CRS Issue Statement on Agriculture Appropriations

CRS Issue Statement on Agriculture Appropriations

CRS Issue Statement on Agriculture
Appropriations
Jim Monke, Coordinator
Specialist in Agricultural Policy
January 11, 2010
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
IS40598
CRS Report for Congress
P
repared for Members and Committees of Congress

CRS Issue Statement on Agriculture Appropriations

he Agriculture appropriations bill is formally known as the Agriculture, Rural
Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act.
T During the second session of the 111th Congress, the focus on Agriculture appropriations
will be on passing the regular annual appropriations bill for FY2011.
The bill includes funding for all of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) except the Forest
Service, plus the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Appropriations for the Commodity
Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) sometimes also reside in the Agriculture appropriations bill
because jurisdiction is split between the Agriculture appropriations subcommittee in the House
and the Financial Services appropriations subcommittee in the Senate.
In FY2010, the enacted Agriculture appropriations bill totaled $121 billion (P.L. 111-80). This
amount is up 12% from a year earlier and has grown 7% per year on average for the last five
years. Historically, about 20% ($23 billion in FY2010) is for discretionary spending that is
directly controlled by the annual appropriation acts, and 80% ($98 billion in FY2010) is for
mandatory spending on subsidy programs whose eligibility and benefit formulas are written by
authorizing committees, not appropriators. Steady increases in domestic nutrition programs and
recent increases in farm commodity program outlays account for much of the growth in
mandatory outlays.
About two-thirds of the $121 billion total—$83 billion in FY2010—is for domestic nutrition
programs. The remaining one-third—$38 billion in FY2010—supports the rest of USDA
(including the farm commodity programs, but excluding the Forest Service), FDA, and CFTC.
This two-thirds/one-third ratio has grown from about a 50/50 ratio a decade earlier.
Much of the public debate in recent years’ Agriculture appropriations bills has centered not so
much on the dollars appropriated, but rather on policy issues. For example, in FY2010, the ability
to import poultry from China—and the related health and food safety concerns—was one of the
key differences for conferees to resolve between the House and Senate bills. Similarly, other
recent years’ bills have addressed policy decisions about the implementation of animal
identification regulations, country-of-origin labeling, agricultural trade with Cuba, and
prescription drug reimportation.
Nonetheless, in an era of high budget deficits and changing social demands, the 111th Congress—
and particularly the agriculture subcommittees—will continue to struggle with how to allocate
limited discretionary funding among competing agricultural and related priorities. The major
discretionary accounts include the Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and
Children (WIC), meat and poultry inspection, rural development, international food aid,
conservation, agricultural research, agricultural credit, and commodity marketing and regulatory
programs. The discretionary accounts also include FDA (with its dual drug and food safety
missions) and CFTC appropriations.
The vast majority of USDA’s mandatory spending is for food and nutrition programs (e.g., food
stamps and child nutrition), the farm commodity price and income support programs, the federal
crop insurance program, and various smaller conservation, rural development, and trade
programs. Generally, mandatory spending has tended to rise over time, particularly as food stamp
participation and benefits have risen. Farm commodity program outlays are highly variable and
are driven by market price fluctuations and weather conditions.
Congressional Research Service
1

CRS Issue Statement on Agriculture Appropriations

Issue Team Members

Jim Monke, Coordinator
Tadlock Cowan
Specialist in Agricultural Policy
Analyst in Natural Resources and Rural
jmonke@crs.loc.gov, 7-9664
Development
tcowan@crs.loc.gov, 7-7600
Renée Johnson
Dennis A. Shields
Specialist in Agricultural Policy
Analyst in Agricultural Policy
rjohnson@crs.loc.gov, 7-9588
dshields@crs.loc.gov, 7-9051
Melissa D. Ho
Randy Schnepf
Analyst in Agricultural Policy
Specialist in Agricultural Policy
mho@crs.loc.gov, 7-5342
rschnepf@crs.loc.gov, 7-4277
Joe Richardson
Susan Thaul
Specialist in Social Policy
Specialist in Drug Safety and Effectiveness
jirichardson@crs.loc.gov, 7-7325
sthaul@crs.loc.gov, 7-0562
Megan Stubbs
Carol Canada
Analyst in Agricultural Conservation and Natural
Information Research Specialist
Resources Policy
ccanada@crs.loc.gov, 7-7619
mstubbs@crs.loc.gov, 7-8707
Geoffrey S. Becker

Specialist in Agricultural Policy
gbecker@crs.loc.gov, 7-7287

Congressional Research Service
2