You limited your search to:

 Resource Type: Report
 Collection: Congressional Research Service Reports
Farm and Food Support Under USDA's Section 32 Program

Farm and Food Support Under USDA's Section 32 Program

Date: November 28, 2006
Creator: Becker, Geoffrey S
Description: None
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
Farm and Food Support Under USDA's Section 32 Program

Farm and Food Support Under USDA's Section 32 Program

Date: September 29, 2004
Creator: Becker, Geoffrey S
Description: None
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
Farm and Food Support Under USDA's Section 32 Program

Farm and Food Support Under USDA's Section 32 Program

Date: June 22, 1999
Creator: Becker, Geoffrey S
Description: None
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
Farm and Food Support Under USDA's Section 32 Program

Farm and Food Support Under USDA's Section 32 Program

Date: August 26, 2005
Creator: Becker, Geoffrey S
Description: None
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
Emergency Funding for Agriculture: A Brief History of Supplemental Appropriations, FY1989-FY2005

Emergency Funding for Agriculture: A Brief History of Supplemental Appropriations, FY1989-FY2005

Date: June 23, 2005
Creator: Chite, Ralph M
Description: From FY1989 through FY2005 (to date), 31 appropriations, authorization, or farm disaster acts added approximately $53.2 billion in supplemental funding for U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) programs (excluding the Forest Service, which is funded annually under the Interior appropriations bill). Nearly $41 billion, or 77% of the total amount, was for FY1999-FY2005 alone. Two FY2005 supplementals have been enacted to date, the largest of which was a disaster relief package in response to the 2004 hurricanes and other natural disasters, which included $3.5 billion for agricultural losses (attached to the FY2005 Military Construction Appropriations Act (P.L. 108-324)).
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
Farm Disaster Assistance: USDA Programs and Recent Legislative Action

Farm Disaster Assistance: USDA Programs and Recent Legislative Action

Date: November 4, 1998
Creator: Chite, Ralph M
Description: None
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
Agriculture in the WTO: Member Spending on Domestic Support

Agriculture in the WTO: Member Spending on Domestic Support

Date: June 17, 2005
Creator: Schnepf, Randy
Description: Under the World Trade Organization’s (WTO’s) Agreement on Agriculture (AA), member countries agreed to general rules regarding disciplines on domestic and export subsidies, and concessions on market access. This report focuses solely on the commitments made by WTO member countries concerning government outlays in support of domestic agricultural production. The three sections of the report provide a brief overview of WTO domestic policy commitments; background information on WTO member requirements for reporting on domestic subsidy outlays; WTO member outlays made to support agricultural production; and U.S. agricultural support outlays compared against spending limits. In addition, the report briefly discusses the implications for U.S. agricultural policy of continued adherence to existing WTO commitments.
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
Agricultural Biotechnology: The U.S.-EU Dispute

Agricultural Biotechnology: The U.S.-EU Dispute

Date: November 17, 2005
Creator: Hanrahan, Charles E.
Description: In May 2003, the United States, Canada, and Argentina initiated a formal challenge before the World Trade Organization (WTO) of the European Union’s (EU’s) de facto moratorium on approving new agricultural biotechnology products, in place since 1998. Although the EU effectively lifted the moratorium in May 2004 by approving a genetically engineered (GE) corn variety, the three countries are pursuing the case, in part because a number of EU member states continue to block approved biotech products. Because of delays, the WTO is expected to decide the case by December 2005. The moratorium reportedly cost U.S. corn growers some $300 million in exports to the EU annually. The EU moratorium, U.S. officials contend, threatened other agricultural exports not only to the EU, but also to other parts of the world where the EU approach to regulating agricultural biotechnology is taking hold.
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
Agricultural Biotechnology: The U.S.-EU Dispute

Agricultural Biotechnology: The U.S.-EU Dispute

Date: March 10, 2006
Creator: Hanrahan, Charles E.
Description: In May 2003, the United States, Canada, and Argentina initiated a formal challenge before the World Trade Organization (WTO) of the European Union’s (EU’s) de facto moratorium on approving new agricultural biotechnology products, in place since 1998. Although the EU effectively lifted the moratorium in May 2004 by approving a genetically engineered (GE) corn variety, the three countries are pursuing the case, in part because a number of EU member states continue to block approved biotech products. Because of delays, the WTO is expected to decide the case by December 2005. The moratorium reportedly cost U.S. corn growers some $300 million in exports to the EU annually. The EU moratorium, U.S. officials contend, threatened other agricultural exports not only to the EU, but also to other parts of the world where the EU approach to regulating agricultural biotechnology is taking hold.
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department
Agricultural Biotechnology: Background and Recent Issues

Agricultural Biotechnology: Background and Recent Issues

Date: March 7, 2005
Creator: Becker, Geoffrey S.
Description: Since the first genetically engineered (GE) crops (also called GM [genetically modified] crops, or GMOs, genetically modified organisms) became commercially available in the mid-1990s, U.S. soybean, cotton, and corn farmers have rapidly adopted them. As adoption has spread, there have been policy debates over the costs and benefits of GE products. Issues include the impacts of GE crops on the environment and food safety, and whether GE foods should be specially labeled. Congress generally has been supportive of GE agricultural products, although some Members have expressed wariness about their adoption and regulation. The 109th Congress will likely continue to follow trade developments, particularly the U.S.-EU dispute, as well as U.S. regulatory mechanisms for approving biotech foods.
Contributing Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department