House Ag. Comm. Hearing -Votes; Biofuels; Climate Issues;
Soybean Checkoff; and Biotechnology
Posted By Keith Good
House Ag. Comm. Hearing -Votes; Biofuels; Climate Issues;
Soybean Checkoff; and Biotechnology
House Agriculture Subcommittee Hearing- Quality Control Systems in SNAP
Yesterday, the House Agriculture Committee’s Subcommittee on
Department Operations, Oversight, Nutrition and Forestry, held a hearing to
review quality control systems in the
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
A House Agriculture Committee news
release stated that, “The Subcommittee heard testimony from government
officials and advocacy and industry groups about efforts to reduce the
error rate in the SNAP program and to combat fraud and abuse in the system.”
Ms.
Julie Paradis, the Administrator of USDA’s Food
and Nutrition Service, provided a fascinating background and statistical
overview on the recent upsurge in SNAP program participation
rates. She also indicated that according to a report last month, “The
SNAP national payment accuracy rate, for FY2009, had reached an all time high of
95.64 percent.” To listen to a portion of this overview, just
click here (MP3- 1:08).
During the discussion portion of yesterday’s hearing, Rep. Kurt Schrader,
D-Oregon, inquired about the possibility of reaching a “tipping point,” or
point of “diminishing returns” with respect to resource allocation for
improving SNAP program payment accuracy. In addition, Rep. Schrader also asked
about “unauthorized immigrants” and the SNAP program. To listen to a portion of
this dialogue from yesterday, just
click here (MP3- 2:38).
Meanwhile, Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper,
D-Pennsylvania, asked the first panel of witnesses at yesterday’s hearing about
the use of SNAP benefits at local farmers markets, a portion of this exchange
is available
here (MP3- 1:28). In the clip, FNS Administrator Paradis
notes that, “Our goal is to have every farmers market in the country
participating in the [SNAP] program.”
Subcommittee Ranking Member Jeff Fortenberry,
R-Nebraska, expressed concern about health and obesity rates, and noted that
data from the Healthy Incentives
Pilot (HIP) would not be available for another two years. He went on to ask
the second panel of witnesses yesterday an interesting theoretical question
about a potential “new paradigm” in linking SNAP benefits to improved
choice. He offered a hypothetical example: “Instead of a SNAP
card having $100 on it, a SNAP card would have 100 ‘nutritional points,’ and
that would also be measured as you buy certain foods and therefore the
market would then respond to develop food products that would fit easily into
the nutritional categorizations.” To listen to this interesting discussion on
linking SNAP benefits to nutritional health, click
here (MP3- 8:12).
An audio replay of yesterday’s Subcommittee hearing on SNAP is available here,
while prepared testimony can be found here.
In other nutritional developments, a news release
yesterday from Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Blanche Lincoln,
D-Arkansas, noted that, “Today, [Sen Lincoln] returned
to the Senate floor for the second time this week to speak on the need to pass
‘The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act’
to reauthorize child nutrition programs before they expire on September 30th.
The bi-partisan legislation would make the most historic investment in child
nutrition programs since their inception and is completely paid for.”
The release included remarks delivered yesterday by Chairman Lincoln.
House Agriculture Committee- Votes
A news
release yesterday from the House Agriculture Committee indicated that, “Today,
the House Agriculture Committee approved three bills for consideration by the U.S. House of
Representatives.
“H.R. 5509,
the Chesapeake Bay Restoration and Improvement Act, is a
bipartisan bill that will give farmers and ranchers in the Chesapeake Bay
region additional tools to help them meet regulatory requirements imposed on
them by the Environmental Protection Agency.”
“H.R. 3519,
the Veterinary Services Investment Act, establishes a
competitive grant program at USDA to support efforts to increase access to
veterinary care in underserved areas.”
And, “H.R.
5852, the Mandatory Price Reporting Act of 2010,
reauthorizes mandatory price reporting programs run by the U.S. Department of
Agriculture for five years. It also adds mandatory reporting for wholesale pork
cuts and electronic reporting for dairy products.”
With respect to the Chesapeake Bay bill, the American Farm Bureau noted
yesterday that, “The Chesapeake Bay Program Reauthorization and Improvement
Act (H.R. 5509) will help farmers while also benefitting communities in
the bay’s watershed. The American Farm Bureau Federation is urging the
House Agriculture Committee to approve the bill when it comes up for
consideration today.
“‘This bill is a commonsense approach to the work that is needed in the Chesapeake Bay watershed,’ said AFBF President Bob
Stallman. ‘It offers an opportunity to improve water quality by
working with farmers and ranchers. Perhaps most importantly, it
provides a viable, effective alternative to other measures which view this
problem as a ‘zero-sum’ game that would not just limit opportunities for
agriculture in the watershed but would, in all likelihood, spell the end of
agriculture for many farm families.’”
A news
release yesterday from the National Corn Growers Association stated that,
“Today, the House Agriculture Committee voted to pass The Chesapeake Bay
Program Reauthorization and Improvement Act, H.R. 5509. The bi-partisan bill
addresses water quality challenges in the Chesapeake Bay and establishes
a workable nutrient trading program under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Department
of Agriculture, which will provide incentives for producers to implement
additional conservation practices on their land.
“‘We appreciate the committee’s work on this important piece of bipartisan
legislation,’ said Production Stewardship Action Team Board Liaison Jamey
Jamison. ‘This bill uses a common sense approach to improving water
quality while maintaining a strong farm economy.’”
On the Veterinary Services Investment Act bill, a news item from Rep. Adrian
Smith, R-Nebraska, indicated
yesterday that, “[Congressman Smith's] legislation addressing veterinary
shortages in rural communities overwhelmingly passed the House Agriculture
Committee this afternoon. The Veterinary Services Investment Act (H.R.
3519) would authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to award competitive grants
to help develop, implement, and sustain veterinary services.”
“‘This was a great step toward fixing the veterinarian shortage
which plagues many rural communities. Large animal vets, in particular, are
integral to small, rural communities but are often scarce. The
Veterinary Services Investment Act seeks to stem this tide,’ Smith said.”
And a news
release yesterday from the National Pork Producers Council stated that, “The
National Pork Producers Council today applauded the House Agriculture Committee
for approving legislation to reauthorize the law requiring meat packers to
report to the U.S.
Department of Agriculture the prices they pay producers for animals.
“The committee passed H.R. 5852, sponsored by panel Chairman Collin
Peterson, D-Minn., to reauthorize for five years the
Livestock Mandatory Reporting Act, which is set to expire Sept. 30. The
committee bill also adds to the reporting law provisions requiring reporting of
pork exports – by price and volume – and of wholesale pork cuts.”
Recall that a news
release from earlier this week from the Senate Agriculture Committee stated
that, “U.S. Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), Chairman of the
U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, today joined
Ranking Member Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.),
in introducing bipartisan legislation that would reauthorize mandatory
price reporting for five years. This bill will guarantee transparency
of the livestock marketing sector and help improve producers’ ability to access
fair market prices.”
Yesterday, Nebraska Senators Mike
Johanns (R) and Ben
Nelson (D) also signed on as co-sponsors of the Senate legislation
regarding mandatory pricing.
Biofuels
Joe
Ruff reported yesterday at the Omaha World-Herald Online that, “It’s
time for the federal government to move beyond offering tax credits to
companies that combine ethanol with gasoline, said the CEO of the
fourth-largest ethanol producer in the country.
“Instead, he said, government incentives are needed for
companies that install special pumps at gas stations and design cars capable of
handling higher amounts of the fuel additive.
“‘Let’s build the infrastructure,’ said Todd Becker of Green
Plains Renewable Energy in Omaha.
‘Roads, rail, pipelines — all had some kind of tax incentives or loan
guarantees. It’s happened in every single industry, even semiconductors.’”
Yesterday’s article noted that, “This is a critical time for the
ethanol industry. Congress could eliminate or reduce the ethanol
industry’s $6 billion tax credit by about 9 cents a gallon, from 45 cents to 36
cents.”
“Growth Energy, whose position Becker backs, has called for phasing out the
credit in favor of infrastructure incentives. The Renewable Fuels Association,
on the other hand, said it is important to extend the credit while also
expanding infrastructure efforts.
“Even without the credit, ethanol is competitive in price with
gasoline, Becker said. Now the industry needs government approval to
move from blending 10 percent ethanol with gasoline to
15 percent and the ability to move the product more efficiently across the
country, he said.”
Meanwhile, The New York Times editorial
board stated today that, “Congress must soon decide whether to extend
federal tax subsidies for renewable energy that expire at the end of the year.
The subsidies for wind, solar and geothermal energy are necessary to give these
energy sources the help they need to compete with oil, coal and natural gas. While
it renews those subsidies, Congress should end tax breaks for corn ethanol,
which can stand on its own and is of dubious environmental benefit.”
The Times noted that, “Ethanol, which in this country is made almost
exclusively from corn, has been subsidized since the early 1970s, partly
because it increases octane levels while helping to reduce certain pollutants,
most notably carbon monoxide. Refineries that blend the ethanol with gasoline
now get a 45 cent tax break for every gallon they produce. That break
is no longer needed… A bipartisan group of senators,
have rightly begun to question the subsidy. So have many members of
the House Ways
and Means Committee. Even the powerful ethanol lobby is showing signs of
cracking, with Growth Energy, an ethanol trade group, suggesting a four-year phaseout. It would be far better to end it now. There are
many more useful ways to spend taxpayer dollars.”
Climate Issues
Evan
Lehmann of Climatewire reported yesterday at The
New York Times Online that, “The Senate’s small energy
package unveiled last night flirts with Republican opposition and turns its
cheek to clean-power Democrats. Its first vote, nonetheless, is planned for
next week.
“Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) resisted
mounting efforts in his own party to include a renewable electricity standard
(RES) in his last-ditch attempt to pass an energy bill this summer, even as
several Democratic senators openly questioned his assertions that the
electricity standard lacks support.
“Reid instead raced toward debate this week on the $15 billion bill
that offers $5 billion in rebates for energy efficiency retrofits in homes,
$3.8 billion to encourage the use of natural gas trucks, and $400 million to
study electric cars. The measure would be paid for by increasing a tax on the
oil industry.”
Darren
Goode reported yesterday at The Hill’s Energy Blog that, “Senate
Democrats and Republicans appear on a collision course that would sink chances
of passing oil-spill and energy legislation amid disagreements over both
substance and process.
“Democratic leaders Wednesday foretold the likely failure of the package and
blamed Republicans for obstructing it and other legislation.”
“At a press conference in the Capitol, senior Republicans attacked
several specific provisions while calling the overall bill a hastily crafted
product that Democrats want to speed through the Senate.”
Soybean Checkoff
DTN Ag Policy Editor Chris Clayton reported Tuesday (link
requires subscription) that, “Leaders from the United Soybean Board and
American Soybean Association both indicated Tuesday that the two groups need to
work better together, after waiting a year and a half for an audit of the checkoff to be completed.
“Following an 18-month investigation of the United Soybean Board, USDA’s
Office of Inspector General stated this week in a letter that the agency
‘found insufficient evidence’ to support allegations made by the American Soybean
Association that the USB had misused soybean checkoff
dollars.
“The report by the OIG sent to the office of Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, provides
an anticlimactic end to a public row between the United Soybean Board
and American Soybean Association over checkoff
spending and an employee who no longer works for a checkoff
export group.”
The DTN article stated that, “Phil Bradshaw, a farmer from Griggsville, Ill., and chairman of the United Soybean
Board, said in a conference call with reporters that the report found
no basis for the allegations by ASA, but did suggest USB increase
oversight of the U.S. Soybean Export Council, which Bradshaw noted has already
occurred.
“‘The USDA report speaks for itself,’ Bradshaw said.”
Mr. Clayton noted that, “Since the dispute began, ASA and USB have put
together ‘the group of eight,’ four representatives from each group to talk
further about plans for what Bradshaw described as a ‘facilitated conversation’
to find areas where ASA and USB can work together. Bradshaw said he has a good
relationship with American Soybean Association President Rob Joslin and said he thinks the two groups are ready to move
forward in the best interest of soybean farmers.
“‘I think this is behind us. I hope it is,’ Bradshaw said.”
Biotechnology
Philip
Brasher reported yesterday at The Green Fields Blog (Des Moines Register)
that, “Critics of agricultural biotechnology used the increasing
problem with herbicide-resistant weeds to call for tighter regulation of
biotech crops.
“‘Now, more than ever, farmers need to have a Department of Agriculture that
takes care to preserve and protect the farming environment for generations to
come,’ Kucinich said.”
Yesterday’s update added that, “Rep. Aaron Schock,
R-Ill, expressed concern that increased regulation of biotech crops
could threaten advances in crop production.
“‘The market controls already in place are more than enough to ensure that
farmers are employing the best practices to control herbicide-resistant weeds
in their fields,’ he said.”
We believe that America's farmers and ranchers will support the most enlightened governmental policies when given timely, accurate and complete information. Therefore, it is our goal to make available to them at no cost the same information that is used by lawmakers and USDA officials.
Produced by AgricultureLaw.com, L.L.C., a company dedicated to providing farmers and ranchers with the most complete source of timely information and ideas on agricultural policy.
Michael R. McLeod, President
Randy Green, Editor
Richard Pasco, General Manager
Lydia Lorenz, Web Site Coordinator
NOTE: Materials posted on this Web Site do not consitute legal advice, nor does AgricultureLaw.com warrant the accuracy of the information on this site. Click here for full disclosure.
