Seventy-three years ago last month (May 12, 1933) the first farm bill became law. This landmark legislation was drafted in response to Depression-era economics that were devastating America’s heartland and political forces that demanded change. It was a time when farm prices were depressed and when nearly half the U.S. population lived in rural areas, where most were employed in agriculture.

Despite dramatic changes in our own economy, the impact of the global marketplace and huge changes in the structure of American agriculture, current farm policy still looks a lot like it did in 1933. Most of the farm bills of the 20th century met the needs of their times. But their shortcomings are now more evident, and the time for major change has once again arrived. The 2007 farm bill must respond to the 21st century needs of rural America, rather than the much different policy challenges of 70 years ago.

Our traditional commodity programs are costly, and most of the benefits go to larger farms, not those in the small- or medium-size category. Many producers are excluded, and the programs themselves are complicated and difficult to administer. Some are vulnerable to challenge under international trade rules. Conservation and other laudable environmental programs have been added in recent years, but have never been fully funded. There is also a need to devote more attention to non-traditional issues such as energy generation, nutrition, industrial uses of farm products and rural infrastructure.

For the first time in memory the door is wide open for a new generation of farm policies that will provide a defensible safety net for producers, distribute benefits more equitably, serve all farmers rather than a select minority, improve resource conservation and environmental quality, increase domestic and global market opportunities, and enhance prospects for economic development in rural America. Such a farm bill would allow farmers to be responsive to market signals rather than government checks, help revitalize rural communities and deliver real public goods (including a major dose of additional environmental protection) in return for taxpayers’ investment. Were this to be accomplished, it would yield an unprecedented payback to our nation over the long term.

That’s why we have endorsed a new framework and recommendations for U.S. farm policy for the 21st century contained in a new report produced by American Farmland Trust. “Agenda 2007: A New Framework and Direction for U.S. Farm Policy,” is a product of more than a year of consultation with hundreds of farmers, ranchers, economists and policy experts. Its recommendations would foster more widespread farm prosperity; U.S. competitiveness; enhanced environmental protection; and improved diets for our citizens.

Not everyone agrees that the time is right for innovative leadership and a new vision for U.S. agriculture. Many remain fixated on the past. It is human nature to be wary of change, and lots of farmers have a vested interest in the status quo. So it is not surprising that proposals for change are resisted. But that is the challenge of our political process, and the arguments for change – for a major farm policy update – are overwhelming.

We believe a simple extension of current law, as some have suggested, would be a grave error. It would waste an unprecedented opportunity to prepare American agriculture for the global competition it will face over the next half century. And it would forgo the opportunity to create lasting public support for policies linking farm support to broader public values – clean water, wildlife habitat, resource conservation, nutrition and renewable energy, among others.

The forces for change will gather momentum and intensify over time. Hence, maintenance of the status quo is an unattractive option.

Federal policymakers and agricultural leaders are now at a crossroads. They can take the easy way out, at least for the short term, and opt for “business as usual.” Or they can take the political risk involved in trying to do this job right for the long pull. We hope they’ll choose the latter course and craft a 2007 farm bill that is innovative, broad based, designed to serve all producers, and one that will generate widespread public support.

– Clayton Yeutter served as the U.S. trade representative during the Reagan administration and as the secretary of agriculture during the George H.W. Bush administration. Dan Glickman served as the secretary of agriculture during the Clinton administration and as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives Agriculture Committee for 18 years while representing Kansas in Congress.