American Farm Bureau Federation

Supreme Court Rules Against EPA in WOTUS Case

Tue, 08 Aug 2023 20:10:09 GMT

The U.S. Supreme Court sided with an Idaho couple in a significant environmental case against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over a plan to develop a small lot near Priest Lake. This decision has national implications for water quality, ag, development and the Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS) rule.

The court was unanimous in finding that the land owned by the Idaho family was not subject to the Clean Water Act. The court was split 5-4 on the court’s new “test”, which stated that only wetlands with a continuous surface connection to a body of water are covered by the law.

Related story: What’s Wrong with the Current Waters of the U.S. Rule?

The case focused on the interpretation of the 1972 Clean Water Act and asked for a clearer definition of what the law intended by giving the EPA authority to regulate WOTUS.

Michael Regan, EPA administrator, shared in an EPA press release that he’s “disappointed” by the Supreme Court’s ruling that “erodes longstanding clean water protections.”

"[The administration] worked to establish a durable definition of ‘waters of the United States’ that safeguards our nation’s waters, strengthens economic opportunity, and protects people’s health while providing the clarity and certainty that farmers, ranchers, and landowners deserve,” Regan said. “These goals will continue to guide the agency forward as we carefully review the Supreme Court decision and consider next steps.”

What Supreme Court justices have to say on the WOTUS ruling

Court Justice Samuel Alito, joined by four conservative justices, wrote the opinion stating that the federal government could regulate water that has a “continuous surface connection” to major bodies of water. This ruling overturns a previous decision by a federal appeals court that supported the EPA.

Alito said the EPA’s interpretation of its powers went “too far.”

“We hold that the Clean Water Act extends to only those wetlands with a continuous surface connection to bodies that are ‘waters of the United States’ in their own right, so that they are ‘indistinguishable’ from those waters,” Alito wrote, quoting from past court opinions.

Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the court’s liberals, comparing the ruling to last term’s decision limiting the EPA’s ability to combat climate change.

“The vice in both instances is the same: the Court’s appointment of itself as the national decision-maker on environmental policy,” she wrote, joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh wrote separately to object to the majority’s reading of the law. He wrote that the majority’s new test “departs from the statutory text, from 45 years of consistent agency practice, and from this Court’s precedents” and will have “significant repercussions for water quality and flood control throughout the United States.” Kagan, Sotomayor and Jackson joined Kavanaugh.

What the ag industry has to say on the WOTUS ruling

Rep. G.T. Thompson (R-Pa.) calls the ruling a “victory” for farmers, ranchers and landowners.

“The decision reaffirms the rights of property owners and provides long-needed clarity to rural America. In light of this decision, the Biden Administration should withdraw its flawed final WOTUS rule,” Thompson said. “It is time to finally put an end to the regulatory whiplash and create a workable rule that promotes clean water while protecting the rights of rural Americans.”

Zippy Duvall, American Farm Bureau president, echoed Thompson, saying the EPA “clearly overstepped” its authority under the Clean Water Act.

“The justices respect private property rights. It’s now time for the Biden administration to do the same and rewrite the Waters of the United States Rule,” Duvall said. “Farmers and ranchers share the goal of protecting the resources they’re entrusted with, but they deserve a rule that provides clarity and doesn’t require a team of attorneys to properly care for their land.”

Background on the WOTUS case

The case began when Michael and Chantell Sackett purchased a vacant lot in a residential subdivision in Idaho in 2004. They acquired the necessary county permits to develop the site, but the EPA argued that the land was subject to its review because it contained wetlands about 300 feet from Priest Lake.

Related story: What Bodies of Water are Considered WOTUS?

This case, having returned to the Supreme Court for the second time, was closely monitored by environmentalists, developers, and farming groups due to the ongoing debate over the extent of the EPA’s jurisdiction beyond navigable lakes, rivers, and into smaller streams and wetlands.

What’s Next for WOTUS?

A court decision against the EPA, said Attorney Rafe Petersen, who represents miners, offshore wind developers and others seeking EPA permit, likely leaves the Biden administration to start all over again from scratch.

“I don’t see how they get away from that,” Petersen said. “The Biden administration is really boxed into the corner.”

The ruling trims the jurisdiction of EPA to regulate waters under the Clean Water Act to interstate and navigable waters and immediately adjacent wetlands. It is a return to the traditional understanding of what Congress passed in the early 1970s.

A Historical Day: SCOTUS Hears Oral Arguments on Proposition 12

Mon, 15 May 2023 13:41:32 GMT

Operating with the constant backdrop of uncertainty of new and pending legislation makes it difficult to run any business, let alone a farm, says National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) president Terry Wolters, a Minnesota pork producer.

He was one of a handful of pork producers who watched Supreme Court justices grill attorneys with questions during oral arguments on Oct. 11 in NPPC v. Ross brought forward by the American Farm Bureau Federation and NPPC challenging the constitutionality of California Proposition 12.

“Proposition 12 is not good for my animals. It’s not good for the consumers. And it’s definitely a challenge for the future of farming,” Wolters said during a media briefing following oral arguments. “When I’m on the farm in the Midwest, it seems like Washington, DC, can be a long way away. It’s fascinating today to watch the two worlds come together on an issue so significant to our industry.”

From animal welfare and worker safety to food affordability and producer livelihoods, Wolters said Proposition 12 threatens the pork industry. One state should not be able to regulate commerce in another state and set arbitrary standards that lack any scientific, technical or agricultural basis, NPPC said in a statement.

“We’ve worked long and hard to be able to proudly tell the story of the U.S. pig farmer to the Supreme Court. And today was the day...a very remarkable day,” Wolters said.

Michael Formica, NPPC chief legal strategist, agreed it was a good day in court. He said he felt hopeful to hear the justices understand the trouble that will be created by laws like Proposition 12 that reach far outside of the state’s borders and try and impose the moral wills of one state on farmers, or in this case, on any business or operation that’s located entirely in other states.

“It has a tremendous impact on pork production and pork prices. But if let stand, it would have a tremendous impact on the U.S. economy and on the flow of commerce across borders,” Formica said.

Competing Morals

The concept of “moral will” was mentioned often throughout the oral arguments. Formica said different states having different competing morals will always be a risk.

“Some of the California voters voted for this, but we have pork producers here on our board and other pork producers in the courtroom today, who every day wake up with a moral imperative to care for their animals, to raise those animals in a sustainable fashion and then ultimately to produce food that feeds everyone and in a fashion that everyone can afford to eat it,” Formica said.

The justices pointed out that farmers’ morals command them to take care of the animals and to produce food. So, what happens when one state comes up with a decision that they determine is the best way to care for animals?

“What happens when Ohio convenes all of its experts and they come up with a decision that they determine is the best way to raise animals in Ohio? Does California have the right to usurp the legislative and regulatory authority of Ohio within the state of Ohio?” Formica asked. “I don’t think the Constitution allows it. I think we heard from justices that they’re very troubled by that notion.”

At the end of the day, NPPC and AFBF support pork producers raising pigs in a way that’s best for them and their operation. For example, Scott Hays, NPPC president elect and a pig farmer from Missouri, says gestation crates work best on his farm.

“Sows are bullies. They fight. They assert their dominance. Housing animals in individual pens where they can be fed and watered and cared for individually is a very humane way of housing them,” Hays said.

Formica said one of his concerns is the changing nature of ballot initiatives.

“If a farmer were to go and change their operation to comply with (California) Proposition 12, what is there to stop New York from turning around in two years and say it’s not 24 square feet, it’s got to be 26 square feet? And then, two years after that, California goes back and says let’s make it 30 square feet,” Formica said. “If there’s really market demand, we’ve got this thing called the free market in this country and it’s amazing. If there’s demand, supply will follow.”

Producer Perspectives

For Lori Stevermer, NPPC vice president and a pig farmer from Minnesota, being able to sit in the courtroom to hear oral arguments was exciting and reaffirms the Constitution is on pork producers’ side.

“It also made me very happy to be part of both NPPC and AFBF. These organizations are working on my behalf for important issues like this. As a smaller farmer, I can’t do it myself. But to see what they’re doing and hearing the case they brought forward, it was just very exciting and very positive,” Stevermer said.

There’s no doubt this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity will long be remembered by Hays, too.

“The exchange with the judges and the lawyers was interesting. I enjoyed their comments and the depth of knowledge of what’s at stake here,” Hays said. “I felt like they were really trying to understand and come up with a decision that is best for all Americans. That’s going to be a high-quality, low-cost protein source for everyone, not imposing one group’s opinion on the rest of us.”

Stevermer said pig farmers have always been good at responding to market demands, utilizing new technology and listening to advice from veterinarians and consultants.

“We continue to evolve and learn from each other,” she said. “I don’t see that changing. That’s what makes us a great industry and such a low-cost producer. Consumers send us the signals, then we use the technology and expertise available to us to make the right decision for our farms and our animals.”

A Life-Changing Case

Even though Stevermer doesn’t own sows, she says the outcome of today has a major impact on her life.

“If the cost to implement in California is great as we expect it will be, or if the market is cut off, it’s very possible the people we raise pigs for will say, ‘we don’t need your farm anymore because we don’t have any place to sell our pork.’ And that takes us out of the business,” Stevermer said. “It’s a life-changing case for many of us – not just me.”

To that point, Wolters added there’s a large financial investment decision that’s going to have to be made for owners of sow farms.

“In today’s inflationary period and with the availability of supplies, every producer is going to have to sort that out individually whether they can financially move forward with the new model,” Wolters said.

A ruling is due by the end of June, Reuters reports.

SCOTUS Zeroes in on Key Proposition 12 Issues

More from Farm Journal’s PORK:

Follow California Proposition 12 SCOTUS Oral Arguments Live

Proposition 12 is Not the Way We Want to Care for Animals, Hays Says

How Prop 12 Could Impact Crop and Livestock Producers

Proposition 12 Will Push Pig Farmers Out of Business, NPPC and Farmers Say

Ironic Timing: NPPC, AFBF File Reply Brief on Prop 12, CDFA Finalizes Rules

Proposition 12 Compliancy: Don’t Do It for Free, Hollis Says

Why Agriculture Can’t Ignore Proposition 12 and Question 3

Ag Groups File Lawsuit to Challenge EPA's "Vague" New WOTUS Definition

Fri, 20 Jan 2023 22:27:35 GMT

A group of 17 organizations are challenging the new Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS) definition through a lawsuit against the EPA, filed Thursday.

“The EPA’s new rule doubles down on the significant nexus test, which is this unworkable test for jurisdiction of when the federal government regulates farms and ranches,” says Travis Cushman, Farm Bureau’s deputy general counsel. “We filed our lawsuit to stop it.”

The lawsuit comes as the EPA published its final definition of WOTUS on Dec. 30, which gives federal protection to large waterways, such as interstate rivers and streams, and adjacent wetlands.

Ag Policy Whiplash

In a press release on the lawsuit, Farm Bureau President Zippy Duvall says the rule is “vague” and puts farmers and ranchers in a position where they will have to hire lawyers and consultants to establish the boundaries of farming, which “isn’t what clean water regulations were intended to do.”

Ethan Lane, NCBA’s vice president of government affairs, echoed Farm Bureau, saying the “unjust” ruling hits too close to home.

“I’m from the state of Arizona. The ‘significant nexus’ test that determines a dry stream bed from some kind of runoff area is describing my entire home state, depending on the definition you use,” he says. “We need clarity.”

Why Rule on WOTUS Now?

The new definition and lawsuit come as the Supreme Court is evaluating a decision on another WOTUS case that could significantly impact WOTUS rulemaking, which is set to be ruled on later this year.

Can You Now Repair Your Own John Deere Equipment?

Tue, 10 Jan 2023 15:28:13 GMT

The “right to repair” issue has been a topic of debate both in and outside of agriculture. A memorandum of understanding signed by Deere & Co and the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) means farmers will be able to repair their own equipment.

The MOU was announced during AFBF’s annual meeting in Puerto Rico on Sunday. According to both Deere and AFBF, the MOU formalizes the availability and access to parts, tool, software and documentation to perform repair and maintenance.

“This will enable you and your independent mechanics to identify and fix problems,” Farm Bureau president Zippy Duvall said during his AFBF address. “You will have access to the diagnostic tools and information you need. And you’ll get it at a fair and reasonable price.”

“The says the agreement with the American Farm Bureau Federation formalizes the longstanding commitment Deere has made to ensure our customers have the diagnostic tools and information they need to repair their machines,” Deere stated. “We look forward to working alongside the American Farm Bureau and our customers in the months and years ahead to ensure farmers continue to have the tools and resources they need to diagnose, maintain and repair their equipment.”

With the MOU, farmers can either repair equipment on their own or go to an independent technician. It also helps dodge legislation around the issue. Several states had introduced their own “right to repair” legislation, but as stated in the MOU released this week, the agreement will happen “through a voluntary private sector commitment to outcomes rather than legislative or regulatory measures.”

The Association of Equipment Manufacturers (AEM) represents agriculture equipment manufacturers. The association says it welcomes the MOU between Deere and AFBF and supports their goal of having issues like “right to repair” resolved without legislation.

“The Association of Equipment Manufacturers and its member companies have always supported a farmer’s right to safely maintain, diagnose, and repair equipment,” says Curt Blades, senior vice president of AEM. “We remain committed to helping farmers reduce downtime and maximize productivity through solutions that keep them safe and protect our environment. The success of the agriculture industry is also the success of the equipment manufacturing industry, and we welcome every opportunity to work together to secure the future of American agriculture. The agreement between Deere & Co. and the American Farm Bureau Federation is a positive step in resolving a long-standing issue and reinforces our belief that successful resolution does not require onerous legislative action.”

The Complicated Issue of “Right to Repair”

The issue of “right to repair” is one the entire industry has faced, but John Deere is the equipment manufacturer who is typically the target of both news coverage and policies introduced. As one equipment industry source stated, John Deere is the company with the most to lose.

“Right to repair” is a complicated issue with no easy solution. The latest models of equipment come with sophisticated and high-tech combinations of hardware and software. While the technology allows farmers to be even more precise, one of the downsides is it can be more prone to breakdowns or issues than older models without technology. This can cause more downtime during critical times of the year, such as planting and harvest.

At the same time, protecting the software and intellectual property is of high importance, especially with the r ise in cyberattacks in agriculture. If an agricultural company hasn’t built the proper cloud-based or offline systems, then it puts farmers- and the entire agriculture industry- at risk.

The MOU is aimed to protect the software, while also aiding farmers’ efforts to repair their own equipment as quickly - and efficiently - as possible.

MOU Protects Safety or Protocols

The MOU states equipment owners and independent technicians cannot compromise any safety measures and protocols on the equipment, which includes Deere’s intellectual property, including its software, are protected from infringement; and no federal and state emissions control requirements can be compromised because of modifications made to the machinery.

The MOU also states this access will not be allowed for the purpose of overriding safety features or emissions criteria.

“This MOU shall not be interpreted or construed to require a Manufacturer to: a) divulge trade secrets, proprietary or confidential information; b) allow owners or Independent Repair Facilities to override safety features or emissions controls or to adjust Agricultural Equipment power levels; or, c) violate any federal, state, or local laws or regulations,” states the MOU.

Will More Equipment Manufacturers Sign On?

While the initial MOU is just with John Deere, Duvall invited other equipment manufacturers to also sign on. He also said Farm Bureau officials will meet at least semi-annually with John Deere to discuss the “right to repair.”

“This is a positive step in the right direction. NAEDA will be working to learn more about how the MOU will affect dealers and state legislation going forward and will continue to keep dealers informed,” says Kim Rominger, CEO of the North American Equipment Dealers Association (NAEDA).

Read the complete MOU here .

Many Farmers Support “Right to Repair” Laws

John Phipps: In Right to Repair, Farmers May Be Watching the Wrong Battle

Farm Bureau Seeks ‘Unified’ Farm Bill of Ag and Nutrition Aid

Fri, 14 Oct 2022 19:35:41 GMT

American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) released its general new farm bill recommendations on Thursday.

Farm Bureau’s Agenda

First on the AFBF’s list : “protect farm bill program spending,” followed by “maintain a unified farm bill that keeps nutrition programs and farm programs together.” They also want a robust federally subsidized crop insurance system and “adequate” staffing and funding of the USDA’s technical assistance programs for farmers and ranchers.

The AFBF suggested three minor changes to public nutrition programs, including one to allow food banks to buy fruits, vegetables, and other specialty crops directly from farmers.

“It makes perfect sense” to combine commodity supports and SNAP (food stamps) in the same piece of legislation, said president Zippy Duvall in announcing the group’s farm bill priorities on Thursday.

Farm Bureau also said more milk should be eligible for the Dairy Margin Coverage subsidy program.

Lock-in Rates

The AFBF called for higher reference rates and loan rates, at a still-to-be-determined level and cost, and more emphasis on stewardship on working lands rather than long-term idling of cropland.

“We believe that because of the higher cost of production, it justifies the increase in the reference prices for Title I commodities to ensure farmers remain economically viable,” said Duvall.

Farm Bureau knows full well not to be too specific ahead of their January annual confab.

On the Conservation Reserve Program

The enrollment cap for the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) should be lowered from its current 25.5 million acres, Farm Bureau said, and landowners should be encouraged to return prime cropland now in the reserve to production.

“We believe that the right way to do it is through working land projects,” he said. Land set-asides limit the land available for new and beginning farmers and constrict crop production in a hungry world, said Duvall.

Farm Bill Math

Around 85% of all farm bill spending is on food and nutrition programs, primarily food stamps. So, there is usually a concerted battle by various groups and lawmakers over the remaining 15%. That process has begun.

Total funding beyond food and nutrition spending should be increased for adequate farm policy support. One of the ways, but by no means the only way to do that, is via a large boost in maximum spending for the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC).

More on farm bill 2023:

What’s Your Take on the 2018 Farm Bill?
5 Conservation Needs to be Met in Farm Bill 2023
New Farm Bill, but Same Debate on Food Stamps

Zippy Duvall: Labor is Biggest Limiting Factor for American Agriculture

Wed, 11 May 2022 21:21:24 GMT

Zippy Duvall, president of the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF), weighed in on a number of President Joe Biden’s proposed policy shifts which were announced earlier today by the White House.

“We understand there’s going to be a need for more food because of what’s going on around the world, and we very much appreciate the administration looking for ways to help us increase production,” Duvall said during a conversation on AgriTalk with Host Chip Flory on Tuesday.

Biden’s three-part plan would include:

1. Doubling the funding for domestic fertilizer production to $500 million;
2. Providing greater access to farm management tools for plant and soil needs;
3. Increasing the number of counties eligible for double cropping insurance by up to 681 additional counties. That would bring the total number of counties where double-cropping qualifies for crop insurance to 1,935.

While Duvall thanked the Biden administration for trying to address would-be food shortages, he questions whether more double-crop acres is even a viable option for farmers. Concerns he cites include the later than average 2022 planting season and whether adequate soybean seed and other inputs would be available in those additional counties.

“You’ve got to look at the cost of production, whether we will be able to get enough money out of that second crop to meet the cost of producing it,” he says.

Observations On Immigration Reform And Work Permits
What could potentially put more money in farmers’ pockets is the ability to employ more labor.

Specifically, Duvall would like to see legislation to modernize the current guest worker program which would allow year-round, documented workers who could supply U.S. agriculture with manpower.

“Labor is the biggest limiting factor that American agriculture has,” he contends. “If (the U.S. government) wants us to be more productive, give us the workers to be productive with.”

Duvall told Flory he isn’t sure Congress has what it takes to do immigration reform.

“It surely doesn’t look like it, but we need to make sure that we secure that border,” he says.

He adds that the situation along the border between the U.S. and Mexico is concerning for the communities and residents located there.

“I’ve been to the border, and it is a mess,” he says. “Our farmers and ranchers have suffered terribly down there and think the federal government has abandoned them. They’re even fearful for their lives in a lot of cases.”

AFBF Criticizes Securities and Exchange Commission Proposal
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) released a proposal in early April called the Enhancement and Standardization of Climate Related Disclosures for Investors, which the AFBF opposes.

The proposal would require public companies to report on Scope 3 emissions, which are the result of activities from assets not owned or controlled by a publicly traded company but contribute to its value chain. The AFBF says it has deep concerns the SEC is proposing a rule that would end up subjecting farmers to regulations that are intended for Wall Street.

“The SEC’s trying to get those companies traded on the stock exchange to follow their carbon footprint all the way back to the farm, and we don’t think they have the authority to do that,” Duvall says.

“We don’t need to add any more cost of regulation to our farmers,” he adds. “We’re already over-regulated. We just think this is a bad move, and it’s another area where the federal government is overreaching.”

The SEC has granted an extension until June for the comment period on the 510-page proposal. An analysis of the proposed SEC rule is available here .

Support For Climate-Smart Commodities Program
AFBF sent letters of support to five organizations that have submitted proposals for the USDA Climate-Smart Commodities program.

USDA is investing $1 billion in approximately 350 pilot projects to create market opportunities for U.S. agricultural and forestry products that use climate-smart practices and include innovative, cost-effective ways to measure and verify greenhouse gas benefits.

Duvall says an AFBF review committee placed a high priority on the projects that reflect objectives laid out by it and state Farm Bureaus during USDA’s request for information process.

Controversy Continues Over Waters Of The U.S. (WOTUS)
The EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have proposed a Step 1 WOTUS rulemaking that would repeal the Navigable Waters Protection Rule and replace it with an updated version of what the AFBF calls “murky pre-2015 regulations.”

An AFBF press release says that once the Step 1 rule is complete, the agencies plan to work on a new rule that broadens the WOTUS definition even further.

The EPA and Army Corps of Engineers are in the process of holding regional “listening sessions” to gather feedback from stakeholders on the forthcoming Step 2 rule.

Duvall says he is concerned the stakeholders included in the listening sessions are not diverse enough as a group and do not adequately reflect farmers’ needs and concerns.

“We think (EPA and the Army Corp) limited the people and their experience with the WOTUS rule and they need a wider variety of people involved so they can make wise decisions as they move forward in rewriting this rule,” he says.

“We continue to ask our membership to communicate with EPA, to tell their concerns and their stories from their individual farms, and we’re going to continue that movement,” he adds.

Listen here for Duvall’s entire comments on AgriTalk:

The House passes BBB Act — Do the costs outweigh the benefits?

Mon, 22 Nov 2021 20:11:35 GMT

On Friday, Nov. 19, 2021 The U.S. House of Representatives passed President Joe Biden’s ‘Build Back Better’ plan, also known as the reconciliation package. This vote came after months of debate and countless rewrites to the plan.

“ The Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal is now law and we will reap its benefits of new job and economic growth and the ability to compete around the world. The American Rescue Plan continues to get our economy back on track as we recover from the pandemic. Together with the Build Back Better bill, we have a truly transformational opportunity to rebuild the physical, natural, and human infrastructure of our nation,” said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack in a release.

The $1.7 trillion plan invests more than $90 billion in climate-smart agriculture, forestry, research, rural development, child nutrition and debt relief, according to the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry .

Climate-Smart Agriculture: $27 billion to give farmers and ranchers the tools they’ve asked for to keep leading on climate. It’s the biggest investment in conservation since the Dust Bowl —reaching as many as 240,000 farms and 130 million acres of cropland per year;
Forestry: $27 billion to restore forests, fight wildfires and sequester carbon in trees – the biggest ever investment in forest restoration, wildfire prevention, and climate-smart forestry;
Research: $2 billion for agricultural climate research and agricultural research facilities;
Rural Development and Energy: $18.3 billion to invest in rural prosperity and help rural communities transition to cleaner energy;
Child Nutrition: $10 billion to invest in child nutrition programs to feed millions of additional kids during the school year and over the summer; and,
Debt Relief: $6 billion in additional funding to expand support to economically distressed borrowers and underserved farmers, ranchers and forest landowners in high-poverty areas.

“The Build Back Better initiative is a historic step forward. It’s going to enable us, once passed and signed by the President, to remain competitive and resilient in a global economy into the future. While at the same time helping American families cut costs in areas of health care, education, housing, and increase their ability to cope with any increased costs,” Vilsack said in a press briefing on Nov. 19 following the house approval vote.

Vilsack said in the briefing that the plan won’t prevent obstacles to farmers who want to pass on their operation to the next generation, noting that the estate tax code stepped up-basis would not be eliminated. He said corporations and rich individuals would pay more.

“Our corporations have made more than a billion dollars and didn’t pay any tax and individuals who make more than $25 million a year; they are going to pay a little extra tax, and I think they probably can afford a little extra.” Continue reading.

However, some organizations stand opposed to the legislation. The American Farm Bureau Federation sent a letter to the U.S. House of Representatives Tuesday, Nov. 16 stating, “After watching months of contentious, partisan debate surrounding the Build Back Better Act, AFBF stands in opposition to the legislation. While some elements of the reconciliation package would benefit agriculture, the massive amount of spending and tax increases required to pay for the plan outweigh the gains we would see in rural America.”

In the Nov. 19 press conference Vilsack replied, “with respect to the Farm Bureau… I just don’t think that’s that aligns with the terms and conditions of this bill. The initial proposal contained an elimination of stepped-up basis. And notwithstanding the fact that there was a provision in the initial proposal that would have exempted 98% of the farms in the country today from having to be concerned about this. There was still I think a level of concern that folks had. That provision is not in this bill.”

“I don’t see anything in this bill that necessarily compromises the ability of family farms to stay in business,” Vilsack said.

Ag Industry Leaders Congratulate Biden, Echo His Call for Unity

Wed, 20 Jan 2021 22:54:01 GMT

Following the inauguration of President Joe Biden, the 46^th President of the United States, agriculture industry leaders congratulated Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris. They also echoed Biden’s call for unity and a commitment for Americans to work together toward common goals.

In a statement, American Farm Bureau president Zippy Duval said addressing the needs of America’s farmers, ranchers and rural communities is important, including strengthening the farm bill, expanding trade, finding a fair solution to the farm labor shortage and expanding rural broadband access.

“We are also looking for partners in our efforts to achieve sustainability goals while ensuring climate policies remain market-based and voluntary. We have been meeting with President Biden’s nominees to discuss priority issues and today we shift into high gear to achieve these goals,” he said. “All of this can be done if we commit ourselves to working together for a better America. Agriculture is traditionally divided more by regional differences than by political parties. We urge our elected leaders to continue that tradition of bipartisanship in the agriculture committees and throughout our government. Our country faces some big challenges. Let’s get to work on solutions.”

Similarly, the National Milk Producers Federation CEO Jim Mulhern noted what he called the dawn of a new chapter in American history.

“Inaugurations represent new beginnings and new opportunities. This is especially important today, as we begin this journey at a time of turmoil that has intensified in recent months and weeks,” he said in a statement. “We in dairy offer our own commitment to work on a bipartisan basis for progress on issues important to dairy farmers, their cooperatives and the greater good. We also look forward to engaging with the broader agricultural community to meet our common challenges and build a thriving rural America that lifts the entire nation.”

Constance Cullman president and CEO of the American Feed Industry Association noted the need to curb COVID-19 and spur the economy.

“Now more than ever, we need a strategy that will curb the spread of COVID-19 and get our economy going and growing again; an efficient regulatory system that allows U.S. manufacturers to swiftly bring innovations that can improve animal health and nutrition to the marketplace; and trade policies that foster opportunities for growth and leadership abroad to maintain our competitive edge,” she said in a statement. “We also look forward to working together on a science-based strategy for tackling climate change and improving rural infrastructure, including improving the connectivity of the rural communities responsible for keeping us fed in times of calm and crisis.”

Emily Skor CEO of Growth Energy congratulated the president and vice president while noting President Biden’s campaign promise to “usher in a new era of biofuels.”

“We look forward to working with the President and his Administration to deliver on his promise and include biofuels as a big part of the climate strategy for decarbonizing the transportation sector immediately,” she said in a statement.

The Ag Retailers Association CEO and President Daren Coppock joined the other leaders in looking forward to working on issues critical to their trade group.

“The Biden transition team worked diligently to be inclusive of ag retailers from day one, and for that we are grateful. We appreciate the engagement we have already had with the leadership of the incoming administration and look forward to continuing those relationships for a bright future for American agriculture,” Coppock said.

Chuck Conner of the National Council for Cooperatives suggested a key piece of agriculture’s success under the new administration hinges on the confirmation of Tom Vilsack, President Biden’s choice for Agriculture Secretary.

“Key to ensuring that happens will be filling out the leadership team at the U.S. Department of Agriculture,” he said in a statement. “We urge the Senate to quickly take up and confirm the nominations of Tom Vilsack for secretary of agriculture and Jewel Bronaugh for deputy secretary of agriculture.”

Trump Brings Border Wall Fight To AFBF, Promises Ag Labor Solution

Fri, 20 Nov 2020 05:20:18 GMT

President Donald Trump brought his fight to build a border wall to the 100^th American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) annual meeting in New Orleans, La., on Monday. There, the president found support for border security and received a standing ovation when he promised to address ag labor concerns.

“We’re going to have a barrier. We’re going to have something that’s going to be very strong,” Trump said to a standing crowd of 7,000 farmers.

In December, 20,000 migrant children were illegally brought across our borders, said Trump, adding “most of the drugs” in the U.S. enter via the southern border. According to Trump, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and border patrol agents are asking for a wall and America must provide them the tools necessary to do their jobs well.

“As president, the defense of our nation is my highest and most important duty, and this is the defense of our nation,” he said. “I will never ever back down.”

Trump invited Arizona rancher Jim Chilton on stage to say a few words. Chilton’s ranch, which sits along the U.S.-Mexico border, is on the route for a major Mexican drug trafficking cartel.

“Mr. President, we need a wall,” said Chilton to a standing ovation. He thinks a wall is necessary to stop drug traffickers from importing drugs that “poison our people.”

Directing his comments to Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, Chilton said: “Walls are not immoral. The biggest wall I’ve ever seen is around the Vatican.”

Addressing the concern of many in the agricultural industry, Trump promised immigration reform, which would make it easier for farmers to source immigrant labor.

“We want to take people in to help our farmers,” he said. “We’re going to make it easier for them because you need these people.”

The cheers of the farmers in attendance made it clear they support President Trump’s border wall and his promises of immigration reform.

Touching On Trade

President Trump briefly mentioned trade during his one-hour talk, touching on a potential trade deal with the European Union, the trade war with China and the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).

“I don’t blame China,” he said, adding it’s our leaders’ fault for allowing the theft of intellectual property to happen. “Over the past 15 years, we’ve seen a continual decline in the U.S. share of agricultural trade all throughout the world. You know it’s all going in the wrong direction when you see that happen. We do the right deal with the Chinese—you’re talking about massive [improvement].”

Trump added China is already “backordering” products from the U.S. While export data is not available during the ongoing government shutdown, previous data shows China is purchasing soybeans, but at a very slow rate.

“We want a fair deal for American farmers, removing China’s arbitrary bans on agricultural imports to safeguard our intellectual property and providing fair market access to all American producers,” he said.

Trump also touted opening markets for pork exports to Argentina, poultry exports to India and Morocco, potato exports to Japan and beef exports to Brazil and China.

In addition, the president said he made history by replacing the “horrible” North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) with USMCA. That deal has yet to be approved by Congress.

Overviewing The Wins

While addressing Farm Bureau members, President Trump gave an overview of his ag policy scorecard, mentioning several subjects that received standing ovations from the crowd. Those included tax reform, the repeal of the Waters of the U.S. rule, the “virtual elimination” of the estate tax, an increase in farm income and the passage of the farm bill.

Trump Touts Trade Wins at Farm Bureau

Wed, 11 Nov 2020 06:22:12 GMT

“We did it! We did it!” With those words, President Donald Trump launched into an hour-long recap of legislative wins for agriculture in a speech Sunday to delegates at the American Farm Bureau Convention in San Antonio, Texas.

There is much to celebrate. Trump made the trip to Texas on the heels of two big trade wins: the signing of a Phase 1 trade deal with China and congressional approval of the U.S. Canada Mexico Agreement (USMCA).

It is rare to have a president speak at the Farm Bureau Convention. Trump has made a point to appear before this key constituency each of his three years in office. On Sunday, the president vowed to return a fourth time in 2021 drawing a roar from the audience. That Farm Bureau audience appears ready to place Trump in position to return after November’s election, a sentiment that drew the president into a relaxed and familiar conversation with the nearly 6 thousand delegates in attendance.

“Look at this. Farmer approval of Trump hits record, a poll shows 83% of the farmers and ranchers approve of the President’s job performance,” Trump said noting the latest Farm Journal Pulse Poll released Sunday. “That’s pretty good, right?”

“We are winning for our farmers, and we are winning like never before,” Trump noted.

“The deal with China will tear down market barriers and pry open vast new markets for American beef, pork, poultry, seafood, soybeans, rice, dairy, infant formula, animal feed, biotechnology, and much, much more,” he said “This is an incredible success for our entire country. And it was your fortitude, your perseverance and your devotion. That made it all possible.”

In the speech the president confirmed that round three of Market Facilitation Program (MFP) payments will go out shortly. The payments are designed to offset some of the market losses from the trade war with China.

The MFP announcement was praised by Minnesota Farm Bureau President Kevin Paap.

“We haven’t seen any jump in the markets, we still have got some low prices, many below the cost of production,” Paap said noting how needed the third round payments are for farmers in his state.

Those trade wins are bringing new optimism for farmers like David Fisher of Madrid, New York.

“I think 2020-2021 has some opportunities,” Fisher said after the speech. “It depends on a lot of other factors, but anything that clears product from the market at competitive prices is good for farmers.”

It was expected that President Trump would unveil a new Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS) rule in his Farm Bureau speech. The topic came up late in the speech with the president saying of the Obama-era WOTUS rule, “This rule gave bureaucrats virtually unlimited authority to regulate stuck tanks, drainage ditches and isolated ponds, as navigable waterways and navigable water.”
The president did not unveil the anticipated new definition of waters regulated by the Clean Water Act, but indicated that a new rule is coming soon.

“As long as I’m President, government will never micromanage America’s farmers,” he said.

EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler was scheduled to speak to the Farm Bureau audience, but his appearance was cancelled over the weekend leading to speculation that the draft WOTUS rule has run into a temporary snag.

While nearly all of the policy boasts by the president were met with thunderous applause, there was notable silence after Trump detailed his action on ethanol, including clearing the regulator path for year-round sales of E15. He did not address the lingering fight over small refinery exemptions to the Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS).

“It’s really about the small refinery exemptions, the waivers,” Paap said. “Fifteen billion gallons (required ethanol blending under the RFS) is what farmers invested in. That’s what we built plants on. I would’ve really liked to have heard the president say ’15 billion gallons means 15 billion gallons.’”

USDA Secretary Sonny Perdue is slated to speak at the Convention on Monday.

Watch President Donald Trump’s full speech at the American Farm Bureau Federation Convention in the player below.