On the Agenda For A New Fiscal Year

ASHS National Issues Consultant Jonathan Moore discusses the budget and other upcoming issues on Capitol Hill

This bill proposes to establish at least one college in every State upon a sure and perpetual foundation, accessible to all, but especially to the sons of toil, where all of needful science for the practical avocations of life shall be taught . . . . where agriculture may look for troops of earnest friends, studying its familiar and [obscure] economies, and at last elevating it to that higher level where it may fearlessly invoke comparison with the most advanced standards of the world.”
—1862 quote recorded by William Belmont Parker for
his book, The Life and Public Services of Justin Smith Morrill

A 30 Sept. hearing regarding implementation of the Farm Bill’s Research Title (Title VII), sponsored by House Agriculture’s Conservation, Credit, Energy & Research Subcommittee, echoed the late Senator Justin Smith Morrill’s (R-VT) timeless words. Marking this transitory process from the Cooperative State Research, Education, & Extension Service (CSREES) to the National Institute of Food & Agriculture (NIFA), the “Father of the Land Grants” would have been justifiably proud of agriculture research’s ever-expanding boundaries. This transition, which became official on 1 Oct. 2009, signaled a new era for USDA’s research capabilities as collaborators and competitors with other federal agencies. Morrill’s rationale for establishing land-grant institutions was predicated on the intrinsic value of research, education, and extension services at home and abroad. Viewing land grants as academic facilitators conveying agriculture and mechanical sciences to the public for a variety of purposes, the spirit of Morrill’s historic Land Grant Act lives on through comments at the 30 Sept. hearing by Rajiv Shah, USDA’s new Undersecretary for Research, Education, & Economics (REE). According to Shah, NIFA will “elevate USDA’s research capabilities and resources to new and more competitive levels with the National Institutes of Health and National Science Foundation.” This new era for USDA arrives as lawmakers renew focus on Title VII programs, providing a golden opportunity to proclaim horticulture research’s continued importance for all sectors of American agriculture.

Subcommittee members unanimously supported the continued expansion of NIFA’s research frontiers, reinforcing an Obama administration theme that places science-based solutions for food safety, abundance, and affordability alongside the more conventional sustainable practices for producer profitability and environmental stewardship. Undersecretary Shah reiterated his goal for creating new approaches and solutions addressing food-based challenges through scientific approaches—reinforcing sentiments expressed earlier this year USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack. Shah also remains committed to ensuring continued viability of Title VII’s unique role as a knowledge-base provider for all agriculture programs. Subcommittee Chair Tim Holden (D-PA) and fellow colleagues projected a stay-the-course approach for implementing NIFA’s competitive and formula grant programs. Formula funds in particular (Hatch, Evans–Allen, Smith–Lever, 1994 Tribal colleges/universities, etc.) were prominently referenced by subcommittee members and USDA officials. One hearing witnesses, D.C. Coston, Vice President for Agriculture & University Extension at North Dakota State University (also representing the Association of Public & Land-Grant Universities—formerly NASULGC), gave impassioned remarks for maintaining formula funds as vital components for administrative and resource management. He referenced instances where formula funds were instrumental in addressing unforeseen spur-of-the-moment situations. Responding to a query from North Dakota Representative Earl Pomeroy (D–At Large), Coston said formula funds have successfully addressed climate-based disasters and disease/pest mitigation issues in the Dakotas and other North Central states. With formula and competitive grants, Subcommittee Members revealed preference for continued dual-track approaches, even though USDA indicates a trend via NIFA toward more competitive-based research in future years. A brief discussion also ensued to review and possibly refine ongoing issues connected with indirect recoverable cost percentages between USDA and land grants. The ASHS National Issues Task Force (NITF) is aware that this particular issue remains a concern for ASHS members.

Another legislative bill of prime importance for projects is the Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 Agriculture Appropriations Conference report. Embodied in this annual measure, (HR. 2997/S. 1406), are federal research funds covering a variety of specialty crop programs, as well as spending guidelines for Rural Development and the Food & Drug Administration. Fiscal Year 2010 began 1 Oct. 2009 and ends on 30 Sept. 2010. On 30 Sept. 2009, House and Senate conferees reached agreement on this report. Now, time for a dose of Washington-speak. Please follow closely! If the FY10 Agriculture Appropriations Bill (HR 2997/S. 1406) is passed before the end of October 2009, it will supersede a continuing resolution (CR) signed Thursday, October 1, 2009, by President Obama as the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act for FY 2010—HR 2918. Until HR 2997, is officially passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the President, this CR will fund programs at FY09 levels up to 31 Oct. 2009 for most of the Federal government, including USDA and REE-NIFA. Though I don’t anticipate this CR running the length of a similar bill in 2008, it is a stopgap measure until the FY10 conference report officially becomes law. (The House passed this conference report Wednesday, 7 Oct. Senate action came the following day. Now it is President Obama’s turn. Upon his signature, we will officially move to FY10 funding guidelines.)

Budget numbers show measurable increases for research in FY10. Specifically, a total of $2.767 billion for USDA research agencies, $174 million above 2009. HR 2997 provides $1,359,335,000 for NIFA, an increase of $121,475,000 over FY 2009 appropriations for the then CSREES. The Agriculture Research Service will receive $1.25 billion, $63 million above FY09 levels. Of additional interest for ASHS, NIFA’s total includes an estimated $61 million increase over FY09 specifically for competitive grant programs. Most FY10 conference numbers mirror figures listed in May’s policy update, but as with any conference report of this magnitude, there are minor changes. Thus, a brief list bears repeating (see box,below).

Other numbers: $1.02 billion allocated for USDA’s Food Safety & Inspection Service—$47 million above FY09 levels and $2.36 billion to the Food & Drug Administration to help improve safety of domestic and imported food products. Child Nutrition programs, an increasing customer of horticulture products, weighs in at almost $17 billion for meals and snacks to more than 32 million children in schools, day care, and after school care programs. I am pretty certain ASHS advocacy for retaining $5 Million for the National Clean Plant Network (NCPN) program in FY10’s budget has been achieved. However, I await formal confirmation from NCPN’s national coordinator at USDA’s Animal Plant Health Inspection Service.
Based on the ASHS NITF’s agenda for 2009–10, other policy issues initiated since the ASHS Annual Conference in St. Louis include inroads with the National Turfgrass Federation (NTF), and expanding contacts with potential research avenues covering organic and sustainable agriculture practices. Organics and sustainability are two of the fastest-growing segments of American agriculture. Reflected in authorized sums from the 2008 Farm Bill, both of these programs offer fertile grant opportunities, not only for producer transition and certification, but for improving on-farm production and conservation methods as well.

ASHS has an advantageous new contact for organics in Mary Peet (2007–08 ASHS President), who recently signed on as NIFA’s new National Program Leader in Washington. She joins fellow ASHS member Tom Bewick, NIFA’s National Program Leader for Horticulture. ASHS looks forward to continued contacts with Peet in her new role covering Integrated Organic Programs, especially the Organic Agriculture Research & Extension Initiative (OREI). Sustainable practice is another area holding great promise for specialty crops, with broad objectives providing greater economic returns through energy savings, environmental conservation, new technologies, and other practices enhancing producer profitability. The Sustainable Agriculture Research & Education Program (SARE), an outgrowth of the 1990 Farm Bill, promotes research for on-farm applications through environmentally sound and cost-effective practices. [For more information on SARE, its grants process, and its U.S. regional networks, log on to www.sare.org.

On 30 Sept. I met with Robert Hedberg, SARE’s Interim Program Leader at NIFA, to discuss current and future opportunities with sustainability-based research, and how ASHS’ National Issues Task Force could elucidate more information about SARE benefits. Hedberg referenced several items, including $14.5 million allocated in FY10 for research and education, and SARE’s four regional networks, which make final decisions on grant disbursements. Hedberg indicated research academicians and other affiliates could become more acquainted with SARE grants by serving on regional grant review panels. It is a way to gain familiarity with the process and increase strategic contacts within the program’s nationwide network. I will provide more information on SARE and Integrated Organic Programs in the next policy update. This will include turfgrass, where the focus will be primarily on the NTF’s National Turfgrass Research Initiative (NTRI)—funded through ARS and collaboratively operated between USDA, land-grant institutions, and turfgrass industries. Echoing sentiments from NITF members in St. Louis, NTF Executive Director Kevin Morris believes that promising opportunities await ASHS with turfgrass research. I will seek additional input from ASHS Task Force members before proceeding further in this important and potentially lucrative area, which is specifically defined in the 2008 Farm Bill as a specialty crop. In the next two policy updates, I also plan to convey new developments with NITF’s continued monitoring of SCRI’s non-federal matching grants, and potential initiatives increasing flexibility with those matching requirements, plus ongoing strategies on behalf of ARS’ National Agricultural Library in Beltsville, MD.

This month, I will also make additional inroads with USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) as they prepare for next year’s Horticulture Census. As NITF Chair Thomas Björkman states, “in a political environment where competing interests vie for numerous federal grants, it is vitally important for specialty crop producers and processors to stand up and be counted. NASS results will have a direct impact on research funding in future years—funding that affects this sector’s economic bottom line.”

- published in the October 2009 ASHS Newsletter