Agribusinesses have contributed $27 million to members of the House and Senate Agriculture committees over the past decade, according to an analysis released yesterday by a nonprofit that tracks money and politics.

At $3.8 million, the crop production and basic processing sector has contributed the most to committee members, according to the report. The milk and dairy sector follows at $2.9 million, and sugar cane and sugar beets round out the top three at $2.6 million.

The report by MapLight comes as the agriculture community awaits a farm bill proposal from leaders of those committees that would determine funding for the nation's farm subsidy, conservation and nutrition programs for the next several years.

That proposal, which could come as soon as today, will be given to the congressional supercommittee tasked with coming up with $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction over the next 10 years. The closed-door process for writing the proposal has led to many accusations that the agriculture committee leaders are writing a "secret" farm bill (E&ENews PM, Oct. 26).

Environmental groups have been alleging for years that big agribusinesses wield heavy influence over agriculture committee members. Green groups say agribusinesses are then rewarded through subsidies in federal farm policy and that subsidies continue to be favored even as spending for conservation and energy is cut (Greenwire, Feb. 24).

"It is no surprise that agri-lobbyists spent $27 million on members of the House and Senate Agriculture committees to protect farm policies that funnel billions of dollars into agribusiness pockets every year," said Don Carr, senior communications and policy adviser at the Environmental Working Group.

The study from MapLight does not accuse the agribusinesses of using influence to sway agriculture members.

Its numbers were culled from the Center for Responsive Politics,another organization that tracks money in Washington, D.C. The study uses the center's definition of agribusiness, which includes companies with commodity crops, livestock, pesticides, tobacco, forest products, speciality crops, farm machinery, and paper and pulp mills, among others.

The analysis runs through June 30 of this year, well before agriculture leaders started putting together their deficit reduction proposal.

The highest single contributor was American Crystal Sugar Co., an agriculture cooperative, which has given $984,998 to Agriculture Committee members over the decade. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, American Crystal Sugar also leads agribusinesses this year in overall political contributions.

Highest in the dairy sector was Dairy Farmers of America with $550,100. In the poultry sector, the United Egg Association has contributed $414,500, while in livestock, the National Pork Producers Council has given $276,214. The National Cotton Council has contributed $332,718.

None of the associations for corn producers broke $100,000. The National Corn Growers Association was at the top at that sector with $66,666.

Corn Growers is in fact advocating for the elimination of direct payments to farmers and producers. The association is instead hoping that agriculture leaders will include a shallow-loss program in their proposal or one that would pay producers for dips in their revenue that are due to uncontrollable circumstances like weather and disease (E&E Daily, Nov. 4).

Supercommittee members have also gotten their share of dollars from the agriculture industry. According to the report, the crop production sector has given almost $500,000 total over the last decade to the 12 members. Forestry has given $441,000, while tobacco has contributed $416,000.

Overall, the analysis shows, agribusinesses have contributed $3.7 million to the 12 supercommittee members.