U.S. farm groups are fighting mad about continued attacks on the federal crop insurance program. The American Soybean Association was not pleased to discover a US$18 billion cut to crop insurance contained in U.S. President Barack Obama’s 2017 budget proposal. “Our policy has always been that we will strongly oppose any attempt to target farm bill programs for additional cuts, and it goes without saying that we will continue to fight proposed cuts to the farm safety net,” ASA president Richard Wilkins said in a news release. “All it takes is a quick glance around the farm economy to see that we need a stronger safety net for our farmers, not a weaker one.” Obama’s plan says the U.S. taxpayer pays 62 percent of grower premiums, and he would like to see that reduced. His budget proposes lowering the premium for harvest price coverage by 10 percentage points, which would save taxpayers an estimated $16.9 billion over 10 years. The remaining savings would come largely through reforms to prevented planting coverage, which the government claims is being abused by growers in certain parts of the country, such as the prairie pothole region of the northern Great Plains. This is not the first attempt to gut the crop insurance program. Last October, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and congressional leaders announced a bipartisan budget deal that included a $3 billion cut to crop insurance over a 10-year period. That legislation was repealed in December after strong protests from the farm community. Chip Bowling, president of the National Corn Growers Association, said the 2014 farm bill is a market-based safety net that kicks in when farmers need it. “Unfortunately, that time is now,” he told reporters attending Commodity Classic 2016. He vowed that farm groups will continue to fight against crop insurance cuts. “This is not the time to put the farm safety net in jeopardy,” said Bowling. U.S. agriculture secretary Tom 
Vilsack said he is dealing with a capped budget and there is no appetite in Congress to remove the cap, which means he has to make tough budgetary choices and tradeoffs. “Do we get that reduction out of conservation? Are you OK with that?” he asked reporters questioning the proposed crop insurance cuts. “How about we don’t do as many guaranteed farm loans at a time when bankers are being a little squeamish about credit?” Other alternatives include cutting export promotion programs or gutting the rental assistance program, which could result in 10,000 to 20,000 homeless families in rural America. “These are the choices that are involved in forming a budget,” said Vilsack. Source - producer.com