FarmPolicy.com

Climate Legislation; Farm Policy Perspectives; Animal Agriculture; and the Ag Economy

Climate Legislation

Reuters writer Ayesha Rascoe reported yesterday that, “The United States needs to have a climate change law in place before international talks on a climate pact begin in December, two top Obama administration officials said on Monday.”

The article stated that, “It is unclear whether the bill will make it into law before the international climate negotiations in Copenhagen in December. The highly contentious debate over health care reform is likely to crowd the legislative agenda in the fall.

“‘We think it is important for the president to be empowered to be able to say to the rest of the world that America stands ready to lead on this issue,’ Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack told reporters after an energy briefing at the White House.

“Groups from the oil industry, agriculture and manufacturing have lined up to oppose climate change legislation, saying it would add costs for producers, farmers and consumers without guaranteeing environmental gains.

“Vilsack and Commerce Secretary Gary Locke met with groups from the Midwest and Mid-Atlantic states to press their message that a climate change law would be good for the environment and economy.”

Tom Steever reported yesterday at Brownfield that, “Economic benefits of cap and trade legislation will outweigh added energy costs, according to U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. In a conference call to farm broadcasters Monday, the agriculture secretary maintained that USDA analysis is conservative to the point that some farmers will do better financially than first thought. Some of the payback, says Vilsack, will come from an expected influx of so-called green jobs to rural areas.

“‘This is the first time I’ve seen the opportunity created for Rural America to actually benefit from potential manufacturing opportunities and job growth because the solar panels, the windmills are most likely going to be constructed, maintained and installed in rural areas,’ Vilsack told reporters Monday, citing that changes to climate are problematic for agriculture.”

Siobhan Hughes noted yesterday at the Washington Wire Blog (The Wall Street Journal) that, “A high-level White House meeting today dealt with the concerns of a group that will be crucial to winning support for energy and climate legislation: Midwesterners.”

The Journal item indicated that, “Democratic leaders are finding that resistance in the heartland is one of the biggest hurdles to Senate passage of climate-change legislation…[S]o administration officials, especially those most trusted in the Midwest, are engaged in a charm offensive. ‘It was important for us to convey specific messages about what the bill contains, the studies that we’ve done at USDA that show it can be a net winner for farmers and ranchers,’ U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack told reporters during a break between sessions. The former Iowa governor noted the USDA has a special ‘outreach opportunity’ thanks to its ‘presence around the country.’”

And a Daily Radio News item from USDA yesterday (audio report) included excerpts from Sec. Vilsack’s presentation in which he expressed his thoughts about Senate passage of the climate legislation.

In a separate look at executive branch perspective on the climate change issue, Michael Grunwald reported earlier this week at Time Online that, “‘What the U.S. and China do over the next decade,’ declared Energy Secretary Steven Chu, the Nobel Prize – winning physicist who is leading President Obama’s push for a clean-energy economy, ‘will determine the fate of the world.’

“Chu had gone to Beijing’s Tsinghua University, the ‘MIT of China,’ to make his half-apocalyptic, half-optimistic pitch about climate change. In his nerdy professor style and referring to ‘Milankovitch cycles’ and the ‘albedo effect’ as well as melting glaciers and rising seas, Chu methodically explained that the science is clear, that we’re boiling the planet — but also that science can save us, that we can innovate our way to sustainability. He acknowledged that the developed nations that made the mess can’t tell the developing world not to develop, but he also warned that China is on track to emit more carbon in the next three decades than the U.S. has emitted in its history; that business as usual would intensify floods, droughts and heat waves in both countries; that greenhouse gases respect no borders. This earth, he concluded, is the only one we’ve got; it would be illogical and immoral to fry it. ‘Science has unambiguously shown that we’re altering the destiny of our planet,’ he said. ‘Is this the legacy we want to leave our children and grandchildren?’”

The Time article pointed out that, “[Americans] ranked global warming last in a national survey of 20 top priorities; in a global poll, only 44% of them wanted action to be taken on the issue, vs. 94% of Chinese. Most Republican leaders flatly reject prevailing climate science, while many Democrats from coal, oil and farm states are equally protective of the fossil-fuel status quo. This is why the American Clean Energy and Security Act — a far-reaching Democratic bill that would cap carbon emissions — has been marketed to a confused public on the basis of issues that poll far better: gas prices, foreign oil and green jobs. It narrowly passed the House, but it’s in trouble in the Senate, and the President, while supportive, is now preoccupied with health care.”

In climate bill news from a legislative branch perspective, Brad Swenson, the opinion page and political editor of the Bemidji Pioneer (Minnesota), indicated in a blog update on Sunday that, “U.S. Rep. Collin Peterson was put on the hot seat last week when he held a health care forum in Bemidji. Nearly 400 people packed a large hall at the Hampton Inn & Suites for nearly three hours. But it wasn’t Democrat-sponsored health care reform bills that got Peterson, DFL-7th District, in the most trouble — it was the U.S, House Agriculture Committee chairman’s vote for the American Clean Energy and Security Act, the bill most known for its cap-and-trade provisions for controlling carbon emissions.

“‘I am thoroughly disappointed with you and your cap and trade,’ a woman from Thief River Falls pointed at Peterson. ‘You can tell everybody in here that it didn’t go anywhere anyway, but I’m still disappointed in your vote because you don’t believe in global warming and yet you turn around and vote for something like that that is going to cost everybody something because you got something.’

“Peterson, to his credit, held out on the ACES bill to gain concessions for agriculture as a carbon-producing industry. No concessions, no vote. He got what he asked for, so he voted in support of the bill.

“‘So you think I should just be irresponsible and let the EPA come out here and run our people out of business?’ he returned to the lady from Thief River. ‘That’s the alternative.’ ‘No it isn’t,’ she said.”

Mr. Swenson went on to quote Chairman Peterson as saying, “‘The Supreme Court of the land has decided that global warming or greenhouse gases are a problem. The only way the Supreme Court of the land can be overturned is by act of Congress, and that’s the bill we’re working on. And to be part of the process, I did what I did — it’s not a final deal, we’ve still got a ways to go — but the alternative is to have the Clean Air Act come out here and tell farmers what they can plant and what they can’t. That’s where we’re heading.’”

Mr. Swenson went on to include this excerpt from Chairman Peterson: “‘This cap and trade thing keeps coming up,’ Peterson said, adding that he’d received heat on the issue at an earlier forum at Willmar. ‘First of all, there is a court case that happened out on the East Coast by a federal judge that found that greenhouse gas is an endangerment to public health. This was a case that was decided by a federal judge. It was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2008 and was upheld in a 5-4 decision. So the EPA is right now working on regulating greenhouse gases on tailpipe emissions of cars under the Clean Air Act, which is what this case required them to do.

“‘There are eight other lawsuits pending against the EPA to get them to start regulating agriculture, regulating cows, regulating all kinds of other stuff — I’m serious — because cow flatulence is one of the big problems. To the farm groups, I did say I was not for this bill. … I had the farm groups come to me, including the Farm Bureau, the corn growers, all of the farm groups came to me and said that you’ve got to intervene on this bill and get some provisions in there so that we’ve got agriculture in a position that we can live with this.”

In other developments regarding the legislative branch, and a key player in the climate legislation debate in the Senate, Donald Lambro reported in today’s Washington Times that, “Sen. Barbara Boxer’s bid for a fourth term next year was not showing up on the political hot lists until polls revealed last month that former Hewlett-Packard Chief Executive Officer Carly Fiorina was just four points behind the veteran California Democrat.

“The combative, archliberal lawmaker had easily won re-election in 2004 with 58 percent of the vote in the heavily Democratic state, and most election forecasters are still putting her candidacy in the safe column.”

Today’s article added that, “‘Few observers believe that Fiorina, who has many political liabilities, will actually upset Boxer, but the former CEO’s experience and fund-raising potential [make] the contest at least entertaining and worth watching,’ said elections analyst Stuart Rothenberg in his closely watched newsletter analysis of House and Senate races.

“Still, political strategists were surprised when a July 22 Rasmussen poll of 500 likely voters in California found that Mrs. Boxer drew support from 45 percent of them while her expected Republican rival was breathing down her neck with 41 percent. The rest were either undecided or supported someone else.”

And for his part, O. Kay Henderson reported yesterday at RadioIowa.com that, “Former Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack says he has no plans to leave his post to run for the U.S. Senate. Republican Senator Chuck Grassley plans to seek reelection in 2010, but Vilsack — a Democrat who is President Obama’s Secretary of Agriculture — says he does not intend to leave his post anytime soon.

“‘I’ve got a great job,’ Vilsack said during an appearance at the State Fair last week, before repeating: ‘I’ve got a great job.’ Vilsack’s wife is keenly interested in politics, but according to her husband she hasn’t been talking about running for the U.S. Senate either. ‘I can’t speak for Christie, but she hasn’t told me anything about that,’ Vilsack said.”

More specifically with respect to climate related issues and agriculture, Alister Doyle reported yesterday at the Reuters News Environment Blog that, “Forests and farms don’t mix, according to conventional wisdom.

“Farmers are often portrayed as the villains, slashing and burning trees to clear land for crops and wrecking forests from the Amazon to Indonesia (…not to mention Europe, where people cleared most forests thousands of years ago).

“But a report today by the World Agroforestry Centre indicates that farms aren’t such enemies of trees as usually thought – it says tree canopies cover at least 10 percent of almost half the world’s farmland. That is a gigantic area the size of China, or Canada. (For a story, click here).”

Meanwhile, Jim Tankersley reported in today’s Los Angeles Times that, “The nation’s largest business lobby wants to put the science of global warming on trial.

“The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, trying to ward off potentially sweeping federal emissions regulations, is pushing the Environmental Protection Agency to hold a rare public hearing on the scientific evidence for man-made climate change.”

The article explained that, “Chamber officials say it would be ‘the Scopes monkey trial of the 21st century’ — complete with witnesses, cross-examinations and a judge who would rule, essentially, on whether humans are warming the planet to dangerous effect.

“‘It would be evolution versus creationism,’ said William Kovacs, the chamber’s senior vice president for environment, technology and regulatory affairs. ‘It would be the science of climate change on trial.’

“The goal of the chamber, which represents 3 million large and small businesses, is to fend off potential emissions regulations by undercutting the scientific consensus over climate change. If the EPA denies the request, as expected, the chamber plans to take the fight to federal court.”

Farm Policy Perspectives

Recall that Friday’s FarmPolicy.com update pointed to a recent Time magazine article by Bryan Walsh entitled, “Getting Real About the High Price of Cheap Food.”

In one excerpt from the Time piece, Walsh stated that, ““But we don’t have the luxury of philosophizing about food. With the exhaustion of the soil, the impact of global warming and the inevitably rising price of oil — which will affect everything from fertilizer to supermarket electricity bills — our industrial style of food production will end sooner or later. As the developing world grows richer, hundreds of millions of people will want to shift to the same calorie-heavy, protein-rich diet that has made Americans so unhealthy — demand for meat and poultry worldwide is set to rise 25% by 2015 — but the earth can no longer deliver. Unless Americans radically rethink the way they grow and consume food, they face a future of eroded farmland, hollowed-out countryside, scarier germs, higher health costs — and bland taste. Sustainable food has an élitist reputation, but each of us depends on the soil, animals and plants — and as every farmer knows, if you don’t take care of your land, it can’t take care of you.”

In response to the Time article, an update posted yesterday at the National Corn Growers Association Online stated that, “In a letter to Time magazine, the National Corn Growers Association took issue with its Aug. 31 cover story on food and its apparent ignorance of modern American farming. Despite the abundance, affordability, health and safety of food in the United States, the magazine strove hard to find a crisis to report on and left out valuable information about modern farming practices.”

The NCGA update noted that, “As the world population expands and demands for protein grow, U.S. farmers are delivering. When can we expect to see a Time cover story that treats hard-working American family farmers with respect for their innovation, dedication and sacrifice?”

An update posted recently at the American Farm Bureau Federation Online included a more comprehensive rebuttal to some of the general themes expressed in the Time article, as well as other media outlets, in a piece entitled, “The Omnivore’s Delusion: Against the Agri-Intellectuals.” The article, which was written by Blake Hurst, first appeared in The American Magazine and was included in the most recent edition of the Farm Bureau’s FBNews publication.

In a related article on food security issues, Stephanie McCrummen reported in Saturday’s Washington Post that, “Across East Africa, drought is again leaving millions of people in dusty countryside hungry, thirsty and dangerously dependent on food aid, the United Nations has warned. But as the weeks wear on, its effects — less drastic but perhaps more politically potent — are also creeping into urban capitals such as this one [Nairobi].

“In crowded, iron-sheet settlements as well as in high-hedged enclaves of the city’s elite, water taps are running dry. With widespread crop failures, the price of staple foods such as corn flour is soaring. Low water levels in dams have led to power cuts, forcing businesses to shut down or switch on expensive, gas-powered generators. And once again, people here are dealing with the nuisance of thousands of cattle wandering along the trash-strewn edges of highways in search of grass or water.”

Animal Agriculture

Emily Charrier-Botts reported yesterday at The Sonoma Index-Tribune Online (California) that, “Almost a year after Proposition 2, the Farm Animal Cruelty Act, was passed in California banning so-called ‘battery pages’ for housing chickens, the battle continues over how to implement the somewhat vague legislation.

“Last November, voters overwhelmingly supported the bill, which asked that a farm animal have enough room to ‘stand up, lie down and extend its limbs’ without touching another animal. The bill impacted egg producers most specifically because the battery cages the industry has used for decades no longer meet the standards of Proposition 2. In the months since November, egg farmers have protested that the legislation is vague because it does not spell out in inches and centimeters what type of confinement is allowable under the new law. The Humane Society of America, which sponsored Proposition 2, said that the language of the bill was specifically written based on other animal-welfare legislation.

“‘We wrote the language in the very manner of how all animal cruelty laws are written,’ said Jennifer Fearing, a spokeswoman for the Humane Society. ‘You don’t write specific engineering standards into law, it just doesn’t happen.’ But the egg industry disagrees. Farmers have said that without specific standards in place to follow, egg producers will live under the threat of being cited for not complying with Proposition 2, which carries the penalty of a $1,000 fine or up to six months in jail.”

And Charlene M. Shupp reported on Friday at Lancaster Farming Online that, “The take-home message from last week’s Animal Welfare Forum was simple. Chad Gregory of the United Egg Producers and Paul Shapiro of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) agreed to disagree.

“During the two-hour discussion, farmers, veterinarians and industry professionals heard Gregory and Shapiro discuss the impact of California’s Proposition 2 ballot initiative from 2009. This was the first time both have addressed a group jointly on animal agriculture production. The event was sponsored by PennAg Industries Association and the Pennsylvania Veterinary Medical Association.”

The article noted that, “The battle over animal welfare has gained momentum in several states in addition to California. In states where the issue was taken through the state legislature, Gregory said his organization has won because they have been able to use science to explain their side of the issue to legislators.

“On the other hand, in states where the issue can be decided by a ballot initiative, HSUS has been successful.

“Gregory asked this rhetorical question: If all the HSUS wanted to do was ban battery cages, why did they not simplify the language to reflect that? He believes it is so HSUS can expand the meaning of the law as it is implemented.”

Ag Economy

DTN Executive Editor Marcia Zarley Taylor reported yesterday (link requires subscription) that, “Financial influenza could be spreading through farm country later this fall.

“While only a tiny fraction of all farm loans have been affected to date, the pork and dairy industries have eroded huge portions of their lifetime equity in the last year and face a wave of restructurings or forced sales in the next few months. Given banks’ own problems, they may be in no condition to show lenience.

“‘Access to credit could be the top issue for all types of agricultural producers in 2010,’ Steve Hofing, a managing partner in Centrec Consulting, cautioned a group of 75 farm operators who gathered in Chicago to discuss the state of the economy recently.

“‘At these commodity prices, very few operations in either crops or livestock can project profits,’ Hofing said.”

Yesterday’s DTN article added that, “What’s more, all farm lenders are becoming more selective in their credit extensions than they were. Underwriting standards haven’t necessarily changed, Hofing said. ‘What’s changed is the risk appetite of people who make the loans.’

“So far, Kansas City Federal Reserve economist Jason Henderson said farm loan delinquencies nationwide are running below normal, but have edged up from 1.08 percent to 2.08 percent of bank farm loan portfolios in the last year. ‘It’s the trend people are concerned about, not necessarily the level of problem loans,’ he said.”

Keith Good

 Email This Post Posted by Keith Good • August, 25, 2009 • 4:10 am