Follow us on twitter
Site Feed
Podcast
Email Updates
Climate Legislation; Food Security; Ag Economy; ACRE- Crop Insurance; C.O.O.L.; Animal Agriculture; USDA Issues; and Sen. Lincoln
Climate Legislation
Reuters writers Louis Charbonneau and Gerard Wynn reported yesterday that, “Official Washington sounded more upbeat on Monday than it has for weeks in sizing up U.S. President Barack Obama’s chances of progress on a climate-change bill in Congress this year.
“U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer predicted the committee she leads would approve a bill before a U.N. climate summit in Copenhagen in December while Obama’s Energy Secretary Steven Chu said he hoped all of Congress would pass a law by then.
“Their positive comments contrasted with those of Carol Browner, head of [the White House Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy] who said 10 days ago she did not expect the U.S. Senate to act in time.”
Yesterday’s article noted that, “‘I believe we will get this bill out of my committee soon,’ Boxer, who chairs the Senate’s Environment and Public Works Committee, told reporters after meeting U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon at the United Nations on Monday.
“‘Certainly before Copenhagen, and we’re hoping maybe to even have it on the floor (of the Senate),’ she said.”
The Reuters article added that, “[President] Obama has come under pressure from other countries to show progress, all the more so since he won a Nobel Peace Prize on Friday which cited what it called his more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting.
“Climate change is competing for attention in Congress with Obama’s proposals to bolster a battered economy and overhaul healthcare, which have consumed lawmakers all year.”
Edward Felker reported in today’s Washington Times that, “The surprise endorsement of climate-change legislation by a leading Senate Republican has jump-started the languishing proposal but also has raised the prospect that it will include two major items that environmentalists dislike: more nuclear power and more offshore oil drilling.
“In an op-ed published Sunday, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina joined with Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, the chamber’s leading Democratic advocate of climate legislation, to promote a bipartisan plan to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions.
“They proposed a compromise that reduces U.S. carbon-dioxide emissions – which are widely considered to contribute to climate change – through a market-based ‘cap and trade’ system, combined with a ‘clean energy’ program providing incentives for nuclear power, offshore oil and gas drilling, and coal emissions controls.”
Nonetheless, today’s article indicated that, “Many obstacles remain. Democrats and Republicans from coal-producing states and the Midwest continue to resist the legislation over fears that it would cause huge increases in the cost of energy that would hurt their constituents and businesses.”
Geof Koss, writing today at Roll Call Online, reported that, “Unlike last year, when the dress-rehearsal debate on global warming sputtered to a halt on the Senate floor without a single amendment vote, both sides are prepping for a fight with full knowledge that the chamber could actually pass a bill limiting greenhouse gas emissions.”
The Roll Call article explained that, “The 900-pound gorillas, both in the Environment committee room and on the Senate floor, will be coal and nuclear power.
“Moderate Democrats from states that produce coal, as well as those states who depend on it for electricity, are already signaling they’ll want more support for the fossil fuel. ‘There’s been an effort to reach out to coal states,’ Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) said. ‘We need to do a little bit more.’”
Today’s article added that, “The bill’s broad jurisdiction also provides an opportunity for two other powerful committee chairmen — newly minted Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Chairman Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) and Commerce, Science and Transportation Chairman Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) — to take a whack at it. Neither lawmaker is enthused over the bill’s possible impact on their home states.
“Senate Democrats can take solace that the House passed similar legislation sponsored by Reps. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and Ed Markey (D-Mass.) in June after grappling with the same regional issues. However, that bill was able to advance on a simple-majority vote with limited debate; getting a bill through the Senate may be considerably more cumbersome.”
Meanwhile, Anna Palmer reported today at Roll Call that, “While the health care issue may be dominating Capitol Hill, it’s all about climate change in the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.
“After several years of working on different manifestations of the legislation and failing to get anything passed, the panel is poised to finally get climate change off its plate sometime in the next several months.”
Ms. Palmer pointed out that, “The biggest hurdle: partisanship.
“Although EPW has long been known for working together and being populated with moderates such as former Sens. Lincoln Chafee (R-R.I.) and Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-N.Y.), that is no longer the case. This Congress, there are few moderates from either party on the panel, which makes achieving harmony difficult, according to several lobbyists.”
The article noted that, “Lobbyists say that while they continue to try to work to find consensus on issues, they realize that most of the political maneuvering on different climate change provisions will happen on the floor after the committee has voted.”
Food Security
Associated Press writer Ariel David reported yesterday that, “Agricultural investment in developing countries will have to increase more than fivefold to ensure that by 2050 the world has enough to eat, a U.N. food agency said Monday.
“Poor countries will need a yearly $44 billion of development assistance in agriculture compared with the current $7.9 billion, the Food and Agriculture Organization said as it opened a two-day forum of experts on how to feed the world in 2050.
“By then, population is expected to rise from 6.7 billion people to 9.1 billion and the world’s food output will have to increase by 70 percent, the agency said in a statement.”
Bloomberg news reported yesterday that, “An agricultural development company owned by Saudi billionaire Sheikh Mohammed al-Amoudi bought $80 million in equipment from Caterpillar Inc. to develop holdings in Ethiopia, Fortune reported.
“Al-Amoudi-owned Saudi Star Agricultural Development Plc hopes to develop as much as 500,000 hectares (1.2 million acres) of land in Ethiopia over the next two decades for sugar, edible oil and grain production, the Addis Ababa-based newspaper said, citing Alemayehu Mengesha, managing director of Caterpillar importer Ries Engineering.”
Ag Economy
DTN Executive Editor Marcia Zarley Taylor, writing yesterday at the Minding Ag’s Business Blog, noted that, “Inflation fears have vanished for the time being, meaning farmers can likely look for continued low interest rates for operating funds and even relative bargains in longer-term rates at least through year-end, according to a recent report from Farm Credit Services of Mid-America, the nation’s largest Farm Credit Association.
“Inflation is always the key driver of interest rates, but it remains virtually nonexistent at the moment, FCS Mid-America Vice President Bill Medley said in a statement issued last week.”
In a related article, Peter S. Goodman reported in today’s New York Times that, “Many small and midsize American businesses are still struggling to secure bank loans, impeding their expansion plans and constraining overall economic growth, even as the country tentatively rises from its recessionary depths.
“Most banks expect their lending standards to remain tighter than the levels of the last decade until at least the middle of 2010, according to a survey of senior loan officers conducted by the Federal Reserve Board. The enduring credit squeeze appears to reflect an aversion to risk among lenders confronting great uncertainty about the economy rather than any lingering effects of the panic that gripped financial markets last fall, after the collapse of the investment banking giant Lehman Brothers.”
The Times article added that, “Bankers acknowledge that loans are harder to secure than in years past, but they say this attests to the weakness of many borrowers rather than a reluctance to lend.”
ACRE- Crop Insurance
Ohio State University Agricultural Economist Carl Zulauf penned at item that was posted yesterday at DTN (link requires subscription) entitled, “Why I Chose ACRE.”
In part, Dr. Zulauf stated that, “People might assume I would elect the new Average Crop Revenue Election for my corn-soybean-wheat farm in northwest Ohio since I was the developer of many of the central concepts of the ACRE farm program. I strongly believe that ACRE is a farm program for the 21st-century instead of one for 20th-century farming. However, like everyone else, I needed to decide if ACRE fit the needs of my farm. It was not a given that I would choose ACRE.
“I did end up choosing ACRE, but not because I expected it to pay more. Instead, ACRE offered me (1) different, yet complementary, revenue risk protection than crop insurance, and (2) better risk management for corn, soybeans and wheat than traditional farm programs.”
As part of a more detailed discussion, Dr. Zulauf noted that, “The first issue is the relation of ACRE to crop insurance. I typically purchase revenue insurance instead of yield insurance. Revenue is a more comprehensive measure of risk since it includes the impacts of both price and yield. ACRE also is a revenue risk program, but it differs from revenue crop insurance on several factors including the time period covered. Revenue crop insurance addresses the risk that revenue declines during a pre-harvest period (for example, February to October for soybeans). In contrast, ACRE addresses the risk that revenue declines from one crop year to the next. Crop years essentially start at harvest and run until the next harvest. For example, soybean’s crop year is Sept. 1 to Aug. 31. These different time periods have become even more important with South America’s emergence as a major export competitor.”
Meanwhile, in a related article regarding crop insurance, Marcia Zarley Taylor reported at DTN on Friday (link requires subscription) that, “Losses from diplodia ear rot (white mold) on corn in parts of Illinois and Indiana may result in dockage of up to 60 to 80 cents per bushel, elevators report. But some crop insurance sources contacted by DTN doubt quality losses from diplodia alone will be severe enough to generate many sizable farmer claims.
“Quality damage — rather than a straight yield loss — is hard for crop insurance to cover. Guidelines imposed by the Risk Management Agency (RMA) treat quality losses conservatively, since elevator dockage can sometimes exaggerate the value of the crop, said Craig Henning, the field service manager who handles national claims for John Deere Risk Protection.”
The DTN article also explained that, “Cody Gault, a southeast Indiana crop insurance specialist with Farm Credit Services of Mid-America, also told DTN there had been very little incidence of diplodia in his region. However, insurance carriers are asking producers with signs of mold or other disease in their crop to take a sample of their grain to a local elevator for diagnosis and an assessment of the percent of damage or loss, Gault said.
“Bill Klein, chief of the loss adjustment standards at RMA, emphasized that white mold is not insured as a ‘special case’ like aflatoxin, which has its own set of guidelines because of its dangerous toxicity to humans and animals.
“Instead, white mold is considered kernel damage and lumped together with other items like injury from hail, insects, odor or frost. Only grain at Grade 5 or worse qualifies for federal crop insurance adjustment.”
C.O.O.L.
Clifford Krauss reported in today’s New York Times that, “Ratcheting up a trade dispute with the Obama administration, Canada is asking the World Trade Organization to rule against an American food-labeling law that it claims is helping to destroy much of its hog-farming industry.
“The dispute concerns an American rule requiring that food products be labeled by country of origin. The Obama administration denies that the labeling policy is an act of protectionism, even though it is driving American pork producers to decrease purchases of Canadian hogs, traditionally about 7 percent of the pork consumed in the United States.
“The reduction in imports has brought some short-term relief to American hog farmers suffering from high feed prices and low domestic and export sales. The industry says sales have been hurt by unfounded consumer concerns about catching swine flu from eating pork.
“The new regulations require American companies to track and label the country of origin of meats and produce at all stages of production and sale, except at restaurants. Cattle producers were instrumental in getting the rules passed, feeling it would give them a competitive edge over foreign producers.”
Animal Agriculture
An update posted yesterday at Feedstuffs Online reported that, “Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm signed legislation today that will require cage-free housing for layers in 10 years and stall-free housing for gestating sows in 10 years and for veal calves in three years.
“The legislation represents a compromise between Michigan agricultural interests and Farm Sanctuary, the Humane Society of the United States and the Michigan Humane Society in which Michigan farmers and livestock producers sought a law that would be less onerous and delay the transition schedule, as compared with a ballot initiative that was threatened by the activist groups.”
USDA Issues
Wade Goodwyn reported yesterday on National Public Radio’s (NPR) All Things Considered Radio Program (“Hispanic Farmers Fight To Sue USDA”) that, “In Texas and across the Southwest, Hispanic farmers have been fighting the Agriculture Department for close to a decade.
“The farmers say the department’s Farm Services Agency discriminated against them — denying or delaying loans, and refusing to investigate when they cried foul.
“The government settled a similar complaint brought by African-American farmers for $1 billion. And while the claims of discrimination and other factors are almost identical, the Hispanic farmers have gotten nothing.”
The NRP piece noted that, “In 1997, then-Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman testified before Congress and conceded a long history of discrimination in the loan program. He talked about ‘good people who lost their family land, not because of a bad crop, not because of a flood, but because of the color of their skin.’
“‘[Agriculture] Secretary [Tom] Vilsack often talks about how the department is known in some quarters as ‘The Last Plantation.’ That’s a reputation that’s unfortunate and one we intend to fix,’ says Justin Dejong, Vilsack’s spokesman. ‘By empowering the Office of Civil Rights at the USDA, Secretary Vilsack is laying the foundation for people to be treated better in the future.’”
Sen. Lincoln
The AP reported yesterday that, “U.S. Sen. Blanche Lincoln says she has more than $4.1 million in the bank for her re-election bid as she faces a challenge from a growing list of Republican hopefuls.
“Lincoln said Monday that she raised $1.2 million over the past three months and spent $266,105. Lincoln, a Democrat, is seeking a third term next year.
“Seven Republicans have said they’re seeking the nomination to challenge Lincoln in next year’s election, and she faces a potential primary fight from Democratic state Senate President Bob Johnson.”
Keith Good
