|
Tobacco
Quota Buyout: Is It Will or Is It When?
The
flies on the walls of every Co-op, drugstore, equipment dealer and
other places farmers in the Southeast congregate are getting an
earful these days about the prospects for a tobacco quota buyout.
The majority of the tobacco policy questions being asked today are
some variant of these two: (1) Is there really going to be a tobacco
quota buyout? and (2) When?
With the help of APAC economist Dr. Kelly Tiller, I have used this
space before to introduce you to some of the mounting challenges
and uncertainties facing tobacco growers. Bottom line is that the
amount of tobacco growers can market has been reduced by about half
over the last few years, and it doesn't look like it will be returning
to historical levels anytime soon. Many tobacco observers have concluded
that the federal tobacco program is actually to blame for some of
today's tobacco farmer hardships, justifying government intervention
to "level the playing field." Enter discussion of a buyout.
Actually, "buyout" is somewhat of a misnomer. Legislation
introduced to date does include a "buyout", or compensation
to tobacco quota owners for elimination of the quota asset they
currently hold. But it also includes support for "transitioning"
tobacco farmers from the current quota system to a new way of growing
and marketing their crop.
Again drawing on Dr. Tiller's expertise, I'd like to update you
on progress toward a tobacco quota buyout, especially focusing on
what some of the important political considerations will be as the
buyout issue moves forward in Congress.
Currently, there are five pieces of legislation on the table that
all have some potential to shape the bill that may eventually come
to be known as "the" tobacco buyout. All five bills share
several elements in common. They all propose making payments to
quota owners ($8 per pound) and also to the person actually growing
the quota ($4 per pound), who may or may not also be the quota owner.
They all are projected to cost between $15 and $19 billion over
five years and all propose to pay for the buyout and related programs
by imposing a user fee on tobacco manufacturers and importers.
In addition to differences in qualifications and bases for payments,
the bills differ in two important ways: the future of the tobacco
program and FDA regulation over manufactured tobacco products. Three
of the bills propose replacing the federal tobacco program with
a modified system of annual production permits with minimum price
supports based on the costs of production while the other two bills
eliminate the program altogether. The same two bills that eliminate
the tobacco program also include provisions for FDA regulation of
tobacco, although the public health community has not endorsed the
FDA language included in these two bills.
But how realistic is it for tobacco growers to expect a tobacco
quota buyout? And when might this windfall come about? Unfortunately,
those are impossible questions to answer at this point. But because
the answers depend in large part on politics, let's consider some
of the political realities influencing the ultimate outcome.
First, time is short and the clock is ticking. There just aren't
that many legislative days left in this session. Once they return
from August recess, Congress is scheduled to have about four weeks
remaining. Now they don't always finish and recess as early as they
are scheduled to, but there will be more pressure to finish on time
this year since a lot of seats are up for grabs in the November
election and they'll be anxious to get home to campaign. And in
that short amount of time, a buyout faces a lot of still competition
for attention. While it may even beat out NASCAR for discussion
time at the Sunday dinner table in some households in the Southeast,
the tobacco quota buyout is still in line behind a long list of
things that are real hot button issues in Washington, especially
just before big mid-term elections. Just to name a few pressing
issues, it will compete with Homeland Security, a Medicare prescription
benefit program, foreign policy decisions, and all of the Appropriations
Bills that have to be passed by September 30. A lot of these other
pressing issues are way ahead of a tobacco buyout in the political
process. Currently, no hearings have been scheduled on the tobacco
buyout issue.
If a tobacco buyout bill does manage to work its way to the top
of the pile for consideration this term, there are still several
political obstacles it will have to overcome. For starters, it will
require a lot of support. Less than half of the 218 votes needed
on the House side are from all of the tobacco states combined and
at least 60 votes will be required on the Senate side. Somehow,
a quota buyout will have to achieve a lot of buy-in support from
representatives and senators from states that will (1) not directly
benefit from any of the buyout money, and (2) essentially impose
higher prices on their tobacco-consuming constituents. That's a
tough sell, but that's where the ties between a tobacco quota buyout
and FDA regulation over manufactured tobacco products make a significant
difference.
While a tobacco quota buyout will be very expensive, the most likely
source of funding is tobacco manufacturers, through a user fee that
can be passed along to consumers of their products. While the user
fee isn't welcomed by all of the tobacco manufacturers, it may be
an easier political sell since taxpayer dollars are not involved.
Also working in favor of moving a buyout forward is the recent inclusion
of a peanut quota buyout in the 2002 Farm Bill. Election pressures
may be strong in some key tobacco state seats, which may provide
additional incentive for a quicker resolution of the issue.
But despite all the speculation and analysis, the fact remains that
any buyout will have to be played out in a political arena. Once
the discussion moves from the local hangouts to the halls of Washington,
it could change drastically and it could change very quickly. And
those flies on the walls-thinking they've become so highly educated
about the buyout debate-may just get an education about politics
as well.
Daryll
E. Ray holds the Blasingame Chair of Excellence in Agricultural
Policy, Institute of Agriculture, University of Tennessee, and is
the Director of the UT's Agricultural Policy Analysis Center. (865)
974-7407; Fax: (865) 974-7298; dray@utk.edu;
http://www.agpolicy.org.
Reproduction
Permission Granted with:
1) Full attribution to Daryll E. Ray and the Agricultural Policy
Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN;
2) An email sent to hdschaffer@utk.edu
indicating how often you intend on running Dr. Ray's column and
your total circulation. Also, please send one copy of the first
issue with Dr. Ray's column in it to Harwood Schaffer, Agricultural
Policy Analysis Center, 310 Morgan Hall, Knoxville, TN 37996-4500.
|