseline may be subject to budget constraints such as PAYGO.4
Some farm bill programs have baseline beyond the end of the 2008 farm bill, while others do not.
This funding issue—and the difficult budget dynamics that it might cause for the next farm bill—
was identified by the chief economist of the House Agriculture Committee in early 2009.5 It
subsequently has been mentioned by members in hearings.6
From a budget perspective, programs with a continuing baseline are assumed to go on under
current law, and have their own funding if policymakers want them to continue.7 That future
funding also may be used as a budgetary offset to fund other programs or for deficit reduction.
However, 37 programs that received mandatory funding in the 2008 farm bill do not have any
baseline beyond the end of the farm bill (Table 1 and Table 2) and are not assumed to continue
under budget rules. To continue them for five years in the next farm bill, an estimated $9 billion
to $14 billion may be needed and offsets from other programs could be necessary.

1 For more background on the scope of the farm bill, see CRS Report RS22131, What Is the “Farm Bill”?.
2 Actual outlays in the future may be higher or lower depending on market conditions or participation, with no
corresponding costs being charged or savings being credited to the agriculture committees. The farm bill also makes
“authorizations of appropriations” for discretionary programs, but these funds are paid for in the appropriations process
rather than in the farm bill (see CRS Report R41964, Agriculture and Related Agencies: FY2012 Appropriations).
3 For more information, see CRS Report 98-560, Baselines and Scorekeeping in the Federal Budget Process.
4 See CRS Report R41157, The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010: Summary and Legislative History.
5 Craig Jagger, Chief Economist of House Agriculture Committee (now minority), slides 53-54 in “Understanding the
Congressional Budget Process and How It Affects Farm Policy,” presentation to the University of Arkansas, April 21,
2009, at http://agribus.uark.edu/Craig_Jagger_lecture.ppt. “[S]topping funding early means that the program does not
earn a baseline. Without a baseline, there are no funds for continuing the program in future legislation.… New funding
will need to be found for the 2012 farm bill to continue programs that were stopped after five years.”
6 For example: Frank Lucas, Chair of House Agriculture Committee (then ranking member), at “Hearing to Preview
U.S. Agriculture Policy in Advance of the 2012 Farm Bill,” April 21, 2010. “This next farm bill is shaping up to be one
of the most difficult.... There are many challenges. Not least of all is the uncertainty of the budget parameters.… Many
of the popular conservation programs do not have funding past 2012. In essence, we already start with a deficit.”
7 For example, the March 2012 CBO baseline for the farm commodity programs, conservation programs, crop
insurance, and trade programs is available at http://cbo.gov/publication/43053.
Congressional Research Service
1

Expiring Farm Bill Programs Without a Budget Baseline

Programs Without Baseline After FY2012
Thirty-seven provisions in the 2008 farm bill received mandatory budget authority but are not
assumed to receive such funding in the budget baseline beyond the end of the farm bill. If
policymakers want to continue these programs in the next farm bill, they will need to pay for the
programs with offsets from other sources.
The amount of mandatory funds that might be needed to extend these 37 programs is estimated
here to be about $9 billion to $14 billion over a five-year period (Table 1), depending on the
approach to estimate costs.8 The cost was separately estimated in 2010 by a House Agriculture
Committee economist at $9 billion.9 These amounts are nearly 3% of the $507 billion five-year
CBO baseline for farm bill programs (FY2013-FY2017, based on the March 2012 baseline), or
13% of the $108 billion five-year baseline if the nutrition title is excluded.10 It would cost even
more to try to extend the programs for a longer time so that they could have baseline beyond the
next farm bill.
Normally, a program that receives mandatory funding in the last year of its authorization will be
assumed to continue at that level of funding in the budget baseline as if there were no change in
policy. This allows major farm bill provisions such as the farm commodity programs or nutrition
assistance to be reauthorized periodically without assuming that funding will cease or following
zero-based budgeting. However, some programs may not be assumed to continue in the budget
baseline beyond the end of a farm bill because
• the program did not receive new mandatory budget authority during the last year
of a farm bill, or
• the baseline during the last year of a farm bill is below a minimum $50 million
scoring threshold that is needed to continue a baseline, or
• the budget and agriculture committees did not give the program a baseline in the
years beyond the farm bill in order to reduce the program’s 10-year cost at the
time the farm bill was written.11
The 37 programs without baseline beyond FY2012 can be grouped in several ways: by title of the
farm bill, by the degree of uncertainty in the cost, and by the duration of the use of mandatory
funding in the 2008 farm bill.

8 Estimates are derived under two different approaches discussed in the next section: (1) the CBO cost at the time of
enactment in 2008, and (2) the most recent CBO baseline of program costs.
9 In 2010, Craig Jagger, Chief Economist of the House Agriculture Committee (now minority), estimated about $9
billion as the cost to continue programs without baseline, using the March 2010 CBO data. See “Federal Budget Issues
& the Next Farm Bill,” Farm Foundation Forum, “Budget Implications for the Next Farm Bill,” September 14, 2010,
slide 45, at http://www.farmfoundation.org/news/articlefiles/363-Jagger_Budget_Color_Farm%20Found_09-14-10.pdf.
10 For more background on farm bill baselines and actual spending, see CRS Report R41195, Actual Farm Bill
Spending and Cost Estimates.
11 Section 257 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (P.L. 99-177, 2 U.S.C. 907), as
amended, specifies that expiring mandatory spending programs are assumed to continue in the budget baseline if they
have outlays of more than $50 million in the current year and were established before the Balanced Budget Act of
1997. Programs established later are not automatically assumed to continue, and are assessed program by program in
consultation with the House and Senate Budget Committees. (CBO, The Budget and Economic Outlook: Fiscal Years
2012 to 2022, pp. 11 and 64, at http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/01-31-2012_Outlook.pdf).
Congressional Research Service
2

Expiring Farm Bill Programs Without a Budget Baseline

Table 1. Titles in the 2008 Farm Bill Containing Programs
Without Baseline After FY2012
(titles in the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 with provisions that receive mandatory budget
authority, but are not assumed to continue in the budget baseline beyond FY2012)
Ranked by Number of Provisions
Ranked by Cost of Provisions
Estimated cost to extend under

two approaches ($ million, 5 yrs.)a
Number of
CBO score at
CBO baseline
Farm Bill Title
provisions
Farm Bill Title
2008 passageb
in March 2012b
Energy
8
Agricultural Disaster Assistance
4,846
9,000
Conservation 5
Conservation 2,105
2,725
Nutrition 5
Energy
1,112
1,162
Horticulture and Organic Agriculture
5
Research
383
383
Rural Development
3
Miscel aneous
175
175
Research 3
Rural
Development
150
150
Trade 2
Trade
144
144
Miscel aneous
2
Horticulture and Organic Agriculture
95
95
Farm Commodity Programs
1
Farm Commodity Programs
50
50
Forestry 1
Forestry
39
39
Livestock 1
Nutrition
31
31
Agricultural Disaster Assistance
1
Livestock
1
1
Total 37
Total
9,131
13,955
Source: Compiled by CRS using P.L. 110-246; the CBO score of the 2008 farm bill; the March 2012 CBO
baseline; and Reuters, “High price tag to revive U.S. farm disaster programs,” May 11, 2011.
Notes: The provisions selected had mandatory budget authority at some time during the 2008 farm bill, but do
not have baseline beyond FY2012. Amounts are estimates and are the five-year funding specified in statute or, if
unspecified, either the CBO score at enactment in 2008 or updated for newer CBO data. Amounts for two
estimated conservation programs are CBO’s actual amounts from FY2008 to FY2011 and the projection for
FY2012; the amount for biomass crop assistance (part of energy) is the FY2012 projection multiplied by 5; and
the amount for disaster assistance was cited in the press as a CBO score in May 2011 (see Table 2 for details).
a. Unofficial estimates in the absence of projections by CBO that would be based on proposed legislation.
b. If a fixed amount was specified in the 2008 farm bill, then that amount is used in both cost columns.
Programs Grouped by Title of the 2008 Farm Bill
Programs without baseline beyond FY2012 are spread among 12 of the 2008 farm bill’s 15 titles
(Table 1). The title with the most such provisions is the energy title (8), followed by conservation
(5), nutrition (5), and horticulture and organic agriculture (5).
The ranking among the titles is much different based on the dollar amounts that might be needed
to continue the provisions in the next farm bill (the right half of Table 1). The title with the
largest cost to extend programs without baseline is agricultural disaster assistance ($4.8 billion to
$9 billion, depending on the estimation approach), followed by conservation ($2.1 billion to $2.7
billion), energy ($1.1 billion to $1.2 billion), and research ($383 million).
Congressional Research Service
3

Expiring Farm Bill Programs Without a Budget Baseline

Programs Grouped by Degree of Cost Uncertainty
Farm bill funding typically is specified as either (1) a fixed dollar amount or (2) “such sums as
necessary” to operate a program under specified provisions (the “type” column in Table 2).
For the fixed dollar amount programs (type = “fixed”), the five-year cost to continue a provision
is assumed to equal the five-year sum of the funding specified in the 2008 farm bill. Given the
likelihood of a “baseline farm bill”—that is, a farm bill without additional funding to increase
spending—or a farm bill facing deficit reduction, many people believe that it is unlikely that any
or many of these programs could see an increase above what they received in the 2008 farm bill.
Fixed-dollar funding was specified for 33 of the 37 provisions in the 2008 farm that do not have
baselines beyond 2012. The total five-year amount for these 33 programs was about $2.4 billion,
which is about one-fourth of the total of the provisions without baseline (Table 2).12
For the “such sums as necessary” programs (type = “estimated”), CBO estimates how much the
provision is expected to cost. The estimated five-year cost to extend a provision was computed
under two different approaches:
• the CBO cost estimates at the time of enactment of the 2008 farm bill, and
• the most recent CBO baseline projection based on more recent estimates.
As with the fixed-dollar amounts, these are unofficial estimates in the absence of projections by
CBO that would be based on actual proposed legislation. Presenting estimates from both
approaches helps provide a range of costs and indicates where uncertainty is more apparent.13
Only 4 of the 37 provisions without baseline have “such sums as necessary” funding. They
account for the difference in the costs between the two approaches (the two cost columns).
Although fewer in number than the fixed-amount group, they account for $6.7 billion to $11.5
billion (depending on the approach), which is about 80% of the total for provisions without
baseline (Table 2).
In the 2008 farm bill, Congress indicated its relative priorities for programs by the tradeoff or
allocation of budgetary resources among programs. If a proposal was deemed too expensive
during legislative development, its parameters may have been tightened to reduce costs. After
enactment, some “such sums as necessary” programs may become more expensive than first
estimated. If selected for continuation, would the program continue at its current higher cost, or
be redesigned in the next farm bill to cost less? Thus, which of the two approaches is better
depends on whether one believes Congress would change program parameters, for example, to
reduce a program that has become more expensive than initially expected, or whether Congress
would continue current program provisions and pay a higher cost than in 2008.

12 Other approaches are possible, such as, for example, assuming that programs continue at the level of their last year of
authorization (an approach sometimes used for programs with continuing baseline). Some fixed-cost programs receive
increasing amounts over time, with the largest amount in FY2012 (examples are apparent in the “comments” column of
Table 2). If the last year of the authorization (FY2012) were used as the cost to continue the programs, the cost to
extend the 33 fixed-cost provisions would be about $500 million higher than the $2.4 billion estimate.
13 Other approaches also are possible (see footnote 12). Assumptions within these approaches also may lead to different
results, such as the length of time that agricultural disaster assistance might be extended, or implementation and
regulatory decisions for the biomass crop assistance program (BCAP), as discussed in notes to Table 2.
Congressional Research Service
4

Expiring Farm Bill Programs Without a Budget Baseline

Table 2. Programs in the 2008 Farm Bill Without Budget Baseline After FY2012
(provisions in the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 that receive mandatory budget authority,
but are not assumed to continue in the budget baseline beyond FY2012)
Estimated cost to extend ($ million, 5 yrs.)Error!

Reference source not found.
CBO score
CBO
at 2008
baseline in
Section
Name of Provision
Comments
Termb Typec
passaged
March 2012d
Farm Commodity Programs
Sec. 1622
Implementation (of farm
$50 million in FY2009 to the Farm Service
Short Fixed
50 50
commodity programs in
Agency to help implement the farm bill.
Title I)
Such expenses usual y are discretionary.
Subtotal, Farm Commodity Programs
50
50
Conservation
Sec. 2202
Wetlands Reserve Program
3.04 million acres to be enrolled through
Ful Est. 1,460
2,100e
FY2012. The 2008 farm bill added $128-338
million of costs to baseline annually.
Sec. 2403
Grassland Reserve Program
1.22 million additional acres to be enrolled
Ful Est.
320
300e
during FY2009-2012. The farm bill added
$63-80 million of costs to baseline annually.
Sec. 2606
Voluntary Public Access and $50 million for the period FY2009-2012,
Short Fixed
50
50
Habitat Incentive Program
made available in FY2009.
Sec. 2803
Smal Watershed
$100 million in FY2009, to remain available
Short Fixed
100
100
Rehabilitation Program
until expended. Discretionary
appropriations also are authorized.
Sec. 2807
Desert Terminal Lakes
$175 million in FY2008, to remain available
Short Fixed
175
175
until expended (transfer from USDA to
Dept. of Interior’s Bureau of Reclamation).
Subtotal, Conservation
2,105 2,725
Trade
Sec. 3106
McGovern-Dole
$84 million in FY2009, to remain available
Short Fixed
84
84
International Food for
until expended. It also receives annual
Education and Child
discretionary appropriations (e.g., $184
Nutrition Program
mil ion in FY2012).
Sec. 3206
Local and Regional Food
$5 million in FY2009, $25 million in FY2010
Ful Fixed
60
60
Aid Procurement Projects
and FY2011, and $5 million in FY2012.
Results of pilot program to be evaluated.
Subtotal, Trade
144 144
Nutrition
Sec. 4141
Pilot projects to evaluate
$20 million of mandatory funds in FY2009,
Short Fixed
20
20
health and nutrition
to remain available until expended.
promotion in the
Discretionary appropriations also are
supplemental nutrition
authorized.
assistance program
Congressional Research Service
5

Expiring Farm Bill Programs Without a Budget Baseline

Estimated cost to extend ($ million, 5 yrs.)Error!

Reference source not found.
CBO score
CBO
at 2008
baseline in
Section
Name of Provision
Comments
Termb Typec
passaged
March 2012d
Agricultural Disaster Assistance
Sec. 12033 Supplemental agricultural
Authorized for FY2008-FY2011. CBO
Short Est.
4,846
9,000g
and Sec.
disaster assistance, including estimated in 2008 that the cost would be
15101
establishing the Agricultural
$4.846 billion over 4 years ending in
Disaster Relief Trust Fund
FY2011. The March 2012 baseline projects
$5.9 billion of outlays for the 4-year life of
the provision. Reuters reported in 2011 a
CBO score of $9 billion for a 5-year
extension.g
Subtotal, Agricultural Disaster Assistance
4,846
9,000
Miscellaneous
Sec. 14004 Outreach and Technical
$15 million in FY2009, and $20 mil ion each
Ful Fixed
75
75
Assistance for Socially
year for FY2010-2012.
Disadvantaged Farmers or
Ranchers
Sec. 14012 Determination on Merits of
$100 million in FY2008, to remain available
Short Fixed
100
100
Pigford Claims
until expended.
Subtotal, Miscellaneous
175 175
Total: 37 provisions in 2008 farm bill without baseline beyond FY2012a

9,131
13,955
Subtotals by term (or duration) of mandatory funding

20 provisions with short-term use of mandatory funds in the 2008 farm bill
Short

5,969
10,123
17 provisions with full-term use of mandatory funds in the 2008 farm bill
Full

3,162
3,832
Subtotals by type of certainty about costs

33 provisions where cost is fixed or known in the farm bill

Fixed
2,435
2,435
4 provisions where cost is estimated based on implementation

Est.
6,696
11,520
Source: Compiled by CRS using P.L. 110-246; the CBO score of the 2008 farm bill (at enactment against the
March 2008 baseline, May 12, 2008, unpublished); the March 2012 CBO baseline (http://cbo.gov/publication/
43053); and Reuters, “High price tag to revive U.S. farm disaster programs,” May 11, 2011, at http://www.
reuters.com/article/2011/05/12/us-agriculture-disasters-aid-idUSTRE74B01N20110512.
a. Unofficial estimates in the absence of projections by CBO that would be based on proposed legislation.
b. Provisions were identified as having either short-term or full-term mandatory funding. Provisions selected as
short-term have mandatory budget authority at some time in the early years of the 2008 farm bill, but no
new mandatory budget authority in the last year (FY2012). Provisions selected as full-term have mandatory
budget authority at least during the last year of the farm bill, but no baseline beyond FY2012. Provisions
with full-term funding may not have an extended baseline either because (1) the funding during the last year
of a farm bill is below a minimum $50 million scoring threshold that is needed to continue a baseline, or (2)
the budget and agriculture committees did not give the program a baseline in the years beyond the farm bill
in order to reduce the program’s 10-year cost at the time the farm bill was written.
c. The cost of provisions is identified as either fixed or estimated. For fixed-cost programs, the cost is
specified by statute and equals the five-year funding provided in 2008 farm bill. For programs with estimated
costs, the cost to extend the provision depends on assumptions relevant for the heading of each column.
d. If a fixed amount was specified in the 2008 farm bill, then that amount is used in both cost columns.
Congressional Research Service
8

Expiring Farm Bill Programs Without a Budget Baseline

e. Costs for WRP and GRP are CBO’s actual amounts from FY2008 to FY2011 and the projection for FY2012.
f.
Because USDA’s implementation rules for the biomass crop assistance program changed in 2010, this
estimate is CBO’s projected cost in FY2012 ($24 million) multiplied by five years. This estimate may be low,
however, because BCAP might have operated at a higher level if appropriations acts had not placed limits
on BCAP in recent years.
g. This cost estimate was cited in the press as a CBO score in May 2011 (Reuters, “High price tag to revive
U.S. farm disaster programs,” at http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/12/us-agriculture-disasters-aid-
idUSTRE74B01N20110512). At an average of $1.8 billion per year, the five-year $9 billion estimate is higher
than the historical $5.9 billion four-year cost of the supplemental agricultural disaster program (an average
of $1.5 billion per year). This estimate is sensitive to assumptions about interactions with crop insurance
and other agricultural support programs.
Programs Grouped by Duration of Use of Mandatory Funding
In terms of the length of time that mandatory funding is used, 20 provisions in the 2008 farm bill
provided mandatory funding only in the early years of the 2008 farm bill (FY2008-FY2011).
These are estimated to cost $6 billion to $10 billion if they are extended in the next farm bill
(depending on the approach to estimate costs). Seventeen other provisions provided mandatory
funding for the entire duration of the farm bill. These are estimated to cost $3.2 billion to $3.8
billion if they are extended for five years (the “term” column in Table 2).
This distinction may be important for some observers because programs without full-term
funding may not be prioritized as highly as programs receiving full-term funding. Some of the
provisions were given short-term funding to help begin implementation or to fund a backlog of
unfunded obligations. Other programs received a short-term infusion of mandatory funding and
may be authorized to receive discretionary appropriations. These programs may have authority to
operate for the full term of the 2008 farm bill, regardless of the duration of mandatory funding.
The provisions listed with full-term funding do not have baseline either because their cost is
relatively small (less than the $50 million scoring threshold in FY2012) or because the budget
scoring at the time the 2008 farm bill was enacted did not assign a cost or give the program a
baseline for the second five years of the scoring window (to make the bill less expensive, as
discussed above in footnote 11).
Some of these programs are pilot programs or are new programs without a large or established
constituency (e.g., local and regional foreign food aid procurement, or the national clean plant
network). Six of them are bioenergy programs, and five affect specialty crops or beginning and
minority farmers. Others are relatively established programs, such as the wetlands reserve and
grasslands reserve programs in conservation.
In summary, 37 programs received mandatory funding in the 2008 farm bill, but do not have any
baseline for a new farm bill because their finding stopped before FY2012, their amounts are
below scoring thresholds, or they were intentionally unfunded for future years. An estimated $9
billion to $14 billion would be needed to continue these programs for five more years. Congress
would need to find offsets from other sources to continue them, a difficult task in a tight budget
environment.

Congressional Research Service
9

Expiring Farm Bill Programs Without a Budget Baseline

Author Contact Information

Jim Monke

Specialist in Agricultural Policy
jmonke@crs.loc.gov, 7-9664

Acknowledgments
Craig Jagger provided valuable expertise on the subject and helpful peer review.
Congressional Research Service
10