News and Press Releases
National Leaders Call For Renewed Federal Commitment To Rural Development As Part Of 2007 Farm Bill
Apr 25, 2007
Contact: Edwin Rosado, Legislative Director,
National Association Of Counties
(202) 942-4271
erosado@naco.org
WASHINGTON, DC – A new coalition of diverse organizations representing the interests of rural America today launched the Campaign for a RenewedRural Development and called on the 110th Congress to create and fund a strong and effective rural development title in the newfarm bill. The announcement was made by National Association of Counties (NACo) President Colleen Landkamer on behalf of twenty‐four organizations during a news conference this afternoon on Capitol Hill.
“Federal rural development programs must be significantly enhanced in the 2007 Farm Bill if our nation is to strengthen the econmic competitiveness and quality of life in small town and rural America,” said Landkamer, a county commissioner from Blue Earth County, Minnesota, who chairs the Campaign.
Joined by a bipartisan group of congressional leaders during an April 25 Capitol Hill press conference, the Campaign for a Renewed Rural Development was launched by a diverse collection of national organizations representing stateand local officials, community and economic development practitioners, healthcare professionals, educational institutions, energy cooperatives, entrepreneurs, sustainable agriculture, civic leaders and other rural stakeholders.
“Our farmers, businesses and entrepreneurs are facing immense global competition,” according to Landkamer. “The 2007 Farm Bill offers a timely and appropriate legislative vehicle for Congress and the administration to renew the federalcommitment to rural America.”
Leanne Mazer, Tri‐County Council of Western Maryland Executive Director and First Vice President of the National Association of Development Organzations said, “Since the last Farm Bill, rural development programs, including those at USDA, have experienced a significant decline in grant funding and support, resulting in countless lost opportunities to improve local water systems and infrastructure, deploy the latest communication technologies, help entrepreneurs jumpstart and expand their businesses, and generally improve the economic conditions and quality of life in many of our nation's smaller towns and rural areas.”
“Despite the perception created by many media pundits and news outlets,” reports Mazer, “the federal government currently spends more, per capita, in our nation's metropolitan areas than in our rural communities, including two to five times more on community and economic development initiatives. Our organizations' are strong advocates for continued federal assistance for our urban communities, yet we also firmly believe that the federal government must provide more robust support for sustained community and economic iprovements in our small cities and rural areas.”
In analyzing Consolidated Federal Funds data for the latest available fiscal year (FY03), according to the independent Southern Rural Development Initiative, nonmetropolitan areas received $548 less per capita than metropolitan areas ($7,242 versus $6,694) when examining all federal expenditures. Furthermore, per capita funding for community resources represented 14.5 percent of funds to metropolitan areas, but only 8.9 percent of funds to nonmetropolitan areas. The FY2003 findings are consistent with other independent studies by the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, Rural Policy Research Institute and others concluding that metropolitan areas received two to five times more during each yearfrom FY1994‐2001.
“As demonstrated by our incredibly diverse and broad range of stakeholder organizations in the Campaign for a Renewed Rural Deveopment, “ Landkamer explained, “Increased federal funding and a holistic and flexible approach to rural development is an urgent need across the rural landscap. Whether we are striving to support our farmers, tap into the immense potential of renewable and alternative energy supplies or leverage and sustain our treasured natural amenties, rural communities must also establish the community, infrastructure, educational, health, technological and other fundamental community assets needed to remain competitive and reach their potential.”
“However, the recent trend of converting vital federal rural development grant programs into direct loan and loan guarantees is a dangerus and costly policy shift for rural America. While some loans and loan guarantees may be appropriate and necessary, there still remains a dire need for core grant dollars that serve as essential gap financing and seed capital for local communty, infrastructure and economic development investments,” states Alan Morgan, Chief Executive Officer of the National Rural Health Association.
“Whether it is value‐added agriculture, renewable and alternative energy, advanced manufacturing, entrepreneurship or heritage tourism, rural America has remarkable assets that can be better utilized with the goal of making rural America a stronger contributor t the national economy while protecting our environment and quality of life”, says Ed Coulter, Chancellor, Arkansas State University ‐ Mountain Home and chair of the American Association of Community Colleges. “Unless we secure significantly greater federal commitment through USDA Rural Development programs, rural communities will continue to be at a marked disadvantage in trying to build and sustain viable local economies.”