WSP12001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

From: NACO Washington Office To: Oan Parker Date: 9/19195 Time: 20:48:44 Pege , of 2 t.'":> ...... W tv DATE: September 18, 1995 AGRICUI.TURE APPROPRIA TIONS On Wednesday, September 13, the Senate Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee met and approved its version of the USDA budget. On Thursday, September 14, the budget was presented and approved by the full Senate A nn~FR~ans Committee. It will be scheduled next for approval on the Senate floor and then go to. cenfcrence with the House to resolve their differences. The results of the conference will tben go back to tbe full House and Senate for approval and then to the President for his signature. NA TIONAL ASSOCIA nON OF CONSERVATION DISTRICTS CONSERVATION PARTNERSHIP COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK LEGISLATIVE UPDATE RE: Senate Appropriations Actions Tbe agriculture budget as approved by the Senate ~p:ri~ons Committee contains the following items concerning conservation programs: --I~ 5"S +- . ..... NRCS Conservati Operatio is at $637.9 million (M), up $7.9M from the House level and $50.9M more than 1 appropriations. . Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations is set at $100M, the same as the House and $30M more than 1995. . River Basin Surveys and Investigations is $8.3M and Watersbed Planning is $5.6M. Tbis is vety close to the House block grant of $14M wbich contained tbese two items. . RC&D was set at 0$27M, $5.8M less than 1995. RC&D was part of the otber House block grant with the Colorado River Salinity Control Program. and FlP that totaled $36M. . Great Plains was zeroed as it was in the House. . FIP was set at $6.3M, down $300,000 from 1995. .f..Q;..-~ ~ Colorado RiveIA was at $1M. 3.5 ess than 1995. WRP was set at $77M, $16.2M less than 1995. The House set WRP at $210M. . . . CRP was approved at $1.78 billion (B), the same as the House, $38.5M more than 1995. . ACP is set at $50M, dQwn $25M from tbe House figure of $75M and $50M less than 1995. The Water Qmwty Incentives. Program is earmarked at $15M to come out of the ACP budget. These figures were developed by the staff and passed unchanged by the subcommittee and committee. You Will recall that the one item that was .selected by the National Partnership as the most important element of our conservation efforts was NRCS technical assistance thrOugh the CO account. The $43M increase by the House over last year's level was boosted by another $7.9M by the Senate. This is a testament to your tremendous and sustaining responses to our calls for making contacts with the House and Senate Budget and Appropriation Committees over tbe last 7 months. This is a truly significant accomplishment in this Congress. Likewise, tbe $30M increase in Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations which include PL-566 brings it back from the imminent death to the program proposed by the Administration last year. However, the cost-share programs continue to dwindle to insignificant levels. As discretionary programs, tbey are easy targets. As regional programs sucb as Great Plains and Colorado River, they are also easy targets. We have watched ACP drop $148M or 75% in 2 years, Water Bank and Great Plains get zeroed and Colorado