SDFB Leader Connection

In this issue:    GF&P Agency review meeting set
                      Anticipated Farm Bill Action
                      Colorado FB satisfied with new animal law
                      Most Americans believe meat is safe
                      Key House committee extends biodiesel tax credit
                      Calling All Century Farms
                      YF&R contests
                       President Bush’s statement on reasons to veto the farm bill
                       Quote of the Day

 May 19, 2008 

Upcoming events:
SDFB Youth Camp – June 9-11, Chamberlain
Legislative Interim Agency review: SDGF&P – June 11, Pierre
Dakota Fest – August 19-21, Mitchell
Century Farms recognition – August 28, Huron
SDFB Annual Meeting – November 21-22, Sioux Falls
National Farm-City Week – November 21-27
AFBF Annual meeting – January 11 – 14, San Antonio, TX

Department of Game, Fish & Parks agency review meeting set
The first meeting of the interim legislative committee studying GF&P is set for 9:00 a.m. on Wednesday, June 11, in Pierre.  Each year the LRC Executive Board selects a couple of agencies for a department-wide review.  This year, the two agencies selected are Game, Fish & Parks and the Department of Tourism and State Development.

Anticipated Farm Bill Action

President Bush is expected to veto the farm bill this week, possibly tomorrow (Tuesday).  The bill received veto-proof margins of 81-15 in the Senate and 318-106 in the House.  AFBF farm policy specialists believe it is likely that congressional leaders will schedule over-ride votes for Wednesday or Thursday before adjourning for the Memorial Day recess.

The new farm bill is expected to cost about half that of the 2002 farm bill. Mandatory spending for Title I (commodity) in the 2002 farm bill cost about $95 billion over five years. In the pending farm bill, the total budget for Title I, plus permanent disaster assistance and crop insurance—which is not Title I spending—is expected to cost about $48 billion over five years.

In related legislative business, the House and Senate extended the existing 2002 farm bill through next Friday, May 23. It was set to expire today.

The New York Times  reports the Senate vote “virtually seals President Bush’s defeat in a battle over agriculture policy.” An editorial in the same paper states Bush “should keep his promise to veto it and demand better legislation.” An editorial in The Washington Post today describes the farm bill as “the epitome of old-style Washington politics.”

President Bush’s statement on reasons for vetoing the farm bill is at the bottom of this e-mail.

 

Colorado Farm Bureau satisfied with new animal law

Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter (D) this week enacted legislation regulating the care of farm animals. In an op-ed submitted to media outlets, Colorado FB President Alan Foutz described the new law as “welcome news to Colorado farmers and ranchers. It will, over the long term, help make sure our agriculture and livestock community has a strong voice in the regulation of animal care practices in this state.

“In the last few years, concerns have been raised about some of the standard practices we’ve used for many years in raising farm animals,” Foutz wrote. “All of these practices, it’s important to note, have been developed over time by livestock veterinarians and other animal scientists.

“Nevertheless, the Colorado agriculture community is listening to these concerns because we understand the public holds us to high standards. The bill signed by Gov. Ritter makes it very clear that we take those concerns seriously, giving the force of law, for example, to the Colorado Pork Producers’ commitment to phase out pregnancy safety pens for sows.

“But it’s important to keep one other point in mind as we move forward. While we’re always willing to take a fresh look at what we do and how we do it—and to be sensitive to the public—we also believe that animal and livestock practices ought to be reviewed by experts like livestock veterinarians and other animal care scientists. And like most of our neighbors here in Colorado, we believe decisions about animal care need to be made on the basis of sound science, not on purely emotional impressions.”

Near the end of the op-ed, Foutz wrote, “The care of farm animals is a legitimate issue for reasonable discussion. But that discussion should be conducted by the people who know what it’s like to care for animals every day of the year.”

 

 

Most Americans Believe Meat is Safe

Ninety percent of consumers believe the meat, poultry and fish their groceries sell is safe, according to a survey by the grocery industry. The same survey shows nearly 80 percent of consumers trust the Agriculture Department to ensure food safety, and 76 percent said they hold that view of the Food and Drug Administration.

In addition, the Food Marketing Institute’s U.S. Grocery Shopper Trends 2008 report shows Americans’ concerns about the economy are bearing out in the decisions they make related to food and dining. Seventy-one percent said their views of the economy compel them to eat at home more, and 67 percent said they are buying fewer luxury foods. Sixty percent said they are buying more store brands, and 58 percent said they are eating more leftovers.

Further, 41 percent of shoppers said they are very concerned about the nutritional content of the foods they eat, with fat of all kinds being a major concern.

 

 

Key House Committee extends biodiesel tax credit

The House Ways and Means Committee last week approved H.R. 6049, a bill that extends tax credits favored by the biodiesel industry.

Among the bill’s provisions, it extends the biodiesel tax incentive for one year through Dec. 31, 2009; provides a dollar-a-gallon incentive for all biodiesel, regardless of feedstock; and shuts the “splash-and-dash” loophole that allows foreign-produced fuel to enter the U.S, claim the biodiesel tax incentive, and then be shipped to a third country.

According to the National Biodiesel Board, biodiesel displaced 20 million barrels of petroleum in 2007. Biodiesel also is a clean-burning fuel that reduces carbon emissions by 78 percent, the equivalent of removing 700,000 cars from the nation’s roadways.  

Calling all Century Farms
If there are any farms or ranches in your neighborhood that have been in the same family for at least 100 years with continuous ownership, that family is eligible to apply for this year’s Century Farms recognition. 

To qualify as a Century Farm, there must be at least 80 acres of the original SD farmland owned by the same family for 100 years.  The present owner must be related to the original owner.  This recognition is a joint effort with the SD Department of Agriculture and is not limited to SDFB members.

The ceremony will be held at the SD State Fair on Thursday, August 28.

For an application, or for more information, go online to:  http://sdfb.fb.org/centuryfarm/centuryfarmapp.pd
 

YF&R Contests
Information about the YF&R Discussion Meet, Achievement Award, and Excellence in Agriculture Award, is available on the SDFB website.  Go to http://sdfb.fb.org/ and click on the YF&R link under “Programs.”

President Bush’s statement on reasons for vetoing the farm bill:
In January 2007, I was hopeful that leaders in Washington could come together on a good farm bill. At that time, my Administration had completed more than fifty listening sessions across the country and developed a reform-minded farm bill based on the thousands of comments received. Our proposal would make wise use of the people's money by reforming farm programs, funding emerging priorities and providing a safety-net that better targets benefits for farmers.

I am deeply disappointed in the conference report filed today as it falls far short of the proposal my Administration put forward. If this bill makes it to my desk, I will veto it.

Today's farm economy is very strong and that is something to celebrate. It is also an appropriate time to better target subsidies and put forth real reform. Farm income is expected to exceed the 10-year average by fifty percent this year, yet Congress' bill asks American taxpayers to subsidize the incomes of married farmers who earn $1.5 million per year. I believe doing so at a time of record farm income is irresponsible and jeopardizes America's support for necessary farm programs.

Congress claims that this bill increases spending by $10 billion, but the real cost is nearly $20 billion when you include actual government spending that will occur if this bill becomes law. Instead of fully offsetting the increased spending, the bill resorts to a variety of gimmicks, such as pushing commodity payments outside the budget window. Adding nearly $20 billion in additional costs to the current ten-year spending level of approximately $600 billion is excessive, especially when net farm income is at a record high and food prices are on the rise. My Administration clearly identified numerous reforms as essential to justify even a $10 billion increase in spending, yet this bill includes none of those reforms in full.

Crop prices have averaged a twenty percent increase since just last year. Still, Congress wants to raise payment rates for most crops and create new subsidies which can be triggered even at very high prices. The bill fails to stop the practice of collecting subsidies even when crops are sold later at a higher price; it restricts our ability to redirect food aid dollars for emergency use in the midst of a global food crisis; and it falls short of the Administration's conservation proposals. By increasing trade-distorting subsidies, the bill undermines our ability to open foreign markets to American agricultural goods. The bill creates an egregious new sugar subsidy program that will keep sugar prices high for domestic consumers, while making taxpayers subsidize a handful of sugar growers. These are just a few of the reasons why I cannot support this bill.

In the absence of a good farm bill, I call on Congress to extend current law for at least one year. The Administration's reform-minded proposal would be preferable to current law, but in light of the bill produced by conferees an extension is now the better policy for American agriculture and American taxpayers. It is a far superior option than supporting a bill that increases farm subsidy rates, spends too much and fails to reform farm programs for the future.

 Quote of the Day:
“Good humor is one of the best articles of dress one can wear in society.”  William Makepeace Thackeray