Peterson’s talks with the administration have fueled fears in the Senate that the House might cut a deal with the administration. The Senate may be especially sensitive to such talks after the debate over an economic stimulus bill, in which House leaders negotiated directly with the administration and then pressured the Senate to sign their agreement.

An aide to Peterson stressed that he has kept in close contact with the Senate on his talks with Deputy Agriculture Secretary Chuck Conner.

Those high prices meant certain farm subsidy payments were not triggered, and the last farm bill cost less than expected. It also means farm-state lawmakers were given less money for the new farm bill.

House and Senate Democrats still want to increase spending over baseline levels, but they have some different priorities.

The lack of a farm crisis, the looming election and the president’s veto threat have some predicting that work on a new farm bill will be pushed back until 2009, and instead current policies will be extended.

“At the end of the day, I still think you end up with an extension,” said Gattis, who previously worked as an aide to Goodlatte. Congress has already extended the current bill until March 15.

Some groups, like fruit and vegetable growers, would be losers in such an outcome. The bill approved by the House provides $1.7 billion in new funding for fruit and vegetable growers, while the Senate measure would provide an additional $2.2 billion.

“We certainly would oppose an extension of the current farm bill,” said Robert Guenther, a vice president with the United Fresh Produce Association.

Congressional aides also point out that while prices are high, so are costs. Farmers face high fuel prices to run their equipment; the higher fuel prices also increase the cost of fertilizer.

Higher fuel prices seem here to stay, but commodity prices at some point could fall. That would leave farmers vulnerable, and the bill’s energy provisions could help by, for example, offering incentives for farmers to grow other crops that could be used for ethanol production. Finding the money to pay for those provisions, however, is tricky.

For reform groups like the Environmental Working Group, the question of supporting a new farm bill hinges on whether it includes enough reforms. “People want a farm bill, but a good farm bill. The question is the farm bill you do have, is it better than nothing?” said Sandra Schubert, EWG’s director of government relations.

She acknowledged some interest groups can live without a new agricultural policy. “It varies depending on the organization and the interest,” she said.