Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/8590

Bill Overview

Title: Small Family Farmer And Rancher Relief Act

Description: This bill increases premium and insurance subsidies for certain small family farmers and ranchers, creates a program to provide relief to small producers when cattle prices and values exceed a specified threshold level, and establishes a grant program to assist cattle producers to market and add value to beef products.

Sponsors: Rep. Scott, David [D-GA-13]

Target Audience

Population: Small family farmers and ranchers, particularly those involved in cattle production

Estimated Size: 2000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

cattle rancher (Texas)

Age: 58 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think the policy is a step in the right direction for us small guys.
  • The subsidies and relief program will help us manage risks better, especially with the unpredictable cattle prices.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 8 4
Year 10 9 4
Year 20 9 3

rancher (Montana)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's crucial that the government notices the struggles of family-run beef farms.
  • The marketing grants could help us reach more customers interested in organic products.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 9 6
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 9 5

farmer and rancher (Kansas)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • While my focus is more on crops, the cattle grants could still provide some seasonal cost balancing.
  • It'd be helpful, but not life-changing for us.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 7 5

retired rancher (North Dakota)

Age: 63 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It's rewarding to see such initiatives, I hope they support the next generation of ranchers.
  • These programs might have made retirement easier had they been available sooner.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 8
Year 5 8 8
Year 10 8 8
Year 20 8 8

new rancher (Colorado)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • As new ranchers, every bit of help counts, both financially and in terms of market access.
  • I believe this policy could level the playing field for newcomers.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 8 5

cattle breeder (Oklahoma)

Age: 51 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The relief program for cattle prices is essential, given the market's unpredictability.
  • I'm hoping to see more long-term stability with potential market expansion.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 9 6
Year 5 9 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 8 5

agricultural consultant (Nebraska)

Age: 37 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I see firsthand the struggles many small operations face; this policy could open up important opportunities.
  • The marketing grants align well with current industry trends.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 8 5

ranch manager (Wyoming)

Age: 49 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think the policy is more focused on smaller operations, so our benefit might be negligible.
  • My main concern is on sustainability and modern ranching approaches, which aren't covered.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 6 6
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 6 5

retired farmer (Idaho)

Age: 67 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • While it won't affect me directly, it's good to see these programs for current farmers.
  • Support for small farmers is key to keeping rural communities vibrant.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 8
Year 5 8 8
Year 10 8 8
Year 20 8 8

agro-economist (California)

Age: 54 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy could provide substantial short-term relief but needs assessment for long-term impact.
  • The program's success will depend on effective implementation and fair distribution.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 9 7
Year 3 9 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 9 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $120000000, High: $180000000)

Year 2: $152000000 (Low: $122000000, High: $182000000)

Year 3: $154000000 (Low: $124000000, High: $184000000)

Year 5: $158000000 (Low: $128000000, High: $188000000)

Year 10: $165000000 (Low: $135000000, High: $195000000)

Year 100: $200000000 (Low: $170000000, High: $230000000)

Key Considerations