Quentin Bowen of Humboldt, Neb., is a farmer who raises corn and soybeans.

As I spend these hot summer days tending to my drought-stressed and dying corn and soybean crops, I am glad I purchased crop insurance.

Whether it’s a flood instantly washing your livelihood down a newly formed river channel, or the blistering sun overcooking your hopes one day at a time, there’s nothing worse than losing a crop and a whole year’s work.

Then again, there’s nothing better than rejoicing in a bountiful harvest, which wouldn’t even have been an option for most growers had crop insurance not helped them pick up the pieces following a disastrous 2011.

Future bumper crops may not be an option for many if some senators are successful in gutting the pending farm bill. That’s because more than a dozen farm bill amendments have been introduced to render private-sector-run crop insurance — our most effective risk management tool — ineffective.

Some amendments would take more money from a program that has already seen $12 billion in funding reductions since 2008, leaving it stressed to a breaking point. Other amendments would cap the discounts farmers get on insurance premiums to make policies obtainable, effectively leaving many mid-size farms and specialty crops without adequate protection from disaster.

The biggest threat comes from a proposal to limit participation in crop insurance through an arbitrary means test, based on your tax filings with…

COLUMBIA — Gene Painter kneels and observes the sample of wheat before him, explaining the difference between damage done by hail and other perils. A clean cut in the stalk signals a rodent; a bent stalk is wind damage; but a broken stalk or missing berries are signs that hail is to blame.

Once determining that hail is the culprit, Painter, a claims supervisor with American Farm Bureau Insurance, refers to the calculations that are used to determine the stage of growth the plants were in when they were damaged. The earlier the damage occurred, the higher the expected loss. These tools serve as a guide to assessing hail claims.

“The way things were done in the old days, every adjuster had his own method and we had to get away from that,” he said. “We need to base it on real facts.”.

Painter is one of 18 plot leaders instructing 85 crop insurance adjusters at the National Crop Insurance Service Crop-Hail Wheat & Corn School.

The school was held Tuesday and Wednesday at MU’s Bradford Research & Extension Center. Bradford has been home to the annual school for over 20 years.

It’s one of the great ironies of our time that the richest nation on earth, with the most productive agriculture sector the world has ever seen, would have so many citizens who live with food insecurity, the fear of not knowing where theirnext meal is coming from. The fact that many of these citizens are children makes it even worse.

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) has been a great advocate for the needy and for healthy eating, and it shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone that she’s doing everything she can to ensure that federal support for food stamp benefits are fully funded. Unfortunately, to pay for her recent amendment, she’s cutting the only viable risk management tool available to the very New York farmers who grow healthy food for the poor: crop insurance.

Crop insurance is a private-public partnership that has worked miracles in serving as a backstop to farmers and ranchers after disaster strikes, as it did last year here at home. Farmers purchase crop insurance, which is partially underwritten by federal government, so that when Mother Nature serves up a nasty surprise, there is something in place to ensure that come next year, farmers will be able to plant yet again and feed America.

2011 was a tough year for many of our areas farmers. Tropical Storm Irene hit right as farmers were harvesting their crops, wiping out an entire year’s work for many as their fields were swallowed under several feet of water. New York farmers growing apples, corn, grapes, peas and peaches, as well as many other crops, suffered enormous losses and thankfully collected nearly $45 million in indemnity payments from their private crop insurance policies.

And 2012 has already presented its challenges to our local farmers, as many in the Hudson Valley and the western part of the state lost some or their entire apple and other fruit crops to a late spring freeze. Thankfully, again, crop insurance was there to keep them from losing their farms. In fact, for those who argue that Americans, especially the disadvantaged, need to have access to fresh fruit and vegetables, crop insurance is the only viable safety net available to farmers who grow that produce.

Mike Southcott is a crop insurance agent based in Albion, New York.

Mississippi and farming are so intertwined that it is hard to imagine one without the other. Agriculture is not only our state’s No. 1 industry; it employs roughly one-third of our population, contributing $5.8 billion to the state’s economy. There are approximately 42,000 farms in the state covering 11 million acres, producing rice, cotton, soybeans and other commodities, and there is not a county in our state where farming doesn’t play a major role.

Agriculture in this state, and throughout the U.S., has been one of the bright spots that is helping the U.S. turn the economic corner. But the productivity of the American farm and the consumer benefits of the American food supply did not just happen in a vacuum. And hands down, farmers across the country will tell you that their most important risk management tool is crop insurance.

As a crop insurance agent who was on more than a few farms the day after Hurricane Katrina struck, I can tell you first-hand that crop insurance was a financial lifeline for many farmers…

William Cole is a crop insurance agent from Batesville, Mississippi.

It’s no great surprise when a well-funded libertarian think tank full of Washington policy wonks pushes for the belief that the federal government should not be involved in crop insurance and other key farm policies.

But those of us in farming know better. All we need to do is to remember the recent floods, droughts and other natural disasters that, without some government help, would’ve left our towns, our jobs, our economy and our lives in ruin.

The simple fact is that everyone wins with a strong crop insurance policy. It’s good for farmers because we’re not faced with losing our farms every time a natural disaster occurs. But it’s also good for consumers, particularly those in urban areas who rely on others to grow all of their food.

And it’s good for developing countries, which depend on us to help feed their growing numbers. Crop insurance ensures stability and reliability in the food supply.

But don’t take my word for the effectiveness of crop insurance. It happens that just last week, the Senate Agriculture Committee called together farm groups, elected officials and bankers in Kansas to ask what agriculture policies they thought were the most important.

During testimony, the governor of Kansas, every farm leader and two local bankers all agreed that crop insurance is the most important farm policy now.

Kansas Gov. and former Sen. Sam Brownback, no big fan of big government, said, “crop insurance is an important risk management tool to producers.” A spokesman for the Kansas Soybean Association called crop insurance “a vital part of the farm income safety net for soybean farmers.” His colleague with the Kansas Cotton Association agreed, calling crop insurance “an essential risk management tool for cotton producers.”

Karl Esping with the Kansas Sunflower Commission said that growers need crop insurance to manage their risky business. “As you look at priorities in this new farm bill, please consider that producers still need a safety net for crop failure and disaster. Crop insurance has been and still is the best tool for these situations.

“Full funding for the crop insurance program is the highest priority for sunflower growers, and I suspect that it is the case for all commodities.”

In fact, when all was said and done, groups representing corn, wheat, cotton, sunflowers and sorghum all sang the praises of crop insurance. But it didn’t stop there.

The director of High Plains Farm Credit promised to “continue to work hard to ensure that our customers and others have access to the crop insurance policies they need to protect their investment in their crop and farming operations.” The CEO and chairman of Western State Bank discussed the various proposed cuts in farm policies and urged members of the Senate to make sure that federal monies are spent on efficient and effective policies.

“I think the most efficient program is the crop insurance program,” he said.

While these testimonials come from a hearing in Kansas, the script would have been identical if the hearing was held in Minnesota, North Dakota or any other big agricultural state.

What most libertarians don’t like to admit is that crop insurance is a great example of a public-private partnership that combines the strengths of both sectors and increases the amount of good done by a modest government investment.

For skeptics who thought that the flexibility and efficiency of the free market could never be combined with the universality and affordability of the public sector, this policy proves them wrong. Crop insurance was bought for more than 80 percent of America’s principal crop acreage, with 256 million acres under policies worth $80 billion in total coverage.

There’s no denying that agriculture’s support for crop insurance is strong and deep. That might not be a tune libertarians want to hear, but it’s music nevertheless.

Author: Greg Schwarz, President, Minnesota Corn Growers Association

This op-ed first appeared in the Grand Forks Herald on September 20, 2011

The weather has been so wild and so unpredictable this year that it’s not just farmers who are complaining about it. Here in the Corn Belt, it’s been cold and damp for so long that it took us forever to get our crop in.

Parts of the Southwest wheat belt are parched, while millions of acres in the vast Mississippi Delta region are underwater.

But being subjected to the unforgiving whims of Mother Nature is a central aspect of being a farmer.

Decades ago, our elected leaders recognized this fact and decided that in order to have a safe and ample food supply, we needed to have farm safety net policies in place to ensure that unpredictable weather doesn’t knock America’s farmers out of business and leave the country short on food.

It’s the future of a key aspect of the farm safety net — crop insurance — and whether or not it will be viable after the upcoming federal budget cuts, that keeps me awake at night. As a business owner, I understand the importance of balancing a budget, and I hope Congress does, too.

But if Congress eviscerates crop insurance or other farm policies that are but a dot on the federal budget but are so important to our unique sector of the economy (“Farming: Of equity and evolution,” June 2), then all Americans and a rapidly expanding global population would feel the pinch.

Crop insurance is an example of a federal program that provides a tremendous amount of benefit per dollar of federal investment.

For example, in 2010, for a relatively small federal outlay combined with private monies from the farmers who purchased the policies, the government was able to leverage a $4 billion investment into an astounding $80 billion in liability coverage for America’s food, feed and clothing crops.

That’s a $20 return on every dollar invested.

This amplification is possible because crop insurance combines the best of government and private sector to help protect farmers from adversity — promoting a safe, affordable, ample food supply for our citizens and for the world.

The government helps farmers underwrite a portion of their premiums to make crop insurance more affordable, and the private sector provides the policies and coverage that kick in when needed.

So if disaster strikes — whether in the form of floods or free-falling grain markets — crop insurance means that farmers aren’t thrown to the wolves and that they live to provide food, fiber and energy for this country yet another day.

This security helps farmers farm better and is a fundamental reason why America has the most dynamic agricultural sector in the world. The modern crop insurance model is a great example of the ability of the public and private sectors to partner, harmonizing their efforts and increasing their benefits.

And crop insurance is very popular among farmers nationally. In fact, more than 1.1 million policies covering 256 million acres across the country were written in 2010 to deal with risks.

And when you consider that the agricultural sector produces the food that we eat, the ethanol that we use as fuel for transportation and is a significant economic engine in the United States, it seems that it might be worth protecting.

Now I understand that when Congress starts trimming the budget, everyone is going to argue that their specific program deserves protection. While I can’t speak for other aspects of federal spending, I can attest to the fact that crop insurance and other aspects of farm policy work for me.

Without a doubt, they are the policies that keep family farms like mine in business and our nation food secure.

It is important to note that nearly $12.45 billion total has already been cut from crop insurance in the last several years. That’s sobering news for a farmer like me, because I know how much I need crop insurance to protect myself from disaster and how important it is for farmers to have crop insurance to secure a loan.

Agriculture is one of the only industries to have already made big sacrifices to help trim budgets. And, there isn’t much left to cut — farm policies account for less than one-quarter of one percent of federal spending.

Further reductions will only weaken our country’s food supplies and punish our state’s workforce — one-fourth of which depends on agriculture for jobs.

The United States needs to be put back on firm financial footing. But sacrificing food security and one of the economy’s lone bright spots is not the best path to get there. We’ll all sleep better knowing there will be food on the table tomorrow.

Author: Greg Schwarz is the president of the Minnesota Corn Growers Association and a third-generation Minnesota farmer who raises corn, soybeans and turkeys in Le Sueur County.

This op-ed appeared in the Minneapolis Star Tribune on June 13, 2011.

We have been taught from an early age that humans have four basic needs: food, water, clothing and shelter. Interestingly enough, it is the U.S. farm sector that provides two — food and clothing — out of those four needs. This fact puts farming and the programs that protect farmers from adversity — the farm safety net — pretty high on this country’s priority list. Yet farm programs account for just one-quarter of 1 percent of the federal budget, and some are advocating further reductions. Though every dime we spend must be scrutinized, dollar for dollar there is not a better investment of taxpayer funds than the U.S. farm safety net. Take the federal crop-insurance program, for example. It’s hard to think of a federal program that exacts so much benefit per dollar of federal investment. This amplification is possible because crop insurance combines the best of government and the private sector to help protect farmers from adversity and, therefore, ensure a safe, affordable, ample food supply for our citizens and the world.

After several years of planning, the Risk Management Agency will release the COMBO product for use in insuring crops for the 2011 cropping year. The first experience many producers will have with the Combo product will be when insuring wheat for 2011. The COMBO product is meant to simplify crop insurance choices, replacing many individual farm-level products with one product: the COMBO product. The release of the COMBO product does not impact county level plans such as Group Risk Plan (GRP) or Group Risk Income Plan (GRIP).

It’s no great surprise when a well-funded libertarian think tank full of Washington policy wonks pushes for the belief that the federal government should not be involved in crop insurance and other key farm policies. But those of us in farming know better. All we need to do is to remember the recent floods, droughts and other natural disasters that, without some government help, would’ve left our towns, our jobs, our economy and our lives in ruin. The simple fact is that everyone wins with a strong crop insurance policy. It’s good for farmers because we’re not faced with losing our farms every time a natural disaster occurs. But it’s also good for consumers, particularly those in urban areas who rely on others to grow all of their food.

This week, U.S. crop insurers will have to sign the latest long-term contract with the federal government — a deal that slashes billions from the long-standing public-private partnership. The U.S. Department of Agriculture must have the 16 companies-signed forms by July 12, leaving just a few days for the insurers to put signatures on the latest Standard Reinsurance Agreement, which cuts the federal program by $6 billion over the next 10 years.

USDA Risk Management Agency Administrator Bill Murphy said June 30 that his agency has sent crop insurance companies a revised final offer of a new standard reinsurance agreement and gives the companies until July 12 to sign it. The original deadline was June 30. After a Senate Agriculture Committee hearing Murphy said that he had made concessions to the companies on the structure of the agreement, but not made any changes in the proposal to cut $6 billion in the program or to put restrictions on agent commissions.

Crop insurers said late Thursday the industry and the crop insurance program will be able to “withstand” the severe cuts in subsidies imposed on the program by the Agriculture Department. “Our hands are tied. The companies have no choice but to sign this new Standard Reinsurance Agreement,” said Bob Parkerson, president of National Crop Insurance Services, which represents the 16 crop insurers involved in the program. “If they don’t, they cease operating and the safety net that America’s farmers and ranchers rely on so heavily would be disrupted,” he said.

The group that represents U.S. crop insurers is preparing for a June 18 meeting with officials of the U.S. Department of Agriculture to hash out some disagreements over the latest draft of the Standard Reinsurance Agreement — a draft the federal officials are calling final but that the insurers said they feel blindsided by. The National Crop Insurance Services — the Kansas-based association representing the insurers — said there are provisions in the long-negotiated agreement that they hadn’t seen before. “We are a little astounded by the fact that they’re calling this third draft a final draft.,” said Robert W. Parkerson, the association president. “There are several items in there that we never discussed.”

Aiming to reform the federal crop insurance program, reduce the federal deficit, and maximize taxpayer dollars, the USDA has released the final draft of a new crop insurance agreement and, as a result, $6 billion in savings. Two-thirds of the savings will go toward paying down the federal deficit, and the remaining third will support high priority risk management and conservation programs. By containing program costs, these changes will also ensure the sustainability of the crop insurance program for America’s farmers and ranchers for years to come. USDA’s Risk Management Agency (RMA), which administers the federal crop insurance program, released the final draft version of a new Standard Reinsurance Agreement (SRA), which details the new terms, roles, and responsibilities for both the USDA and insurance companies that participate in the federal crop insurance program.

Aiming to reform the federal crop insurance program, reduce the federal deficit, and maximize taxpayer dollars, the USDA has released the final draft of a new crop insurance agreement and, as a result, $6 billion in savings. Two-thirds of the savings will go toward paying down the federal deficit, and the remaining third will support high priority risk management and conservation programs. By containing program costs, these changes will also ensure the sustainability of the crop insurance program for America’s farmers and ranchers for years to come.