-5 In the 1984 survey, three-fourths of the respondents supported a recommendation which would require farmers to follow soil conservation practices to be eligible for price and income payments. The 1985 Food Security Act includes provisions that require farmers to develop conservation plans by 1990 and fully implement these plans by 1995. These soil conservation provisions have been controversial. When asked in the 1989 survey, 56% of the farmers concurred that soil conservation and water quality compliance should be a condition for receiving government farm program benefits. Twenty-four percent said no and 20% were not sure or did not respond to the question. Younger farmers are more likely than older farmers to favor this proposal. Also there is less support for this proposal among larger farmers than among smaller farmers. Farmers who are college graduates strongly support the proposal. Another feature of the 1985 Act that was strongly favored in the 1984 survey is the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). In the 1989 survey only 24% want the CRP eliminated and 11% did not respond. Nearly twothirds want the CRP continued in the 1990 Farm bill with 20% wanting it limited to 30 million acres (its current size), 26% wanting it expanded to 45 million acres (the upper limit specified in the 1985 Act), and 17% wanting it expanded to 60 million acres. Younger farmers more frequently favor the expansion of the CRP to 60 million acres. Smaller farmers tend to want the CRP eliminated while moderate to large sized grain farmers, especially those with more years of schooling, favor the continuation of the CRP Government regulation of farming practices is not very popular among Hoosier farmers. Only 13% of the respondents desire additional government regulations of farming practices to achieve soil conservation and water quality goals. Most (44%) prefer government cost sharing to establish conservation and water structures. About one-third would support taxes on fertilizer and chemicals to reduce excessive use. Older farmers are more supportive of taxes on fertilizer and chemicals than are younger farmers. payments to producers to modify cultural practices or remove land from production was supported by 26%. Crop Insurance Government Several past farm bills have provided for Federal crop insurance to cover losses from national disasters. However, in years of major drought such as 1988, the Congress usually has responded with special emergency legislation. When asked what our national policy should be to deal with production risk associated with natural disasters such as drought, about one-third of the respondents preferred a continuation of the current voluntary crop insurance program where farmers pay about 70% of the cost and government pays about 30%. About one-fifth of the farmers would prefer the elimination of the current Federal crop insurance program and instead have the Congress provide limited disaster assistance when a severe national disaster occurs such as 1988. However, 14% favor the elimination of all government crop insurance and disaster assistance programs. Only 9% favor legislation which would require farmers to buy Federal crop insurance to be in -6 eligible for government program benefits. Yet 14% were not did not respond, and 2% suggested other alternatives. A significant number of the smaller farmers want all government disaster programs eliminated. Support for the current crop insurance program appears to be strongest among the mid-sized farmers. Dairy Policy Dairy policy has often been controversial. Six percent of the Indiana farmers who returned the survey were dairymen. Of these dairy farmers, only 17% have more than a 50 cow herd. Thirty percent of the dairy farmers favor the elimination of all dairy price support programs, 23% want to continue the current program, 20% prefer production quotas and price supports based on the average cost of production, 13% want to give the Secretary of Agriculture more authority to set milk price supports, and 13% are not sure what should be future dairy policy. A comparison of all respondents indicates attitudes on dairy policy similar to those of dairy farmers. Agricultural Credit Policy For many years the Farmers Home Administration has served as a creditor of last resort for many farmers who can not obtain credit through commercial channels. When asked if the government should continue to loan money to farmers with limited capital who can not get credit from other sources, 44% said no, 28% said yes, 20% were not sure, and 8% did not respond. Program Payment Distribution smaller Slightly over one-half of the Indiana farmers favor a change in farm programs which would give a higher proportion of price and income farmers. the As might be expected, is highly correlated with farm size. supportive of support payments to response to this question Farmers with annual gross sales less than $100,00 are this proposal while larger farmers with annual gross sales over $250,000 are not. Farm Programs and Structure used to Farmers' views on whether farm programs should be influence the number and size of farms are quite divided. Forty six percent said yes, while 40% said no and about 8% did not respond. Small less than 180 acres or annual gross sales less than operators with farm size and numbers $40,000 think farm programs should influence while those who operate more than 500 acres or whose annual gross sales exceed $250,000 disagree. Domestic Food Programs There are strong and opposing views among Indiana farmers concerning on on domestic food assistance spent $19 billion assistance programs. amount should be food Slightly increased. -7 Slightly more (39%) disagreed. About one-fourth were unsure or did not respond. Rural Development There has been growing interest in the Congress and in rural communities to expand efforts to encourage economic development in rural areas. Over one-half (53%) of the respondents favor increased Federal government funding for rural development programs to expand employment and economic activity in low-income rural communities. Only about one-fifth disagree. Support for rural development efforts is inversely associated with educational levels. Those with less years of schooling are more supportive. Rural development is an issue that is likely to receive increased attention in the 1990 Farm Bill. International Trade and Development Since the early 1970s international trade has become extremely important to U.S. agriculture. After rapid growth in the 1970s, agricultural exports declined in the early 1980s and have only begun to recover since 1986. Changes in domestic policies, e.g., lower loan rates and export subsidy programs, economic recovery in other countries, and a weaker U.S. dollar have contributed to the recent increase in the value and volume of U.S. agricultural exports. Indiana farmers strongly favor efforts to reduce world trade barriers (78%), especially grain producers and those who are college graduates. Over one-half (58%) favor bilateral and multilateral efforts to reach separate trade agreements and reduce farm and export subsidies in order to enhance world agricultural trade. There is less enthusiasm, however, to enter into joint agreements with other nations to limit production and establish marketing controls. Thirty-six percent agree, 30% disagree, and 34% have no opinion. The United States has been a major source of foreign food assistance under P.L. 480 since the 1950s on both a donation and concessional sale basis. Most farmers (43%) favor the continuation of efforts to fund food aid to low-income nations. However, 21% disagree and 29% have no opinion. Private and public funds have financed the development of foreign markets for U.S. agricultural products. Most farmers (47%) favor additional farmer-financed foreign market development efforts. However, again there are other views with 21% saying no, 23% unsure, and 9% who did not answer the question. Farmers' views on the effectiveness and level of expenditures on export subsidies vary. Partly in response to the use of export subsidies by the European Community, the U.S. began an Export Enhancement Program (EEP) in 1985. Since then the U.S. has spent several billion dollars on agricultural export subsidies, especially for wheat. Most Indiana farmers (46%) favor the continuation of these export subsidies. While 11% disagree, a large number (32%) are unsure and 11% did not answer the question. Large grain producers are more likely to favor the continuation of these export subsidy programs. -8 is The support for a reduction in U.S. agricultural import barriers relatively weak. About one-third would favor such efforts, about onefourth would not, and approximately another one-third are uncertain. U.S. agricultural development assistance programs in low-income countries have been controversial for many years. Despite research evidence and country-specific experience where the U.S. has assisted a country to develop its agricultural sector and subsequently that country has become a strong importer of U. S. agricultural and nonagricultural products, many farmers still do not support economic development efforts directed towards agriculture by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). Less than one-third (30%) of the respondents favor such efforts while over one-third (38%) do not. Again, many are unsure (21%) or did not answer the question (11%). Federal Budget Deficits throughout Budget Amendment, Federal budget deficits have been a major national concern the 1980s. Despite the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings efforts to reduce the Federal budget deficit have been only modestly successful. The deficit during each of the past three years has exceeded $150 billion. Most Indiana farmers (53%) favor across-the-board cuts to reduce the Federal budget deficit. About one-fifth disagree, however. There is strong support to cut defense expenditures (57%), social programs excluding Social Security (50%), and farm program expenditures (49%). Also if farm programs are reduced, 36% favor across-the-board cuts, 36% favor the continuation of payments to small and moderate sized farmers, 11% would make payments only to farmers with severe financial need, and 7% would cut some programs more than others. About 10% had no response or suggested other alternatives. Larger grain farmers are more likely to support across-the-board cuts while smaller farmers favor cuts in payments to larger producers and prefer that payments be made on the basis of financial need. There is very little support for a tax increase (16%) as a budget balancing technique. However, a majority of farmers would favor an increase in user fees for government services (49%) and increased efforts to collect taxes due the Federal government (71%). Farmers clearly do not want Social Security payments reduced. Only 11% favor this. Farmers with annual gross sales under $40,000 strongly disagree with any efforts to reduce Social Security Payments. Also, as expected, older farmers were more likely to disagree. Some Indiana Issues The survey included a few policy questions that may future sessions of the Indiana General Assembly. Corn Check-off. In recent years there have been two soybean referenda and one for corn in Indiana. All were defeated. check-off -9 When asked in this survey if they would favor a corn check-off of one cent per bushel with the funds allocated for research and market development as determined by an elected board that included only Indiana corn producers, 41% of the respondents said no. A slightly smaller number (37%) said yes. About one-fifth were unsure and 4% did not respond. These responses parallel the vote in the December 1987 corn check-off referendum when 37% of the Indiana corn producers voted yes and 63% voted no. College graduates and mid-sized farmers are more likely to support a corn check-off. Roads and Bridges. Many Indiana residents have expressed concern in recent years with the declining quality of rural roads and bridges. Farmers are especially concerned about the need for all weather roads and stronger bridges that support heavy loads of grain and are safe for the movement of large farm equipment. The survey asked if they would favor a two cent per gallon increase in the Indiana gasoline and diesel fuel tax with no exemptions for farm use but the requirement that all tax revenues could only be allocated for the repair of rural roads and bridges. Despite the frequently expressed concern about the poor state of Indiana rural roads and bridges, over one-half (56%) responded negatively to this proposal and less than one-third (28%) would favor such a tax to generate tax revenues to repair rural roads and bridges. Eleven percent were unsure and 5% did not answer the question. Agricultural Credit from the State of Indiana. Farmers' views on state agricultural credit programs such as the Indiana Agricultural Development Corporation and the Treasurer's Farm Program appear to be quite mixed. One-fourth do not favor this type of credit program. However, 29% favor more of this type of credit, 30% favor a continuation of the same level, and 13% want it reduced. Only 2% had no response. Larger farmers tend to be more supportive of additional agricultural credit. Conclusions Indiana farmers remain divided in their views on many food and agricultural policy issues. Furthermore, their views appear changed on some issues during the past five years. to have Perhaps the most significant change in views is with respect to mandatory production control programs. Only 8% favored this in 1989 compared to slightly over one-fourth in 1984. Furthermore, the support for elimination of farm programs has increased from about onefourth to 42%. The support for soil conservation programs remains relatively strong. While there are some differences of opinion about the size of the Conservation Reserve Program, most farmers favor its continuation. The Uruguay Round of General Agreement on Tariff and Trade (GATT) Negotiations are underway in Geneva, Switzerland. A major goal of these multilateral trade negotiations is to reduce barriers to trade. |