NASDA URGES SCHAFER TO REVISIT DISASTER PROGRAM

News Date February 18, 2008

       NASDA has urged the new U.S. secretary of agriculture to reconsider the Senate-approved proposal of a permanent disaster program in the 2007 farm bill. NASDA's president, North Dakota Agriculture Commissioner Roger Johnson, delivered the letter to Schafer after he addressed NASDA's midyear conference on February 11.

       The NASDA membership--the agriculture commissioners, secretaries and directors of the 50 states and four U.S. territories--welcomed Schafer, congratulated him on his recent confirmation and presented him with more than 200 recommendations for the farm bill. Specifically, they urged him to reconsider the administration's continued dependence on existing programs and ad-hoc assistance to deal with disaster situations. "We are disappointed in your January 31 statement indicating that you will not fight the administration's opposition to a permanent fund for weather-related disaster aid," the NASDA membership said in the letter. "We believe it to be a mistake and shortsighted to pass up the opportunity to fix this obvious shortfall in the safety net." 

       "Relying on crop insurance and ad-hoc assistance to deal with disaster situations has proven to be inefficient, unreliable and unpredictable," they said, pointing out that producers are just now getting disaster assistance payments for losses suffered in 2005, 2006 or 2007 and that the waiting has caused others to go out of business. "Continuing down this policy path is unacceptable." The letter described the program in the Senate version as "national in scope," providing disaster relief for all producers who purchase crop insurance or participate in the Non-insured Assistance Program (NAP). The NASDA members said the program complements crop insurance by providing an incentive for producers to purchase higher levels of coverage. It also includes a livestock indemnity program for disaster-related livestock deaths, and is based on "whole-farm revenue," providing assistance only when a farm's total revenue falls below the determined revenue guarantee. 

       NASDA's letter also pointed out that "it will likely cost less in the long-term than ad-hoc assistance programs, which are often delivered in a 'shotgun' approach."

       "It targets assistance to those who need assistance when they need it." (Contact: Charlie Ingram)