The 1996 Freedom to Farm Act was supposed to allow market forces to have greater influence, and the government less, over farmers and agriculture markets. Farmers no longer have to plant hundreds of acres of a crop just because of a government- supported price, or because they have to do so to stay eligible for future payments. Instead, farmers can adjust -- while continuing to receive government payments -- by switching to one of a limited number of other so-called program corps, reducing acreage planted, or going out of business.

But last month, Congress retreated from market-oriented reforms by passing a $5.9 billion bailout bill that temporarily increases the farm subsidies the 1996 act has been phasing out.

• Many farmers will receive twice as much from the government as last year.

• Congress increased payments because world prices for commodities covered by the program have fallen disastrously -- with corn prices down 60 percent and soybean prices down nearly a third from 1996 levels.

• Wheat farmers in Kansas responded to low prices by growing a million acres less of wheat and turning to sorghum and cotton -- but that put them in competition with other states that traditionally grow those crops.

• Many farmers outside the Midwest turned to soybeans, with the result that the U.S. had 10 million more soybean acres than before -- while prices for soybeans also fell.

The deregulatory process could collapse, say observers, if grower groups press of another bailout next year. Also, leadership of the House Agriculture Committee is likely to pass to Rep. Larry Combest (R-Texas), who says "I just don't see how we can get out of agriculture when it's so important."

Source: Scott Kilman, "Crop Deregulation Is Put to the Test in New Rural Crisis," Wall Street Journal, November 9, 1998.