Senators from flood-ravaged Iowa may offer legislation to force the Bush administration to use a new disaster-relief program included in this year’s farm bill.

Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer so far has resisted using the controversial program, despite pleadings from Sens. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), who say farmers in their state have seen billions in damages to crops as a result of summer floods.

The program allows farmers to receive disaster payments if they have suffered losses to their crops or livestock because of severe weather, but stipulates that disaster payments must be based on price averages for 2008 crops. Because those estimates will not be available until 2009, Schafer said, it is impossible to make payments under the program.

“It’s going to be almost impossible to estimate what a cost would be, and if we can’t estimate what a payment might be, it’s pretty hard to give you an advance or a portion of that,” Schafer said in a conference call with reporters. “So you know, unless Congress sees fit to make some changes in the way we have to deliver this program, I do not think it’s likely to see an advance payment.”

Harkin and other supporters of the program want the administration to make advance payments. If the administration says it can’t do this, Harkin, the chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, said he’ll try to move legislation.

“Chairman Harkin is hopeful USDA [the U.S. Department of Agriculture] will interpret the law to make an advance payment, but if the agency cannot find the statutory authority or will not do so, then he will prepare language and have it scored to accomplish that advance payment,” said Kate Cyrul, a Harkin spokeswoman.

The American Farm Bureau Federation backs Harkin’s plan, but his effort is dividing other key supporters of the program, who often split with Harkin during the long battle over the farm bill.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.), the program’s top advocate, insists the administration already has the right to make the payments and sees no need for legislation.

“There is no reason that USDA cannot make a partial disaster payment once it is apparent that a farm has suffered a loss significant enough to qualify for some disaster assistance,” said Sara Kuban, a spokeswoman for Baucus. “Sen. Baucus is not working on a legislative fix since he does not believe the legislative language precludes a partial advance disaster payment.”

But both Grassley, the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, and Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), support legislation.

“It’s not a simple thing, but I support exploring it and doing something if it’s feasible,” Grassley said during a conference call with reporters last week. He said he raised the issue with Schafer in a meeting last month.
 Conrad also would back a legislative fix to the program, according to one of his aides.

“Advance disaster payments would be a better solution than ad hoc relief because it is going to be very difficult to get anything else from Congress this year,” said Mary Kay Thatcher, director of public policy for the Farm Bureau.

She also argued this would be more fiscally responsible since the advance payments could come from the $3.8 billion allocated under the program.

The Farm Bureau recently sent a letter to Schafer asking USDA to make advance payments. The letter encourages his department to calculate disaster payments off of USDA’s estimates for the supply and demand of the world’s crops and livestock instead of waiting for the price averages of the 2008 crop.

“Right now, this disaster program won’t be giving out payments until 15 months from now,” said Thatcher. “There is going to be a lot of producers waiting for those disaster payments.”

According to Thatcher’s organization, crops have suffered more than $8 billion in weather-related damage so far this year. About half of that damage has been in Iowa, although Illinois and Missouri have also sustained substantial losses due to heavy rain and floods. In response to the floods, USDA has made available emergency loans and is helping with clean-up.

The disaster program was a point of contention in farm bill talks among the House, Senate and administration.

Several environmental and humanitarian aid organizations opposed the program, the White House cited it in its veto threat and several lawmakers tried to reduce its size as the farm bill moved through Congress. The Environmental Working Group (EWG) said it would encourage farmers to plant on land not healthy enough for crops in order to receive payments.

“We are worried that it actually gives funding to things that are not truly disasters. It’s not based on weather patterns,” said Sandra Schubert, EWG’s director of government affairs.

Schubert believes ad hoc disaster relief is the better solution to help farmers reeling from flooded fields.

“What we need is a disaster program to respond in a timely manner. It doesn’t sound like this is accomplishing that,” said Schubert.