Farm Bill; and the Ag Economy- Tuesday Posted By Keith Good On May 21, 2013  Farm Bill Yesterday afternoon, the Senate proceeded to consider the Farm Bill (S.954). “Democrats and Republicans disagree on many things. So it’s really remarkable and encouraging to see how well Senators Stabenow and Senator Cochran — the chairman and ranking member of the Senate Agriculture Committee — worked together to bring the agriculture jobs bill to the floor. Their work has been exemplary — some would say old-fashioned — the way things used to be,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) said yesterday. “In an effort to expedite the floor process, the committee even included many of the amendments that were adopted last year, when the Senate considered and passed a farm bill. I hope their cooperative spirit guides our work on this important legislation. American farmers are counting on us. So is the economy,” Leader Reid noted; while adding that, “But to keep American farms strong, Congress must pass a strong farm bill.” In remarks on the Senate floor yesterday (video replay here) Senate Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D., Mich.) stated that, “Most of us don’t have to worry about how many days it’s been since the last rainfall.  Or whether or not it’s going to freeze in May after the fruit trees are blooming.  Most of us don’t have to worry about decisions and weather conditions around the world and how it affects our livelihood.  And that’s why we have the Farm Bill.  We have a Farm Bill because farmers are in the riskiest business in the world.” Chairwoman Stabenow noted that, “We are putting in caps on payments to farmers, we’re closing loopholes that allowed people who weren’t actually farming to receive payments, and we’re strengthening crop insurance so farmers can go to an agent and buy insurance to protect their crops from bad weather or market swings.” Committee ranking member Thad Cochran (R., Miss.) also addressed the Senate chamber yesterday (video replay) and “focused on farm program reforms and savings in the legislation, as well as the importance of agriculture to the American economy,” according to a news release. Meanwhile, Ramsey Cox reported yesterday at The Hill’s Floor Action Blog that, “Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) said the House farm bill cuts to food stamps, also called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), could not pass in the Senate [video replay, full remarks]. “‘We shouldn’t be cutting federal nutrition programs,’ Brown said Monday. ‘[The Senate] bill cuts $4 billion from SNAP and that’s already $4 billion too much. … The House’s $20 billion in SNAP cuts won’t pass muster in the Senate and certainly won’t get my support.’” DTN Ag Policy Editor Chris Clayton reported yesterday (link requires subscription) that, “Reid would like to clear the Senate calendar of legislation such as the farm bill with the plan to provide as much time as possible in June for the Senate to debate the comprehensive immigration reform bill now being debated in the Judiciary Committee. “That said, it took all of about 30 minutes on the floor Monday before Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., threw the first wrench into the farm-bill machinery. Introducing an amendment co-sponsored by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., McCain said the amendment would eliminate the crop-insurance premium subsidy for tobacco. McCain pointed to the $10 billion tobacco subsidy bailout to question why taxpayers now subsidize crop insurance for tobacco.” The DTN article noted, “‘Well, it turns out Joe Camel’s nose has been under the tent all this time in the form of hidden crop-insurance subsidies,’ McCain said. “McCain then questioned the justification for subsidizing crop insurance for tobacco considering the cost tobacco use creates for taxpayers in terms of more expensive health care [audio of a portion of Sen. McCain’s remarks available here (MP3- 2:37)]. David Rogers reported yesterday at Politico that, “Senate Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) urged her colleagues to look at the crop insurance program with a ‘broad lens’ and not focus on one crop singled out for its impact on health care. “The underlying farm bill, in fact, ends direct cash subsidies to producers — a costly system dating back to the mid-90’s. And while the government absorbs about 62 percent of the premium costs for crop insurance, the farmer never sees that subsidy. What he or she sees is the bill for the remaining 38 percent — not some cash handout like today.” Mr. Rogers noted that, “‘We’ve moved to a system where we’re asking farmers to put some skin in the game,’ Stabenow said. ‘We’re saying you have to have crop insurance, you have to be part of paying for it.’ “‘As we move to that cornerstone, I would hope that we could keep that in place and not see efforts that will weaken it around the edges.’” A news update yesterday from Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D., N.H.) stated that, “[Sens. Shaheen], Pat Toomey (R-PA) and Mark Kirk (R-IL) today are announcing plans to implement commonsense reforms to the U.S. sugar program by amending the Senate Farm Bill with a bipartisan effort that will save consumers money.  The trio will introduce the Sugar Reform Act as an amendment to roll back unnecessary provisions that unfairly benefit wealthy sugar famers at the expense of consumers.  This legislation, introduced earlier this year as a stand-alone bill with bipartisan, bicameral support, will reform domestic supply restrictions, lower price support levels, and ensure adequate sugar supplies at reasonable prices.” And a news update yesterday from Sen. Jeff Merkley (D., Ore.) stated that, “Today, Oregon’s Senator Jeff Merkley announced that he would put forward an amendment to the Senate farm bill that would repeal a controversial provision of the recently-passed continuing resolution known as the ‘Monsanto Protection Act.’ “‘The Monsanto Protection Act is an outrageous example of a special interest loophole,’ said Merkley. ‘This provision nullifies the actions of a court that is enforcing the law to protect farmers, the environment and public health. That is unacceptable.’ “To avoid public scrutiny, the ‘Monsanto Protection Act’ was quietly and anonymously inserted into the continuing resolution passed this March to avert a government shutdown.” Meanwhile, a news release yesterday from Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D. N.D.) stated that, [Sen. Heitkamp] will spend the week pushing for agriculture policies that work for North Dakota as the full Senate debates a long-term Farm Bill. Heitkamp is committed to preserving the provisions she supported in the current bill, which passed the Senate Agriculture Committee in a strong bipartisan fashion last week.…‘This is a critically important week for the Farm Bill,’ said Heitkamp. ‘Now is the time for the Senate to step up and pass this major reform legislation, which will send a clear signal to the House of Representatives that this work must get done. While we can’t know for sure if the House will actually bring a Farm Bill to the floor for a vote this year, it is our duty in the Senate to show leadership and move this legislation forward.” Speaking yesterday on the AgriTalk radio program with Mike Adams, Senior Director of Congressional Relations for the American Farm Bureau Federation, Mary Kay Thatcher, noted that, “I think the Senate floor, you’re likely to see some hits on crop insurance, probably quite a few.  I think you could have people come in and just try to repeal the ability to rely on permanent law to get this bill done every four years or five years.  And then you’re going to have just a whole host of conservation and nutrition type amendments.  And if you were a betting person, you’d bet at least 100 amendments will be filed on the bill.” More specifically on the commodity title Ms. Thatcher noted that, “Well, certainly peanut and rice producers have wanted a reasonable target price throughout the debate on this bill.  They have, in general, felt like a revenue program or like the ARC program or the RLC over in the House, or a crop insurance program doesn’t work as well for them as it works for other commodities, and so they’ve pretty much said we don’t want to look at some of these shallow loss revenue programs.  We just want a target price that will be set, that target price will stay set for the life of the bill, we’ll worry about our own yields and revenue, etc., just give us the target price… [N]ow, the target prices on the Senate side, you would have to say, are less trade distorting than those on the House side, number one because they are lower, and number two because they’re tied to the old base acres rather than tied to current planted acres…” With respect to the House side, Ms. Thatcher noted on yesterday’s AgriTalk program that, “I think the House floor is just going to be a nightmare.  We are going to have so many nutrition amendments, and we have so many fewer rural people on the House side.  I can’t really see a way that you make either the Senate or the House bill much improved from where they are now, and I can see lots of ways that they could get a lot worse.” A floor schedule update posted recently at the Senate Democrats webpage indicated that, “The Senate stands in adjournment until 10:00am on Tuesday, May 21, 2013.  Following any Leader remarks, the Senate will be in morning business for one hour with the Majority controlling the first half and the Republicans controlling the final half.  Following morning business, the Senate will resume consideration of S.954, the Farm bill.” With respect to executive branch perspective on the Farm Bill, Reuters writer Charles Abbott reported yesterday that, “The Senate should cut crop insurance subsidies, the most expensive part of the farm safety net, by $1 billion a year before it passes the new farm bill, the White House said on Monday. The Reuters article noted that, “It [the executive branch proposal] would reduce the federal subsidy on premiums, now averaging 62 cents of each $1, by 3 percentage points on the most heavily subsidized and most popular policies, which shield crop revenue from low prices and poor yields. “Premium subsidies would be cut by an additional 2 points on policies that base the revenue guarantee on market prices at harvest time rather than the price projected at planting time. One analyst said those policies were unduly expensive in the 2012 drought because commodity prices soared in the fall. “The administration also would limit insurers to a 12 percent rate of return, down 2 points, and lower the annual payment, now $1.3 billion, to defray overhead costs.” And in a statement yesterday, Sec. of Ag. Tom Vilsack noted in part that, “I also appreciate efforts by Chairman Lucas and Congressman Peterson to pass a bill out of the House Agriculture Committee. I am deeply concerned about portions of the House version of the bill, including significant cuts that would deny struggling families and their children access to food assistance. The Administration strongly supports the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), a cornerstone of our Nation’s food assistance safety net, which is why it was not subject to cuts in the President’s Budget.”   Agricultural Economy Gregory Meyer reported yesterday at The Financial Times Online that, “US farmers driving floodlit tractors into the night have planted the most corn in any week on record in a sprint that could force prices lower on world agricultural commodity markets. “US Department of Agriculture data suggested farmers seeded a record 42m acres (17m hectares) in the seven days to Sunday – an area larger than Austria, Ireland or South Korea. Seventy-one per cent of corn fields were planted in the main farm states by Sunday,up from 28 per cent the week before.” The FT article added that, “Planted Illinois corn acreage jumped from 17 per cent to 74 per cent in the week, USDA reported. “In Iowa, the biggest corn-growing state, the jump was from 15 per cent to 71 per cent.” Mr. Meyer explained that, “Corn prices have remained high this spring as steady rain left fields too muddy to plant. This threatened to expose late-germinating corn stalks to severe midsummer heat.” AP writer David Pitt reported yesterday that, “Clark Kelly plans to spend a lot of time on the links this spring. The Illinois farmer is plowing the Hend-Co-Hills Golf Course near tiny Biggsville into a cornfield. “He’s not the only one turning over soil in unlikely places. Across the Midwest, farmers are planting crops on almost any scrap of available land to take advantage of consistently high corn and soybean prices. Growers are knocking down old barns, tearing out fencerows and digging up land that had once been preserved for wildlife.” Also yesterday, a news release from the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) stated that, “A coalition of U.S. food and agricultural organizations led by the [NPPC] is urging the Obama administration to press the European Union to negotiate a ‘comprehensive’ free trade agreement, including addressing sanitary-phytosanitary (SPS) barriers to trade. “In a letter signed by 47 organizations sent today to U.S. Trade Representative nominee Mike Froman, the coalition expressed concern with a resolution approved last month by the European Parliament that in negotiating the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) with the United States the EU should maintain the ‘precautionary principle’ for SPS issues. Precautionary measures are implemented based on the mere identification of potential risk or, worse, on public perception and political considerations rather than on science-based risk assessments. The World Trade Organization requires member countries’ SPS measures to be based on scientific risk assessments.”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    May 20 Farm Bill; and the Ag Economy- Monday Posted By Keith Good On May 20, 2013  Farm Bill A floor schedule update posted recently at the Senate Democrats webpage indicated that, “The Senate stands in adjournment until 2:00pm on Monday, May 20, 2013.  Following any Leader remarks, the Senate will be in a period of morning business until 3:00pm. “Following morning business, the Senate will proceed to the consideration of S.954, the Farm bill.” And the Congressional Budget Office on Friday released its cost estimate of the Senate Ag Committee based legislation, which can be viewed here, “S. 954, Agriculture Reform and Risk Management Act of 2013.” Also on Friday, The Mississippi Business Journal Blog reported that, “Politics, agriculture, and the economy were the hot topics on a rainy Delta morning as hundreds gathered for the 78th annual meeting of Delta Council, Friday, May 17, on the campus of Delta State University…[F]ollowing the business session of the annual meeting, United States Senator Thad Cochran introduced United States Senator from Michigan and Chairwoman of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Forestry and Nutrition Debbie Stabenow as thefeatured speaker.” Friday’s update noted that, “‘We passed a Farm Bill last year with a broad, bipartisan vote – in the middle of an election year, no less,’ said Stabenow. ‘Unfortunately, the House did not take up the Farm Bill on the floor and the 2008 Farm Bill expired on September 30. This was unacceptable to us, as was the partial extension that was added to the fiscal cliff deal on January 1st of this year, which left out many key programs, including disaster assistance. So when Senator Cochran and I sat down at the beginning of this year, I told him I wanted to build on our successes from last year and give America’s farmers the Farm Bill they deserve. We had made great progress, and we knew that, together, we could make even more. Together, we worked to craft another strong Farm Bill that gives farmers the ability to manage their risk; that streamlines programs and cuts red tape for farmers; and that recognizes the diversity of agriculture from the cotton fields in the Mississippi Delta to the cherry orchards of Traverse City in northern Michigan.’ “Stabenow thanked Senator Cochran for his leadership, noting that writing a Farm Bill that works for every region of the country can be challenging. ‘I’m glad Senator Cochran joined the leadership team and helped build the Southern connection we needed to make sure this bill works for everyone – that cotton, rice and peanut farmers receive the support they need to succeed.’ “The Senator cited the changes in rice farming over the past 20 years as an example. ‘The high costs of rice farming have deterred entry for new farmers, the number of rice farms has dropped by almost half, and the average rice farm size has more than doubled between 1992 and 2007. We took this and other aspects of rice and peanut farming into consideration when creating a new price program. Under the Adverse Market Protection program, which would operate very similarly to the existing counter-cyclical program, payments are made on historic base acres and decoupled from production. This way, farmers would still have the freedom to decide what and where to plant,’ she said. ‘For most crops, payments would only be made to farmers when prices drop below 55 percent of their historic rolling average. For rice and peanuts, however, there will be a fixed target price, and producers would have the opportunity to update their historic payment yields and acres. We also have included the crop insurance program designed specifically for cotton that we drafted in the 2012 Farm Bill that takes into account the unique challenges of cotton growers.’” Pete Kasperowicz reported on Friday at The Hill’s Floor Action Blog that, “The main business of the Senate next week is the $955 billion farm bill. Senate leaders aren’t expecting to finish work on the bill next week, but it will start the process of passing the nation’s next five-year agricultural plan. “The bill would cut $23 billion from current spending levels over 10 years, but some Republicans have noted with a similar bill last year, that this cut is from post-stimulus levels. It also cuts $4 billion in food stamps, which has led to some Democratic opposition. “Still, the Senate seems likely to pass a version of the bill passed the Senate last year in a 64-35 vote.” With respect to Farm Bill perspective from the House, DTN Ag Policy Editor Chris Clayton reported on Friday that, “The House Agriculture Committee will face floor fights on a number of issues from both parties when the farm bill is taken up, but should be able to hold together its version of the bill for eventual negotiations with the Senate later this summer, ranking member Collin Peterson said Friday. “Peterson, a Democrat from Minnesota, also expressed confidence the farm bill could be done before the August recess if both versions are able to get past their respective floor debates in the coming weeks. Peterson said his conversations with House Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas, R-Okla., suggest the legislation will be debated in mid-June. Floor debate begins on the Senate bill Monday afternoon. “‘Having said that, we have challenges facing us when we get to the floor,’ Peterson said.” Mr. Clayton pointed out that, “Peterson noted 13 of 21 Democrats on the committee voted for the bill, ‘which was better than I thought.’ Peterson said it showed there is ability to get Democratic votes despite $20.5 billion in cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. “In the coming weeks, Peterson said he, Lucas and others will be talking with House leaders about how to manage the floor debate. Peterson said without restrictions on amendments, the floor debate will become too unwieldy to manage. “Peterson still sees significant battles on the floor, starting with nutrition programs and cuts.” In the telenews conference with reporters on Friday, Rep. Peterson stated: “That’s a tricky thing because you have some Democrats that have taken a position, which I think is not defensible, that SNAP can’t be cut one penny.  I think that’s a ridiculous position.  You’ve got people on the other side that want $130 billion of cuts, and that’s ridiculous.” Noting that without administration opposition to the Farm Bill, and no veto override vote to plan for, Rep. Peterson stated that only 218 votes were needed in the House to pass the measure; he added that, “We don’t expect…you know, [Speaker] Boehner is not going to be for this bill.  [Majority Leader] Cantor, I would be surprised if he is.  But I think Kevin McCarthy probably will be for the bill, who’s the whip, so I expect, at the end of the day, there will be some help on their side, and there will help on our side.  Leader Pelosi is behind us.  I’ve been talking to her.  She will be supporting what we’re doing.” On the crop insurance issue, Rep. Peterson noted that, “I’ve been looking into the flood insurance situation.  Flood insurance is being subsidized roughly the same amount as crop insurance, so if we’re going to have this discussion and they want to reduce government subsidy in crop insurance, then I would argue we ought to be looking at flood insurance as well, because I think there’s more reason for the government to be behind crop insurance than there is flood insurance, because crop insurance supports the food production system, which is a national security issue, and has much bigger implications than whether you’re going to build a mansion on the Outer Banks that gets wiped out every other year and why the government should subsidize that.  So that’s where, when we get to this discussion, that’s where I think it should be focused.” A reporter asked Rep. Peterson on Friday: “Congressman, the conservation compliance tie-in with crop insurance in the Senate, on the House Ag Committee bill, how do you see that issue coming together as we get to the floor and ultimately into conference? “Rep. Peterson:  Well, that will be a fight.  The chairman feels strongly about this.  I supported him.  So the position of the committee is to not tie the two together.  There will be an amendment on this on the floor.  This will be a tough fight.  We may not win.  But we’ll deal with what comes out of the situation.” Beyond crop insurance issues, Rep. Peterson pointed out that, “We’re going to have challenges in certain areas on the floor.  The dairy issue will be a contentious issue.  There will be a vote on sugar, which will also be contentious.  There will be other issues in other areas, so it’s not going to be easy…And it looks like the Senate is on track to get their bill moved.  And at the end of the day, this bill is going to be written in conference, and we just need to figure out how to get this to conference.  That’s the trick.” Eric Wasson reported on Friday at The Hill’s On the Money Blog that, “Pelosi’s office clarified Friday that the minority leader supports moving forward on a farm bill, but has not weighed in on the substance of the Agriculture Committee bill. “‘As Ranking Member Peterson stated today, Leader Pelosi is supportive of getting a five year farm bill reauthorized. She is hopeful that the Republican leadership will bring the committee-passed bill to the floor under an open rule so that Members will have an opportunity to weigh in.  Sixteen million jobs are on the line, including 800,000 jobs in California,’ spokesman Drew Hammill said.” Ted Booker reported on Friday at the Watertown Daily Times (N.Y.) Online that, “The new margin insurance program [for dairy producers] is expected to be hotly contested in the House, even though it is included in versions of the farm bill passed by committee, according to U.S. Rep. William L. Owens, D-Plattsburgh [N.Y.] The free, voluntary insurance program is designed to help dairy farmers combat low milk prices and high feed costs. It would reimburse farmers when the difference between their costs and milk prices surpasses a certain threshold.” The article noted that, “Because the Dairy Freedom Act [an alternative dairy proposal] is supported by House Speaker John A. Boehner, Mr. Owens said, it has a strong chance of being approved on the floor. If that happens, he said, the fight over that policy would then be waged between the House and Senate before a final bill is sent to the president.” To listen to remarks on the dairy issue by Rep. Peterson from Wednesday’s Ag Committee markup of the Farm Bill, just click here (MP3- 6:00). In executive branch perspective on Farm Bill issues, on Thursday’s AgriTalk radio program with Mike Adams, Sec. of Agriculture Tom Vilsack noted that, “I think frankly, at the end of the day, it isn’t going to be target prices that is the most difficult hurdle to cross here.  I think it’s going to be the dairy program that absolutely needs to be done.  We have too much volatility in dairy prices.  It’s not stable.  I think Rep. Peterson has taken a good shot at trying to resolve the volatility issue.  I think he’s got some challenges with the speaker of the house on the supply side piece of it. “But at the end of the day, he’s right that you can’t have a program that just opens up the checkbook.  There has to be some constraint and restraint on that.  But at the same time you need a system that provides better assistance and help for dairy producers when prices are low or feed costs are high.” Also last week, Bloomberg writers Eric Martin and Alan Bjerga reported that, “U.S. House and Senate agriculture committee proposals for a new farm law represent a ‘good faith’ effort by lawmakers to resolve a trade dispute over cotton with Brazil, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said. “The proposals passed this week may modify farm subsidies enough to satisfy the South American nation, Vilsack said today in an interview in Mexico City. The U.S. competes with Brazil in exporting grain, soybeans, beef and cotton. “‘We would not intentionally pass legislation with the knowledge or awareness that it was going to invite a series of challenges,’ Vilsack said after a meeting with Enrique Martinez, Mexico’s agriculture minister. Farm-bill subsidy plans, which emphasize crop insurance over price-pegged supports, represent ‘a real good-faith effort to resolve that issue with Brazil and to get it finished once and for all,’ Vilsack said.” Also on the Farm Bill, David Rogers reported on Friday that, “Pigs, chickens, the U.S. Constitution — and a dose of olive oil — all got thrown together in a House farm bill markup that took a remarkable turn from the barnyard to the judicial bench late Wednesday night. “‘I’m one of these country lawyers, which is no lawyer at all,’ Rep. Jim Costa (D-Calif.) was candid to say at the outset. But that didn’t stop him or most of the House Agriculture Committee from plunging into an hour-long debate on the constitutional fine points of the interstate commerce clause and state laws excluding eggs or meat that don’t meet local production standards.” (Note that at a FarmPolicy.com transcript of the full debate from Wednesday on this issue is available here). Mr. Rogers added that, “Before the dust settled, the committee had adopted a far-reaching amendment that infuriated animal welfare groups, delighted the pork and beef lobbies and broke more than a few eggs. Where it goes next in the context of the larger farm bill debate, no one truly knows. But scores of state laws could be impacted and it surely reaches well beyond its initial target: sunny California. “Most simply the language would bar any state from excluding the marketing of ‘agricultural products’ if they have been grown in a manner ‘pursuant’ to federal law and the laws of the state or locality from which they come. “Proponents argue that this is needed to allow the free flow of farm commerce across state lines. But for animal welfare groups, it’s a huge Catch 22, since the same committee continues to resist any new federal standards for raising livestock — preferring to leave the issue to farmers and individual states.” And Ron Nixon reported in Saturday’s New York Times that, “In response to the Obama administration’s plans to overhaul the nation’s international food aid program, which provides food to disaster-stricken regions, Congress this week began laying the groundwork for its own changes. “Farm bills passed this week by the House and Senate Agriculture Committees do not go as far as the Obama administration’s proposal, which would move the $1.4 billion program from the budget of the Agriculture Department to the foreign affairs budget in an effort to speed delivery and cut costs. The bills reauthorized the food aid program and left it largely intact, in the agriculture budget.” Mr. Nixon indicated that, “Senator Debbie Stabenow, Democrat of Michigan and the chairwoman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, said she had had conversations with the Obama administration about changes to the food aid program. “‘We chose to keep it in the Agriculture Department, but give it more flexibility,’ she said in a conference call with reporters on Thursday. ‘I think it’s a big step forward, and it had bipartisan support.’ “Tamara Hinton, a spokeswoman for the House Agriculture Committee, said there was also widespread support among members of the committee for keeping food aid in the farm bill.” Meanwhile, University of Illinois Agricultural Economist Nick Paulson noted on Thursday at the farmdoc daily blog (“A Farm Bill Update: More Changes to Commodity Programs”) that, “After creating a one-year extension to the 2008 Farm Bill in the midst of larger budget issues at the end of last year, Congress has resumed the Farm Bill process. Both the Senate and House Ag Committees have released 2013 Farm Bill markups (see Senate version here; House version here). Both the Senate and House drafts are similar to the versions passed by the full Senate and House Ag Committee in 2012 (see previous posts from Carl Zulauf summarizing those here and here) in that the majority of existing commodity programs (direct, countercyclical, ACRE, and SURE programs) are repealed to achieve spending reductions. However, there have been some slight changes to the programs created to replace those being repealed, particularly in the new version from the Senate. Today’s post provides a summary of some of those commodity program changes. Discussion of continued changes in other titles, such as Crop Insurance, and the budget implications will be saved for future posts.”   Agricultural Economy Michael Birnbaum reported in Saturday’s Washington Post that, “Many Europeans see American farming and its reliance on genetically modified crops as more Frankenstein than Farmer in the Dell. “Now, the opposition here [Lennewitz, Germany] to U.S. agricultural practices is threatening to become a major battle in discussions starting next month that could sweep away trade barriers between the United States and Europe.” The Post article noted that, “Many here worry that a trade pact would ease regulations that have made it difficult for genetically modified crops and products to reach European shores. Genetically modified crops are broadly unpopular in Europe, and farmers and environmentalists fear that if trade restrictions are lowered, both genetically modified seeds and U.S.-grown genetically modified products would quickly take over European farmland and grocery stores. “Some farmers are hoping to stop the talks if rules that govern their work are thrown into the mix, and they are determined to keep U.S. industrial farming an ocean’s-length away.” Michael Wines reported in today’s New York Times that, “The land, known as Section 35, sits atop the High Plains Aquifer, a waterlogged jumble of sand, clay and gravel that begins beneath Wyoming and South Dakota and stretches clear to the Texas Panhandle. The aquifer’s northern reaches still hold enough water in many places to last hundreds of years. But as one heads south, it is increasingly tapped out, drained by ever more intensive farming and, lately, by drought. “Vast stretches of Texas farmland lying over the aquifer no longer support irrigation. In west-central Kansas, up to a fifth of the irrigated farmland along a 100-mile swath of the aquifer has already gone dry. In many other places, there no longer is enough water to supply farmers’ peak needs during Kansas’ scorching summers. “And when the groundwater runs out, it is gone for good. Refilling the aquifer would require hundreds, if not thousands, of years of rains.” And on Friday, Reuters writer Sam Nelson penned an article titled, “U.S. farmers dodge showers to plant corn at breakneck pace.”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    May 17 Farm Bill Issues; and, the Ag Economy- Friday Posted By Keith Good On May 17, 2013  Farm Bill In a telenews conference with reporters yesterday, Senate Ag. Comm. Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D., Mich.) commented on how quickly the panel’s Farm Bill will move from the Committee to the Senate floor: “I don’t know if this is a record, but it’s got to be one of the — possible records for getting a bill from committee on to the floor for consideration, so I’m very pleased about that…after coming out of the committee with 15 to five strong bipartisan vote, we did not have objection to moving to the bill, and there are very few things that have occurred this year, or in — in over the last number of years, that did not require a motion to proceed, and several days of waiting, and a cloture vote, and so on, in order to get to the bill. “We did not have to do that, there was not an objection to going to the bill, and I hope that bodes well for — for moving things through next week.” Later, Chairwoman Stabenow indicated that, “We’re going to start debate, and we’ll be moving on amendments, you know, as quickly as possible. So I absolutely expect to be on amendments next week, and you know, urging people now to put their amendments together, let them know — let us know what they are so we can work with them.” Speaking yesterday on the Agriculture Today radio program (Red River Farm Network), Senator Amy Klobuchar (D., Minn.) stated that, “[The Farm Bill] went directly to the floor, I don’t think people– usually when you guys ask me questions its, ‘Okay, you got it through the Committee what’s next?’  And I say, ‘Well, we hope in the next six months we will go to the floor.’ This time it was six hours, and we have the bill on the floor.” Sen. Klobuchar added that, “there’s good amendments and dumb amendments and we’ll hear them all, get through them and get the bill passed before Memorial Day.” A news release earlier this week from Sen. Bob Casey (D., Penn.) indicated that, “With frost hitting farms throughout the state, [Sen. Casey], today, pushed for passage of a 5 year Farm Bill before the Senate’s Memorial Day recess.  During a conference call, Senator Casey discussed data showing the benefits that farm bill will have for all Pennsylvanians and highlight the Farm Bill’s inclusion of a crop insurance provision which could aid farmers hit by the recent frost.” Beyond procedure, when asked yesterday about the House Ag. Comm. passed Farm Bill, which contains much larger cuts to nutrition programs than the Senate version, Chairwoman Stabenow stated: “Well, first of all, I absolutely reject the level of cuts and the way this is done in the House. They eliminate something called categorical eligibility, which we’ve now voted down either two or three times on the Senate floor on a bipartisan basis.  It came up in committee this week, it was voted down on a bipartisan basis.So that policy does not have support in the U.S. Senate. I won’t support it in conference, and so we will look for ways that we can continue to provide savings by tackling abuse, or misuse.” AP writer Mary Clare Jalonick reported yesterday that, “The two chambers are far apart on how much the $80 billion-a-year program [SNAP] should be cut, however, reflecting a deep ideological and at times emotional divide on the role of government in helping the poor… At both committee meetings, debate over the food stamp cuts was heated, with defenders of the program saying the bills would take food out of the mouths of children and the elderly.” With respect to the House Ag Committee debate on nutrition, Jerry Hagstrom reported this week at National Journal Online that, “But since the 2010 election, the panel’s membership has consisted of very different types of people, who seem to enjoy being hostile to each other…[W]hen it came time to talk about nutrition, Republicans and Democrats couldn’t wait to show how differently they view the world.” Rep. Joe Crowley (D., N.Y.) spoke on the House floor recently about cuts to the SNAP program (video replay here), and on the floor Wednesday, Rep. Barbara Lee (D., Calif.) noted that, “Every $1 in SNAP benefits generates $1.70 in economic activity. Yet the Republican farm bill cuts nearly $21 billion from our Nation’s antihunger program while millions of Americans continue to struggle from the impacts of the Great Recession.” Speaking yesterday with Mike Adams on the AgriTalk radio program, Rep. Steve Fincher (R., Tenn.) indicated that, “And let me be clear about this.  The cuts [in nutrition programs] that we’re making are not cutting people.  They’re reforming programs, existing programs that have been abused.  There’s fraud.  So what we’re doing is tightening these up.  The duplicate programs, we’re reforming those and putting them together, and still making sure that our most vulnerable in our society are taken care of. “But at the same time, this is a huge, huge program that’s really slipping away from us, and we’ve got to do our part.  I mean, our job in Congress is to make sure that the taxpayer money that’s being sent to Washington is being spent in a responsible way, and in a lot of these areas they’re not.  We think probably, in the end, we will be tickled if we can end up with that $20 billion number.  This is going to be a dog fight on the House floor.  So hopefully we end up with that number.” On potential procedural movement of the Farm Bill in the House, Mr. Hagstrom indicated in his National Journal article that, “[Chairman] Lucas has said the House leadership has told him the bill will come up on the floor in June. That would follow Senate consideration of the legislation, which is expected to begin Monday. Senate and House leaders want to finish a conference before Sept. 30, when the current extension of the 2008 farm bill is scheduled to expire.” In addition to nutritional differences in the Committee passed legislation in each chamber, a reporter on yesterday’s conference call noted to Chairwoman Stabenow:  “You were unable to get that egg bill into your mark… Yet the House, as you know, last night, had a contentious debate and included this amendment of Steve King’s to basically block states from being able to impose rules on other states.  What do you think about that particular amendment, and how do you expect to address this issue?” (Note that a FarmPolicy.com transcript of the debate on the King Amendment is available here, while a video replay can be found here). Chairwoman Stabenow stated that, “Well, our egg producers need some help.  Right now there’s a patchwork of regulations around the country.  I mean, what happened last night in the debate is exactly the reason why we need a national standard.  And the egg producers came together to develop something that’s workable only for them.  I know others in the livestock community think somehow that creates a slippery slope and the possibility of pressure on them to do the same thing. “I really personally disagree.  I think this is something that an industry has done to step up and form an agreement so that the egg producers in Michigan are going to be able to stay in Michigan and sell around the country.  But unfortunately, we did not have the support in committee to put this bill into the farm bill. “And I’m going to continue to look for ways to help the egg producers, because I think they’ve stepped up in a responsible way.” Dan Charles noted yesterday at the salt blog (NPR) that, “When the agriculture committees of both House and Senate finished their versions of the farm bill this week, all mention of guaranteed living space for egg-laying hens had vanished. “In fact, the House committee adopted a provision that could make it more difficult for states to set such standards. This amendment, offered by Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, would prohibit any effort by state governments to control the way that their food is produced by out-of-state farmers. The measure is aimed specifically at California’s Proposition 2, which is set to ban farmers in Iowa or Idaho from selling their eggs in California if those eggs come from chickens housed in traditional cages.” On the issue of crop insurance, Chairwoman Stabenow noted yesterday: “Well, this is the number one most supported program in the farm bill, from a farmer perspective.  Everywhere we’ve gone, as I’ve traveled around the country, farmers have said we’re willing to give up direct payment subsidies.  We know, from a taxpayer standpoint, that doesn’t make sense that we receive help in good times, but crop insurance is what works for us.” Meanwhile, differing perspectives on Title I of the Farm Bill continue to percolate. Speaking with reporters yesterday, Sen. Mike Johanns (R., Neb.) noted that, “This year’s farm bill presents some different problems though. This draft, in my judgment — judgment, represents a step backward for Ag policy. Instead of moving forward with a free market type system, what this farm bill does, is it doubles down on something called, target prices, which is really a subsidy for certain commodities. “That was eliminated in last year’s farm bill. With bipartisan support, it actually got 64 votes in the Senate, got out of committee, but now it’s back in this bill. The government should not be involved in setting prices for commodities. The government should not be involved in raising target prices, which is exactly what’s happening.” And earlier this week on the AgriTalk radio program with Mike Adams, Sen. Pat Roberts (R., Kans.) expressed similar concerns with respect to the target price concepts and noted that he did not think the current committee bill was “a reform oriented Farm Bill like we passed last year”- Sen. Roberts audio here (MP3- 4:00). Mikkel Pates reported yesterday at AgWeek Online that, “Will farmers who opted out of the farm program so they could drain wetlands to grow valuable crops now be forced to restore those wetlands if they want to keep vital premium subsidies on their crop insurance? “Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., hopes not. North Dakota’s senior senator tried in vain to pass a half-dozen amendments to the Senate Agriculture Nutrition and Forestry Committee version of the 2013 farm bill that would have kept crop insurance disconnected from conservation compliance, or at least reduce the regulatory burden of compliance. “That didn’t work in the Senate Ag Committee bill, passed May 14, but Hoeven says he’s still working to keep the insurance and conservation ‘decoupled.’ He says an opportunity is in a conference committee with the House Ag Committee farm bill, also passed this week.” Mr. Pates added that, “The House version, passed hours later on May 15, does not tie crop insurance to compliance with conservation programs. Additionally, the House bill saves $6 billion by consolidating duplicative conservation programs and streamlining the delivery of incentive funds to farmers, ranchers, and landowners. “‘The voluntary, incentive-based method of encouraging conservation in the House bill is the right approach,’ says U.S. Rep. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D. ‘Farmers in North Dakota do not need Washington instructing them on how to farm and care for their land. Ensuring crop insurance is decoupled from conservation programs is a top priority for our farmers and ranchers.’” Additional lawmaker perspective on the House Ag. Committee passed Farm Bill included: Rep. K. Michael Conaway (R., Tex)- “The bill strengthens Title I by putting in place a new safety net, one that will offer ranchers and farmers choices in how to manage risk while reforming outdated policy. This move creates regional equity among agriculture producers, increasing their choices and implementing a broad approach to production agriculture.” Rep. Kristi Noem (R., S.D.)- “I fought for policies that are most important to South Dakota, such as livestock disaster programs, forestry provisions to help fight the pine beetle, conservation and a permanent office of tribal relations within the Department of Agriculture. I am proud they were included in this bill and will keep fighting on behalf of South Dakota as the Farm Bill moves forward.” Rep. Bill Owens (D., N.Y.)- “Owens also applauded the inclusion of a number of local initiatives he either sponsored or co-sponsored earlier this year.  H.R. 1297, the Agricultural Credit Expansion Act, and H.R. 1298, legislation to increase export opportunities for local apple growers, were both originally introduced by Rep. Owens and included this week in the Agriculture Committee’s markup of the Farm Bill.  In addition, H.R. 1272, the Maple Tapping Access Program Act, was also included in the bill.  Rep. Owens joined Rep. Peter Welch as a co-sponsor in introducing that legislation earlier this year.” Rep. Adrian Smith (R., Neb.)- “Passage of a responsible, long-term Farm Bill is among my highest priorities and yesterday’s markup in the Agriculture Committee was a step in the right direction.” Rep. Rick Crawford (R., Ark.)- “The House Farm Bill reflects the regional diversity in American agricultural production, including the heavily irrigated Mid-South. The Senate farm bill takes a positive step in sharing this goal, which brings us closer than ever to a final product.” Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R., Tex.)- “I think there’s more room to target our nutrition funding better.” Rep. Tim Walz (D., Minn.)- “Speaker Boehner and Majority Leader Cantor should bring this bipartisan bill forward for a vote without delay… [I]’m especially concerned about the large cuts to SNAP, which helps hardworking families and seniors who are struggling to put food on the table. Americans don’t want a handout, just a hand-up in times of need. I’m hopeful much of this funding will be restored in conference with the Senate.” Rep. John Garamendi (D., Calif.)- “While there’s room for improvement, particularly in light of the shortsighted cuts to food assistance, I believe passing a Farm Bill out of the House Agriculture Committee is a good first step.” Rep. Jim Costa (D., Calif.)- “We still have more work to do to ensure the 2013 Farm Bill works for all Americans, including revisiting cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), but we are moving this process forward…There is too much good in this bill to let it die before it is heard on the House floor. Rural America cannot afford inaction. We owe them a vote.” Rep. Suzan DelBene (D., Wash.)- “Today’s bill will benefit our local producers of specialty crops, such as fruits and vegetables, with programs to help them expand and enter new international markets. The funding for the Specialty Crop Research Initiative and Specialty Crop Block Grant Program increased significantly and will help our farmers who rely on partnerships with our local universities to improve crop quality and yields.” Rep. Kurt Schrader (D., Ore.)- “Overall, I was very pleased with our ability to secure increased funding for our specialty crop programs.  The funding will allow the specialty crop industry to continue to exceed innovative expectations, generate greater economic output and make sure that our food continues to be the safest in the world. This industry is a big piece of the puzzle in making sure that Oregon and American agriculture remain as competitive as possible in the global marketplace for years to come.” Rep. Annie Kuster (D., N.H.)- “I am gravely disappointed that this legislation undermines assistance for hungry families, and I fought hard to protect this essential program. At the same time, this Farm Bill contains many important reforms: it eliminates wasteful direct payment subsidies, streamlines more than 100 duplicative programs, and includes both an amendment I sponsored to support rural colleges and an amendment I cosponsored to expand access to local, healthy food.” Rep. Bob Gibbs (R., Ohio)- “As past President of the Ohio Farm Bureau, I believe that agriculture policy should be based on market-driven principles.  Including language for dairy farmers that effectively equates to supply management is the exact opposite of a free market system.  Ohio dairy farmers need to be able to grow with the market, and artificially setting limits on the milk they can produce will only keep them more dependent on government subsidies. “Finally, I believe the commodity title, Title One, is drastically unfair to Ohio farmers.  The commodity title now includes target prices that are set so high for certain crops, that some farmers may have guaranteed profits.  I believe farmers should be making decisions on what to plant based on market signals, not on which crop will give them the most government subsidy.  I fully support a Farm Bill that gives farmers and producers ways to mitigate their risk to continue to provide a safe and affordable food supply.”   Agricultural Economy Gregory Meyer reported yesterday at The Financial Times Online that, “Farmland prices in the US corn belt have risen at double-digit clip this year despite weaker grain markets in a move that will intensify debate over whether loose monetary policy and congressional largesse are inflating a bubble. “Agricultural land values increased 15 per cent on last year during the first quarter in a district that includes Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan and Wisconsin, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago said on Thursday. The region’s farmland values have trebled in the past decade. “Whether the market is overheating has become a feverishly discussed question among land shoppers from farmers to pension funds. Past booms have ended in prolonged declines, with US prices plunging by 66 per cent from 1919-1940 and more than 40 per cent from 1981-1987, according to research published by the Kansas City Fed.”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    May 17 Farm Bill Issues; and, the Ag Economy- Friday Posted By Keith Good On May 17, 2013  Farm Bill In a telenews conference with reporters yesterday, Senate Ag. Comm. Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D., Mich.) commented on how quickly the panel’s Farm Bill will move from the Committee to the Senate floor: “I don’t know if this is a record, but it’s got to be one of the — possible records for getting a bill from committee on to the floor for consideration, so I’m very pleased about that…after coming out of the committee with 15 to five strong bipartisan vote, we did not have objection to moving to the bill, and there are very few things that have occurred this year, or in — in over the last number of years, that did not require a motion to proceed, and several days of waiting, and a cloture vote, and so on, in order to get to the bill. “We did not have to do that, there was not an objection to going to the bill, and I hope that bodes well for — for moving things through next week.” Later, Chairwoman Stabenow indicated that, “We’re going to start debate, and we’ll be moving on amendments, you know, as quickly as possible. So I absolutely expect to be on amendments next week, and you know, urging people now to put their amendments together, let them know — let us know what they are so we can work with them.” Speaking yesterday on the Agriculture Today radio program (Red River Farm Network), Senator Amy Klobuchar (D., Minn.) stated that, “[The Farm Bill] went directly to the floor, I don’t think people– usually when you guys ask me questions its, ‘Okay, you got it through the Committee what’s next?’  And I say, ‘Well, we hope in the next six months we will go to the floor.’ This time it was six hours, and we have the bill on the floor.” Sen. Klobuchar added that, “there’s good amendments and dumb amendments and we’ll hear them all, get through them and get the bill passed before Memorial Day.” A news release earlier this week from Sen. Bob Casey (D., Penn.) indicated that, “With frost hitting farms throughout the state, [Sen. Casey], today, pushed for passage of a 5 year Farm Bill before the Senate’s Memorial Day recess.  During a conference call, Senator Casey discussed data showing the benefits that farm bill will have for all Pennsylvanians and highlight the Farm Bill’s inclusion of a crop insurance provision which could aid farmers hit by the recent frost.” Beyond procedure, when asked yesterday about the House Ag. Comm. passed Farm Bill, which contains much larger cuts to nutrition programs than the Senate version, Chairwoman Stabenow stated: “Well, first of all, I absolutely reject the level of cuts and the way this is done in the House. They eliminate something called categorical eligibility, which we’ve now voted down either two or three times on the Senate floor on a bipartisan basis.  It came up in committee this week, it was voted down on a bipartisan basis.So that policy does not have support in the U.S. Senate. I won’t support it in conference, and so we will look for ways that we can continue to provide savings by tackling abuse, or misuse.” AP writer Mary Clare Jalonick reported yesterday that, “The two chambers are far apart on how much the $80 billion-a-year program [SNAP] should be cut, however, reflecting a deep ideological and at times emotional divide on the role of government in helping the poor… At both committee meetings, debate over the food stamp cuts was heated, with defenders of the program saying the bills would take food out of the mouths of children and the elderly.” With respect to the House Ag Committee debate on nutrition, Jerry Hagstrom reported this week at National Journal Online that, “But since the 2010 election, the panel’s membership has consisted of very different types of people, who seem to enjoy being hostile to each other…[W]hen it came time to talk about nutrition, Republicans and Democrats couldn’t wait to show how differently they view the world.” Rep. Joe Crowley (D., N.Y.) spoke on the House floor recently about cuts to the SNAP program (video replay here), and on the floor Wednesday, Rep. Barbara Lee (D., Calif.) noted that, “Every $1 in SNAP benefits generates $1.70 in economic activity. Yet the Republican farm bill cuts nearly $21 billion from our Nation’s antihunger program while millions of Americans continue to struggle from the impacts of the Great Recession.” Speaking yesterday with Mike Adams on the AgriTalk radio program, Rep. Steve Fincher (R., Tenn.) indicated that, “And let me be clear about this.  The cuts [in nutrition programs] that we’re making are not cutting people.  They’re reforming programs, existing programs that have been abused.  There’s fraud.  So what we’re doing is tightening these up.  The duplicate programs, we’re reforming those and putting them together, and still making sure that our most vulnerable in our society are taken care of. “But at the same time, this is a huge, huge program that’s really slipping away from us, and we’ve got to do our part.  I mean, our job in Congress is to make sure that the taxpayer money that’s being sent to Washington is being spent in a responsible way, and in a lot of these areas they’re not.  We think probably, in the end, we will be tickled if we can end up with that $20 billion number.  This is going to be a dog fight on the House floor.  So hopefully we end up with that number.” On potential procedural movement of the Farm Bill in the House, Mr. Hagstrom indicated in his National Journal article that, “[Chairman] Lucas has said the House leadership has told him the bill will come up on the floor in June. That would follow Senate consideration of the legislation, which is expected to begin Monday. Senate and House leaders want to finish a conference before Sept. 30, when the current extension of the 2008 farm bill is scheduled to expire.” In addition to nutritional differences in the Committee passed legislation in each chamber, a reporter on yesterday’s conference call noted to Chairwoman Stabenow:  “You were unable to get that egg bill into your mark… Yet the House, as you know, last night, had a contentious debate and included this amendment of Steve King’s to basically block states from being able to impose rules on other states.  What do you think about that particular amendment, and how do you expect to address this issue?” (Note that a FarmPolicy.com transcript of the debate on the King Amendment is available here, while a video replay can be found here). Chairwoman Stabenow stated that, “Well, our egg producers need some help.  Right now there’s a patchwork of regulations around the country.  I mean, what happened last night in the debate is exactly the reason why we need a national standard.  And the egg producers came together to develop something that’s workable only for them.  I know others in the livestock community think somehow that creates a slippery slope and the possibility of pressure on them to do the same thing. “I really personally disagree.  I think this is something that an industry has done to step up and form an agreement so that the egg producers in Michigan are going to be able to stay in Michigan and sell around the country.  But unfortunately, we did not have the support in committee to put this bill into the farm bill. “And I’m going to continue to look for ways to help the egg producers, because I think they’ve stepped up in a responsible way.” Dan Charles noted yesterday at the salt blog (NPR) that, “When the agriculture committees of both House and Senate finished their versions of the farm bill this week, all mention of guaranteed living space for egg-laying hens had vanished. “In fact, the House committee adopted a provision that could make it more difficult for states to set such standards. This amendment, offered by Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, would prohibit any effort by state governments to control the way that their food is produced by out-of-state farmers. The measure is aimed specifically at California’s Proposition 2, which is set to ban farmers in Iowa or Idaho from selling their eggs in California if those eggs come from chickens housed in traditional cages.” On the issue of crop insurance, Chairwoman Stabenow noted yesterday: “Well, this is the number one most supported program in the farm bill, from a farmer perspective.  Everywhere we’ve gone, as I’ve traveled around the country, farmers have said we’re willing to give up direct payment subsidies.  We know, from a taxpayer standpoint, that doesn’t make sense that we receive help in good times, but crop insurance is what works for us.” Meanwhile, differing perspectives on Title I of the Farm Bill continue to percolate. Speaking with reporters yesterday, Sen. Mike Johanns (R., Neb.) noted that, “This year’s farm bill presents some different problems though. This draft, in my judgment — judgment, represents a step backward for Ag policy. Instead of moving forward with a free market type system, what this farm bill does, is it doubles down on something called, target prices, which is really a subsidy for certain commodities. “That was eliminated in last year’s farm bill. With bipartisan support, it actually got 64 votes in the Senate, got out of committee, but now it’s back in this bill. The government should not be involved in setting prices for commodities. The government should not be involved in raising target prices, which is exactly what’s happening.” And earlier this week on the AgriTalk radio program with Mike Adams, Sen. Pat Roberts (R., Kans.) expressed similar concerns with respect to the target price concepts and noted that he did not think the current committee bill was “a reform oriented Farm Bill like we passed last year”- Sen. Roberts audio here (MP3- 4:00). Mikkel Pates reported yesterday at AgWeek Online that, “Will farmers who opted out of the farm program so they could drain wetlands to grow valuable crops now be forced to restore those wetlands if they want to keep vital premium subsidies on their crop insurance? “Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., hopes not. North Dakota’s senior senator tried in vain to pass a half-dozen amendments to the Senate Agriculture Nutrition and Forestry Committee version of the 2013 farm bill that would have kept crop insurance disconnected from conservation compliance, or at least reduce the regulatory burden of compliance. “That didn’t work in the Senate Ag Committee bill, passed May 14, but Hoeven says he’s still working to keep the insurance and conservation ‘decoupled.’ He says an opportunity is in a conference committee with the House Ag Committee farm bill, also passed this week.” Mr. Pates added that, “The House version, passed hours later on May 15, does not tie crop insurance to compliance with conservation programs. Additionally, the House bill saves $6 billion by consolidating duplicative conservation programs and streamlining the delivery of incentive funds to farmers, ranchers, and landowners. “‘The voluntary, incentive-based method of encouraging conservation in the House bill is the right approach,’ says U.S. Rep. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D. ‘Farmers in North Dakota do not need Washington instructing them on how to farm and care for their land. Ensuring crop insurance is decoupled from conservation programs is a top priority for our farmers and ranchers.’” Additional lawmaker perspective on the House Ag. Committee passed Farm Bill included: Rep. K. Michael Conaway (R., Tex)- “The bill strengthens Title I by putting in place a new safety net, one that will offer ranchers and farmers choices in how to manage risk while reforming outdated policy. This move creates regional equity among agriculture producers, increasing their choices and implementing a broad approach to production agriculture.” Rep. Kristi Noem (R., S.D.)- “I fought for policies that are most important to South Dakota, such as livestock disaster programs, forestry provisions to help fight the pine beetle, conservation and a permanent office of tribal relations within the Department of Agriculture. I am proud they were included in this bill and will keep fighting on behalf of South Dakota as the Farm Bill moves forward.” Rep. Bill Owens (D., N.Y.)- “Owens also applauded the inclusion of a number of local initiatives he either sponsored or co-sponsored earlier this year.  H.R. 1297, the Agricultural Credit Expansion Act, and H.R. 1298, legislation to increase export opportunities for local apple growers, were both originally introduced by Rep. Owens and included this week in the Agriculture Committee’s markup of the Farm Bill.  In addition, H.R. 1272, the Maple Tapping Access Program Act, was also included in the bill.  Rep. Owens joined Rep. Peter Welch as a co-sponsor in introducing that legislation earlier this year.” Rep. Adrian Smith (R., Neb.)- “Passage of a responsible, long-term Farm Bill is among my highest priorities and yesterday’s markup in the Agriculture Committee was a step in the right direction.” Rep. Rick Crawford (R., Ark.)- “The House Farm Bill reflects the regional diversity in American agricultural production, including the heavily irrigated Mid-South. The Senate farm bill takes a positive step in sharing this goal, which brings us closer than ever to a final product.” Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R., Tex.)- “I think there’s more room to target our nutrition funding better.” Rep. Tim Walz (D., Minn.)- “Speaker Boehner and Majority Leader Cantor should bring this bipartisan bill forward for a vote without delay… [I]’m especially concerned about the large cuts to SNAP, which helps hardworking families and seniors who are struggling to put food on the table. Americans don’t want a handout, just a hand-up in times of need. I’m hopeful much of this funding will be restored in conference with the Senate.” Rep. John Garamendi (D., Calif.)- “While there’s room for improvement, particularly in light of the shortsighted cuts to food assistance, I believe passing a Farm Bill out of the House Agriculture Committee is a good first step.” Rep. Jim Costa (D., Calif.)- “We still have more work to do to ensure the 2013 Farm Bill works for all Americans, including revisiting cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), but we are moving this process forward…There is too much good in this bill to let it die before it is heard on the House floor. Rural America cannot afford inaction. We owe them a vote.” Rep. Suzan DelBene (D., Wash.)- “Today’s bill will benefit our local producers of specialty crops, such as fruits and vegetables, with programs to help them expand and enter new international markets. The funding for the Specialty Crop Research Initiative and Specialty Crop Block Grant Program increased significantly and will help our farmers who rely on partnerships with our local universities to improve crop quality and yields.” Rep. Kurt Schrader (D., Ore.)- “Overall, I was very pleased with our ability to secure increased funding for our specialty crop programs.  The funding will allow the specialty crop industry to continue to exceed innovative expectations, generate greater economic output and make sure that our food continues to be the safest in the world. This industry is a big piece of the puzzle in making sure that Oregon and American agriculture remain as competitive as possible in the global marketplace for years to come.” Rep. Annie Kuster (D., N.H.)- “I am gravely disappointed that this legislation undermines assistance for hungry families, and I fought hard to protect this essential program. At the same time, this Farm Bill contains many important reforms: it eliminates wasteful direct payment subsidies, streamlines more than 100 duplicative programs, and includes both an amendment I sponsored to support rural colleges and an amendment I cosponsored to expand access to local, healthy food.” Rep. Bob Gibbs (R., Ohio)- “As past President of the Ohio Farm Bureau, I believe that agriculture policy should be based on market-driven principles.  Including language for dairy farmers that effectively equates to supply management is the exact opposite of a free market system.  Ohio dairy farmers need to be able to grow with the market, and artificially setting limits on the milk they can produce will only keep them more dependent on government subsidies. “Finally, I believe the commodity title, Title One, is drastically unfair to Ohio farmers.  The commodity title now includes target prices that are set so high for certain crops, that some farmers may have guaranteed profits.  I believe farmers should be making decisions on what to plant based on market signals, not on which crop will give them the most government subsidy.  I fully support a Farm Bill that gives farmers and producers ways to mitigate their risk to continue to provide a safe and affordable food supply.”   Agricultural Economy Gregory Meyer reported yesterday at The Financial Times Online that, “Farmland prices in the US corn belt have risen at double-digit clip this year despite weaker grain markets in a move that will intensify debate over whether loose monetary policy and congressional largesse are inflating a bubble. “Agricultural land values increased 15 per cent on last year during the first quarter in a district that includes Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan and Wisconsin, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago said on Thursday. The region’s farmland values have trebled in the past decade. “Whether the market is overheating has become a feverishly discussed question among land shoppers from farmers to pension funds. Past booms have ended in prolonged declines, with US prices plunging by 66 per cent from 1919-1940 and more than 40 per cent from 1981-1987, according to research published by the Kansas City Fed.”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, May 16 Farm Bill; and the Ag Economy- Thursday Posted By Keith Good On May 16, 2013  Farm Bill: House Agriculture Committee Advances Legislation DTN Ag Policy Editor Chris Clayton reported yesterday that, “The battle over dairy policy took center stage in the House Agriculture Committee’s early debate on the farm bill Wednesday as committee reforms to commodity and conservation programs were approved relatively unscathed.” Mr. Clayton explained that, “Debate in the House put dairy policy front and center. The farm bill includes language from the Dairy Security Act, crafted by ranking member Collin Peterson, D-Minn., following the collapse of dairy prices in 2009. Peterson and others worked to successfully get the dairy act into both the House and Senate versions of the bill. The Dairy Security Act creates a margin protection between national milk prices and the average cost of feed. Producers get basic coverage and can buy higher coverage if they want. At the same time, the provision has more controversial language that creates a market stabilization program meant to manage the size of the national dairy herd. “The market stabilization program kicks in when dairy prices are low and profit margins collapse. Producers whose herd size exceeds a base amount would lose payments unless they culled down the size of their milking herd.” The DTN article added that, “The Dairy Security Act has the strong backing of the National Milk Producers Federation while being equally opposed by the International Dairy Foods Association. Caught in the middle are a broad array of producer and processor cooperatives and businesses. “Reps. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., and David Scott, D-Ga., sought to replace the Dairy Security Act in the bill with their own language that would avoid any attempts to limit supply. Their plan, supported by IDFA, would create a comparable margin insurance policy for dairy producers but eliminate any policy meant to manage dairy supplies. The Goodlatte-Scott amendment sparked the first major round of debate on the committee Wednesday.” A FarmPolicy.com transcript of a portion of the debate on this issue is available here.  This debate including the following remarks: Rep. Peterson- “And I just want to talk about the economics of the dairy industry a little bit more. A 2% oversupply in milk will collapse the system. We’ve seen that. That’s all it takes, is 2%. It means we can’t sell it in the U.S. and we can’t export it in the world market. If you get into that kind of a situation, the bottom falls out…Now, back in ’09 that problem was caused, to some extent, by the financial collapse and what happened within the economy at the time, and demand for dairy, for a lot of different things, went down, including dairy products. So we had an increase in production and we had a decrease in demand; it collapsed the market. And as Mr. Costa said, we had I don’t know how many bankruptcies. I don’t know how much equity was lost. It was a disaster. And if we get into that situation again, we’re going to lose 25% of the dairy farmers in this country.” Rep. Goodlatte- “And yes, the prices fluctuate. Farmers have to deal with that and consumers have to deal with that. They make the decision whether they’re going to be consuming something or not consuming it based on the price. If you consistently attempt to fix the price based upon controlling the supply of the herd, it hurts farmers because they will not be able to grow, they will not be able to plan, they will not be able to tell new markets that they can consistently supply those markets, and it hurts consumers.” Rep. David Scott- “I’ve listened to this, and I want to make a couple of points clear on the pricing. The CBO clearly states that under the language of the supply management program the price of milk will go up. And when you calculate in inflation, it could go up, over the next period of time before we get back to the next farm bill, just this cost for the supply management, up to 50 cents.” Chairman Lucas- “In all respect, you have to vote your conscience, of course. But a farm bill is like a giant jigsaw puzzle. You have many pieces that have to fit together in order to create that final product. I am in good faith opposing one friend’s amendment and sustaining another friend’s work. I have to move that puzzle forward…I believe the base text is the best opportunity to complete that. Vote your conscience, but remember, we have to have a farm bill when all this is over with.” The Goodlatte-Scott amendment failed by a vote of 20 “yeas” to 26 “nays,” a joint statement released yesterday by the two lawmakers indicated that, “The outcome of today’s vote in the Agriculture Committee on this amendment was disappointing.  Supply management is antithetical to the future growth of the dairy industry. Government bureaucracy should not control the size of your herd.  A supply control program that will directly intervene in markets and increase milk prices will ultimately hurt dairy producers and consumers as well as dairy food manufacturers by stifling industry growth.  This program is contrary to the reforms already in the Farm Bill.” And a statement yesterday from Jerry Slominski, of the International Dairy Food Association, noted that, “We expect that the Goodlatte-Scott amendment will be brought to a floor vote and that the House will ultimately take a strong position against a supply management policy that would restrict job growth, hurt middle-income families and add additional costs to nutrition programs that are losing funding in the Farm Bill. Also, the Goodlatte-Scott amendment would cost taxpayers less than the Dairy Security Act, according to the Congressional Budget Office.” Meanwhile, Daniel Looker reported yesterday at Agriculture.com that, “The ranking Democrat, Representative Collin Peterson (R-MN), said he’s more optimistic than a year ago that the committee’s bill will come up for a vote on the floor the House. “‘One of the reasons I’m optimistic is that the Speaker of the House has started to lobby people on the dairy program. That tells me, he is serious,’ said Peterson, referring to Representative John Boehner (R-OH). Last year, Boehner called a new dairy program championed by Peterson a ‘Soviet-style’ supply management system.” Mr. Looker added that, “Another more contentious issue will be food stamps. “Representative Jim McGovern (D-MA) offered an amendment to withdraw the committee’s cuts to its nutrition title. “‘If this stands, two million people will be cut from the SNAP program,’ he said [related audio from Rep. McGovern here (MP3- 2:38)]. Mr. Looker noted that, “[Rep. Steve King (R., Iowa)] said it appears that a goal of the Obama Administration has been to get more people on the food stamp program or SNAP and to ‘expand the dependency class’ [Rep. King audio here (MP3- 1:39)]. The Agriculture.com article pointed out, “[Rep. Reid Ribble (R., Wis.)] said that during the recession and slow recovery, poverty has increased by 16%, but SNAP spending is up by more than 100% [Rep. Ribble audio here (MP3- 0:59)]. And in an update yesterday at the DTN Ag Policy Blog, Chris Clayton pointed out that, “As debate around SNAP got heated Wednesday, Rep. Juan Vargas, a freshman Democrat from southern California, invoked Jesus in his arguments against cutting the program [Rep. Vargas audio here (MP3- 1:54)]. The DTN update noted that, “Rep. Doug LaMalfa, a freshman Republican and a rice grower from northern California, also cited a Bible quote in arguing that Christians should be helping the poor. That’s not necessarily the role of the government.” Rep. Mike Conaway (R., Tex.) echoed a similar theme regarding the role of individual charity versus government administration- audio here (MP3- 0:47). In the end, this amendment by Rep. McGovern failed.  Bloomberg writer Alan Bjerga reported yesterday that, “Democrats on the House Agriculture Committee failed in a bid to restore cuts in federal food-stamp spending as the panel debates a $940 billion bill reauthorizing U.S. Department of Agriculture programs. “The measure would cut $40 billion in the next decade by eliminating $20.5 billion for nutrition programs over that period including food stamps, or five times as much as proposed in a Senate Agriculture Committee plan approved yesterday.” AP writer Mary Clare Jalonick indicated yesterday that, “The House bill would cut about $2.5 billion a year — or a little more than 3 percent — from the food stamp program, which is used by 1 in 7 Americans…The committee rejected an amendment by Democrats to strike the cuts 27-17, keeping them in the bill.” Later at yesterday’s hearing, Rep. Jim McGovern offered an amendment that would prevent SNAP cuts from going into effect until the waste, fraud and abuse rate in the federal crop insurance program was equal to, or less than the fraud rate for the SNAP program. As additional background, during the 2008 Farm Bill debate, Rep. McGovern also sought to attain a legislative link between crop insurance and nutrition. In late July of 2007, Dan Morgan reported on unfolding Farm Bill developments in The Washington Post, and noted: “Recalling that a similar [Rep. Ron Kind] amendment garnered 200 votes in 2001, the Agriculture Committee loaded the bill with billions of dollars for nutrition programs, conservation, black farmers, and the Florida and California fruit and vegetable industries, in an effort to attract broad support. As late as 1 a.m. yesterday, Democratic leaders were adding money for nutrition programs. “About $840 million in mandatory spending was added for the McGovern-Dole food aid program, after nearly $1 billion was shifted out of government payments to private crop insurance companies to offset the cost. “The new funding was sought by Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), a key member of the House Rules Committee. McGovern said it was ‘a good thing’ that the crop insurance industry would be contributing to feeding hungry children abroad.” Likewise, Philip Brasher, who then worked for The Des Moines Register, added that, “And to get the final votes for the bill, Democrats had to cut the crop insurance program by another $1 billion to pay for a boost in international food aid. That cut will come from insurers and agents, who have some powerful friends in the Senate.” And AP writer Julie Hirschfeld Davis reported at the time that, “They won over Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., with the promise of more funding for an international food aid program.” A FarmPolicy.com transcript of a portion of the debate on Rep. McGovern’s crop insurance- SNAP amendment from yesterday is available here. In part, Rep. Peterson noted that, “Frankly, we should put more money into data mining, both in SNAP and in crop insurance so we can…because it kind of tells you where the problem is…[S]o I just… I just think your amendment is unworkable. I’d be happy to try to work with you to see if we can do a better job of getting at the bottom of this, but I don’t see how you would ever be able to figure out what this level of fraud is to compare the two.” Rep. Peterson added that, “[Y]ou know, we keep talking about like somehow or another we’re cutting SNAP. We’re not actually cutting any benefits. What we’re doing is we’re…what they’re doing here is changing how you qualify for SNAP… [H]alf of the people in my district who qualify for [SNAP] benefits, more than half of the people that qualify don’t get the benefits. And I can tell you a number of them, it’s because they don’t want the benefits. That’s just not what they want to do.” Rep. McGovern indicated that, “Part of the benefit of categorical eligibility is that there are multiple programs out there for poor people, and when they go to one, they can automatically get enrolled in the other. So without it, I mean, I think there’s a fear that people who are eligible for benefits will not get them, people who deserve them.” Meanwhile, in a separate aspect of the Ag. Comm. debate yesterday, a news release late yesterday from Rep. Steve King (R., Iowa) stated that, “The first King amendment prohibits states from enacting laws that place conditions on the means of production for agricultural goods that are sold within its own borders, but are produced in other states. “‘The Constitution of the United States reserves the regulation of interstate commerce to the Congress, not the states,’ said King. ‘The Protect Interstate Commerce Act (PICA) prohibits states from entering into trade protectionism by forcing cost prohibitive production methods on farmers in other states. PICA covers all agriculture products listed in section 206 of the Agriculture Marketing Act of 1946. By 2015, California will allow only eggs to be sold from hens housed in cages specified by California. The impact of their large market would compel producers in other states to invest billions to meet the California standard of ‘means of production.’ PICA will also shut down the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), PETA and other radical organizations from creating a network of restrictive state laws that will slowly push agriculture production towards the demise.’” A video replay of the debate on PICA, which lasted almost an hour, is available here, at FarmPolicy.com Online. After defeating an alternative amendment on a roll call vote, the Committee passed Rep. King’s PICA amendment on a voice vote. Chad Gregory, the president of the United Egg Producers issued the following statement last night regarding the King Amendment: “The Egg Products Inspection Act Amendments (H.R. 1731) introduced by Reps. Kurt Schrader (D-Oregon) and Jeff Denham (R-California) is a preferable solution to the interstate commerce calamity in eggs rather than Rep. Steve King’s (R-Iowa) amendment which was included in the Farm Bill by the House Agriculture Committee today. “Historically, when Congress preempts state laws it replaces them with a uniform national standard, such as the Egg Bill that egg farmers nationwide support. Rep. King’s amendment does not set a level playing field for farmers. “It could affect interstate commerce in a wide variety of agricultural products, from eggs, to the sale of raw milk, to the labeling of farm-raised fish or artificial sweeteners, to restrictions of firewood transported into a state in order to protect against invasive pests and potential damage to local forests. As many as 150 different state laws from Alabama to Wisconsin could be preempted or affected by the King amendment. “We believe that the Egg Bill is the best solution to insure orderly and efficient interstate commerce in eggs, protecting egg farmers in every state with uniform national standard that is fair for everyone.” And Ron Nixon reported this morning at The Caucus Blog (New York Times) that, “After a late-night session Wednesday, the House Agriculture Committee voted to approve a $940 billion farm bill, a day after the Senate passed its version, setting the stage for Congress to finally begin work on a new five-year bill. “The vote was 36 to 10, with mostly Democrats voting against the bill after nine hours of debate.” Chris Clayton noted last night at the DTN Ag Policy Blog that, “Part of the ability to pass the bill may come down to the rules for debating it on the floor. Peterson said the bill needs a rule that would manage the number of amendments that would be brought and debated on the floor. ‘Otherwise it would just be chaos and you would have 600 amendments to deal with,’ Peterson said. He added, ‘There has to be some limitations.’” Also, David Rogers reported yesterday at Politico that, “Moving in tandem with the Senate, the House Agriculture Committee approved its own new farm bill late Wednesday, promising billions in savings but also embracing a greater government role in farm policy than many free-market Republicans are likely to accept. “The bipartisan 36-10 roll call shortly before midnight capped 48 hours of intense activity in which first the Senate Agriculture Committee and next the House panel have approved competing five-year farm bills to take effect this fall. “Senate floor debate is expected to begin next week, and if the House can act in June, it would clear the way for the two sides to begin final negotiations and break the often bitter impasse that has hung over agriculture policy since last summer.” Mr. Rogers noted that, “The chairman’s affable style gives him a genuine reservoir of personal support he can tap into going to the floor. And he has long argued that it will only be in a cauldron of floor debate that he can really test ideas and hone the coalition he needs to prevail. “But the splits on the left and right are real. And before the long night had ended, his jigsaw puzzle only got more complicated. “In a coming of age, of sorts, the organic foods industry won— over Lucas’ objections — the right to have its own promotional check-off program such as those now enjoyed by pork and beef under the Agriculture Department. At the same time, the chairman was on the losing end of a fight over catfish inspections, and he had to sit through a long tortured debate over interstate commerce and the ‘balkanization’ of American agriculture as individual states, especially California, impose tougher standards on the treatment of livestock such as hens and breeding sows.”   Farm Bill- Senate Chris Clayton reported yesterday at DTN (link requires subscription) that, “While members of the Senate Agriculture Committee held an intense debate over the impact of target prices on Tuesday, an amendment that restructured the target-price program was largely overlooked. “Under the original structure of the Senate bill, target prices for all commodities with the exception of rice and peanuts stayed the same as the current counter-cyclical program. But an amendment to the bill by Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, completely restructures the proposed Senate target-price plan, known as Adverse Market Payments. The amendment was included as part of a broad group of ‘en bloc’ amendments added to the bill without committee debate. “The Grassley amendment would create a new formula for target prices for every commodity with the exception of rice and peanuts. The proposal creates a five-year rolling average for target prices that would exclude the high and low years, which is typically called the “Olympic average.” That Olympic average for commodities would then be multiplied by 55%. That would create the target price for a particular crop.” Also, Chad Gregory, President of United Egg Producers, issued this statement on Wednesday: “The Farm Bill passed yesterday by the Senate Agriculture Committee, is designed to provide America’s agriculture sector with ‘five years of certainty.’  It is a travesty that a few senators blocked efforts to provide that same certainty for America’s egg farmers.”   Agricultural Economy Mark Peters reported in today’s Wall Street Journal that, “The rise in prices for agricultural land slowed somewhat to start the year in parts of the U.S. Farm Belt, new reports showed, signaling a boom in land values might be moderating as commodity prices cool and incomes for farmers are expected to weaken. “The Kansas City Federal Reserve Bank said in a report Wednesday that prices for nonirrigated farmland in its region rose 3.4% in the first quarter from the fourth quarter of 2012. That was much slower than the 7.7% quarter-to-quarter increase recorded for the same region a year earlier. “A separate report from the St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank also released Wednesday showed that land values in parts of the Midwest and Southeast regions fell by an average of 2.3% in the first quarter compared with the previous quarter.”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    May 15 Farm Bill; and, the Ag Economy- Wednesday Posted By Keith Good On May 15, 2013  Farm Bill: Senate Agriculture Committee Advances Legislation DTN Ag Policy Editor Chris Clayton reported yesterday (link requires subscription) that, “The markup of the Senate version of the farm bill translated into few substantive changes in the legislation, but Tuesday’s three-and-a-half-hour debate highlighted the philosophical and regional split among Republicans over target prices. “The bill, formally named the Agriculture Reform, Food and Jobs Act of 2013, passed out of committee early Tuesday afternoon on a vote of 15-5. Four Republicans [Roberts, Thune, Johanns, McConnell] and one Democrat [Gillibrand] voted against it. “Senate Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., told reporters afterward that floor debate on the Senate farm bill could begin as early as Wednesday. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said the bill will come up immediately after the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) is finished. Final votes on that bill are expected Wednesday.” The DTN article noted that, “Regional differences again flared Tuesday. Southern Republicans backed the bill while Midwest Republicans fought against what they saw as backsliding on commodity reforms…[T]he bill would eliminate $4.9 billion a year in direct payments as well the Average Crop Revenue Election program, or ACRE. The bill also renames the current counter-cyclical program as Adverse Market Payments. Under the AMP, target prices for most major commodities remain the same as under the counter-cyclical program, with exceptions for rice and peanuts. Rice producers would see a $13.30-per-cwt price, and peanuts would see a price of $523.77 per ton. “Last year, southerners largely opposed the farm bill in committee because the legislation would have completely eliminated target prices. On Tuesday, Republican Sens. Mike Johanns of Nebraska [related news release], Pat Roberts of Kansas [related news release] and John Thune of South Dakota [related news release] opposed the bill after failing to eliminate target prices from the legislation.” Mr. Clayton noted that, “Thune proposed an amendment to save $897 million over 10 years by eliminating target prices for commodities other than rice and peanuts. That also was voted down.” A FarmPolicy.com transcript of the debate regarding this Thune amendment is available here.  This debate included strong arguments on both sides of the issue of target prices.  Points and counter-points on this amendment were made by: Sen. Thune- “A target price countercyclical program, in my view, is a step backwards to an old, outdated policy that we removed in last year’s Senate passed farm bill.” Sen. Cochran- “This [amendment] would be a disruptive influence in the process of commodity programs that are presented to the committee for its consideration today.” Sen. Roberts- “At the levels the target prices for rice and peanuts have been set above the cost of production on average world price, I’m afraid the WTO will consider the high target prices as trade distorting, and thus put us in the red box. That’s a big red flag for me and my producers. Why should the two commodities dictate that all others have to have target prices when we don’t want them?” Sen. Chambliss- “But as we discussed last year, the crop insurance provision does not work as a safety net for rice and peanuts, and my farmers are most likely to accept the AMP program.” Sen. Johanns- “We’re already paying Brazil, every year, tens of millions of dollars because of the defeat of the cotton litigation that they had. I think this is just begging for additional litigation.” Daniel Looker reported yesterday at Agriculture.com that, “Thune offered another amendment to require that the base acres for rice be updated, which he said would save about $1 billion more over the next 10 years. “Roberts said that because AMP payments are made on a crop’s historical base, that estimate of $1 billion in savings means that AMP payments will be going to farms that no longer grow rice. “Speaking against Thune’s amendment, Senator John Boozman (R-AR) said that if it passed, he would urge that other crops be required to have updated bases as well.” AP writer Mary Clare Jalonick noted yesterday that, “Under the House bill, authored by Rep. Frank Lucas, R-Okla., those subsidies for rice and peanut farmers could kick in even sooner. These ‘target price’ programs allow farmers to receive subsidies if prices fall below a certain threshold. It hasn’t been used much in recent years because of record crop prices, but is intended to be a safety net if prices collapse. “The bill includes generous protections for other crops as well. Both bills would boost federally subsidized crop insurance and create a new program that covers smaller losses on planted crops before crop insurance kicks in, favoring Midwestern corn and soybean farmers who use crop insurance most often.” And David Rogers noted yesterday at Politico that, “The House Agriculture Committee is slated to markup its own bill Wednesday, and in making her concessions to Southern growers, Stabenow is also trying to open the door toward a final deal with House Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas (R-Okla.), whose roots lie in the South as well. “Nonetheless, some of the chairwoman’s staunchest Midwest allies in last year’s farm bill debate have been lost along the way.” In his DTN article from yesterday, Chris Clayton also explained that, “For cotton producers, the bill keeps the Stacked Income Protection for Cotton, or STAX. Under STAX, USDA would pay 80% of the premiums. The bill also would include a new crop insurance coverage for peanut producers. “The one major change to the bill Tuesday was that Stabenow included the compromise language for tying conservation compliance to eligibility for crop-insurance premium subsidies. That compromise also eliminates what would have been a $750,000 cap on adjusted gross income to be eligible for the full premium subsidy. “Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., offered an amendment to remove the language on conservation compliance, arguing it would create a whole new mandate on farmers.” To listen to a related discussion on the conservation compliance / crop insurance issue from yesterday’s hearing, just click here (MP3- 7:00). A news release yesterday posted at the National Association of Conservation Districts Online (“Conservation Compliance Coalition Praises Agreement in Senate Farm Bill”) stated in part that, “A coalition of agriculture, conservation, environment and crop insurance groups are applauding the passage of an historic conservation compliance agreement as part of the bipartisan Agriculture Reform, Food and Jobs Act of 2013 passed by the Senate Agriculture Committee today. The non-partisan conservation compliance agreement represents a compromise position that supports the linking of conservation compliance with crop insurance premium assistance, and opposes means testing, payment limitations or premium subsidy reductions for the crop insurance program.” The release included specific responses from members of the coalition on the measure. Bloomberg writer Alan Bjerga reported yesterday that, “The Senate bill would cut $24.4 billion in spending in the next decade by trimming $4 billion from food stamps, the biggest USDA program, $17 billion in farm subsidies and $3.6 billion in environmental programsthe Congressional Budget Office reported. Crop insurance, which is making record payouts after last year’s drought, would rise by $5 billion. The full Senate will take up the bill next week, said Senator Debbie Stabenow, the Michigan Democrat who heads the committee.” Meanwhile, Bill Tomson reported yesterday at The Wall Street Journal Online that, “Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D., N.Y.), who sits on the Agriculture panel, vowed Tuesday to fight any larger cuts to food-assistance programs. Ms. Gillibrand said the program serves ‘children, hard-working adults, struggling seniors, veterans, active-duty troops and the families that stand by them. That’s who suffers in this callous political fight.’” Sen. Gillibrand tweeted yesterday that, “I could not support the #farmbill that passed out of Ag cmtee today because of the steep cuts to the #SNAP food stamp program.” Reuters writer Charles Abbott reported yesterday that, “Analysts say food stamps are the make-or-break issue for enactment of a new U.S. farm law because Republicans want deep cuts in food stamps and Democrats oppose them.” Ron Nixon reported yesterday at The Caucus Blog (New York Times) that, “The most contentious fight during the hearing was over cuts to food stamps. The Senate bill would reduce the food stamp program by about $4.1 billion. Ms. Stabenow said most of the cuts would come from a program overhaul. But Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Democrat of New York, said the reduction in financing for the program would cause millions to go hungry.” And Erik Wasson reported yesterday at The Hill’s On the Money Blog that, “Johanns offered an amendment to eliminate categorical eligibility for food stamps to save $11 billion. The provision — included in the House draft farm bill — was defeated.” To listen to the debate regarding this issue from yesterday’s markup, just click here (MP3- 7:41). Additional news item yesterday regarding the Senate Ag. Comm. action can be found here: Sen. Cochran- “Cochran ready for Senate Consideration of 2013 Farm Bill.”  (“A key provision would create Adverse Market Protection, a price protection program that would aid rice and peanut growers and work in tandem with an Agriculture Risk Coverage program that is suited to crops like corn, wheat and soybeans.  The Senate measure also authorizes a new cotton insurance program that will contribute $2.8 billion toward deficit reduction and lead to a resolution of the Brazil Cotton Dispute in the World Trade Organization.”) Sen. Grassley- “Farm and Nutrition Bill Clears Committee, Grassley Provisions Included.”  (“In addition, an amendment sponsored by Grassley along with Senators Mike Johanns, John Thune and Pat Roberts was approved during today’s Agriculture Committee action on a new farm bill…Grassley said the measure is intended to make the farm bill more market-oriented in the way target prices are set.  Grassley would have preferred that a target price program not be included in the bill, but since the target price program was included he wanted to push for ways to make it more market-oriented.  For commodities except rice and peanuts, the measure set the target price by averaging the prices from the five previous years, while dropping the low and high price for that average, and multiplying it by a factor of 55 percent.”) Sen. Boozman- “Farm Bill Framework ‘a step in the right direction.’”  (“This framework is a fair approach to providing a safety net for all crops and regions of the country.”) Sen. Heitkamp- “Committee-Passed Bipartisan Farm Bill Gives North Dakota Producers Certainty They Deserve.”  (“It is my hope that the House and Senate continue moving the bill forward so we can get this signed into law and give North Dakota farmers and ranchers the certainty they need to run their businesses.”) Sen. Harkin- “Harkin Supports Senate Agriculture Committee’s Passage of Bipartisan Farm Bill.”  (“The legislation also builds upon reforms in recent farm bills to strengthen and tighten payment limitations, while strengthening the crop insurance program and making it more beneficial to farmers.”) Sen. Leahy- “Statement Of Senator Leahy (D-Vt.) Farm Bill Business Meeting Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.”  (“Specifically, this mark includes a significant dairy reform proposal that I hope will help producers and consumers get off this dangerous rollercoaster of price swings.  I believe this is key to our consideration of a Farm Bill, and I know it is what farmers in Vermont are watching closely; I have been hearing from them regularly in strong support of stabilization and margin insurance working in tandem.”) Organizations and groups also commented on the Sen. Ag. Comm. Farm Bill yesterday, including, the National Milk Producers Federation, National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, the American Soybean Association, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, National Farmers Union, The Nature Conservancy, the National Cotton Council, the American Farm Bureau Federation, American Farmland Trust , International Dairy Foods Association, and the United States Cattlemen’s Association.   Farm Bill: Dairy Issue A news release yesterday from the National Milk Producers Federation stated that, “A new analysis of the key Farm Bill dairy proposals under consideration in the House Agriculture Committee finds that the Dairy Security Act (DSA) is better for farmers – as well as taxpayers – compared to the Goodlatte-Scott alternative proposal that will be offered in the committee deliberations tomorrow.” A news release yesterday from the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives (NCFC) indicated that, “The [NCFC] today expressed its strong opposition to a proposed amendment to the House Agriculture Committee farm bill that would change key components of the dairy reform package contained in the bill. “The amendment, offered by Representatives Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) and David Scott (D-Ga.), would effectively separate participation in the market stabilization program from other parts of the dairy program contained in the Federal Agriculture Reform and Risk Management (FARRM) Act.”   Executive Branch Perspective- Other Policy Issues In a report yesterday on the Agriculture Today radio program (Red River Farm Network), Mike Hergert provided perspective on Farm Bill developments from Ag. Sec. Tom Vilsack. In his remarks on Agriculture Today, Sec. Vilsack specifically addressed the issue of linking conservation compliance to crop insurance, and spoke broadly about the Farm Bill- Red River Farm Network audio clip here (MP3- 2:49). Julian Hattem reported yesterday at The Hill’s RegWatch Blog that, “Legislators and regulators pledged to increase their support for the organic food industry on Tuesday, as representatives from the sector pushed for friendly policies. “As members of the House and Senate mark up the farm bill, organic farmers, handlers and manufacturers came to Washington to make their case for the burgeoning industry at the annual Washington policy conference of the Organic Trade Association, which represents the sector. “On Tuesday, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced that a crop insurance program will increase options for organic producers, and it said that it would ask other agencies to keep the organic sector in mind for future programs and services.” And a Farm Service Agency (USDA) release from yesterday  noted that, “Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack today reminded farmers and ranchers that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) will conduct a four-week Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) general sign-up beginning May 20 and ending on June 14.”   Farm Bill: House Ag Committee Vicki Needham reported yesterday at The Hill’s Floor Action Blog that, “The House Agriculture Committee will take up its version of the farm bill on Wednesday with the hopes of not only moving it through the panel but finally getting it to the floor for a vote…[H]ouse Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas (R-Okla.) and Senate Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) have expressed an eagerness to get their bills passed by their respective chambers so they can negotiate a final piece of legislation over the summer before this current extension of the 2008 law expires Sept. 30. “The House bill has bigger cuts in spending — $39.7 billion over 10 years compared to $23 billion in the Senate bill — and it would slash food stamps by $20.5 billion, more than five times the amount of the Senate’s $4 billion in cuts from the program.”   Agricultural Economy Reuters writer Sam Nelson reported yesterday that, “Drier weather early this week in the U.S. Midwest will boost corn plantings that have fallen to a record slow pace due to wet and chilly weather, an agricultural meteorologist said on Tuesday. “‘It will remain dry today,’ said Don Keeney, meteorologist for MDA Weather Services. ‘Then showers develop late on Wednesday and continue into the weekend with the heaviest rain in the northern Midwest.’” Agricultural related tweets from yesterday, which included photos, showed planting in Illinois- here and here, and in Missouri.   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter May 14 Farm Bill; Ag Economy; and, Biotech- Tuesday Posted By Keith Good On May 14, 2013  Farm Bill Issues In an interview yesterday with FarmPolicy.com that focused on rural development issues and the Farm Bill, Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, who chairs the Senate Agriculture Subcommittee on Jobs, Rural Economic Growth and Energy Innovation, spoke about issues important to her Subcommittee in this Congress –(full transcript available here, audio replay here (MP3- 7:42)). In part, the North Dakota Democrat stated that, “I think first off we want to make sure that we have adequate resources to address the needs of rural infrastructure, and so the farm bill is a critical component, as it sets forth what, in fact, should be in that line item. And I think the first, most critical thing is making sure that we maintain a level of economic support for rural development. “Beyond that I think it’s taking a look at housing, taking a look at critical infrastructure within rural communities, and how we can continue to make those vibrant, thriving communities so that we can maintain our family farm agriculture and make sure that these are communities that can attract some of the best and brightest Americans and kids from North Dakota farms who want to come back home. So to me it’s about retention and about expansion of economic opportunities in rural areas.” In discussing the link of a profitable agricultural sector to rural development, Sen. Heitkamp pointed out, “And so to me it’s not just about production agriculture. That’s the beginning. That’s what we do. Ninety percent of the land in North Dakota is used in production agriculture, and that’s huge. And it is a huge driver of our economy. “But if you’re going to look at how we stabilize our economy, it’s that next step in rural development. It’s the next step in taking our commodity goods and transforming them right here in our state. It is taking a look at what we can do for export enhancement. It’s taking a look at what we can do in research, which are also two critical issues for me in this farm bill.” After talking briefly about the energy production, where Sen. Heitkamp explained that, “we need to apply the same principles that we’ve done in value-added agriculture to value-added energy, and make sure that we’re getting the maximum amount of profitability out of the products that we produce,” she addressed a key issue in the Farm Bill debate: crop insurance. “[The] crop insurance program is essential to food security in our country,” she said, “it does, in fact, guarantee a steady supply of food in this country.” Sen. Heitkamp also stated yesterday that, “I think that the Senate will definitely pass a farm bill out of the Senate before this extension expires.” A news release yesterday from Sen. Heitkamp indicated that, “[Sen. Heitkamp] today brought together North Dakota ag leaders to discuss her work shaping a Farm Bill that works for North Dakota producers. Heitkamp, who has repeatedly reached out to North Dakotans for input on the Farm Bill, and her colleagues on the Agriculture Committee will mark-up the Senate version of the legislation Tuesday. “‘I have been busy crafting a new long-term Farm Bill, and I could not have done it without the insight I have received from North Dakota producers,’ said Heitkamp. ‘My first priority is to ensure that growers have a safety net that allows them to survive in tough years and thrive in good years. We have put together a solid Farm Bill, and I think the North Dakotans will be pleased with the package we pass out of committee tomorrow. The bill aims to reduce our federal deficit by $23 billion by ending direct payments and strengthening crop insurance.’ “‘Inclusion of enhanced crop insurance, which farmers and ranchers in North Dakota and across the country have said they need for effective risk management, will continue to be a priority in the Farm Bill,’ said U.S. Senator John Hoeven, who also attended the discussion.” More specifically on crop insurance, a recent photo of a corn field destroyed by hail, which was posted at the Texas Farm Bureau Facebook page, illustrates the uncertainties of crop production.  The Texas crop progress report from USDA yesterday noted that, “Additionally some areas experienced heavy thunderstorms with hail, high winds, and localized flooding..Some damage was reported to corn crops across Central Texas from a hail storm and high winds.” Also, this graphic illustration, from National Crop Insurance Services, which goes back to 1999, shows that as U.S. crop values have increased, farm safety net expenditures have been curtailed. Bloomberg writer Alan Bjerga reported yesterday that, “Expanding crop insurance is the main goal of nearly every grower group, [Mary Kay Thatcher, chief lobbyist for the American Farm Bureau Federation] said. ‘Crop insurance is the most important part of the farm bill,’ she said.” Meanwhile, Erik Wasson reported yesterday at The Hill’s On the Money Blog that, “The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) on Monday released its score of the Senate farm bill, a day before the Senate Agriculture Committee marks up the bill…CBO says the bill, authored by Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), cuts $18 billion over 10 years, compared to current law. “The bill cuts more, if one assumes that the automatic sequestration cuts that went into effect would be repealed. The farm bill keeps those cuts in place and can claim another $6.4 billion in savings by doing so. “Added together, the cuts compared to repealing the sequester yield $24.4 billion in savings — about $1.4 billion more than Stabenow estimated when the bill was released last week.” CBO also released its score of the House Farm Bill yesterday, which is available here. Also yesterday, the National Farmers Union outlined priorities for both the Senate and House Farm Bill legislation. And Chris Clayton highlighted some key differences between the Senate and House Farm Bills yesterday at the DTN Ag Policy Blog, “Farm Bills Diverge on Some Key Proposals.” Mary Kay Thatcher, of the American Farm Bureau Federation, discussed a variety of Farm Bill variables yesterday on the AgriTalk radio program with Mike Adams (FarmPolicy.com transcript here, audio replay here (MP3- 10:39)). “Well, nutrition continues to be the biggest difference. You’re looking at a $4 billion cut in the Senate and about $20 billion in the House. I suspect those numbers will change greatly once you get to the Senate and the House floor. May change some in committees, although I don’t think that’s going to be the biggest issue out there,” Ms. Thatcher said. (Note that The New York Times editorial board indicated today that, “Allowing cuts in food stamps is the wrong position fiscally and morally, and a terrible strategy for beginning negotiations with the House.”) She added, “And then you have a little difference in the commodity title. The Senate did come around to putting a target price option in their bill which is different than last year, more similar to what the House has done. But I think there’s probably still more benefits towards some type of an ARC [Agricultural Risk Coverage] shallow loss program in the Senate than there is for target prices. You go to the House side and I think the incentive is there more on the target price issue. So very likely those issues will be conference committee, last minute decisions.” When asked by Mike Adams, “What do you expect when the bill goes to the House floor?,” Ms. Thatcher replied: “A mess.  I think that’s where the rubber is really going to meet the road. We’re going to have some difficult amendments in the House and Senate Ag Committee, we’ll have some difficult ones on the Senate floor, but the House, with all those urban members, with the fact that you have 40% of the House that’s been around less than three years, we just have a tremendous educational need to get to those people.” On the dairy issue, Ms. Thatcher noted that, “Well, the Dairy Security Act is both in the Senate version and the House version now. I don’t think you will see an amendment on the Senate Ag Committee. None were filed. But on the House Ag Committee, I’m sure that Mr. Goodlatte and Mr. Scott will offer an amendment to, in essence, take the Dairy Security Act except strip out the supply management provisions. And I’ll be very surprised if we don’t have about a 50-50 vote on that in the House Ag Committee. I think that’s one to really watch with interest.” Peter Kleiman, a dairy farmer and president of the FarmFirst Dairy Cooperative, noted yesterday that, “Why farmers in the Upper Midwest are asking Congress to replace the ineffective dairy program we have now with a reform plan known as the Dairy Security Act. The DSA ends the direct payments from the government to farmers; it also ends the role of the government as a purchaser of surplus products. Most importantly, it represents a shift in philosophy: it will help farmers use risk management tools to maintain adequate margins, the crucial gap between what farmers receive for their milk, and what it costs them to produce it.” A news release yesterday from the International Dairy Foods Association stated that, “As the House and Senate Agriculture Committees prepare to write a new Farm Bill this week, the list of organizations opposed to a proposed dairy program continues to grow. Nearly 150 organizations and businesses across the food chain, from farmers and food manufacturers to food retailers and consumers, have signed letters to members of Congress urging them to oppose the ‘Dairy Market Stabilization Program’ (DMSP)… [T]he DMSP is a controversial proposal that is part of the Dairy Security Act, a bill sponsored by Representative Collin Peterson (D-MN) that is included in drafts of the next Farm Bill.  Both the Senate and House Agriculture Committees will consider the draft bills this week.” More specifically on the Senate version of the Farm Bill, Daniel Looker reported yesterday at Agriculture.com that, “Last year’s Senate version of a farm bill dropped the counter-cyclical program. This year, with Senator Thad Cochran of Mississippi as the ranking member on the Senate Agriculture Committee, something similar, called the adverse market payments (AMP) program, is back in as part of a bill the committee meets to consider tomorrow. The bill has a slightly less expensive version of agriculture risk coverage (ARC), a revenue protection favored in the Midwest. It also has a stand-alone revenue protection program for cotton in the crop insurance title of the bill. “The Senate’s bill doesn’t give farmers a choice between AMP and ARC. If those programs wind up in the final version of a farm law, you would be in both. But the new AMP program uses the target prices from the 2008 farm bill for a ‘reference price’ for all covered commodities except rice and peanuts. They get a higher ‘alternative price.’ The new reference price keeps the target prices of $2.63 a bushel for corn and $5.80 a bushel for soybeans. For rice, the Senate’s bill puts the alternative price at $13.30 per hundredweight, a27% increase from the 2008 farm law’s $10.50 target price. For peanuts, the new alternative price of $523.77 per ton is almost 6% higher than the 2008 loan rate of $495 a ton.” Meanwhile, the “Washington Insider” section of DTN noted yesterday (link requires subscription) that, “Critics suggest that while Ag leaders’ efforts to push for much strengthened safety nets may be popular with commodity groups, they also create the potential for new WTO price suppression complaints from dozens of countries on over 20 agricultural commodities, ranging from major commodities such as corn and cotton to canola, sunflowers, chickpeas and lentils, a potential global pushback that can be ignored only at our peril. “Increasingly, critics are suggesting that the Ag committees’ focus on complicated maneuverings leaves the overall effort increasingly vulnerable in many dimensions. For example, its very high cost, its efforts to claim savings by cutting nutrition and conservation programs and its end-around on the high exposure cotton programs and its strengthened, highly subsidized insurance programs, among others.” In a related item, an update yesterday at the Economic Research Service (ERS-USDA) Chart Detail page (“U.S. trade-distorting agricultural support declines with higher world commodity prices”) stated that, “In recent years, however, high commodity prices have reduced program spending, and an AMS [aggregate measurement of support- commonly called the ‘amber box’) has been notified to the WTO for only a few commodities.” On the issue of sugar, Erik Wasson reported yesterday at The Hill’s On the Money Blog that, “Sugar growers are heading into this month’s congressional farm bill debate confident that they will be able to maintain the United States' sugar program despite efforts to eliminate it. “Jack Roney of the American Sugar Alliance (ASA) said the group is not sure what amendments on sugar will be offered to the House and Senate farm bills, but predicted the group would be able to defeat them.” The Hill update added that, “Leading conservative groups are urging lawmakers to end the program, calling it an ‘outdated relic’ that creates ‘hidden taxes’ for consumers. The candy industry is fighting the program as well, on the grounds that it distorts the market and drives up prices. “The American Sugar Alliance countered on Monday with a study from a University of Maryland professor that argues sugar-buying industries are doing well under the current program.”   Agricultural Economy Cheri Zagurski and Anthony Greder reported yesterday at DTN (link requires subscription) that, “Twenty-eight percent of the nation's corn is in the ground, compared to 12% last week and a 65% five-year average. Emergence is at 5%, compared to 3% last week and a 28% five-year average.” Perry Beeman reported yesterday at The Des Moines Register Online that, “Iowa farmers had planted 15 percent of the corn crop through Sunday, far below normal. “In an average year, 79 percent of the crop would be planted, but wet and chilly conditions have delayed planting across the state, the U.S. Department of Agriculture reported Monday.” Bloomberg writers Jeff Wilson & Luzi Ann Javier reported yesterday that, “Corn rose the most in two weeks on speculation that persistent wet weather in parts of the Midwest will delay planting and curb yield potential of the biggest U.S. crop. Soybeans and wheat also gained. “About 36 percent of the Midwest was dry enough for corn planting during the weekend after rain last week, T-Storm Weather LLC said in a report today. More rain starting May 16 will add to delays, the forecaster said.” Agricultural related tweets from yesterday, which included photos, highlighted planting in Illinois- here, here, here  and here; Indiana and Iowa. University of Illinois Agricultural Economist Darrel Good indicated yesterday at the farmdoc daily blog (“Market Size for US Corn and Soybeans”) that, “The USDA's May 10 WASDE report contained supply and consumption projections for the 2013-14 marketing year for U.S. corn and soybeans. For the most part, the market focused on the projections of crop size, but the most important information is in the projections of marketing year consumption.” Yesterday’s update added that, “The consumption projections for both crops [corn, soybeans] reflect judgment about the size of the market under conditions of ample supplies and much lower prices. These projections are valuable as they provide context for evaluating the price implications of production potential as it unfolds over the next few months. For corn, use for ethanol and by-product production is forecast at 4.85 billion bushels, 250 million bushels above the revised projection for the current year, but below the record consumption of just over five billion bushels in the 2010-11 and 2011-12 marketing years. The modest projection reflects the plateauing of domestic ethanol consumption as the E10 blend wall has been reached and consumption of E15 and E85 increase slowly. The magnitude of ethanol trade will be an important determinant of domestic production and corn consumption. Corn exports are projected at 1.3 billion bushels, well above the revised projection of 750 million bushels for the current year, but well below the 1.8 to 2.0 billion bushels that was common before the 2011-12 marketing year. Lower prices may help to stimulate exports, but competition from South American corn is expected to limit demand growth. “Feed and residual use of corn is projected at 5.325 billion bushels, well above the 4.4 billion bushels projected for the current year. The projection represents the highest level of consumption in six years, but is well below the peak consumption of 6.15 billion bushels in 2004-05 and 2005-06 when distillers’ grains supplies were still small. Consumption for all uses, including non-ethanol domestic processing, is projected at 12.92 billion bushels, 1.785 billion more than projected for the current year, but about 140 million bushels below the record consumption in 2009-10 and 2010-11. For the most part, the projection reflects a very mature market for U.S. corn.” The farmdoc item noted that, “Stocks of U.S. corn at the end of the 2013-14 marketing year are projected at a 9-year high of 2.004 billion bushels, implying that the 2013 U.S. crop would need to be about 1.25 billion bushels (9 percent) below the current projection to require consumption to be less than currently projected. Similarly, the U.S. soybean crop would need to be 140 million bushels (4 percent) below the current projection to require consumption to be less than currently projected. “The 2013-14 marketing year average farm price of corn is projected in a range of $4.30 to $5.10. Even though current bids for harvest delivery in much of the Corn Belt are near the upper end of that range, the market has not had a substantial response to planting delays. Slow progress through mid-May, along with prospects of widespread rain later this week, may well escalate production concerns and a stronger price response. The 2013-14 marketing year average price for soybeans is projected in a range of $9.50 to $11.50, with harvest bids in much of the Corn Belt currently above the upper end of the range. It is still too early for significant production concerns for soybeans.”   Biotech Issue Adam Liptak reported in today’s New York Times that, “The Supreme Court ruled unanimously on Monday that farmers could not use Monsanto’s patented genetically altered soybeans to create new seeds without paying the company a fee. “The ruling has implications for many aspects of modern agriculture and for businesses based on vaccines, cell lines and software. But Justice Elena Kagan, writing for the court, emphasized that the decision was narrow.” The editorial boards at both The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal today supported the Supreme Court’s conclusions in this case. The American Soybean Association and CropLife America  also issued updates yesterday regarding the court’s decision.   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    May 13 Farm Bill; Ag Economy; EPA; and, Biotech- Monday Posted By Keith Good On May 13, 2013  Farm Bill Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D., N.D.), who chairs the Senate Agriculture Subcommittee on Jobs, Rural Economic Growth and Energy Innovation, indicated in a column yesterday at The Dickinson Press (N.D.) Online that, “This week, I am working with other members of the Senate Agriculture Committee to draft a five-year farm bill…[T]he farm bill I am working to draft will provide growers with the support they need to survive the tough years and thrive in the good ones. Specifically, the Senate draft of the farm bill authorizes a new commodity program called Agricultural Risk Coverage (ARC).” Sen. Heitkamp explained that, “This program will kick in when farmers lose money — from either yield losses or price collapse — to provide modest payments to help cover some of the losses they experience. It utilizes a market-oriented approach to adjust support when prices are high to keep pace with increased costs in inputs. It will also track with the market and pay growers on historical production to prevent the policy from influencing planting decisions. ARC will work in concert with the Federal Crop Insurance Program to allow growers to mitigate the variety of risks they face each year. “As the risks pile up for American growers, it is critical our nation strengthens its commitment to a strong domestic agricultural economy. American farmers are some of the most efficient and productive farmers in the world, which is why the American agricultural system is the envy of the world. But in order for that to remain the case, we need to continue to make modest investments to the farm safety net to support farmers in North Dakota and throughout the country.” House Ag. Comm. Member Doug LaMalfa (R., Calif.) noted yesterday at The Record Searchlight (Redding, Calif.) Online that, “A hot topic when I campaigned for this office was the federal Farm Bill and the need for major reform of this program. I’ve lived it as a family farmer, which makes me uniquely suited to undertake this difficult task. Few members of Congress have a first-hand understanding of how Farm Bill policies impact on-the-ground agriculture, how we can save billions through meaningful reform and how important modern agriculture policy is to our economy. In order to support a federal Farm Bill, I believe that it must contain three key components: the elimination of direct subsidy payments, major reform of food stamp programs and an overall reduction in spending.” Rep. LaMalfa indicated that, “Over 80 percent of Farm Bill spending is actually on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, generally known as food stamps. While we must help those in need, the success of the food stamp program should be measured by how many are able to transition from this government assistance, not how many are added to the rolls. A first step toward this goal is to eliminate the bizarre spending on advertising and recruitment of more recipients and instead ensure that they comply with work and work-training requirements, essentially helping them become self-sufficient.” (Note: For more on USDA outreach funding and the SNAP program, see this FarmPolicy.com update from March 16 that included a video replay of a brief floor discussion on this issue with Rep. Diane Black (R., Tenn.) and House Ag. Comm. Chairman Frank Lucas(R., Okla.)). Bartholomew Sullivan reported on Saturday at The Commercial Appeal (Memphis, Tenn.) Online that, “The farm bill proposals go before committees in which the Mid-South is well-represented. The House Agriculture Committee, for example has members Stephen Fincher and Scott DesJarlais, both R-Tenn., and Rick Crawford, R-Ark., whose district includes the state’s entire Mississippi riverfront. Sen. Thad Cochran is the lead Republican on the Senate Agriculture Committee which also includes John Boozman, R-Ark. “‘The farm bill is still a work in progress,’ Cochran said last week. ‘I am hopeful it will benefit agriculture specifically and help improve our economy generally.’ Along the same line, Fincher said he’d been button-holed by Speaker John Boehner about some milk provisions in the bill, adding, ‘a lot of people are moving a lot of pieces around.’” Mr. Sullivan pointed out that, “The Cordova-based National Cotton Council of America is again backing a shallow loss crop insurance measure for cotton alone that it says would provide the necessary safety net for its farmers while not violating its obligations under international trade agreements. The Stacked Income Protection Plan (known as Stax) would, as the name implies, supplement revenue insurance with an 80 percent premium subsidy paid by taxpayers but would replace cotton’s direct and counter-cyclical program to which Brazil, among others, has objected over the years. “America’s cotton industry lost a trade dispute with Brazil over allegations U.S. agriculture subsidies created an incentive to overproduce and thus lower world prices for Third World countries, including subsistence farmers in West Africa. The new head of the World Trade Organization, selected last week with support from those developing countries, was Brazil’s ambassador to the WTO, Roberto Azevedo. He was the Brazilian trade official in Geneva who helped win the first major concessions by a developing country against American crop subsidies.” The Commercial Appeal article noted that, “‘The only thing that was WTO-compliant was direct payments, which are going away, and so we’re ending up with crop insurance,’ [Rep. Fincher]. ‘From what I’m gathering (with crop insurance and Stax), we may be able to go forward and put this to bed.’” (Note: In a related item regarding the WTO, The Wall Street Journal editorial board indicated today that, “Yet [Roberto Azevedo] won that support in large part by helping to scuttle the Doha round of free-trade talks.  Mr. Azevedo was Brazil’s chief Doha negotiator, and opposition to freer trade in manufacturing by Brazil, India, South Africa and other emerging economic powers made a worthwhile Doha deal impossible. It’s now moribund….The result has been that the WTO is increasingly a bystander as the world’s economic powers ignore the global talks and pursue their own bilateral and regional trade pacts. The most important trade diplomacy today is taking place within the trans-Pacific and Europe-U.S. negotiations.”) Meanwhile, Ron Smith reported on Saturday at the Southwest Farm Press Online that, “As the Agriculture Committees in both the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate prepare to mark up farm bill proposals next week, farmers and the commodity organizations that support them will watch closely to see where cuts are proposed, how deep those cuts are and what kind of safety net will be left after all the slicing and dicing is accomplished. “Crop insurance will be top of mind as the industry assesses the importance of what has become the key element of the farm safety net.” Also, The Washington Post editorial board noted today that, “Among the more laudable ideas in President Obama’s budget for fiscal 2014 is a plan to modernize and reform the $1.5 billion U.S. food aid program. Mr. Obama would end ‘monetization,’ the inefficient practice whereby the federal government buys commodities from U.S. farmers and ships them abroad (on U.S.-flagged vessels) to governments and nongovernmental organizations — which sell them and use the proceeds for development projects. Monetization raises costs for U.S. taxpayers while displacing goods produced by farmers overseas.” The Post added that, “Among the many points [USAID Administrator Rajiv Shah] makes are that food aid shipments have declined by 64 percent in the last decade anyway, so it’s a bit late for farmers and merchant mariners to be claiming that they can’t survive without them. In fact, farmers are prospering as never before, thanks in part to commercial exports. “As for the merchant marine, the number of U.S.-flagged ships has been in steady decline for decades, yet the U.S. military managed to prosecute several wars overseas. If we need sealift for national security, it would be more transparent to subsidize that directly.” And with respect to legislative action by the Senate and House on the Farm Bill, Jerry Hagstrom reported yesterday at National Journal Online that, “The reason the bills are moving seems to be that each chamber has gotten tired of the farm bill hanging on and has something more interesting to move on to. Reid has told the Senate that he wants the farm bill passed in May because he wants to devote June to immigration reform. Since exit polls showed that President Obama’s election percentage in rural America went from 50 percent in 2008 to 41 percent in 2012, while Hispanic voters have become the new hope of the Democratic Party, it seems that [Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid] has a logical reason to get the farm bill done quickly and move on to something that interests more Democratic voters. Agricultural employers will encourage this movement, too, since they are promoting provisions for immigrant farm workers and meat-company employees that are included in the immigration-reform bill. “House Republicans want to move on to the periodic reauthorization of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and the House Agriculture Committee has to do it. Most of the futures industry today is financial, but the commission, which regulates the industry, falls under the jurisdiction of the Agriculture committees because the exchanges that engage in financial futures started out trading in agricultural commodities and minerals.” Mr. Hagstrom noted that, “It did not seem to be a coincidence that last Thursday, when [House Ag. Com. Chairman Frank Lucas] scheduled the House panel’s farm-bill markup for Wednesday, he also announced that the committee will hold the first of a series of CFTC reauthorization hearings on May 21.”   Agricultural Economy- WASDE Update, Farmland Values Gregory Meyer reported on Friday at The Financial Times Online that, “US farmers will overcome soggy planting conditions to grow their largest corn crop on record, the government said in a report that knocked buoyant grain markets. “The US Department of Agriculture forecast the nation’s corn haul at 14.1bn bushels, 31 per cent higher than last year’s drought-stressed harvest. “The price of yellow corn used in animal feed, ethanol fuel and processed food has hovered near historic highs this spring as steady rain kept farmers indoors. This delayed planting and raised worries that stalks would enter their fragile pollination stage when summer heat is at its most damaging. As a result, the USDA tempered its estimate of how much average corn fields would yield to 158 bushels per acre, 5.6 bushels less than its previous projection.” The FT article noted that, “CBOT December corn futures, which will contain supplies from this year’s harvest, fell 2.3 per cent to $5.29 a bushel Friday. The USDA predicted farmers will be paid an average $4.70 per bushel for their crop, down more than $2 from this year.” Reuters writer Charles Abbott reported on Friday that, “Record-large U.S. corn and soybean crops will end three years of punishingly tight domestic supplies, the government said on Friday in a report that offered the brightest outlook in years for world food supplies. “One year after a brutal Midwest drought revived fears of grain shortages and higher prices, the U.S. Agriculture Department projected the largest-ever global wheat, corn, rice and oilseed crops in its first projections for the 2013/14 crop year. Global grain stocks would rise more than analysts expected, with corn zooming 23 percent to a 13-year high, it said.” Mr. Abbott noted that, “The forecasts tipped Chicago grain prices lower, but losses were limited by concerns that conditions may change dramatically in the five months before the crops are in the bin. July weather conditions are critical for U.S. crops. A cold, rainy and snowy spring has farmers weeks behind in sowing corn.” For a broad-based look at historic corn production variables, click on this graph, while a similar soybean graph is available here. Owen Fletcher reported on Friday at The Wall Street Journal Online that, “The USDA said the expected large corn harvest likely would result in significant declines in the prices farmers would receive for their crops. The government projected a season-average farm price for this coming harvest of $4.30 to $5.10 a bushel, down sharply from the record of $6.70 to $7.10 a bushel for corn harvested last fall.” “As of Sunday, only 12% of the nation’s corn crop had been planted, the lowest level for that point in the year since 1984. But forecasts this week showing drier weather in much of the Midwest have eased fears about planting delays. Farmers in many states are expected to have a window this weekend and next week in which to sow crops,” the Journal item said. Christopher Doering reported on Friday at The Des Moines Register Online that, “The monster crops bode well for consumers, as well as livestock and ethanol producers who suffered through the 2012 drought, the worst since the Dust Bowl of the 1930s. “Ethanol plants last year were forced to scale back production of the corn-based fuel or shutter facilities altogether. Rather than pay higher feed costs, livestock producers reduced their herds — resulting in a short-term meat glut but lower stockpiles today. The public is still feeling the pinch at the supermarket, with higher prices for everything from beef and pork to eggs and milk.” Also Friday, AP writer Roxana Hegeman reported that, “The winter wheat crop is expected to be far smaller this season compared to last, particularly for hard red varieties used in bread, the U.S. Department of Agriculture reported Friday. “In the first government projection on the harvest’s anticipated size, the National Agricultural Statistics Service estimated winter wheat production will be down 10 percent to 1.49 billion bushels, due to fewer acres – 32.7 million acres, some 6 percent fewer acres than a year ago – and a 1.8-bushel decrease in average yields, to 45.4 bushels per acre.” Agricultural related tweets, which included photos, showed planting in Illinois- here (May 11) and here (May 12), Ohio (May 11), South Dakota (May 11), and Missouri (May 12). More broadly, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations indicated late last week that, “Strong growth is expected for global wheat, coarse grains and rice production in 2013, according to early forecasts published in the May issue of FAO’s monthly Cereals Supply and Demand Brief.” Meanwhile, Nin-Hai Tseng reported on Friday at CNNMoney Online that, “Then there’s apparently a new bubble that few have ever heard about: America’s farmlands.” The article stated that, “True there’s some bubbly behavior going on, but that doesn’t mean the market for farmlands has entered bubble territory, at least according to Yale University economist Robert Shiller, who first warned of a housing bubble back in 2003. “The most obvious sign: Nobody has ever really heard about it, Shiller wrote in 2011  in Project Syndicate, an online opinion forum featuring leading economists. “Even if prices went belly up, it likely won’t cause nearly the kind of financial havoc that subprime loans did onto the housing market and the nation’s financial system. As Shiller points out, the market for farmlands isn’t nearly as big as the housing market or stock market, for that matter. Whereas farmland had a total value of $1.8 trillion in 2010, the U.S. stock market’s value was $16.5 trillion, and the housing market was $16.6 trillion.” Betsy Simon reported late last week at the Grand Forks Herald (N.D.) Online that, “North Dakota is almost 90 percent farm and ranch land, which rose in price, on average, a little more than 57 percent from 2007 to 2012, according to the results of a land valuation model for an ag real estate assessment conducted last year by North Dakota State University’s Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics in Fargo. “The report indicates that between 2011 and 2012, farmland values in southwest North Dakota counties increased by an average of 20 to 30 percent.”   Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Zack Colman reported on Friday at The Hill’s Energy Blog that, “Democrats will try to advance Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) nominee Gina McCarthy to the full Senate again next week after a GOP boycott thwarted attempts to do so Thursday.”   Biotech Andrew Pollack reported in Saturday’s New York Times that, “Genetically engineered crops that could sharply increase the use of two powerful herbicides are now unlikely to reach the market until at least 2015 because the Department of Agriculture has decided tosubject the crops to more stringent environmental reviews than it had originally intended. “The department said on Friday that it had made the decision after determining that approval of the crops ‘may significantly affect the quality of the human environment.’” The American Soybean Association issued a news release on Friday regarding this development. Also on Friday, an update at the Center for Food Safety Online stated that, “[T]he Vermont House has voted 107-37 in support of legislation that would require foods that are genetically engineered (GE) to be labeled. This is the first-ever State House to pass a bill that would require that all GE foods to be labeled.”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    May 10 Farm Bill; Appropriations Hearing; Ag Economy; and, EPA- Friday Posted By Keith Good On May 10, 2013  Farm Bill Developments David Rogers reported yesterday at Politico that, “A new drafted Farm Bill, released by the Senate Agriculture Committee late Thursday [full draft, summary], reflects concessions to powerful pork and beef lobbies as well as an effort to secure Southern Republican votes with target prices for rice and peanut producers. “The Midwest Corn Belt would retain its costly new Agricultural Risk Coverage program—which was the mainstay of the commodity title approved last summer by the Senate in the last Congress. But the ARC payments have been trimmed back modestly and more importantly, the standard index changed from a five-month average market price to the 12-month average. “This should reduce the costs to the government based on a typical marketing year. But even more importantly, it will also push ARC payments into the next fiscal year since the average 12-month marketing price for corn, for example, won’t be known until past Sept 30.” Mr. Rogers explained that, “In the case of the commodity title, the big new Southern element is an ‘adverse market payment’ program giving rice and peanuts the target price protection they have wanted. For rice it will be $13.30 per hundred weight and for peanuts $523.77 per ton. Both would have the option to update their yields but any future countercyclical payments will be calculated on 85 percent of base or historical acres for a farm. “Southern producers would have preferred to be free to operate based on their planted acres, but this was a compromise insisted upon by Midwest critics who argue that the target prices will drive planting decisions unless some cap is set.” The Politico article noted that, “At the same time, [Sen. Ag. Comm. Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D., Mich.)] admitted her own frustration with the outcome of a behind-the-scenes fight over proposed new egg-production standards, important to producers in her state. “The legislation has the strong backing from the Georgia-based United Egg Producers, the leading industry trade group which last year reached a compromise with the Humane Society after a rancorous set of battles at the state level. And in Michigan’s case, it promises some for egg producers, faced with stricter cage-size and production rules enacted at the state level. “But when Stabenow’s staff told pork and beef cattle lobbies of her intent, it provoked such a firestorm that it threatened the entire farm bill. It’s been known for days that the draft bill would not include the egg language, but Thursday, Stabenow told POLITICO that she won’t even attempt to offer an amendment in the markup.” Mr. Rogers added that, “And Chad Gregory, president of UEP, said he had been stunned by the fierce reaction from the meat lobbies as well as their power [see a related statement from Mr. Gregory in yesterday’s FarmPolicy.com update]. “Both [Mr. Gregory] and the Humane Society said they now look for other legislative paths to pursue. ‘We are committed to getting this done, it is a common sense solution,’ said Michael Markarian, a chief program officer at the society.” DTN Ag Policy Editor Chris Clayton reported yesterday on the Senate Farm Bill draft and pointed out that, “Senators also not only ensure crop insurance is protected from cuts, but they propose several new policies to broaden crop insurance with a variety of new programs for different agriculture sectors. The bill encourages USDA to study and create whole-farm coverage for farmers that would have a $1.5 million liability cap. Another provision would ensure organic producers are paid the market price for organic crops in policies. Catfish producers could become eligible for margin coverage to protect against losses. Another policy would be for poultry producers in cases of catastrophic diseases. “Yet another pilot program would create a federally subsidized ‘index-based weather insurance’ program. Farmers and ranchers would receive 60% premium assistance for buying such coverage.” The DTN article noted that, “For cotton producers, the bill keeps the Stacked Income Protection for Cotton, or STAX. Under STAX, USDA would pay 80% of the premiums. The bill also would include a new crop-insurance coverage for peanut producers. “In commodity programs, the Senate bill would still stick with the Agricultural Risk Coverage proposal as the basis for its commodity title. Those provisions are much the same as last year’s Senate proposal. Farmers would make a one-time election to choose to be enrolled in ARC, as well as whether to enroll in individual coverage or county coverage. For individual coverage, 65% of planted acres could be covered. For county coverage, 80% of planted acres could be covered. Also, farmers enrolled in the program could receive payments for 45% of eligible acres.” In addition, Mr. Clayton stated that, “The bill also maintains the Supplemental Coverage Option in the crop-insurance title of the farm bill. The program allows farmers to buy a county-based average yield insurance that would supplement their individual insurance policy. To squeeze more savings out of the bill, the Senate bill trims back the premium level that would be paid by taxpayers to 65% of the coverage cost. Last year’s bill set the taxpayer subsidy at 70%. “For producers who enroll in ARC, the deductible for the SCO plan would be 22% of the value of the crop. For all other producers, the deductible would be 10% of the crop value.” Yesterday’s article also pointed out that, “While farm and conservation groups came together to announce a deal on conservation compliance and eliminating means testing for crop insurance, the chairman’s mark doesn’t include that language.The bill would extend conservation compliance to crop insurance and require anyone who buys crop insurance to have a conservation plan by the end of the farm bill. The mark also keeps the amendment added on the Senate floor last year capping premium subsidies for producers with adjusted gross incomes higher than $750,000. The bill does require a study to determine the effects of that provision. “On sod busting, the Senate bill wouldn’t eliminate crop insurance for farmers putting virgin land into production, but the proposal would limit assistance to 65% of the transitional yield and reduce the premium subsidy by 50% as well.” Also with respect to Farm Bill commodity title issues, Agricultural Economists Carl Zulauf (Ohio State) and Gary Schnitkey (University of Illinois) penned an update yesterday at the farmdoc daily blog titled, “Payments by U.S. Farm Safety Net Program: Differences by Crop.” Erik Wasson reported yesterday at The Hill’s On the Money Blog that, “The Stabenow draft saves $16 billion from commodity programs by repealing direct payments, counter-cyclical payments and Average Crop Revenue Election Program and replacing them with expanded crop insurance. “Stabenow has included also some changes to farm subsidies to enhance payments to rice and peanut growers in ways that resemble the House approach last year. These growers—important constituents of new committee Ranking Member Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.)–will receive more generous target-price based supports.” In a statement yesterday, Iowa GOP Senator Chuck Grassley indicated in part that, “I appreciate Chairwoman Stabenow’s continued commitment to farm program payments reform…I was also pleased to see Congressman Fortenberry introduce companion legislation to my payment limits reform bill in the House today.  As the House Agriculture Committee considers a farm bill it would send a strong message if the House included the common sense and meaningful payment limit reforms in Congressman Fortenberry’s bill and that Senator Stabenow has included in her mark.” Matt Kelley, in an update yesterday at Iowa Radio Online, quoted Sen. Tom Harkin (D., Iowa) with respect to the Senate draft: “‘I’m very happy about the conservation provisions in it, the conservation compliance provisions, the fresh fruit and vegetable program that we have in there, so I think our bill looks pretty good,’ Harkin says. ‘I hope we can get it through.’” Also on the conservation issue, an update yesterday at the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC) Blog stated that, “Today, Representative Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), along with eleven additional cosponsors, introduced a bill to improve current farm conservation programs.  The Balancing Food, Farm, and the Environment Act (H.R. 1890) aims to help farmers and ranchers improve their environmental performance and reward them for the conservation benefits they produce.” “Senator Tom Udall (D-NM) is expected to introduce companion legislation in the Senate later today,” the NSAC update said. And in a teleconference with reporters yesterday, Sen. Mike Johanns (R., Neb.) stated that, “Parts of the new [Senate Farm Bill draft] are just being released, and I’m carefully reviewing the information we can get. I will say, some of the changes from last year do raise flags…[W]e have a window of opportunity now in the Senate to get this bill done, but I believe that’s only going to last for a few weeks. I expect most of June will be devoted to debate on immigration reform, so it is my hope that we move the farm bill forward in a very timely manner…” Meanwhile, Reuters writer Charles Abbott reported yesterday that, “The Senate Agriculture Committee is scheduled to start drafting its bill on Tuesday, with its House panel likely to follow on Wednesday. ‘On food stamps, they’re going to be 10 miles apart,’ said a farm lobbyist.” “In the House, Massachusetts Democrat Jim McGovern has sponsored a resolution opposing against food stamp cuts. As of Wednesday, it had 115 sponsors, all Democrats,” the Reuters article said. The National Farmers Union, National Association of Wheat Growers, American Soybean Association,and National Milk Producers Federation released updates relating to the Senate draft bill yesterday. Also, House Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas (R., Okla.) and Ranking Member Collin Peterson (D., Minn.) were guests on yesterday’s AgriTalk radio program with Mike Adams, where the discussion focused on Farm Bill issues. A FarmPolicy.com transcript of yesterday’s AgriTalk discussion is available here. In part, Rep. Peterson noted that, “I think we’re in pretty good shape here, really. I think we’ve hit a middle ground here. By increasing the food stamp cuts, I think it’s going to help with the members on the Republican side. We still are going to have a fair number of Democrats supporting it, even with the higher food stamp cuts. And so I’m feeling pretty good that we’re going to be able to, by Frank and I sticking together, and by coming together with a kind of middle ground, that we’re going to oppose the people on the right and the people on the left that come at us, and I’m pretty optimistic we’re going to be able to hold this together pretty much the way it comes out of committee.” On the potential differences between the Senate and House Farm Bills, Rep. Peterson indicated that, “Well, I think where the differences are we knew about and have known about. There’s going to be a significant difference in the nutrition area, but that’s been there the whole time, and that will get worked out somehow or another.  There are some differences, potentially, on the commodity title, but I think we have an ally with Mr. Cochran on what we’re doing here in the House on the commodity title, and so at the end of the day I think it’s going to look very much like what we’ve put together. And I don’t know how you can be against this if you’re for giving people the option between the price loss contract and the revenue coverage. I don’t know why anybody should get hung up about that.” Chairman Lucas noted yesterday on AgriTalk that, “But I would tell you, just from a hot button issue, so far—and this is an issue very close to Collin’s heart—dairy has been a really lively subject, and I suspect both in committee and on the floor it will be a lively subject. We’re going to use Collin’s language as the base text language on dairy. That’s where we’ll begin on Wednesday morning. We’ll see how many amendments fly, so to speak.” On the dairy issue, Rep. Peterson stated that, “Well, the proposal that…first of all, I don’t think there’s even a finalized version of what the alternative is going to be, but what they have put together is not workable, and it basically puts the taxpayers on the hook if things don’t work out the way they plan. This is…you know, we gave IDFA 80% of what they were looking for—forward contracting, other things they’ve been asking for for ten years. But really what they want, at the end of the day, is cheap milk, and they don’t really care how they get it. And if the taxpayers have to subsidize it in order for them to get cheap milk, they’re fine with that, but that’s bad policy. “So what they have put together as an alternative, first of all, we don’t even know what it is, but I know enough about it to know that it’s not something that’s going to work. And frankly, from what I can tell, these people don’t care if it works or not. We’ve spent three and a half years putting something together that we know will work, and if we get an oversupply situation, the farmers end up paying for it. The ones that are using the Dairy Security Act are going to end up paying for it and not the taxpayers, and we think that’s the right way to go about it.” In a tweet yesterday, that contained a link to a video, Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R., Va.) indicated that, “#Dairy supply management is contrary to the goals of limited govt, economic growth & free markets.” And a news release earlier this week from Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R., Wis.) stated that, “[Rep. Sensenbrenner] and Congressman Sean Duffy (WI-7), along with several other members of the Wisconsin delegation, sent a letter today to the House Committee on Agriculture Chairman Frank Lucas and Ranking Member Collin Peterson.  The letter expresses opposition to the Dairy Market Stabilization Program (DMSP), which is included in the Dairy Security Act – part of the farm bill scheduled to be marked-up by the Committee later this month.” Also yesterday, Bloomberg writer Isis Almeida reported that, “The U.S. doubled the amount of refined sugar exports allowed by processors to 100,000 metric tons because of expanding supplies in the domestic market. “The increase took effect May 1 and will revert back to 50,000 tons on Jan. 1, 2015, the U.S. Department of Agriculture said in an April 30 notice on its website. U.S. sugar production will climb 5.8 percent to 8.98 million short tons (8.1 million metric tons) in the year ending Sept. 30, the USDA said April 10. Stockpiles are forecast at 2.1 million short tons, 55 percent higher than two years earlier.”   Senate Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee Hearing with Sec. Vilsack Chris Clayton reported yesterday at DTN (link requires subscription) that, “An Obama administration proposal to shift at least some U.S. foreign food aid from buying domestic commodities to direct cash purchases overseas continues to hit a wall with members of Congress. “The chairman and ranking member of the Senate Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee on Thursday  both expressed their displeasure with the administration proposal and said they were flat-out unwilling to go along with it. “Under the plan, the administration would shift $1.5 billion in international food aid under the Food for Peace program from buying U.S. commodities and instead use that money to make cash purchases of food closer to regions or countries in distress. The administration argues the program shift would feed up to 4 million more people over 10 years while cutting costs by about $50 million annually, largely by eliminating shipping costs. The administration highlighted that 55% of all international food aid would still rely on U.S. commodities.” To listen to an exchange on this issue with Subcommittee Chairman Mark Pryor (D., Ark.) and Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack from yesterday’s hearing, just click here (MP3- 3:53). Also on this issue, see this recent column  from the Chicago Tribune by Sec. Vilsack, Sec. of State John Kerry, and Rajiv Shah, the administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development. Crop insurance was also a topic at yesterday’s Ag Appropriations hearing as both Jerry Moran (R., Kans.)- audio replay (MP3- 2:43),  and John Hoeven (R., N.D.)- audio replay (MP3- 2:22) raised the issue with Sec. Vilsack. And a news release yesterday from Sen. Thad Cochran (R., Miss.) stated that, [Sen. Cochran] today once again pressed the Secretary of Agriculture to explain why a catfish inspection program authorized five years ago has not been implemented.”   Agricultural Economy Owen Fletcher reported in today’s Wall Street Journal that, “Heavy rains in the nation’s Corn Belt are tapering off just in time for many farmers to sow their crops, a shift that is putting a damper on corn prices…[N]ow, though, farmers are able to play catch-up. Many investors and analysts think the U.S.—the world’s biggest corn grower and exporter—will produce one of its largest harvests ever, replenishing supplies after last year’s severe drought and sending prices lower in the $46-billion corn-futures market.” The Journal article also included this interesting graphical depiction. Patti Domm reported earlier this week at CNBC Online that, “Just a quarter of the U.S. corn crop normally planted by this time of year is in the ground, but this could still be a bumper crop if muddy fields dry up and the weather cooperates.” Recent agricultural related tweets, with video and photos, showed planting in Illinois- here and here, Indiana, and South Dakota; as well as significant rain in Illinois- here  and here. A National Climatic Data Center update yesterday stated that, “According to the May 7, 2013 U.S. Drought Monitor, moderate to exceptional drought covers 48.1% of the contiguous United States, increasing from last week’s 46.9% and interrupting the recent decreasing trend.” And Lizette Alvarez  reported in today’s New York Times that, “Florida’s citrus industry is grappling with the most serious threat in its history: a bacterial disease with no cure that has infected all 32 of the state’s citrus-growing counties.”   EPA Issues John M. Broder reported in today’s New York Times that, “Senate Republicans continued a campaign to delay confirmation of President Obama’s second-term cabinet nominees on Thursday, blocking a committee vote on Gina McCarthy, the president’s pick to lead the Environmental Protection Agency.” And Ben Goad reported yesterday at The Hill’s RegWatch Blog that, “Small farmers who keep oil tanks would get a reprieve from forthcoming federal regulations intended to protect waterways against disastrous spills under a bipartisan amendment approved Thursday in the Senate.”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    May 9 Farm Bill; Egg Bill; Budget; Ag Economy; and, Immigration- Thursday Posted By Keith Good On May 9, 2013  Farm Bill- Policy Issues AP writer Steve Karnowski reported yesterday that, “An influential Minnesota voice on agricultural policy said Wednesday that he’s hopeful Congress will pass a new farm bill this summer after efforts last year failed amid election year politics. “U.S. Rep. Collin Peterson, the ranking Democrat on the House Agriculture Committee, threatened earlier this year to sit out the process of writing a new farm bill unless he got a guarantee from House Republican leaders that they’d let the legislation come up for a floor vote this time. Peterson told The Associated Press on Wednesday that he’s now ‘fairly comfortable’ with the assurances he’s received from Speaker John Boehner and others, so his name will be on the bill when it’s unveiled later this week.” The article noted that, “Peterson said Boehner made it clear to him in their recent discussions that ‘he wanted to get this over with.’ And he noted that Majority Leader Eric Cantor said late last week that the House will vote on it this summer. Peterson said he’s optimistic that he and Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas, R-Okla., will be able to keep the bill close to what the committee passes and get it into a conference committee where they’ll resolve the differences with the Democratic-controlled Senate’s version. “The Senate’s version won’t cut SNAP as much as the House version, and Peterson said they’ll need to work out that difference. But he said he expects the most difficult problem to reconcile will be the different approaches between the House and Senate bills toward restructuring crop subsidy programs.” Mr. Karnowski explained that, “Coming back this year will be Peterson’s proposal for a dairy policy overhaul aimed at protecting profit margins rather than just propping up milk prices. He said he expects renewed attempts to remove voluntary production controls from the plan, but he said he believes he has the votes to block that. “‘It’s the one area that really needs the bill more than any other part of agriculture,’ Peterson said of dairy policy. ‘Because what’s currently in place is just completely out of date and doesn’t work at all.’” Also yesterday with respect to dairy, a news release from the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) indicated that, “More than 50 state and national dairy organizations, including the [NMPF], sent a joint letter today to members of the House Agriculture Committee, urging that panel to include the Dairy Security Act (DSA) in upcoming Farm Bill. The House Ag panel is expected to begin drafting a Farm Bill next Wednesday. “The letter, which can be found online, said that dairy producers need ‘a financially-sound risk management program to help farmers better manage margin volatility,’ noting that the economic conditions that led to the development of the DSA after the dairy depression in 2009 – low milk prices and high feed costs generating terrible margins – were experienced again by America’s dairy farmers last year, when feed costs soared to record levels as milk prices dropped.” Meanwhile, Ron Nixon reported yesterday at The Caucus Blog (New York Times) that, “A new farm bill being crafted by the House Agriculture Committee includes deeper cuts to the food stamp program than those included in last year’s version of the bill, setting up a potential fight with House and Senate Democrats who oppose additional cuts to the program. “The chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, Frank D. Lucas, Republican of Oklahoma, is proposing to cut $20 billion from the food stamp program in the version of the farm bill that lawmakers will begin working on next Tuesday, up from the $16 billion in cuts that were in the House bill last year.” AP writer Mary Clare Jalonick reported yesterday that, “It won’t be easy, but finding the right amount of food stamp cuts will be the only way farm-state lawmakers can get the five-year farm bill passed. The bill, which also sets policy for farm subsidies and other rural development programs, has historically included food stamps and domestic food aid to gain support of urban lawmakers who may not otherwise vote for the bill. “This year, food stamps are making passage harder.” Ms. Jalonick explained that, “[Sen. Ag Comm. Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow's (D., Mich.)] bill is expected to find the $400 million in annual cuts by targeting states that give people who don’t have heating bills very small amounts of heating assistance so they can automatically qualify for higher food stamp benefits. That approach passed the Senate last year in a farm bill that died at the end of the congressional session when the House failed to move on the legislation. “[House Ag Comm. Chairman Lucas] says the House bill will make those same changes but also end what is called ‘broad-based categorical eligibility,’ or granting automatic food stamp benefits when people are signed up for certain other programs.” “The debate over food stamps doesn’t always fall along party lines — the top Republican on the Senate Agriculture Committee, Mississippi Sen. Thad Cochran, has said he won’t support major cuts to food stamps because it is a popular program in his state,” the AP article said. As an interesting side note, Ian Berry reported yesterday at The Wall Street Journal Online that, “Wisconsin food-stamp recipients would face sharp limits on how much junk food they could buy under a bill moving through the state legislature. “The measure, approved Tuesday by the Wisconsin State Assembly, would require food-stamp users spend at least two-thirds of that money on healthy foods, such as fruits, vegetables and juices.” Mr. Berry noted that, “If the bill became law, Wisconsin would have to apply for a waiver to existing USDA rules to enact its restrictions. The USDA rejected similar requests from Minnesota in 2004 and New York in 2010. A third request, from Mississippi, was withdrawn in 2012. All three requests targeted sugary snacks and drinks. “A USDA spokeswoman declined to comment on the Wisconsin bill Wednesday.” Gannett writer Brian Tumulty reported earlier this week that, “[Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D., N.Y.)] plans to fight any level of proposed SNAP cuts in the latest farm bill. The Senate version is expected to call for cutting $4.1 billion. Gillibrand said she will offer an alternative proposal to offset the SNAP spending through savings in the federal crop insurance program.” With respect to crop insurance, an update this week from Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R., Tex.) stated that, “I think a strong crop insurance program is the best way of ensuring a strong safety net for our producers.  With crop insurance, farmers and ranchers pay a premium each year to insure their harvest.  In bad years, they get a pay out that helps them stay above water when they don’t have much revenue coming in.  It’s a shared-risk program, and it’s the preferred risk management tool for farmers and ranchers across the country.  I’ve introduced a bill to strengthen crop insurance by allowing farmers the option to protect against shallow losses.  I believe it will be included in this year’s Farm Bill.” A report yesterday on the Agriculture Today radio program (Red River Farm Network) by Randy Koenen included remarks on the crop insurance program by Sen. John Thune (R., S.D.)- audio here (MP3- 0:43). In part, Sen. Thune noted that, “[Crop insurance] has become, really, the foundation of the Farm Bill and the basic safety net for our producers.” In conservation news, Joseph Morton reported earlier this week at The Omaha World-Herald Online that, “Congress should require farmers to comply with conservation requirements if they want federally subsidized crop insurance, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack said Monday. “‘We think it’s only fair that we restore that link between conservation compliance and crop insurance subsidies,’ Vilsack told The World-Herald.” An update yesterday at the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC) Blog stated that, “On Tuesday, May 7, six former Chiefs of USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) delivered a letter to the House and Senate Agriculture Committees,urging them to reattach conservation accountability measures to federal crop insurance premium subsidies.” The NSAC update added that, “The letter from the former NRCS Chiefs is an important show of support for relinking conservation accountability measures to crop insurance subsidies, and NSAC will continue to support that accountability provision as we proceed to House and Senate farm bill markups next week.” Chris Clayton reported yesterday at the DTN Ag Policy Blog that, “House Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas is opposed to the agreement announced earlier this week by farm, environmental and wildlife groups to link eligibility for crop-insurance premium subsidies to conservation compliance. “Lucas, a Republican from Oklahoma, told DTN off the House floor Wednesday that he has a philosophical problem with various lobby groups ‘tying strings to how farmers farm’ and dictating terms to producers when the farm bill is supposed to be about raising food and fiber. “‘My perspective has always been, very sincerely, if a farm bill is about raising food — and I know 80% of it now is about making sure people have enough to eat, helping them buy their food — but if it is about raising food, farmers should have the tools to raise the food and fiber,’ Lucas said. ‘And if you engage in whole series of things, such as you can’t get crop insurance unless you plant in a certain way, on a certain day, in a certain direction, or you can’t access a variety of other programs, then we aren’t having a farm bill that helps farmers raise food and fiber, but we have a social tool here that’s used to direct how farmers use their lives and conduct their business.’” Mr. Clayton added that, “On other conservation issues, Lucas said the House Agriculture Committee will lower cap on the Conservation Reserve Program down to 24 million acres, instead of the 25-million cap set by the committee last year. That is partly because CRP acreage has already declined, thus the cap must be lowered for the House Agriculture Committee to get credit for savings in the cost of the program. ‘We need to reflect the reality out there.’” Also yesterday, Alexandra Wexler reported at The Wall Street Journal Online that, “The U.S. Department of Agriculture is expanding a sugar-export program, a first step in the agency’s effort to prevent a wave of defaults on loans made to sugar mills and processors. “U.S. sugar prices have dropped 12.6% this year, with futures on ICE settling Wednesday at 19.58 cents a pound, near a four-year low. If prices don’t rebound, sugar processors could default on as much as $809 million in federal loans later this year, forfeiting sugar that was put up as collateral for the loans to the USDA.” Meanwhile, a news release yesterday from Sen. Jon Tester (D., Mont.) stated that, “Montana U.S. Senators [Tester] and Max Baucus have introduced a bill to help boost veteran employment through farming. The Senators plan to attach the provisions to the upcoming Farm Bill, which is scheduled to be considered by the Senate Agriculture Committee next week.” And, on a separate issue, Tom Lutey reported yesterday at The Billings Gazette Online that, “A new bill requiring labels on foods with genetically modified ingredients is dividing Montana farmers and consumers. “The federal bill, dubbed the ‘Genetically Engineered Food Right-to-Know Act,’ mandates that all food containing genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, be clearly labeled. It has bipartisan support in the U.S. Senate, including from that body’s lone farmer, Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont.” With respect to animal production issues, a news release yesterday from Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D., N.Y.) stated that, “Senators [Gillibrand,] Dianne Feinstein, and Susan Collins today introduced bipartisan legislation aimed at combating antimicrobial drug resistance.  The Antimicrobial Data Collection Act calls for increased data collection by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), enhanced transparency and public awareness of antimicrobial drug use in agriculture and strengthened FDA accountability regarding unsafe antimicrobial drug use.” The release added that, “Specifically, the legislation requires a pilot program to look into new data sources on antibiotics used on food producing animals.”   Egg Bill Recent news reports have indicated that Sen. Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D., Mich.) will not include a bill that she has cosponsored to establish a national standard for the humane treatment of egg-laying hens and the labeling of eggs in the Committee’s Farm Bill draft. Chad Gregory, president of United Egg Producers, made the following comments yesterday in an emailed statement to FarmPolicy.com: “Egg farmers appreciate the efforts of Chairwoman Stabenow to try to help not only the egg farmers in her state, but in all 50 states. We are appreciative also of Senator Feinstein and her Senate co-sponsors for her leadership in getting our Egg Bill introduced in the Senate, as it also has been introduced in the House,” said Chad Gregory, president of United Egg Producers, which represents farmers who produce nearly 90 percent of all eggs in the U.S. “We can’t begin to express our utter disappointment in our fellow livestock and farm groups –who we’ve always supported in the past — who blocked this legislation that is critical to the egg industry’s survival as we know it … simply because these groups were paranoid that somehow an amendment to the Egg Products Inspection Act would affect them, despite explicit language in the bill which exempts them. “Without this legislation, egg farmers will go out of business; states will lose jobs; consumers will see disruption and price affects in their local grocery stores; and grocers and restaurant companies will find interstate commerce in eggs grinding to a halt. All because of pork and beef farmers, and the American Farm Bureau Federation.” “We are hopeful that Congress, in its wisdom, will still find a way to support American egg farmers, and the consumers who count on the 76 billion eggs produced safely, efficiently and economically every year in this country.”   Budget An update yesterday  at the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Online stated that, “CBO plans to release its updated 10-year baseline projections of federal spending, revenues, and budget deficits on Tuesday, May 14. The projections reflect new information obtained since The Budget and Economic Outlook: Fiscal Years 2013-2023 was issued in February and will be available on CBO’s website Tuesday afternoon.”   Agricultural Economy Reuters writer Sam Nelson reported yesterday that, “Better corn planting weather is expected in the U.S. Midwest over the next week to 10 days following wet weather that has hampered the seeding pace to the slowest in nearly three decades, an agricultural meteorologist said on Wednesday.” Agricultural related tweets from yesterday, which included photos, showed corn planting in Indiana and Ohio, as well as some corn that had emerged in Illinois. A news release yesterday from Sen. Chuck Grassley stated that, “[Sen. Grassley] is pressing the Secretary of Agriculture and the U.S. Trade Representative to engage U.S. trading partners in high-level discussions on breaking down barriers to biotechnology.  Grassley is the former Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee, which has jurisdiction over international trade policy. “‘The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that as much as 90 percent of commodity crop acres utilize seeds improved through modern biotechnology.  Trade disruptions caused by barriers to biotechnology derived crops hurt both American farmers and the international customers they serve,’ the senators wrote to U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and Acting U.S. Trade Representative Demetrios Marantis.”   Immigration Lisa Mascaro and Brian Bennett reported yesterday at the Los Angeles Times Online that, “The immigration reform bill crafted by a bipartisan group of senators has deeply split the Republican minority even as lawmakers prepare to take the first votes on the proposal Thursday. “Alabama’s Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions, a conservative former prosecutor with a courtly drawl, has emerged as the leading opponent of the bill. He is aiming at his GOP colleagues with unusual zeal, and calls out the architects of the bill as, essentially, dishonest.” The Senate Judiciary Committee webpage indicated today that, “The Senate Judiciary Committee will hold its next executive business meeting at 9:30 am on Thursday, May 9, 2013, to consider S. 744, the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act. The bipartisan legislation was introduced on April 17, and the original text can be found here. The first amendment circulated to the bill is the Sponsors’ Amendment, which is expected to be offered at the next executive business meeting. A copy of the Sponsors’ Amendment can be viewed here. This document shows changes to the bill as introduced. “The deadline to file amendments was 5 p.m. on May 7, 2013. All filed amendments can be viewed here, and additional information on the history of immigration reform can be viewed here.”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    May 6 Farm Bill; Egg Bill; Ag Economy; Biofuels; Budget; and, Immigration- Monday Posted By Keith Good On May 6, 2013  Farm Bill- Policy Issues Chris Clayton reported on Friday at the DTN Ag Policy Blog that, “House Majority Leader Eric Cantor apparently won’t press another pause button on the farm bill. “Cantor, a Republican from Virginia, sent a memo out Friday to other House Republicans. In it, Cantor outlined several key agenda items for the spring and summer, including another repeal vote on Obamacare, legislation to avoid rising interest rates for student loans and a bill to require the Securities and Exchange Commission to conduct more cost-benefit analysis for rule-making. “In his memo, Cantor also stated on the summer agenda ‘and we will consider a farm bill produced by the Agriculture Committee and Frank Lucas.’” Mr. Clayton added that, “The House Ag Committee is set for a May 15 markup for the farm bill and shooting to reduce the projected 10-year spending by $38 billion compared to current budget estimates.” Erik Wasson reported on Saturday at The Hill’s On the Money Blog that, “Last year, the Senate passed a five-year farm bill 64 to 35 only to see it die in the House because conservatives opposed the funding levels for food stamps. “Democrats believe the failure of the farm bill helped them retain the majority in the 2012 election, and are hoping for a repeat as they enter the 2014 election cycle. “‘There is no question that the House refusal to take up farm bill helped Democrats retain the Senate,’ said one senior Senate Democratic aide. ‘Democrats see an opportunity to make headway in red states and rural America.’” The update added that, “GOP leaders refused to bring up a five-year farm bill last year, but are sending strong signals that they won’t let Democrats use the issue against them again…[B]ut passage of a sweeping farm bill is no sure thing in the House.Conservative groups decry the farm subsidies as corporate welfare and have pushed for deep cuts to food stamps that Democrats are unlikely to accept. “In the meantime, Senate Democrats are moving full-steam ahead with legislation that won wide, bipartisan approval last year.” Mitch Lies reported on Thursday at the Capital Press Online that, “U.S. Rep. Kurt Schrader, D-Ore., said he is optimistic over prospects Congress will send a farm bill to the desk of President Barack Obama this year. “‘There seems to be a new energy that was lacking last time from the leadership and the chair of the (agriculture) committee,’ Schrader said in the May 1 interview with Capital Press.” The article added that, “‘My biggest job has been to push back and make sure they don’t go after the specialty crop title for additional savings,’ he said. “Another amendment he plans would cap the bill’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program cuts in the $4 billion range, similar to cuts proposed in the farm bill the Senate passed last year. “‘The (proposed) idea of taking $28 or $30 billion out of SNAP isn’t going to fly,’ he said.” Mr. Lies also noted that, “Schrader said he also is working on an amendment with Rep. Reid Ribble, R-Wis., to establish a national checkoff program for organic producers.” More specifically on nutrition issues, Chris Clayton reported on Friday at DTN that, “As both [House and Senate Ag] committees again wade into the farm bill this month, committee-driven proposals on SNAP suggest cuts could range from $4.5 billion to $20 billion over 10 years. At least one other proposal in the House and Senate would cut $30 billion over 10 years.” “In the Senate, Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., is still shooting for $4.5 billion in savings and holding the line on cuts to SNAP. Stabenow has said the majority of the Senate won’t go along with proposals to change eligibility or the structure of SNAP benefits. “In the House, Lucas wants to achieve $20 billion in cuts to nutrition programs. Eliminating broad-based categorical eligibility could save $10-$12 billion over 10 years by eliminating future enrollment of 2-3 million people. In general, those people would still qualify under the enrollment guidelines, but might not do so.” A news release Friday from Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D., N.Y.) stated that, “[Sen. Gillibrand] is leading a coalition of one-third of her Senate colleagues pushing the Agriculture Committee to fully fund the nation’s food stamp program and restore the already proposed cuts. Senator Gillibrand also announced her plans to introduce an amendment to the Farm Bill to restore the proposed Senate cuts, as she did last year when the bill was on the Senate floor.”  (See a related letter sent on Friday to Senate Ag Committee leaders on SNAP issues, which was signed by 33 Senators). Meanwhile, Brian Gehring reported on Thursday at The Bismarck Tribune Online that, “With Congress set to begin work on the 2013 farm bill as early as next Thursday, Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., said his message will be clear — crop insurance will be more important to farmers than the farm bill as a whole. “Hoeven hosted a pair of meetings with dozens of state agriculture leaders in Fargo and Bismarck Thursday to discuss, in particular, prevented planting provisions within the crop insurance program.” Thomas P. Zacharias, Ph.D., the president of National Crop Insurance Services and former associate professor at Iowa State University, indicated in a column posted on Friday at Roll Call Online that, “Indemnities to farmers cost about $17 billion. Thanks to crop insurance’s design, these indemnities were not completely borne by taxpayers because farmers and insurers picked up a major portion of the costs and sustained significant economic losses. “Farmers had insurance deductibles so they shouldered at least $12.7 billion in losses before they collected a single check from their insurance companies. Not exactly ‘laughing all the way to the bank.’” “When combined with the $4.1 billion farmers paid out of their own pockets to purchase crop insurance last year, total farmer investment neared $17 billion. To any reasonable person, that constitutes ‘paying their fair share.’” Dr. Zacharias explained that, “It is also important to note that when crop insurance premiums exceed losses, the government sees underwriting gains that help offset payments in bad years. In fact, the government experienced nearly $4 billion in gains from 2001 to 2010. “Perhaps most important of all, Congress was not asked to fund an ad hoc disaster bill despite the historic devastation endured by our agricultural producers. “That is in stark contrast to the days before the current crop insurance system. In fact, 42 ad hoc disaster bills totaling $70 billion have been passed since 1989, according to the Congressional Research Service.” And with respect to executive branch perspective on the Farm Bill, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack indicated in a column on Friday at the USDA Blog that, “As Congress returns to Washington in the coming days, leaders from both parties have signaled a willingness to come together and get a Food, Farm and Jobs Bill passed.  That is promising news. USDA intends to provide whatever technical assistance we can to help Congress pass a long-term, comprehensive bill.” And a news release Friday from USDA indicated that, “Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack today announced new rules to better target Community Connect broadband grants to areas where they are needed the most. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) remains focused on carrying out its mission, despite a time of significant budget uncertainty. Today’s announcement is one part of the Department’s efforts to strengthen the rural economy.”   Egg Bill David Rogers reported on Friday at Politico that, “If hens are given enough room to stretch their wings and scratch, what will the sows be demanding next? “That’s the barnyard buzz these days with farm bill markups starting soon in Congress and the prospect that new national standards for egg production will be added to the mix. “Under pressure from producers at home, Senate Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) is leaning strongly in that direction, judging from talks between her top staff and agriculture lobbyists Tuesday. And there’s been a flurry of activity since in anticipation of a fight when the Senate panel begins voting, possibly as early as next Thursday.” The article noted that, “‘Egg producers are struggling with a patchwork of regulations that vary from state to state, and having one uniform national standard is critically important to them,’ said Cullen Schwarz, a Stabenow spokesman. ‘We’re working with stakeholders and Agriculture Committee members to find a solution to help keep American egg producers in business and avoid losing jobs in the industry.’” Mr. Rogers pointed out that, “Nonetheless, powerful pork and beef cattle lobbies are up in arms, fearing the precedent, they say, of Congress dictating housing for livestock. Just as important perhaps is their antipathy to giving the Humane Society a foot in the door on farm policy.” Friday’s article noted that, “‘The lesson is you can pick up the phone and find common ground,’ said Chad Gregory, president of the UEP [United Egg Producers]. Proponents also point out that the language amends the 1970 Egg Products Inspection Act, which is unique in that the Food and Drug Administration is charged with the inspections of the hens –making it less of a precedent for other livestock. “‘It’s insane, ludicrous for a staff person of NCBA [National Cattlemen’s Beef Association] or NPPC [National Pork Producers Council] to be deciding the fate of a family egg business that has been in business for several generations,’ said Gregory. ‘What right do they have as a staff person to decide someone else’s future? This egg bill has nothing to do with them!’” The egg bill was also a topic of discussion on Friday’s AgriTalk radio program with Mike Adams.  Nebraska GOP Senator Mike Johanns stated on Friday’s show that, “The other thing I’ll tell you—and this is pretty strong, but I feel very strongly about this—if this language goes into the mark on the farm bill, it will bring the farm bill down.” Ellyn Ferguson reported on Friday at Roll Call Online that, “Egg producers in Michigan, a top 10 egg-producing state, support putting the national agreement in federal law which, if approved, would pre-empt more stringent requirements voters approved in a ballot initiative. The agreement also would supersede similar state laws on laying hens in Ohio, Oregon and Washington.” The Roll Call article noted that, “[Rep. Kurt Schrader (D., Ore.)], a former veterinarian who sits on the House Agriculture Committee, introduced similar legislation last year. He found few allies on the committee when the panel wrote its farm bill. Instead, the committee adopted an amendment by Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, that would have prevented states such as California from requiring out-of-state agricultural goods to meet their agricultural production and manufacturing laws in order to be sold in their jurisdictions. Iowa is the nation’s top egg and pork producing state.” (Note: To listen to the full discussion leading up to the vote on the King Amendment that took place during last year’s House Ag Committee markup, just click here (MP3- 23:00).  The clip includes remarks from Reps. Steve King (R., Iowa), Kurt Schrader (D., Ore.),Dennis Cardoza (D., Calif.- since retired), Bob Goodlatte (R., Va.), Chairman Frank Lucas (R., Okla.), Ranking Member Collin Peterson (D., Minn.), Mike Conaway (R., Tex.), and Marlin Stutzman (R., Ind.)). And, a recent statement from UEP on the egg bill noted in part that, “‘The Egg Bill only affects egg farmers and the egg industry. The bill says so explicitly,’ [Chad Gregory, president of UEP] said.  “This bill is needed to save family egg farms and protect interstate commerce in eggs, at no cost to taxpayers. It’s legislation that the overwhelming majority of egg farmers support and need. It has the support of many animal welfare groups as well as consumer groups such as the National Consumers League and the Consumer Federation of America.  The bill is based on sound science. A nearly identical bill introduced last year received support from the American Veterinary Medical Association, the Association of Avian Veterinarians and the American Association of Avian Pathologists. ” UEP also released a brief video on Friday explaining some aspects of the “egg bill.”   Agricultural Economy The front page of Saturday’s Des Moines Register included a photo/graphic with the heading, “A Late Start;” and, a corresponding article by Perry Beeman indicated that, “In fact, the planting season is off to its slowest start since flood-wracked 1993, the U.S. Department of Agriculture reports. Nationally, we haven’t seen such a paltry amount of seed in the ground this time of year since 1984. “This spring’s fickle weather has analysts wondering if the near-record corn planting that seems to be in store will result in a lesser yield than expected. That could affect more than just the corn market, with everything from ethanol production to beef prices hanging in the balance.” Mr. Beeman noted that, “Planting next week still gives farmers time to get much of the seed in the ground before Friday, the informal deadline set by Iowa State University for farmers who want a full yield. But they are likely to plant into the week after.” The Register article added that, “[Chad Hart, Extension economist at Iowa State University] said he’s guessing the late planting will mean a drop of 1 percent to 2 percent in yield in Iowa. Still, last year’s Iowa average yield of 137 bushels per acre should balloon to 170 this year, still a bit shy of what many farmers want. “Nationally, Hart expects an average of 140, up from 123 last year.” Recent agricultural related tweets, which included photos, depicted corn being planted in Ohio (May 3), Illinois (May 2), and Nebraska- here (May 4) and here (May 4).  However, snow was shown in Wisconsin  (May 3) and Iowa (May 3). A news release Friday from University of Arkansas Extension stated that, “Friday’s snowfall in northwest Arkansas was a record setter. Never before had snow been recorded in May in Arkansas, according to the National Weather Service.” Meanwhile, AP writer Sharon Cohen reported on Saturday that, “The merciless drought that ravaged large sections of the Midwest and Plains is over, disappearing this spring in a dramatic weather reversal: heavy rains and floods swamping fields with mud in many areas. But some farmers and ranchers in parts of the West and the Plains, including southwest Oklahoma, are pondering the prospect of another year of a desert-like landscape and a disappointing harvest. “It’s far too soon for predictions. Rain this winter and spring blanketed central and eastern Oklahoma, bringing relief to a state that marked its hottest year ever in 2012 and its driest May-through-December on record, according to Gary McManus, associate state climatologist. But the western third of Oklahoma, including the Panhandle, remains gripped by drought, along with stretches of the central Plains from South Dakota down to west Texas and parts of New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming and Nevada.” In other news, Reuters writer Christine Stebbins reported on Friday that, “U.S. grain farmers have enjoyed a rare combination of soaring prices and land values since 2009 but if incomes dip as expected they should be careful not to fall into the trap of borrowing against inflated land values, the Kansas City Federal Reserve said in a report on Friday.” With respect to trade issues, Dow Jones news reported on Friday that, “Brazil hopes to reach an agreement to export corn to China when Brazil’s agriculture minister visits the Asian state next week, state-controlled Xinhua News Agency reported Friday.”   Biofuels Ellyn Ferguson reported on Friday at Roll Call Online that, “A House panel’s decision to look back at mandates set in the 2007 renewable-energy law could be a pivotal moment for industries hoping to slow down growth in the ethanol industry. “The Energy and Commerce Committee, which helped write the Renewable Fuel Standard, is taking comments on the effect of mandates for commercial use of conventional ethanol, cellulosic ethanol, advanced biofuels and biodiesel. So far, the panel has issued two white papers on the policy and plans three more in a bipartisan attempt to depict RFS successes and failures. Committee leaders also may use the process to provide guidance to the EPA, which reviews and sets the renewable-fuel mandates.”   Budget Pete Kasperowicz reported on Friday at The Hill’s Floor Action Blog that, “Congress returns from a week off to consider an issue that could dominate the agenda for much of the summer — the debt ceiling. “The House will start the process by considering a Republican bill that would let the government borrow money in excess of the debt limit, in the event the government bumps up against that limit. But it would only allow this borrowing to help pay for interest on the national debt or to make interest payments related to the Social Security trust fund. “The measure is a backup plan in case the two parties fail to reach an agreement on the debt ceiling. While a deal is still expected, the road ahead runs through what has become rough but familiar terrain.”   Immigration Russell Berman reported yesterday at The Hill Online that, “The push for immigration reform enters a crucial period when Congress returns this week, as Senate legislation faces the gauntlet of a committee mark-up and House negotiators try to complete their own long-awaited bill.”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter May 3 Farm Bill; Egg Bill; Ag Economy; Biofuels; Bees; and, Regs- Friday Posted By Keith Good On May 3, 2013  Farm Bill- Policy Issues In a radio interview earlier this week with Mick Kjar (Ag News 890, Terry Loomis, Farm Director (Fargo, ND)), Senate Agriculture Committee member John Hoeven (R., N.D.) discussed the potential timing of the Farm Bill. Sen. Hoeven noted that, “We had a meeting last Thursday, and we’re going to try to be, in our Ag Committee, marking up the [Farm] bill by the end of next week.” If not by the end of next week, Sen. Hoeven added, “then we are going to start essentially the 13th –that week of the 13th…[W]e want to be to the Senate floor, in front of the full Senate in May.” (Ag News 890 audio clip here (MP3- 1:08)). And speaking yesterday on the Agriculture Today radio program (The Red River Farm Network), Sen. Hoeven indicated that, “The Farm Bill is still going to emphasize crop insurance first.” (Agriculture Today audio clip here (MP3- 0:15)). A news release Wednesday from Sen. Mark Udall (D., Colo.) stated that, “Six members of the Colorado congressional delegation are urging leaders of the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives Agriculture committees to pass a five-year Farm Bill. In a bipartisan and bicameral letter today, Senators Mark Udall and Michael Bennet [D] and Representatives Scott Tipton [R], Mike Coffman [R], Cory Gardner [R] and Ed Perlmutter [D] called the bill crucial for farmers, ranchers and rural economies across the state.” Dan Mayfield reported yesterday at Albuquerque Business First Online that, “About 125 ranchers, farmers, sportsmen, dairy farmers, state employees and others joined [Rep. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D., N.M.)] to talk about the upcoming votes she will make on the House Committee on Agriculture on the 2013 Farm Bill at the New Mexico State University branch in Albuquerque.” The update stated that, “‘We’re going to be looking at how to manage cuts. That’s going to be largely what we’ll be talking about,’ Lujan Grisham said. ‘If there ever is a state that needs more support, it’s New Mexico.’” “After several mentioned that federal cuts due to sequestration had forced the state to cancel several SNAP education programs, Lujan Grisham said she would support an amendment that would fund those programs,” the article said. Daniel Flatley reported yesterday at The Watertown Daily Times (N.Y.) Online that, “[Rep. Bill Owens (D., N.Y.), speaking at spring lunch of the Watertown Noon Rotary at the Rutland Congregational Church] said he expected the farm bill to come before the Agricultural Committee by May 15, in accordance with the wishes of committee Chairman Frank Lucas, R-Okla., and to make it through the committee process with few changes. “He predicted the bill likely will meet significant challenges on the House floor, however.” Meanwhile, Daniel Looker reported earlier this week at Agriculture.com that, “This year, the farm bill debate has been behind the scenes, as members of congressional agriculture committees wrestle with food stamp spending and regional differences over commodity programs. Farm groups expect the Senate Agriculture Committee to meet next week to finalize a new bill that will be similar to last year’s except for the commodity title. Leaders of the House Agriculture Committee expect to mark up their bill on May 15. “One holdup is that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), which projects the estimated costs of farm bill programs over 10 years, hasn’t quite finished its latest score, Mary Kay Thatcher of the American Farm Bureau Federation told Agriculture.com Wednesday.” In his detailed article, Mr. Looker explained that, “Senate Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow met with farm groups this week to share some of her plans for the farm bill, Farm Bureau’s Thatcher said. Stabenow plans to keep changes to crop insurance made with amendments during final passage of the Senate’s bill, including one advanced by Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) that reduces insurance premium subsidies for farmers with adjusted gross income above $750,000. “‘Stabenow has already said that and crop insurance (conservation) compliance will be in the bill,’ Thatcher said.” In a letter this week to Senate Agriculture Committee leaders, the Independent Community Bankers of America, along with over 40 other organizations, noted that, “For many years, members of the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee have contributed to a strong and vibrant federal crop insurance program. As your Committee and the full Senate prepare to consider a comprehensive farm bill, we write to express our support for crop insurance and opposition to provisions that will limit its effectiveness.” “Limiting crop insurance support to producers of a certain size creates barriers to participation for producers trying to obtain this risk management protection and impacts the financial health of the agricultural community. Insurance products offered through federal crop insurance are key to food security, allowing farmers and ranchers to secure operating capital from lenders each year and produce food for consumers around the world. Agricultural producers keep the rural economy on track, purchasing needed inputs and equipment and supporting jobs throughout rural America. Without the risk protection provided by federal crop insurance, agricultural lenders would be forced to increase underwriting standards, increase costs to offset risk and reduce credit availability in some areas of the country to some producers,” the letter said. Also on the crop insurance issue, a news release this week from USDA’s Risk Management Agency indicated that, “USDA has released a new pilot federal crop insurance plan that utilizes a rainfall index to provide coverage for annual forage crops. The Rainfall Index – Annual Forage Insurance Plan is being tested in six states and covers crops planted annually and are used for livestock feed or fodder. It is available in all counties in Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota, and North Dakota. Catastrophic Risk Protection and buyup levels are available under the plan.” In other developments, Ron Nixon reported in today’s New York Times that, “A proposal by the Obama administration to overhaul the international food aid program has set off a jurisdictional fight among members of several House and Senate committees, threatening to derail the most significant change to the program since it was created nearly 60 years ago…[T]he food aid money is currently part of the Agriculture Department’s budget, but President Obama’s proposal would transfer it to the foreign affairs budget, where it would be overseen by the Agency for International Development. The reorganization would also mean that Congressional oversight of the program would shift from the House and Senate appropriations subcommittees on agriculture to theappropriations subcommittees on foreign operations.” Today’s article noted that, “But members of the House and Senate agriculture subcommittees are skeptical. “During hearings last week, Representative Robert B. Aderholt, Republican of Alabama, the chairman of the House agriculture subcommittee, said he was concerned that removing food aid from the agriculture budget would hurt American farmers. “Representative Sam Farr of California, the committee’s ranking Democrat, also questioned the transfer, raising concerns about the subcommittee losing oversight of the program.” Mr. Nixon added that, “There has been a similar response from members of the Senate agriculture subcommittee. Senator Mark Pryor, Democrat of Arkansas, the chairman of the subcommittee, along with Senator Roy Blunt of Missouri, the ranking Republican, both said that they were opposed to transferring food aid dollars out of the agriculture budget.” Also, Ben Goad reported yesterday at The Hill’s RegWatch Blog that, “Agricultural groups and consumer advocates implored the Obama administration on Thursday to press forward with contentious meat labeling regulations despite the threat of damaging international trade sanctions. “A coalition of farmers and consumer rights groups called on the U.S. Department of Agriculture to finalize a strengthened set of rules requiring meat producers to attach country-of-origin labels (COOL) to their products.” And, a news release yesterday from Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D., N.Y.) stated that, “Today, [Sen. Gillibrand], a member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, and U.S. Representative Richard Hanna applauded the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) finalization this week of a first-ever Commercial Item Description (CID) for Greek yogurt…[P]reviously, USDA Commercial Item Descriptions for yogurt did not differentiate between Greek and other types of yogurt. The new description specifically outlines specific Greek yogurt qualities such as being ‘high-protein’ and ‘strained.’” With respect to nutrition, Kimberly Gasuras reported this week at the Bucyrus Telegraph-Forum (Ohio) Online that, “Bucyrus City Schools has added dinner to its menu of meals served to students. “The after-school dinner program has been launched as a pilot program until May 9 and is being served to students in the BEST (Building Excellent Students Together) after-school program.” Referencing last week’s New York Times article on minority farmers’ claims of discrimination by USDA, Rep. Steve King (R., Iowa), the Chairman of the House Agriculture Subcommittee on Operations, Oversight, and Nutrition, noted in a tweet yesterday that, “Congress must act.” The jurisdiction of the subcommittee Rep. King chairs includes: “Agency oversight, review and analysis, special investigations, food stamps, nutrition and consumer programs.” In trade developments, Jennifer Epstein reported yesterday at Politico that, “President Barack Obama rounded out his second-term Cabinet on Thursday by nominating Penny Pritzker as his new Commerce secretary and Michael Froman to be the next U.S. trade representative.” A separate report yesterday at The Hill’s On the Money Blog indicated that the nominations garnered support from both business groups and lawmakers.   Egg Bill Ken Anderson reported yesterday at Brownfield that, “The president of Nebraska Farm Bureau says federal legislation dictating the size of cages for egg-laying hens ‘has no place in the Farm Bill.’ “Steve Nelson was reacting to reports that Senate Ag Committee chair Debbie Stabenow plans to include the so-called Egg Bill in her markup of the Senate Farm Bill, which is expected to take place next week.” Yesterday’s update added that, “‘The fact that Debbie Stabenow would even consider starting the discussion on a new farm bill by including legislation initiated and advocated for by extremist organizations is a slap in the face to American farm families,’ Nelson says.  ‘Including legislation to set a ‘one size fits all’ standard for the housing and treatment of egg-laying hens would set a dangerous precedent and only encourage further bullying of farm families by activists through baseless legal actions and public smear campaigns.’ “Nelson says such action by Stabenow ‘threatens the prospects of passing a much needed farm bill.’”   Agricultural Economy Emiko Terazono and Gregory Meyer reported yesterday at The Financial Times Online that, “Corn prices hit a one-month high as fears of tighter supplies heightened because planting was delayed by rain and snow in the US Midwest…[A]lthough farmers have until the middle of May to plant new crop corn, agricultural trading houses and analysts are increasingly concerned about the impact of the weather on the next US harvest.” Agricultural related tweets yesterday, which included photos, depicted the snow on farms in Minnesota and Iowa, while a separate tweet captured corn being planted yesterday near Evansville, Ind. An update yesterday from University of Missouri Extension stated that, “Plummeting temperatures in Missouri could mean poor stands of corn and seed damage. “The unseasonable weather might cause chilling injury to corn seeds prior to emergence, said University of Missouri Extension agronomy specialist Bill Wiebold.” Also, an update at the National Climatic Data Center (NOAA) yesterday pointed out that, “According to the April 30, 2013 U.S. Drought Monitor, moderate to exceptional drought covers 46.9% of the contiguous United States, a decrease from last week’s 47.3%.” And Perry Beeman reported yesterday at The Des Moines Register Online that, “After weeks of steady improvement, drought conditions in Iowa remained unchanged in the week that ended Tuesday, the U.S. Drought Monitor reported. “Nearly 54 percent of the state, generally in western counties, remained either abnormally dry or in drought. Three months ago, the whole state was.”   Biofuels A news release yesterday from the National Chicken Council (NCC) stated that, “The [NCC] this week provided detailed comments to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce in response to a white paper the committee issued that asked nine questions for agricultural sector stakeholders specifically addressing the impacts of the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS).” University of Illinois Agricultural Economists Scott Irwin and Darrel Good posted an update yesterday at the farmdoc daily blog (“Brazilian Ethanol Imports – Implications for U.S. Ethanol and Corn Demand”), which noted that, “The current domestic ethanol market is dominated by the ongoing collision between the RFS for renewable biofuels and the E10 blend wall. Given the slow pace of market penetration of E15 and E85, the RFS likely exceeds the blend wall for ethanol in all blends in 2013. The difference between the magnitude of the RFS for renewable biofuels in 2013 (13.8 billion gallons) and the effective blend wall (estimated at 12.9 billion gallons) will be addressed with the use of blending credits accumulated from previous discretionary ethanol blending, some increase in higher blends, or possibly by discretionary blending of biomass-based biodiesel if those blending margins become positive. “Ethanol blended in the fuel supply can be produced domestically or imported from Brazil (or indirectly from Brazil through Caribbean countries). Under a blend wall constraint, imported ethanol from Brazil replaces domestically produced ethanol in the fuel supply. The magnitude of those imports, then, has important implications for the domestic ethanol industry and the demand for corn. The magnitude of U.S. ethanol imports are determined by both supply and demand considerations. The supply of Brazilian ethanol available to export to the U.S. equals Brazilian production minus domestic Brazilian consumption minus exports to other countries. Brazilian ethanol production in 2013 is expected to be larger than the 5.6 billion gallons of the past two years due to an abundant sugar cane crop and lower sugar prices. Production may be nearer the seven billion gallons of 2010. On the other hand, the ethanol blend in the Brazilian fuel supply is scheduled to increase starting next month. The U.S. imported about 490 million gallons of Brazilian ethanol in 2012. Peak imports were at 730 million gallons in 2006. On balance, the supply of Brazilian ethanol available for export to the U.S. this year is not expected to constrain imports.” After a more detailed analysis, yesterday’s farmdoc update concluded by pointed out that, “Brazilian ethanol imports in 2013 of 600 million gallons are 400 million gallons larger than our earlier forecast and imply: 1. 400 million fewer gallons of domestic ethanol production, 2. 145 million fewer bushels of corn consumption, and 3. A faster drawdown in ethanol blending credits. “This analysis also underscores the importance of the rate of growth in consumption of E85. A more rapid growth rate would expand the ethanol blend wall allowing larger domestic ethanol production and larger corn consumption. We will examine the conditions necessary for E85 expansion in a future post.”   Bee Study John M. Broder reported in today’s New York Times that, “The devastation of American honeybee colonies is the result of a complex stew of factors, including pesticides, parasites, poor nutrition and a lack of genetic diversity, according to a comprehensive federal study published on Thursday. The problems affect pollination of American agricultural products worth tens of billions of dollars a year. “The report does not place more weight on one factor over another, and recommends a range of actions and further research.”   Regulations A news release yesterday from the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) stated that, “The [NCBA] is appalled to learn that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) continues to illegally release information on cattle operations to the activist groups Earth Justice, the Pew Charitable Trust and the Natural Resources Defense Council. In this latest action, the agency again admitted it had released too much information on livestock producers, specifically producers from Montana and Nebraska. This action happened less a month after the agency found it had released too much information on livestock producers in 10 states.”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    May 2 Ag Economy; Egg Bill; Farm Bill; Biofuels; Budget; Regs; and, Immigration- Thursday Posted By Keith Good On May 2, 2013  Agricultural Economy A Purdue University news release indicated yesterday that, “Last year, farmers didn’t have nearly enough rain for their wilted, drought-ravaged crops. So far this year, they have too much of it – so much that they can’t get into their fields to work them for planting.” The update explained that, “[Purdue Extension agronomist Tony Vyn] advises farmers anxious to get into their fields not to succumb to three common tillage temptations: tilling too early or too often and when it’s too wet. He says farmers need to be patient and wait for a break in the weather. “That break will come, but slowly. The outlook for the first half of May is continued frequent rainfall with below-normal temperatures for Indiana, said the State Climate Office, based at Purdue University. Both temperature and rainfall should moderate to more typical May conditions later in the month… [W]hen farmers do get into their fields, [Purdue Extension corn specialist Bob Nielsen] says 25 percent to 30 percent of the corn crop could be planted in a week and the rest of it a week later – still in time for maximum yield potential.” The National Weather Service noted yesterday that, “A slow moving storm system is expected to stall over Illinois Thursday through Sunday bringing a prolonged period of rainfall to central and southeast Illinois.” And an Investor’s Soapbox update from Credit Suisse, which was posted yesterday at Barron’s Online, stated that, “Time is running out before late planting affects potential yields. Despite some favorable weather over the past weekend enabling farmers to do some preliminary fieldwork, the latest crop progress report clearly shows we are already in for a ‘late’ planting season. It is still entirely possible that farmers will be able to populate fields expeditiously over the next two weeks, but that probability is clearly declining.” Yesterday’s update noted that, “We believe the most material trends to monitor are in the heart of the ‘I-States,’ including Illinois, Indiana and Iowa, which have on average planted just about 1% of projected corn acreage. In our view, these states are among the most integral to the yield recovery (especially Illinois and Indiana) as they were among the states most affected by the 2012 drought and typically generate above-trend yields.” Agricultural related tweets from Illinois, which included photos, indicate that corn planting was underway yesterday, see here, here, and here. Meanwhile, Bloomberg writer Tony C. Dreibus reported yesterday that, “Wheat output in Oklahoma, the second- biggest U.S. grower of winter varieties, may tumble 45 percent this year because of drought and freeze damage, said Debbie Wedel, a spokeswoman for the Oklahoma Wheat Commission.” In trade news, Reuters writer Doug Palmer reported earlier this week that, “The United States said on Tuesday it was prepared to examine how agricultural policy reform could boost global food security as part of a package of commitments at the World Trade Organization’s upcoming meeting in December. “‘The United States agrees with India and other proponents that enhancing food security in developing countries is indeed an important issue for this body to address,’ U.S. Ambassador to the WTO Michael Punke said in Geneva, according to a text of his remarks released in Washington.”   Egg Bill An industry spokesman has confirmed to FarmPolicy.com that Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D., Mich.) could push to include a bill that she has cosponsored to establish a national standard for the humane treatment of egg-laying hens and the labeling of eggs in the markup of the Farm Bill. Known as the “Egg Bill,” the legislation is cosponsored by Chairwoman Stabenow, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D., Cailf.), Sen. Susan Collins (R., Maine) and Rep. Kurt Schrader (D., Ore). Chad Gregory, president, United Egg Producers (UEP) noted yesterday in a conversation with FarmPolicy.com that, “Egg farmers and the egg industry are an integral part of American agriculture…and we are major customers of corn, soybean and wheat farmers who have a stake in a thriving egg industry to sell their crops to.  Without this egg bill, interstate commerce in eggs will collapse, driving many egg farmers out of business and leaving our industry in chaos with a patchwork of conflicting and contradictory state laws on egg production and sales. That is bad for egg farmers, as well as our fellow farmers who want to continue to do business with us. “This is legislation that only applies to eggs. It is supported by an overwhelming majority of egg farmers nationwide, and UEP which represents over 90 percent of egg production in the U.S.  For other sectors of American agriculture to oppose our egg bill– when it has no direct affect on them — is unconscionable. Egg farmers would never try to intercede against legislation that pork, beef or other farm groups needed to survive. We only ask that they give our egg farmers the same consideration.” And Tom Steever reported yesterday at Brownfield that, “A United Egg Producers (UEP) member says the so-called egg bill proposed to be part of the next farm bill will provide an important standard across the U.S. “Joe Miller, the general counsel for egg producer Rose Acre Farms, says statutes in several states left questions that resulted in virtually halting the construction of new chicken houses because producers don’t know what to build. Those statutes stipulated cage sizes, but they differed from state to state. Miller told Brownfield Ag News that the proposed measure fixes that. The Brownfield update also included an audio replay of a brief interview with Mr. Miller.   Farm Bill Sanford J. Schmidt reported this week at The Telegraph (Alton, Il.) Online that, “Sen. Mark Kirk [R., Il.] met Tuesday with his Agriculture Advisory Board at the National Corn-to-Ethanol Center at University Park on the campus of Southern Illinois University Edwardsville.” The article noted that, “Kirk also said a Republican farm bill likely would cost less than the Democratic version. “‘The Democratic version will pass the Senate and fail in the House. The Republican version would pass the House but fail in the Senate,’ he said. “Therefore, he is hoping a reasonable compromise can be worked out before any bill goes before either chamber.” The Telegraph article added that, “Among cost reductions Kirk would like to see are reductions in farm subsidies by testing the financial means of those who receive subsidies.” Angenene Gibbs reported this week at the Sapulpa Daily Herald (Okla.) Online that at a town hall meeting on Monday, in reference to the Farm Bill, House Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas (R., Okla.) noted that, “‘When we get to the floor, it will get exciting,’ he said. ‘Some of my more liberal colleagues don’t want to spend money on rural America. Conservative colleagues don’t want to spend money because there is no money to spend.’” Stephen Koranda reported yesterday at KMUW- 89.1 (Wichita, Kans.- public radio) that, “Kansas Senator Jerry Moran says the next federal farm bill is likely to cut back or eliminate some farm subsidies. The Republican from Manhattan says that while many lawmakers are focused on cutting spending, he’s hoping to protect money allocated to support the federal crop insurance program. “Moran says that Kansas farmers’ need for crop insurance has been shown in recent years, with drought and late spring freezes among the challenges they’ve been facing. “‘Crop insurance is a tool, a public-private partnership that farmers pay premiums, but the product is subsidized so that it’s affordable, allowing farmers to put seed back in the ground and start another crop when one fails,’ Moran says.” And, Tony Brown reported this week at the Maryville Daily Forum (Mo.) Online that, “U.S. Rep. Sam Graves [R], whose 6th District now embraces virtually all of northern Missouri, was in Maryville Monday as part of a swing through the northwest part of the state focusing on small business.” The article added that, “Longstanding attempts to strip most or all farm subsidies out of the bill are likely to succeed this year, [Rep. Graves] said, adding that he hopes subsidies will be replaced by a comprehensive crop insurance program.” “Graves, a professional farmer, said he favors eliminating subsidies and believes a properly administered insurance system will provide adequate stabilization of commodities prices,” the article said. With respect to nutrition issues, a news release yesterday from USDA indicated that, “Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack today highlighted improvements to school meals, a cornerstone of USDA’s efforts to create a generational change to improve childhood nutrition. The Secretary also discussed efforts to create new partnerships with chefs around the country to positively impact the eating habits of children.” Urban C. Lehner noted yesterday in an update at DTN’s An Urban’s Rural View Blog that, “Farm bill politics, they say, are regional, not partisan. But are they right?” Mr. Lehner pointed out that, “The conventional wisdom, alas, ignores food stamps’ role in the farm bill. It’s a leading role — 70% of the bucks — and the Congressional debate over food stamps is always partisan. This year it will, if anything, be more partisan than usual. “To pass a farm bill on the floor of the Republican-controlled House, big cuts in food stamps will be essential. Even the $20 billion over 10 years that ag-committee chair Frank Lucas is planning may not suffice. Programs like food stamps are red meat for the GOP government shrinkers. “To get a farm bill out of the Democratic-controlled Senate, on the other hand, any cuts must be held to a minimum. Even the $4 billion in last year’s Senate bill was a stretch for many Democratic senators, who like big government and see food stamps as both economic stimulus and the least we can do for the poor.” Yesterday’s update added that, “Chances are, then, a House-Senate conference committee would be looking at a gap of at least $16 billion. Let’s say the conferees split the difference. Could a final bill with only $12 billion in food-stamp cuts carry the day in the House? Could one with as much as $12 billion in cuts pass the Senate?” Meanwhile, AP writer Kevin Wang reported yesterday that, “A Wisconsin Assembly committee approved a bill on Tuesday that would limit the amount of food stamp benefits that could be spent on junk food. “Republican Rep. Dean Kaufert, of Neenah, amended his original bill to require people enrolled in the state nutrition assistance program, known as FoodShare or food stamps, to spend at least two-thirds of their monthly benefits on items such as milk, bread and vegetables. They could spend their remaining benefits on any authorized food.” In news regarding conservation, an update posted yesterday at the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition Blog stated that, “Today, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack announced that applications for the fiscal year (FY) 2013 sign up of the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) will be due by May 31.  USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) will accept slightly more than 12 million acres into the program.” And in other news, Reuters writer Charles Abbott reported yesterday that, “A White House plan to modernize the major U.S. food aid program, by donating cash rather than American-grown food, is in trouble after fierce lobbying by farm groups, food processors, shippers and others who set out to sink the idea months before it was unveiled in President Barack Obama’s fiscal 2014 budget. “The administration, which needs congressional approval to make the changes, is discovering that only a few lawmakers are prepared to publicly support the effort to send cash abroad to make the distribution of aid faster and more efficient. “They are outnumbered by lawmakers from both parties who want to kill the initiative or water it down substantially, based on letters sent to the White House and comments made at recent congressional hearings. In one letter 21 senators, including two key committee chairwomen, opposed the changes.”   Biofuels DTN writer Todd Neeley reported yesterday that, “The Renewable Fuels Standard has arguably been one of the most effective economic development tools for rural America, leading to more demand and higher prices for corn and economic growth in some of the poorest counties in the country in the past decade. “A new white paper from the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, however, raises a series of questions about whether the current RFS is in need of reform. The committee’s series of white papers and industry input to the issues raised could be the precursor to RFS reform, although the Obama administration has shown little appetite for changing the law that mandates the use of 36 billion gallons of renewable fuels by 2022.” Mr. Neeley pointed out that, “A number of agriculture and ethanol groups have responded to the committee’s request for input on a number of questions raised in the latest white paper. “In a letter sent to the committee Monday a number of livestock and poultry interest groups make a case that the RFS has interfered with the free market when it comes to ethanol and corn production.” Also yesterday, Darren Goode reported at Politico that, “An effort by ethanol backers to get the Environmental Protection Agency to scale back the amount of advanced biofuels required in the U.S. gasoline supply this year has opened a rift in a decades-old friendship within the biofuels industry. “The Renewable Fuels Association made the request to EPA in an attempt to limit imports of Brazilian-based sugar cane ethanol. “But Michael McAdams, president of the Advanced Biofuels Association, sees RFA’s move as both encroaching on his turf and violating a pledge to protect the EPA-administered renewable fuels mandate at all costs.”   Budget Peter Schroeder reported yesterday at The Hill’s On the Money Blog that, “The Treasury Department is not ready to provide a detailed timeline for when the debt limit needs to be raised. “Matthew Rutherford, the Treasury’s assistant secretary for financial markets, said Wednesday that there are still too many variables at play to determine how long the Treasury could avoid a default on obligations once it reaches its borrowing limit. Rather, he simply said the government would have ‘a period of time’ to avoid default once the debt limit is re-established on May 19.”   Regulations Nebraska GOP Senator Mike Johanns was a guest on yesterday’s AgriTalk radio program with Mike Adams where the conversation focused on the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) use of aerial surveillance over U.S. livestock operations. In part, Sen. Johanns stated that, “I mean, as remarkable as that is, the EPA continues to want to keep the extent of this aerial flyover program very, very close to the vest.  I brought it up in a hearing recently with the acting director. “The one thing I can tell people that I could not tell them a few weeks ago is that there definitely is a program that definitely extends beyond Nebraska.  Now, how much of the aerial surveillance is going on, I don’t know.  We’ll continue pressing to get that information.  But very clearly they have a program, and I also get the impression they’re going to continue to do it.” Sen. Johanns added that, “Well, they have to be targeting livestock operations.  They’re not flying because it’s a beautiful day, that’s for sure.  They fly at a very low altitude.  They are flying over livestock operations, and whether they’re counting cows or not, they’re looking down from on high to see if they can spot something.  They say, well, we don’t do enforcement.  Well, they do. “I mean, that information is then put into the hands of somebody who goes on site and then they start an enforcement process that can lead to fines and penalties.  So what they’re telling us, in my personal opinion, is basically about let’s hide the ball here.  We don’t want to talk about how big this program is, we don’t want to talk about the fact that it does lead to enforcement.  They stick very, very close to their talking points.”   Immigration Yesterday’s AgriTalk discussion  with Mike Adams and Sen. Johanns also touched on immigration issues. Sen. Johanns noted in part that, “The Senate, I do believe, will get the Gang of Eight bill sometime in the fairly immediate future.  I think late spring, early summer this bill is going to be on the floor of the Senate.  I hate to count votes today.  This is such a dynamic process.  A lot of things can change.  A lot of things could change by next week, really. “So I do think we’ll spend many weeks debating this thing.  I don’t think this is going to be one of those bills that comes to the floor and gets a quick vote.  I also think it will be a fairly open amendment process.  That tells me, again, that there will be a lot of amendments, a lot of debate, a lot of votes.  I hope it’s that way.  It needs to be that way.  The House side, if they decide to do this, kind of a step here and a piece over there.  And then the chances of getting a comprehensive bill almost become nonexistent because you’d have such vastly different approaches.”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    May 1 Farm Bill; Ag Economy; Biofuels; Regulations; and, Immigration- Wednesday Posted By Keith Good On May 1, 2013  Farm Bill- Policy Issues Chris Clayton reported yesterday at the DTN Ag Policy Blog that, “The Senate Agriculture Committee hasn’t announced a date yet to mark up the farm bill, but Sen. Chuck Grassley told reporters Tuesday morning the committee will meet next week. “Responding to a question about a mark-up session next week, Grassley, a Republican from Iowa, said, ‘That’s what I’ve heard and that’s what we’ll be ready for.’ “Grassley said most issues moving into the mark up have been resolved outside of the commodity title. ‘I’d say it’s the only title that’s not settled at this point. There’s pretty much agreement on the rest of the bill.’” Mr. Clayton pointed out that, “Grassley acknowledged there would be attempts to reduce crop-insurance subsidies, but he said he didn’t think those would succeed. Grassley said 92% of farmers buy crop insurance. Attempts to limit it would reduce participation and lead to more payments for disaster programs.” The DTN update added that, “Republicans are going to pursue more cuts in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., a member of the committee, has introduced a bill meant to reduce SNAP, — formerly called food stamps — by $30billion over 10 years.” Christopher Doering also reported on this development yesterday at The Des Moines Register Online and explained that, “Grassley said while he hasn’t seen the language of the bill, a recent meeting Democrats and Republicans had with Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee, indicated most parts of the farm bill appear to have been resolved, except for section that deals with crop subsidies. “‘We’re all going to have to accept the fact there’s going to be more savings and it’s going to be tougher to make those savings than it was last year,’ said Grassley. ‘Farmers are telling me the most important thing is to maintain crop insurance.’” Mr. Doering noted that, “The mark-up next week would come nearly a year after the Senate Agriculture Committee completed a farm bill. The full Senate passed a five-year farm bill in June. A month later, the House Agriculture Committee approved its version, but it contained deeper cuts to government nutrition programs than the Senate. The farm bill languished in Congress, leading to an extension of the 2008 law.” Agricultural Economists Gary Schnitkey (University of Illinois) and Carl Zulauf (Ohio State) noted yesterday at the farmdoc daily blog (“Farm Bill Negotiations: Selection between Three Programs”)  that, “After last year’s failed attempt, Congress will again try to pass a Farm Bill this year. Mark up in both the Senate and House Agricultural Committees likely will occur in the near future. Given bills passed last year in the full Senate and by the House Agricultural Committee, along with proposals put forward this year by farm groups, it is possible to gain a feel for the types of programs likely to be included in the Farm Bill. This year, negotiations likely will be around three programs: a revenue program, a target price program, and a supplemental insurance program. A passed Farm Bill likely will include two, if not all three, of these programs, giving farmers choices among the programs. The exact nature of each program will be determined by negotiations.” The professors analyzed these programs in greater detail, and included a summary section at the conclusion of yesterday’s farmdoc update. Meanwhile, Jonathan Knutson reported yesterday at The Daily Republic (Mitchell, S.D.) Online that, “Last fall, for the fourth straight year, Thief River Falls, Minn., farmer Ken Asp chose not to re-enroll some of his farmland in the Conservation Reservation Program. “Enrolling the land into CRP made economic sense when he did it, in some cases as long as 20 years ago. But times have changed, and Asp now can do better, financially, farming the land than letting it sit idle in CRP.” Mr. Knutson added that, “In the past two years alone, the number of CRP acres nationally has dropped from 31.2 million to 27 million. Of the 4.2-million-acre decline, North Dakota and Montana accounted for a whopping 1.6 million acres, or 38 percent. NorthwestMinnesota and parts of South Dakota also have seen large amounts of land leave the program.” The conservation community, represented by over fifty organizations, came together and provided a summary document yesterday, “Conservation Community’s Principles and Recommendations for Strengthening the Farm Bill Conservation Title,” which outlined specific ideas for the conservation portion of the Farm Bill. In part, the summary stated that, “Prices for basic commodities are expected to remain historically high for the foreseeable future as economic growth in the developing world spurs growing demand for food, fiber, and fuel. High prices are already pushing farmers to plant fencerow to fencerow, intensify production on existing farmland, and convert environmentally sensitive land to crop production.” Also, USDA’s Economic Research Service (ERS) released a report yesterday titled, “The Role of Conservation Programs in Drought Risk Adaptation;” ERS noted that, “This report evaluates the extent to which farms facing higher levels of drought risk are more likely to participate in conservation programs, and finds a strong link between drought risk and program participation.” With respect to nutrition issues, an update yesterday from the House Ag Committee noted that, “The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits are fully funded by the federal government, but the program is administered by the states. As such, states that have the resources to provide job training, or believe sufficient jobs are available can require able-bodied SNAP recipients without dependents to work for their benefits.  Or, states can seek to waive the work requirements. Congress provides states $400 million per year to operate employment and training programs targeting specific needs of the low-income SNAP population. “‘I commend my home state of Oklahoma in leading the charge to return SNAP beneficiaries to work by no longer seeking to waive the work requirements in SNAP law.  I hope other states will follow their lead,’” Committee Chairman Frank Lucas said. Josh Hicks reported yesterday at The Federal Eye Blog (Washington Post) that, “The U.S. Department of Agriculture on Monday announced a $4 million plan to increase the use of federal food credits at farmers markets. “The initiative will expand wireless access to qualified retailers that do not already accept payments through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, also known as SNAP, which provides financial assistance to help people with little to no income purchase food.” Also yesterday, a news release from the International Dairy Foods Association stated that, “Food processor, restaurant and retailer groups voiced their strong support last week for the Dairy Freedom Act in a letter to the bill’s authors, Representatives Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) and David Scott (D-GA). The bill would offer the safety net of margin insurance for dairy farmers without forcing them to participate in a supply management program, a provision included in the dairy section of last year’s Senate and House Agriculture Committee Farm Bills.” In news related to animal production, Megan R. Wilson reported yesterday at The Hill’s RegWatch Blog that, “The political arm of the product review magazine Consumer Reports on Tuesday urged lawmakers and federal regulators to take steps to eliminate antibiotic use in healthy animals.” In news relating more specifically to the executive branch, an update yesterday from the University of Arkansas provided an overview of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack’s visit to the Fayetteville campus earlier this week. In addition, AP writer Jeri Clausing reported yesterday that, “The southern New Mexico plant that has been fighting for more than a year for permission to slaughter horses will open soon, unless Congress reinstates a ban on the practice, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said Tuesday.” And the editorial board at the Chicago Tribune yesterday discussed the USDA’s handling of farmer discrimination lawsuits brought against the Department. After referencing the “5,200-word investigative report in Friday’s New York Times” on the issue, the Tribune stated: “Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, a former Democratic governor of Iowa, defended the program, blaming criticism on USDA employees who refuse to admit the agency’s past mistakes. The Justice Department said the program may have headed off even greater expenses. “But that may be wishful thinking. A balance has to be struck between making it feasible for victims of discrimination to get justice and inviting widespread abuse. In this instance the government seems to have erred badly in the direction of making claims too easy.” In addition, DTN Ag Policy Editor Chris Clayton tweeted yesterday that, “White House names Michael Scuse as Acting Deputy Secretary for USDA –No. 2 job. Scuse had been undersecy for farm and foreign programs.”   Agricultural Economy Perry Beeman reported in yesterday’s Des Moines Register that, “Iowa Agriculture Secretary Bill Northey said in an interview that planting will be scattered for the next week because farmers are worried over a forecast that may send soil temperatures plummeting below the 50 degrees that corn needs to germinate…[I]f conditions improve next week, farmers may have a chance to plant before May 10, generally considered the late side of the normal planting window, Northey said.” Ken Anderson reported yesterday at Brownfield that, “Rain is expected to move across the state later this week with highs only in the 40’s on Thursday and Friday. But Iowa State University Extension Agronomist Paul Kassel says there’s still plenty of time to get corn planted and still see bumper yields. “‘We can still use that old May 10th date as a date to be done by,’ Kassel says. ‘There’s even evidence that northwest and north-central Iowa can go even later than that and still achieve maximum yields.’” Tweets yesterday, which included photos, from producers in Illinois and Indiana indicated that some corn was getting planted; and an AP report from yesterday noted that, “Despite the sudden warm weather, Minnesota farmers are still waiting for the chance to get into their fields.” Reuters writer Michael Hirtzer reported yesterday that, “U.S. wheat surged 2 percent on Tuesday, with benchmark futures at the Kansas City Board of Trade climbing to the highest level in seven weeks on concerns scouts on an annual crop tour will find freeze-damaged fields in the top growing state of Kansas.” While a news release Monday from Texas A&M AgriLife Extension noted that, “A late March and three April freezes have hit wheat in its advanced growing stages. But some of the crop still has potential for moderate and good grain production, said Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service specialists after canvassing three primary wheat growing regions.” Yesterday, the USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service released its monthly Agricultural Prices report, which stated in part that: “The corn price, at $6.67 per bushel, is down 46 cents from last month but 33 cents above April 2012 [graph]…the soybeanprice, at $14.20 per bushel, decreased 40 cents from March but is 40 cents above April 2012 [graph]…and…the April price for all wheat, at $7.52 per bushel, is down 26 cents from March but 41 cents above April 2012 [graph].”   Biofuels Ben Geman reported yesterday at The Hill’s Energy Blog that, “A bipartisan group of 14 farm-state senators is pressing the Obama administration to challenge new European duties on U.S. ethanol imports before the World Trade Organization. “In a letter to U.S. trade officials, the lawmakers call the penalties announced in February ‘unprecedented’ and say that European officials failed to make the case that any specific producers or marketers are engaged in ‘dumping.’” Katy Stech reported in today’s Wall Street Journal that, “The South Bend facility was the country’s first major ethanol plant when it opened in 1984, and now it could be the first to get dismantled after filing for bankruptcy. Several other small towns in the Midwest could face a similar scenario as the ethanol industry begins to emerge from one of the toughest markets in its three-decade history. “The U.S. needs roughly 13 billion gallons of ethanol each year because most gasoline sold in the country is blended with 10% ethanol under a government mandate. But demand for gasoline has been weaker since 2008 as people chose to drive less in the recession and prolonged economic recovery, leading to an oversupply of the fuel. Last year’s Midwest drought, meanwhile, drove up the price of corn that plants need to brew ethanol. “U.S. ethanol production fell in 2012 for the first time in 16 years, according to the Renewable Fuels Association [graph], forcing some ethanol plants to idle and take losses as they wait for the oversupply to ease.”   Regulations AP writer Vicki Smith reported yesterday that, “The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is still exerting a permit power that chicken growers contend it doesn’t have, so a federal judge said he won’t dismiss a lawsuit by a West Virginia farmer the agency had accused of polluting the Chesapeake Bay watershed. “The EPA argued Lois Alt’s lawsuit was rendered moot in December, when it withdrew violation notices and proposed fines against her Eight is Enough farm in Hardy County. But Alt, the West Virginia Farm Bureau and the American Farm Bureau want their day in court, claiming the EPA’s actions in her case have implications for farmers throughout the region. “U.S. District Judge John Preston Bailey agreed last week, denying EPA’s motion to dismiss. The agency had not yet filed a response as of Tuesday.” Julian Hattem reported yesterday at The Hill’s RegWatch Blog that, “The federal environmental regulator has established limits for residues of the chemical weed-killer commercially known as Roundup on fruits and vegetables. “The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing tolerances for residues of glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s popular herbicide brand, on agricultural crops. “The new rule, scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on Wednesday, establishes different limits for various crops including carrots, canola seeds and citrus fruits.” And the House Ag Committee issued a news update yesterday titled, “Government Report Confirms Flawed ESA Science; Specific Answers Needed for Farmers, Forest Managers.” In addition, Jamila Trindle  reported in today’s Wall Street Journal that, “The head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission said the false tweet that temporarily sent markets diving last week highlights the need for the agency to move forward on new oversight of high-speed traders. “CFTC Chairman Gary Gensler, speaking Tuesday, said he hopes the commission can finish a draft policy paper in the next month or two that could help guide future regulation.” And Eric Lipton reported in today’s New York Times that, “Wall Street bankers and some of the world’s top finance ministers are waging a bitter international campaign to block Washington financial regulators from extending their policing powers far beyond the nation’s shores. “The effort — centered on oversight of the $700 trillion marketplace of the financial instruments known as derivatives — is just one front in the battle still being waged nearly three years after Congress passed the Dodd-Frank law, which revamped financial regulations in the United States in hopes of curtailing the risky trading practices blamed for the global financial crisis in 2008.”   Immigration Seung Min Kim reported yesterday at Politico that, “Sen. Marco Rubio acknowledged Tuesday on a conservative radio talk show that the Gang of Eight’s comprehensive immigration reform bill won’t likely pass the Republican-led House. “The comments from Rubio, perhaps the most influential congressional Republican on immigration, illustrate the challenges facing the prospects for reform after months of private negotiations by a bipartisan coalition of senators produced a wide-ranging, 844-page bill.”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    April 25 Farm Bill; Ag Economy; Trade; and, Regulations- Thursday Posted By Keith Good On April 25, 2013  Farm Bill- Policy Issues Ron Hays, of the Oklahoma Farm Report and Radio Oklahoma Network, spoke yesterday with House Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas (R., Okla.) about a variety of current policy variables regarding the Farm Bill. An audio replay and summary of the Chairman’s remarks from yesterday can be found here, while an unofficial FarmPolicy.com transcript of the conversation with Ron Hays and Chairman Lucas is available here. Chairman Lucas noted that, “May 15’s a go. We’ve not issued the official markup notice yet, Ron, but both Ranking Member Peterson and myself are discussing this in public. I think we have an understanding. Leadership’s been alerted. May 15, I believe that’s a Wednesday, we will mark up the 2013 Farm Bill in the House Agriculture Committee. “We’ll begin with a draft that essentially is the 2012 document. There have been some adjustments in some points, simply because the various entities like OMB and CBO have rescored some of our expenditures, our savings, and we’ve had to make adjustments to reflect that. But we’re going to have choice, we’re going to save money, we’re going to do it in a bipartisan way, we’re going to have a safety net for all crops in all regions, and we’re going to make sure our fellow citizens who need help have something to eat.” In the extensive discussion with Ron Hays, Chairman Lucas was asked about crop insurance, in part he noted that, “I think, I believe the Ag Committee will be able to explain and justify everything that will be in the draft of the farm bill when it leaves the committee and goes to the floor, but the floor is where crop insurance will come under assault. It won’t be assaulted in the Ag Committee itself because the membership understand how the program works and why it’s important. And literally, it is becoming, in effect, the safety net of the farm bill as these other programs change so dramatically.” Also yesterday, the House Agriculture Committee Subcommittee on Horticulture, Research, Biotechnology and Foreign Agriculture held a hearing to review specialty crop and horticulture priorities for the 2013 Farm Bill. Subcommittee Ranking Member Kurt Schrader (D., Ore) noted in his opening remarks that, “When it comes to discussing the Farm Bill, all too often the conversation tends to focus on just the commodity or the nutritional elements of the bill.  And that’s despite the fact that specialty crops account for nearly half of all domestic farm gate value nationwide.”  (Audio clip of remarks here (MP3- 1:17)). In prepared testimony, Barry Bushue, American Farm Bureau Federation Vice President and President, Oregon Farm Bureau Federation, pointed out that top level recommendations included: “Allow program crop producers to choose either a Stacked Income Protection Plan (STAX) or a target price program, on top of participation in crop insurance and marketing loans, as the three legs of a safety net; establish a STAX program for all program commodities, as well as for apples, potatoes, tomatoes, grapes and sweet corn; and provide a target price program for all program commodities, with the exception of cotton.” Mr. Bushue noted that, “The Stacked Income Protection Plan (STAX) is an insurance product designed to provide a fiscally responsible and effective safety net for program crop farmers and growers of tomatoes, potatoes, apples, grapes and sweet corn. The program would be administered by USDA’s Risk Management Agency in a manner consistent with the current crop insurance delivery system. It is designed to complement existing crop insurance programs. It does not change any features of existing insurance policies.” “The STAX plan addresses revenue losses on an area-wide basis, with a county being the designated area of coverage. In counties lacking sufficient data, larger geographical areas such as county groupings may be necessary to preserve the integrity of the program. The ‘stacked’ feature of the program implies that the coverage would sit on top of the producer’s individual crop insurance product.” Later in the hearing, Rep. Chris Collins (R., N.Y.) explained that, “When I put together my agricultural roundtable I said, ‘What is it we should be doing here on the Ag Committee,’ and they said number one, we just need a Farm Bill.  We need to know what we are going to be facing in the next five years.  We can’t continue to go with uncertainty.” Immigration was a reoccurring theme at yesterday’s hearing- an issue brought up by both the panel of producers as well as lawmakers. Rep. Schrader highlighted the immigration policy variable in his questions, and solicited responses from all three witnesses during the hearing; an exchange on this issue from yesterday can be heard here (MP3- 3:02). In addition, Rep. Juan Vargas (D., Calif.), a Harvard law classmate of President Obama, in a different inquiry asked the panel members about terrorists being “radicalized” while working on their farms.  This attempt to draw attention to themes occurring on the broader debate on immigration reform in the context of current news developments can be heard here (MP3- 1:26). In other legislative activity yesterday, the House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee held a budget hearing on USDA’s Rural Development mission area. Subcommittee Chairman Robert Aderholt (R., Ala.) noted that, “It seems that I’ve seen this budget request before and is hard to believe that once again USDA proposes very large cuts for the programs, such as Single Family Direct Loans and Water and Waste Disposal grants, that matter the most in rural America. Instead, the administration seems to have placed its focus on a new $55 million economic development program that has not been reviewed by Congress. “As the only federal department dedicated to rural America, I have to wonder if this budget request is truly in tune with its needs, especially the needs of rural Americans with the lowest incomes.” In a separate budget hearing yesterday, the House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee examined USDA’s Natural Resources and Environment mission area. “We convene today to review NRCS’s fiscal year 2014 budget request. NRCS requests a total of $808 million in discretionary funding for its salaries, expenses and activities. In addition, more than $3.1 billion will be available to farmers, ranchers and private landowners through the farm bill’s mandatory conservation programs to help them preserve, protect and enhance their land,” Subcommittee Chairman Aderholt said. Meanwhile, a news update yesterday from Sen. John Thune (R., S.D.) stated that, “[Sen. Thune] and Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) today introduced legislation that would modify crop insurance premium assistance for insured crops grown on native sod converted to cropland and land that a producer cannot verify has ever been tilled. The Congressional Budget Office projects that this bill could save taxpayers $200 million over 10 years, and would encourage conservation of grasslands that pheasants, ducks, and other wildlife use as a habitat. This legislation is supported by farm and conservation groups including the National Farmers Union, Pheasants Forever, Ducks Unlimited, and the National Wildlife Federation.” Earlier this week, in her maiden speech on the Senate floor, Heidi Heitkamp (D., N.D.) noted that, “We have frustration in farm country. There are 16 million jobs in agriculture. It is the bright spot on our economy, and it is helping to reduce our trade deficit. It is everything in my State. “We have small farmers, small family farmers who must spend $1 million before they can even take a crop out of the ground. That is an average farmer in my State. That is how much it costs to engage in farming. When we don’t have a farm bill that provides certainty and security for them, we not only hurt them and hurt American agriculture, we risk our secure food supply. So I came here to speak for North Dakota farmers.” In other Farm Bill analysis, the “Washington Insider” section of DTN stated in part yesterday (link requires subscription) that, “One debate in the constellation of farm-bill issues that has been conspicuous by its absence in recent months concerns the promised ‘farm-bill fix’ of U.S. cotton policies promised in the 2010 temporary stand down of the cotton case Brazil and others won in the late-2000′s.” “The temporary deal with Brazil is increasingly embarrassing to the United States, and continually undercuts U.S. efforts to lead broad negotiations to open global markets. And, trade advocates note that not only did Brazil win the original WTO case but that it has made clear its determination to press trading partners aggressively for future compliance. This suggests that Brazilian complaints regarding proposed safety net policies need to be taken seriously, else the sector may not only continue to face sanctions under the cotton case, but to face new, tougher penalties for new violations in the future if the current proposals are implemented,” the DTN item said. David Rogers reported yesterday at Politico (“A food fight over aid program”) that, “Behind all this is President Barack Obama’s plan to revamp international food aid to allow more flexible, cash purchases overseas — rather than commodity shipments from the U.S. “About $1.47 billion from the Food for Peace program would be reallocated to three accounts, the biggest designated for emergency assistance. The White House promises that 55 percent of the funds would still go to buy and ship American commodities, but that’s a big drop from today and could be ruinous for some carriers. “It’s not a fight that will ever capture the same headlines as gun control or immigration reform. But it’s a real test of the president’s muscle in two gritty corners of Congress where Obama rarely goes: appropriations and agriculture.” In news regarding domestic nutrition, USDA’s Economic Research Service (ERS) released a report yesterday titled, “Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Participation Leads to Modest Changes in Diet Quality,” which noted that, “Recent research has shown that the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) effectively reduces food insecurity. Questions remain, however, about the extent to which SNAP affects the quality of adult participants’ diets.” An ERS summary of the report stated that, “The evidence as to whether SNAP participation is beneficial or adverse regarding diet quality is inconclusive…[T]he study shows the effects of SNAP participation on those who choose to participate. SNAP increases the likelihood that participants will consume whole fruit by 23 percentage points; it also induces participants to decrease their intake of dark green/orange vegetables by a modest amount— the equivalent of about 1 ounce for a 2,000-calorie diet.” In other policy developments, a news release yesterday from Sen. Barbara Boxer (D., Calif.) stated that, “[Sen. Boxer] and Congressman Peter DeFazio (D-OR) today introduced the Genetically Engineered Food Right-to-Know Act, bipartisan legislation that would require the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to clearly label genetically engineered (GE) foods so that consumers can make informed choices about what they eat.” And a news release yesterday from USDA noted that, “Agriculture Secretary Vilsack today renewed a historic agreement with U.S. dairy producers to accelerate the adoption of innovative waste-to-energy projects and energy efficiency improvements on U.S. dairy farms, both of which help producers diversify revenues and reduce utility expenses on their operations.. The pact extends a Memorandum of Understanding signed in Copenhagen, Denmark, in 2009.”  [Note: See also this Bloomberg article by Alan Bjerga titled, “Cattle Waste Feeds New Profits for Dairy Farmer”]. Megan R. Wilson reported yesterday that, “The public will have even longer to give feedback to the Food and Drug Administration about three food safety rules proposed at the beginning of the year. “The Obama administration said the 120-day delay is a result of receiving requests to extend the comment period, which was originally set to end May 16. “All three proposals were released on Jan. 16 as part of the administration’s implementation of the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), a sweeping overhaul of the nation’s food safety system that was passed by Congress in 2011.”   Agricultural Economy Karina Gonzalez reported yesterday at The Pantagraph (Bloomington, Il.) Online that, “Farmers might have a late start to corn and soybean planting if Mother Nature continues to dump rain across Central Illinois…[Don Immke, who farms corn and soybeans southeast of Saunemin] estimates it might be another 10 days before he can get out into the fields to plant. But that’s only if it stops raining and temperatures rise enough to warm the soil, Immke said Tuesday.” Caroline Porter and Mark Peters reported in today’s Wall Street Journal that, “Swollen rivers across a wide swath of the Midwest are forcing hundreds of evacuations, flooding streets and farmers’ fields, and prompting a squabble in the northern Chicago suburbs over flood management.” AP writer Roxana Hegeman reported yesterday that, “Cool temperatures this spring in Kansas have delayed the growth of pasture grasses and the first cutting of alfalfa fields, keeping cattle ranchers from turning out their herds out for grazing and putting pressure on tight hay supplies.” And AP writer Susan Montoya Bryan reported yesterday that, “In southern New Mexico, the mighty Rio Grande has gone dry — reduced to a sandy wash winding from this chile farming community to the nation’s leading pecan-producing county… Across the state’s eastern plains, wells stand empty and ranchers are selling their cattle.” The article stated that, “Going on three years, drought has had a hold on nearly every square mile of New Mexico. Now, with forecasts predicting hotter, drier weather ahead, farmers and small and large communities alike are questioning whether dwindling supplies can be stretched enough to avoid costly fights over water.” Beyond weather variables, Purdue University Agricultural Economist Brent A. Gloy recently penned a brief paper regarding farmland values titled, “Some Thoughts on the Relationship between Corn Price Expectations and Farmland Values.”   Trade Jo Dee Black reported yesterday at the Great Falls Tribune (Mont.) Online that, “Sen. Max Baucus championed expanded export markets for Montana’s agricultural commodities, worked for changes in the federal taxes for estate and capital gains and depreciation, and safe-guarded provisions in Farm Bills that benefit grain and livestock producers during his tenure in Congress, Montana ag organization leaders said Tuesday.” The article added that, “Baucus recognized early in his career that trade with Asia was an opportunity for Montana’s commodity producers, said Jake Cummins, executive vice president of the Montana Farm Bureau Federation. “‘Today 40 percent of Montana’s ag exports go to the Pacific Rim,’ Cummins said. ‘MFBF President Bob Hanson was in Washington testifying before the Senate Finance Committee about ag trade and the addition of Japan in the Trans-Pacific Partnership talks at Baucus’ invitation. Sen. Baucus has brought the Korean ambassador here to our offices for meetings. He has worked very hard to open up those markets for Montana.’” During yesterday’s Finance Committee hearing on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), Chairman Baucus noted that, “Last year, U.S. goods exports to current TPP countries totaled $619 billion, representing 40 percent of total U.S. goods exports.  And U.S. agriculture exports to current TPP countries totaled $47 billion, making up a third of all U.S. agricultural exports.” Senate Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D., Mich.) also participated in yesterday’s Finance Committee hearing.  A replay of some of her remarks and questions, which included topics on auto and dairy issues, can be heard here (MP3- 4:55). After the hearing, in a news update, Sen. Stabenow “called for additional hearings to allow those who have serious concerns about the agreement to express their views. Stabenow said more hearings are needed to get the perspective of the American auto industry, many agriculture leaders, and others who have raised legitimate points about how the inclusion of Japan into the trade agreement could hurt the U.S. economy if Japan does not end anti-competitive barriers to trade.” Earlier this week, Sen. Stabenow penned a column at Politico titled, “Pact must open Japan’s markets.” Note also that an update yesterday from the U.S. Trade Representative’s Office stated that, “The Obama Administration today notified Congress of its intent to include Japan in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement negotiations.” And Howard Schneider reported in today’s Washington Post that, “That deep-seated attitude about rice is perhaps the sharpest edge of a Japanese backlash against the proposed free-trade pact.” Meanwhile, Reuters writer Doug Palmer reported yesterday that, “An influential Democratic U.S. senator said on Wednesday he was working on a bipartisan bill to boost President Barack Obama’s ability to negotiate trade deals, while Republicans made clear that more White House involvement is needed to pass the measure. “‘I would like to see a bipartisan TPA (trade promotion authority) bill introduced by June,’ Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus said at a hearing on the Trans-Pacific Partnership pact, a proposed free trade agreement among 12 countries on both sides of the Pacific.”   Regulations Ben Geman reported yesterday at The Hill’s Energy Blog that, “The acting chief of the Environmental Protection Agency sparred with GOP senators Wednesday over the use of aerial surveillance to help guide enforcement of water pollution laws in farm country. “Bob Perciasepe came under fire from Sens. Mike Johanns (R-Neb.) [video here] and Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), who slammed the EPA’s use of aerial surveillance of animal feedlots, calling it an intrusion into the lives of private landowners. “Perciasepe denied that the agency is engaged in surveillance and said the EPA is only trying to spot pollution.”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    April 24 Farm Bill; Ag Economy; Budget; Regulations; Immigration; and, Political Notes- Wednesday Posted By Keith Good On April 24, 2013  Farm Bill John Mason reported yesterday at The Register Star (Hudson, N.Y.) Online that, “A bill that would help young people get a foothold in farming was announced at Hawthorne Valley Farm Monday. “U.S. Rep. Chris Gibson [R., N.Y.] pledged to lead the effort to include the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Opportunity Act in the Farm Bill. “The bill is renewed every five years, and is due for renewal this year. If the act is included in the bill, it would mean about $55 million a year, Gibson said, spent in such areas as training new farmers, grants for marketing, business planning and creation of value-added products, loans for land purchase and farm startup, conservation easements to keep land affordable for working farmers, and aid to returning veterans wishing to get into farming.” The article noted that, “Gibson described the bill as bipartisan. He said he’s working with U.S. Rep. Tim Walz, D-Minn. “The average age of an American farmer is 57, Gibson said. “‘But here in the Hudson Valley, we’re beginning to lower that,’ he said. ‘Forty-five percent of Columbia County farms are beginning. These programs are making a difference.’” With respect to potential Farm Bill movement, Mary Kay Thatcher, the Senior Director of Congressional Relations at the American Farm Bureau Federation was guest on Monday’s AgriTalk radio program with Mike Adams where she stated that, “The House is going to be a problem again.  You know we have already gotten some critical words coming from Eric Cantor [R., Va.], the number two Republican in the House, who wants a lot deeper cuts in food stamps than [Chairman Frank Lucas (R., Okla.)] is willing to push through the Ag. Committee, and so we are going to continue to have some struggles to get that to the House floor.” Nonetheless, Ms. Thatcher quickly followed up by saying: “But, I think we should remember that John Boehner [R., Ohio], the Speaker, has said several times- twice that I have heard him- we will do the Farm Bill this year.  I don’t think he ever said that clearly last year, and so we still have some hopes that indeed we can get it done…”  (related AgriTalk audio of Mary Kay Thatcher’s remarks from Monday here MP3- 1:58)). Tom Steever reported yesterday at Brownfield that, “The Izaak Walton League wants federal crop insurance subsidies to be re-coupled with conservation compliance. The organization and South Dakota conservation and agriculture leaders are meeting on Monday, April 29, to discuss tying federal farm payments to conservation practices. Until implementation of the 1996 Farm Bill, the provisions were linked, but the effort to get more participation resulted in them becoming decoupled. “The league’s agriculture program director, Bill Wenzel, cites for Brownfield numbers indicating that the vast majority of corn and soybean farmers already participate in conservation programs.” The Brownfield item added that, “Keynoting the forum at the Sioux Falls Izaak Walton League Hall is former USDA Undersecretary Bruce Knight, a third-generation South Dakota farmer. Wenzel says that the former undersecretary will present the case for conservation compliance in federal crop insurance programs.” Meanwhile, Eli Saslow reported in today’s Washington Post that, “A good recruiter needs to be liked, so Dillie Nerios filled gift bags with dog toys for the dog people and cat food for the cat people. She packed crates of cookies, croissants, vegetables and fresh fruit. She curled her hair and painted her nails fluorescent pink. ‘A happy, it’s-all-good look,’ she said, checking her reflection in the rearview mirror. Then she drove along the Florida coast to sign people up for food stamps. “Her destination on a recent morning was a 55-and-over community in central Florida, where single-wide trailers surround a parched golf course. On the drive, Nerios, 56, reviewed techniques she had learned for connecting with some of Florida’s most desperate senior citizens during two years on the job. Touch a shoulder. Hold eye contact. Listen for as long as it takes. ‘Some seniors haven’t had anyone to talk to in some time,’ one of the state-issued training manuals reads. ‘Make each person feel like the only one who matters.’ “In fact, it is Nerios’s job to enroll at least 150 seniors for food stamps each month, a quota she usually exceeds. Alleviate hunger, lessen poverty: These are the primary goals of her work. But the job also has a second and more controversial purpose for cash-strapped Florida, where increasing food-stamp enrollment has become a means of economic growth, bringing almost $6 billion each year into the state. The money helps to sustain communities, grocery stores and food producers. It also adds to rising federal entitlement spending and the U.S. debt.” The Post article noted that, “A decade ago, only about half of eligible Americans chose to sign up for food stamps. Now that number is 75 percent. “Rhode Island hosts SNAP-themed bingo games for the elderly. Alabama hands out fliers that read: ‘Be a patriot. Bring your food stamp money home.’ Three states in the Midwest throw food-stamp parties where new recipients sign up en masse.”   Agricultural Economy Jim Salter and Jim Suhr reported today that, “Flood-weary homeowners and sandbaggers across the Midwest are praying for a relenting of rains that have added more water to already swollen rivers blamed for swallowing up neighborhoods, fraying victims’ patience along the way. “Even as some of the renegade rivers are showing signs of cresting, the recovery won’t be fast or easy. The National Weather Service expects many of the waterways to remain high into next month, straining levees during the river’s expectedly slow descent. “Floodwaters were rising to record levels along the Illinois River in central Illinois. In Missouri, six small levees north of St. Louis were overtopped by the surging Mississippi River, though mostly farmland was affected.” The AP writers noted that, “In Indiana, floodgates were installed to try and keep the flooding Wabash River from the state’s oldest town, Vincennes. Some strategic spots were also being reinforced with sandbags. The weather service projected a crest on Saturday about 12 feet above flood stage, the highest reading in nearly 70 years at Vincennes, founded in 1732.” A tweet yesterday from the National Weather Service in Lincoln, Illinois stated that, “Record flooding continues in Henry and Peoria today. Approaching record levels in Havana and Beardstown.” Also, a news release  yesterday from Purdue University stated that, “Frequent and heavy rains have kept most Indiana farmers out of their fields during corn planting season so far this month, and the weather outlook for the next two weeks portends continued wet conditions. “But that doesn’t mean yields at harvest time are in danger of dropping off yet. “Forecasters expect precipitation to be above normal through the first week of May, following a pattern of rain that has swelled rivers and streams and flooded fields.” The Purdue update pointed out that, “Although Indiana farmers are two weeks behind the five-year average pace in planting corn, statewide statistical data suggest that planting date accounts for only 23 percent of the variability in yields from year to year, said Purdue Extension corn specialist Bob Nielsen. Tillage and use of herbicides and nitrogen fertilizer are among many yield-influencing factors, or YIFs…‘Let’s not succumb quite yet to fear-mongering triggered by the prospects of a delayed late start to corn planting in 2013,’ Nielsen wrote.” Dave Russell reported yesterday at Brownfield that, “Farmers and land owners are being reminded that the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) may have funds available to help repair damage caused by recent rains and flooding to conservation practices. “‘If there’s something going with Mother Nature, there are times we have special funding that we can get to go back and fix some of those problems,’ said Terry Cosby, State Conservationist in Ohio.” Meanwhile, Bloomberg writers Tony C. Dreibus and Jeff Wilson reported yesterday that, “The coldest start ever to the wheat-growing season in Kansas and freezing weather across the southern Great Plains are compounding damage to U.S. crops already hurt by the worst drought since the 1930s.” Yesterday’s article stated that, “Farmers in the U.S., the world’s biggest exporter, probably will abandon 25 percent of their hard, red winter wheat, the most common variety grown, according to the average of 11 analyst estimates compiled by Bloomberg. That would be the most since a drought in 2006. Societe Generale expects U.S. output will drop 27 percent, sparking a 15 percent rally in Kansas City wheat futures to $8.50 a bushel by the fourth quarter. “Wheat sown from September to November went dormant over the winter as drought left crops in the worst condition since at least 1985. Growth resumed in March, and temperatures this month in Kansas, the largest U.S. grower, were the lowest in more than a century for areas that produced about half of the state’s harvest last year. Global supplies will drop to the smallest in four years as production declines from Argentina to Russia to Australia, the U.S. government estimates.” More broadly, Bloomberg writer Rudy Ruitenberg reported yesterday that, “Farmers in Brazil’s Mato Grosso state will produce more corn as a second crop than expected a month ago after rain boosted yields, researcher Instituto Mato- Grossense de Economia Agropecuaria said. “The harvest in the state, Brazil’s second-biggest corn grower behind Parana, is predicted to be 14.6 million metric tons in 2012-13, from a previous outlook of 13.3 million tons, Cuiaba, Brazil-based IMEA wrote in an online report dated yesterday. That compares with last year’s record 15.6 million tons. “Favorable rainfall during the corn-growing season prompted a crop survey by IMEA that led it to increase the yield outlook by 10 percent, the researcher wrote. The harvest would be the second-biggest ever, IMEA said.”   Budget Neil Irwin reported yesterday that, “In the Washington conversation, we often talk about austerity as something that other people are doing. Tight fiscal policy is undermining growth in all those other economies—Greece and Spain most dramatically, but also the rest of continental Europe and Britain—while we Americans have continued our profligate ways. Just Friday, Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles were again offering a plan for the U.S. to finally get serious about its deficits and debt.” “John Makin, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, looks at the Congressional Budget Office’s projections and argues that ‘American fiscal austerity has been moderate and probably  . . . has proceeded far enough for now.’  A budget deficit that was more than 10 percent of GDP in 2009 is on track to be about half that this year. ‘The federal budget deficit is shrinking rapidly,’ writes Jan Hatzius, the chief economist of Goldman Sachs, in an April 10 report. Goldman estimates that in the first three months of 2013 the deficit was running at 4.5 percent of GDP, and they forecast a deficit of 3 percent of GDP or less in the 2015 fiscal year. Hatzius adds that ‘there is still a great deal of room for the economic recovery to reduce the deficit for cyclical reasons [related graph].’ “In other words, if policymakers can just not blow it and keep the recovery on track, that alone will do a good bit of the heavy lifting of deficit reduction.” Mr. Irwin pointed out that, “Those forecasts of falling deficits would of course change if there were a recession or an abrupt change in policy. But it is increasingly clear that American fiscal policy for the next few years is not the disaster zone that some commentary makes it out to be. The reasons are straightforward enough. The economy is gradually healing, leading to higher tax revenue and reducing social welfare spending. The deal to raise the debt ceiling in the summer of 2011 included spending cuts, including the sequestration policy that went into effect March 1. And the deal to resolve the fiscal cliff at the end of last year included tax increases. Put the three together, and you have a recipe for lower deficits over the coming years.” John Bresnahan and Glenn Thrush reported yesterday at Politico that, “President Barack Obama is reaching out to Republican senators — the most receptive participants from his recent ‘charm-offensive’ dinners — to jump-start talks to reach a ‘grand bargain’ on entitlements, spending and taxes, according to White House and Congressional officials. “Obama — fighting against steep odds to reach a big legacy deal on deficits and debts — has personally pressed Congressional leaders for another shot at reaching an agreement similar to one that fell apart during negotiations with Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) in 2011.” The article noted that, “Hill staffers close the situation say the list remains fluid, but names reportedly being considered include Sens. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), John McCain (R-Ariz.), Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.), Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), John Hoeven (R-N.D.) and Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) — Republicans Obama considers to be committed to another round of negotiations in good faith. “But a senior White House official told POLITICO any speculation about specific participants would be ‘wrong,’ and refused to confirm any names because none of the potential attendees had yet been contacted or even briefed on the new process.”   Regulations A news release yesterday from the American Farm Bureau Federation stated that, “Poultry and livestock farmers scored a win Monday when a federal court rejected efforts by the Environmental Protection Agency to dismiss a case brought by West Virginia poultry farmer Lois Alt, according to the American Farm Bureau Federation. “Alt had challenged an EPA order demanding that she obtain a Clean Water Act discharge permit for ordinary stormwater runoff from her farmyard. Despite EPA’s recent withdrawal of the Alt order, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia ruled that the case should go forward to clarify for the benefit of Alt and other farmers whether, as EPA contends, discharge permits are required for ‘ordinary precipitation runoff from a typical farmyard.’ “‘EPA seems to have believed if it withdrew the order against Ms. Alt, the court would dismiss her lawsuit,’ said AFBF President Bob Stallman. ‘The tactic failed because the court recognized EPA wasn’t changing its underlying legal position, but just trying to avoid having to defend that position.’” Travis Fain reported yesterday at the News & Record (Greensboro, N.C.) Online that, “U.S. Sen. Kay Hagan [D., N.C.] called Tuesday for a ‘commonsense’ end to the ‘double regulation’ of pesticides sprayed on or around water. “She said farmers, as well as cities and other entities that use the already-heavily-regulated products, have to go an extra step and get Clean Water Act discharge permits because of a lawsuit. The extra paperwork, she said, is onerous, and she’s part of a bi-partisan effort to do away with it. Larry Wooten, president of the N.C. Farm Bureau, was with her on the call and agreed. “The language Hagan and U.S. Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, are co-sponsoring actually comes from a house bill that’s a few years old, and which Hagan and others have tried before to get amended into the farm bill. The L.A. Times wrote about this issue on its ‘Greenspace’ blog in 2011…” Meanwhile, Aaron Lucchett, Julie Steinberg and Jacqueline Palank reported yesterday at The Wall Street Journal Online that, “MF Global Holdings Ltd. needed cash, was being hounded by regulators and had been threatened with possible ratings downgrades. “None of those problems alone killed the brokerage firm in October 2011, according to a bankruptcy trustee’s lawsuit filed late Monday. The trustee said it was the leadership of Jon S. Corzine and two of the former chief executive’s top lieutenants that proved fatal. “In the 61-page lawsuit, former Federal Bureau of Investigation Director Louis Freeh accused Mr. Corzine and his former chief operating officer and finance chief of ‘acts and omissions’ over several months that were ‘grossly negligent’ and a ‘breach of fiduciary duty’ that led to the company’s collapse.” The Journal article added that, “Less than three weeks ago, Mr. Freeh had declined to bring a lawsuit ready to be filed against MF Global executives so he could participate in mediation talks instead. But with no deal at hand and a liquidation plan moving ahead, Mr. Freeh decided to sue, saying in a statement it was ‘in the best interests of the Chapter 11 estates.’”   Immigration Iowa GOP Senator Charles Grassley was a guest on yesterday’s AgriTalk radio program with Mike Adams, where in part, the conversation turned to issues regarding immigration. Sen. Grassley noted that, “The agricultural issue was up yesterday, it was widely discussed, and I think that agriculture, or anything else in this bill- and its an 844 page bill- isn’t dependent so much upon what is specifically in the agricultural labor section, as whether or not the border will be secured.  Because most every Senator understands that border security, to stop the flow of unlawful people coming into our country, in other words violating our immigration laws- not having papers- is the number one thing we have to do if we are going to do anything else in immigration.  So that overrides everything.” (related AgriTalk audio of Sen. Grassley’s remarks from yesterday here MP3- 2:20)).   Political Notes- Sen. Max Baucus (D., Mont.) to Retire Janet Hook reported in today’s Wall Street Journal that, “Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus will retire rather than run for re-election in 2014, becoming the sixth Democratic senator to announce that he is leaving Congress and auguring change at the helm of the powerful tax-writing panel…Mr. Baucus’s retirement, which he announced Tuesday, leaves Democrats defending open seats in six states as they try to retain their Senate majority. The open seats are in West Virginia, South Dakota, Montana and Iowa, where Democrats could have tough contests, and in Michigan and New Jersey, which tend to support Democrats but now have Republican governors.” Meredith Shiner reported yesterday at Roll Call Online that, “Liberals may have cheered when Montana Sen. Max Baucus announced he would retire in 2014 and give up his stranglehold on the Senate Finance Committee gavel. But the likely ascent of Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden to the top of the committee creates its own problems for Democrats.” And, the Senate Finance Committee holds a hearing this morning titled, “The Trans-Pacific Partnership: Opportunities and Challenges.”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    April 23 Policy Issues; Ag Economy; Budget; Biofuels; and, Immigration- Tuesday Posted By Keith Good On April 23, 2013  Policy Issues: Crop Insurance, CRP, Nutrition, Animal Production (Antibiotics), and Disaster Declaration Christopher Doering reported yesterday at The Des Moines Register Online that, “Crop insurance indemnities have risen to a record $17 billion for 2012 crop year, the U.S. Agriculture Department said in its latest report issued on Monday. “The figure, which was up more than $700 million from the prior week, pushed the total for 2012 to $16.99 billion. The number is higher than 2011 when a series of natural disasters ranging from a freeze in Florida to drought in Texas prompted insurance companies to pay out a record $10.8 billion to farmers, short of the $12 billion they collected in premiums. “The 2012 drought spread beyond the Midwest to affect more than 60 percent of the contiguous United States, making it the worst since the Dust Bowl in the 1930s. A sharp drop in crop yields pushed corn and soybean prices to record highs during the summer and costs to feed U.S. livestock soared, forcing ranchers to send their herds to slaughter rather than pay the higher feed costs.” Rob Schultz reported earlier this week at Madison (Wis.) Online that, “The number of state farmers buying crop insurance this year could increase 15 percent after last year’s drought showed how well the program worked.” “‘Just cropping the land is getting more and more and more expensive, and there’s so much more risk out there from the inputs compared to what your return is. That used to be widening, now it’s narrowing,’ [Michelle Austin, director of insurance services for Badgerland Financial] said.” Meanwhile, an update late last week from Rep. Adrian Smith (R., Neb.) indicated that, “Earlier this month, President Obama released his budget even though it was due on February 4th.  While the House and Senate have already passed 10-year budget resolutions and the President’s proposals have little chance of being enacted, it is a revealing look at his priorities and vision for America.  Of particular interest to Nebraskans is how the President’s proposals would affect agriculture, the backbone of our local economy. “For example, President Obama’s 2014 budget proposes cuts to the federal crop insurance program.  While we need to reduce our deficit and debt, it is counterproductive to undermine producers who manage risk. “Without crop insurance, only those producers able to purchase their own insurance will be able to afford to farm.  Further cuts to this program will discourage participation which could increase premiums for producers and raise the cost of food for consumers.  Given the success of crop insurance, and in light of last year’s severe drought, we should be working to strengthen this fiscally responsible public-private partnership – not cutting it.” Rep. Smith added that, “SNAP [food stamps] and agriculture programs have been enacted together in the Farm Bill since the 1960’s, and more recently food stamp funding has been one major sticking point holding up passage of a long-term Farm Bill.  Maintaining the status quo on food stamps while gutting crop insurance only complicates Farm Bill passage.” In other news, a Grand Forks (N.D.) Herald opinion column from this week indicated that, “CRP [the Conservation Reserve Program] acreage likely will take a hit in the Farm Bill’s renewal. But even with that, Congress should insist that CRP remain fundamentally strong— because in recent decades, the popular and cost-effective program likely has done more for conservation than almost any other in the federal tool box. “It’s rare that a program wins support from conservation groups, farm groups and sportsmen’s groups alike. CRP has done just that. Keeping it at work protecting the North Dakota and Minnesota landscapes should be a priority for the state’s delegations, both of which are playing key roles in the Farm Bill’s reauthorization and renewal.” An interesting update yesterday at the Economic Research Service (USDA) Chart Gallery Online pointed out that, “In 2011, roughly 31 percent of all U.S. farms received commodity payments, conservation payments, or both. Only 6 percent of farms, however,received both commodity and conservation payments. Fifty-five percent of conservation payments went to farms that did not receive commodity payments, while 63 percent of commodity payments went to farms that did not receive conservation payments [related graph].” More specifically with respect to nutrition issues, a news release yesterday from Sen. Pat Roberts (R., Kans.) stated that, “[Sen. Roberts] today said a report released by USDA’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) found the $45.5 billion in stimulus funds spent to increase monthly Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits have not been evaluated to determine their effectiveness and underscores the need for his bill to restore integrity to the food stamps program.” Yesterday’s release added that, “The OIG found that methods used by the FNS [Food and Nutrition Service] to assess the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) spending did not adequately evaluate how additional stimulus spending met the goals of assisting those most impacted by the recession, of stabilizing state government nutrition program budgets or stimulating the economy.” Sid Salter noted in a column posted last week at Gulflive Online (The Mississippi Press) that, “In a systematic effort to bolster efforts to ‘primary’ any incumbent Republicans who fail to walk the hard right political agenda of the Tea Party and similar groups, some members of Congress are trying to separate the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP – read that as food stamps – from the 2013 federal farm bill.” The column stated that, “Representing the poorest state in the union, the cerebral [Sen. Thad Cochran (R., Miss.)] has run the political gantlet between liberal national groups that portray him as hard-hearted against the poor and national conservative groups who see his moderate support for the food stamp program as evidence that he isn’t conservative enough…[C]ochran’s measured stance in favor of including food stamps as part of the nation’s overall agriculture and nutrition policies – rather than a stand-alone target of partisan politics – is one that is both defensible and sensible in a state with both Mississippi’s depth of poverty and significant agricultural production. “Mississippi’s economy would suffer mightily without the annual $894 million in food stamp spending in this state. Don’t think so? Ask a grocer, a farmer or a trucker.” Also, AP writer David Gutman penned an article yesterday (“W.Va. tries to tackle childhood hunger and obesity”) noting that, “West Virginia will be the first state in the nation to set up a statewide public-private funding partnership to try to improve school meals programs.” In policy news regarding animal production, a news update yesterday from the National Chicken Council stated that, “The Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Center for Veterinary Medicine today issued a statement cautioning the interpretation of antimicrobial resistance data.  Recently, the Environmental Working Group (EWG) issued a report of its interpretation of the 2011 Retail Meat Annual Report of the National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System (NARMS). “‘While FDA is always concerned when we see antimicrobial resistance, we believe the EWG report oversimplifies the NARMS data and provides misleading conclusions,’ FDA noted.” From the executive branch yesterday, a news release from USDA noted in part that, “Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack today announced an important package of disaster assistance valued at $209 million to help farmers, land owners and communities recover from the effects of Superstorm Sandy.”   Agricultural Economy Bloomberg writer Whitney McFerron reported yesterday that, “Rain in the northern U.S. Midwest last week spurred flooding along rivers as far south as Tennessee, delaying corn planting a year after drought cut production of the grain to a six-year low. “Areas of Iowa and Illinois, the largest U.S. corn-growing states, were under flood warnings today along the Mississippi and Illinois rivers and tributaries, National Weather Service data show. Flood warnings stretched from Michigan to northern Arkansas and Tennessee.Crests already reached records along parts of the Des Plaines and Illinois rivers in Illinois, and the Mississippi River is at moderate to major flood stages across Missouri, AccuWeather Inc. said in an online statement.” An AP update in today’s New York Times reported that, “The Mississippi River started its slow decline at some spots Monday, but the spring flood was far from over. The Mississippi and other Midwestern rivers were still significantly above flood stage, spurred by heavy rain last week. Levee breaks caused problems in Indiana, and floodwaters flirted with the Michigan State University campus. Flooding is blamed in at least three deaths. Some towns in the stretch of the Mississippi from Quincy, Ill., to Grafton, Ill., reached 10 to 12 feet above flood stage. An inch of rain forecast into Tuesday over much of the Midwest was adding to the concern. Spots south of St. Louis were not expected to crest until late this week, and significant flooding is possible in Ste. Genevieve, Mo., Cape Girardeau, Mo., and Cairo, Ill.” Cheri Zagurski and Anthony Greder reported yesterday at DTN (link requires subscription) that, “The only crop that saw much progress in the last week was rice, which saw 10 percentage points more of the nation’s crop planted and 6 percentage points more emerged, while corn planting progress only rose 2 percentage points in those 7 days. “USDA’s weekly crop progress report showed 4% of the nation’s corn crop planted in the week ending April 21, compared to 2% last week, 26% last year and a 16% five-year average.” A news release yesterday from University of Arkansas Extension indicated that, “As do-overs go, it’s not as bad as it could have been: Less than 10 percent of this year’s already-planted corn crops will need to be replanted, according to a University of Arkansas extension service expert. “It’s ‘less than what we anticipated a couple of weeks ago,’ Jason Kelley, an extension wheat and feed grains specialist for the U of A System Division of Agriculture, said on Monday. ‘A lot of the growers may not be seeing perfect stands they wanted, but in most cases, the stands are acceptable.’” Meanwhile, Purdue University Agricultural Economist Chris Hurt noted yesterday at the farmdoc daily blog (“Will Weak Cattle Prices Continue?”) that, “I thought finished cattle prices were going to have a very bullish year with prices well into the $130s by now. Live cattle futures started the year with the same enthusiasm, but have deflated since. What went wrong? “The mystery can be unraveled by looking at supply and demand. On the supply side, the expectation at the start of 2013 was for a three percent decline in beef production during the first-half of the year. To date, beef supplies have been down closer to one percent. More beef often means lower prices.  There seem to be three demand components contributing to the weaker than expected cattle prices. First, the U.S. economy may have been weaker so far this year than anticipated. Second, reduced pork and chicken exports have meant that more of those products have been adding to domestic meat supplies. Third, retail beef prices rose to record high levels while retail prices of competitive animal proteins were not rising as much, or even falling.” On trade, an editorial posted yesterday at The Wall Street Journal Online (Review& Outlook Asia) stated that, “Yet recent evidence suggests Japan’s entry [into the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)] could prove a mixed blessing if leaders aren’t careful. One worry is that Tokyo could use its seat at the table to dilute the deal in areas such as agriculture or trade in services that touch on sensitive political issues back home (food safety standards, for example). Another worry is that other countries could water down a deal to protect their domestic interests from Japanese competition.” The Journal editorial added that, “More troubling is that [Prime Minister Shinzo Abe] still says some agricultural products may be ‘spared’ liberalization if he has his way. Tokyo would in particular like to keep its 778% tariff on rice, which helps a handful of Japanese farmers at the expense of Japanese consumers.”   Budget Alan K. Ota reported yesterday at Roll Call Online that, “Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and his team are preparing to turn up the pressure on Republicans over a budget conference committee aimed at reaching a broad debt deal. “Senior aides said the top Democrat was expected to seek a deal with the GOP this week to formally appoint Senate budget conference negotiators. They said the move was a response to the statement by Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio last week that he will not name House conference negotiators unless both chambers can first work out a framework for agreement.” Also, Doug Elmendorf provided a brief update yesterday at the Congressional Budget Office Online titled, “CBO To Release Analysis of the President’s FY 2014 Budget and Updated Baseline Projections in May.”   Biofuels Gregory Meyer reported yesterday at The Financial Times Online, in a detailed and lengthy news analysis item (“Commodities: Against the grain”) that, “The US is not the only country where biofuels have stalled. Ethanol pioneer Brazil’s production peaked in 2010. Europe is meanwhile pondering a limit on grain-based ethanol use. Global biofuel output is ‘certainly flattening’, says Christoph Berg of consultancy FO Licht, an authority on the sector. ‘The engine is spluttering, to say the least.’ “After years of double-digit increases, world ethanol production fell in 2011 and 2012 and – excluding Brazil – will probably shrink again this year, according to FO Licht. The smaller biodiesel market expanded by 1 per cent last year. “The US is the biofuel engine’s main combustion chamber. Washington will be crucial in determining whether it regains momentum. Without policy changes, some analysts see a range of dire outcomes from higher petrol prices to a global vegetable oil supply squeeze. The oil and renewable fuels industries, two of the most powerful lobbies in America, are battling over the best way to avert these scenarios.” The FT article noted that, “In a potentially perverse turn, the slowdown in demand for corn-based ethanol could even have the effect of straining supplies of vegetable oil and animal fats, the main source for biodiesel used in trucks, according to economists at the University of Illinois. As stocks of ethanol RINs are depleted and petrol demand wavers, fuel companies may be forced to meet the mandate with biodiesel instead. “‘In 2015, the United States would need to use every gallon of fats and oils in the production of biodiesel to meet the mandate, with tremendous pressures on vegetable oil and fats prices around the world,’ says Scott Irwin, University of Illinois agricultural marketing chairman. He recommends freezing the mandate at 2013 levels for the next two years.”   Immigration DTN Ag Policy Editor Chris Clayton reported yesterday (link requires subscription) that, “Hearings on the comprehensive immigration bill in the U.S. Senate are shedding more light on the divide among Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee over legalizing farm workers. “The Judiciary Committee held a hearing Monday on ‘The Border Security, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Modernization Act,’ or S. 744, a bill that could legalize an estimated 11 million people now living in the country illegally. The hearing was streamed live on the committee’s website.” The DTN article noted that, “The issues of agriculture got to lead off the day-long hearing. Chuck Conner, president and CEO of the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, testified that agriculture has serious challenges, both in the volume of undocumented workers employed in the industry and the lack of an effective guest-worker program. ‘Agriculture admits the reality that a majority of our current workface is undocumented.’ Conner said. He added shortly after, ‘This is not a realization that has come about just in the last few months. We have known we’ve had a problem for a very long time.’ “Under the bill, an estimated 800,000 to 1.1 million people working now in agriculture illegally would become legal through a ‘blue card’ program. Farm workers who worked at least 100 days on a farm in 2011 or 2012 could get an agricultural working permit, or blue card, that also would give them mobility to move from job to job. After working for up to seven years on U.S. farms, those blue-card workers could apply to be permanent residents.” Mr. Clayton added that, “Senators on the committee from Vermont, Arizona, Minnesota and California also all cited the difficulties dairy farmers have in finding year-round legal workers. Under the bill, the guest-worker program would allow a farm worker to stay in the country for up three years at a time, which would help some farmers who rely on hired hands year round.” Reuters writer Charles Abbott reported yesterday that, “The United States will become more reliant than ever on imported food if it does not pass immigration reforms to assure there are enough workers to harvest fruit and vegetable crops and milk cows, a farm coalition told senators on Monday. “The Agriculture Workforce Coalition pointed to estimates that thousands of U.S. farms could go out of business, slashing farm income by as much as $9 billion a year without an adequate labor supply.” Yesterday’s article noted that, “‘Production will move offshore,’ Charles Conner, co-chair of the workforce coalition, said at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on border security. ‘We do have crops going unharvested.’ “Conner said California has lost about 80,000 acres of land formerly devoted to fruit and vegetable production because of labor shortages. Those goods are now imported.”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    April 22 Farm Bill; Ag Economy; Budget; and, Biofuels- Monday Posted By Keith Good On April 22, 2013  Farm Bill- Policy Issues Ellyn Ferguson reported on Saturday at Roll Call Online that, “Mississippi’s Thad Cochran, the new ranking Republican on the Senate Agriculture Committee, could be the wild card among the congressional players involved in writing a farm bill that could have a chance of being signed into law this year. “He took the top GOP seat at the start of the 113th Congress after asserting his seniority on the panel to move Pat Roberts of Kansas out of the spot. The change means not only new leadership but also a regional shift in power that is likely to alter the Senate farm bill’s direction. “Cochran is expected to champion Southern growers who opposed the 2012 Senate farm bill written by Roberts and Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich. Despite opposition from Cochran and other Southern Republican committee members, the two leaders got the bill through the panel and the Senate floor with bipartisan support.” The Roll Call article pointed out that, “On nutrition issues, Cochran may surprise those who want to see significant cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, a domestic food aid program for low-income people that constitutes more than half of all Agriculture Department and farm bill spending. The lawmaker says federal food programs such as SNAP and the national school lunch program have benefited his state, which ranks among the poorest in the nation.” “So far, Cochran, a veteran of the Senate and a courtly practitioner of behind-the-scenes maneuvering, is keeping his farm bill plans to himself. He says he will seek consensus on a committee bill and does not plan to block or delay the legislation,” the Roll Call article said. Meanwhile, a news release Friday from Rep. Ron Kind (D., Wis.) stated that, “[Rep. Kind] and Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) re-introduced legislation to put an end to the $147 million in taxpayer dollars going to the Brazilian cotton agribusiness each year…[T]his legislationstops all payments to the Brazilian Cotton Institute, and puts pressure on the House and Senate Agriculture Committees to make the necessary reforms to be World Trade Organization (WTO) compliant to ensure that American goods, services, and intellectual property aren’t subject to future trade retaliations.” House Ag Committee Member Cheri Bustos (D., Il) indicated on Friday that, “I’m encouraged that Chairman Lucas recently indicated he will move ahead with a farm bill next month, and wants to send a bipartisan farm bill to the floor of the House for a vote.  As I travel around our region and talk to farmers, the one thing I hear over and over again is that they want certainty.” In more specific news regarding nutrition issues, David Rogers reported yesterday at Politico that, “‘Where are the jobs?’ Speaker John Boehner likes to ask. But do his fellow House Republicans really want to kick the unemployed off food stamps if they can’t find the jobs either? “That’s the question behind a simmering farm bill battle over reimposing work requirements on millions of able-bodied adults enrolled in the nutrition program. Most have no reported earnings, and without added job training or workfare slots, the change could spell real hardship in today’s economy. “For this reason, House Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas (R-Okla.) is resisting the move. But back home, the Oklahoma state Legislature recently took steps to reinstate work requirements. And the office of Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) hasrepeatedly raised the issue with Lucas as a way to win conservative votes for his farm bill, now slated for markup May 15.” The article noted that, “Food stamps — officially known as SNAP or Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program — offers a prime testing ground for Republicans trying to put a new face on their approach to poverty.” Mr. Rogers pointed out that, “The tug of war with Cantor is reminiscent of last year’s farm bill debacle when the leadership ultimately blocked House floor action on Lucas’s bill. Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), who took over the nutrition subcommittee this year, shares Lucas’s concerns that producers can’t wait another year for farm bill action. “Previously, King has taken a harder line on cutting SNAP than his predecessor, ex-Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-Ohio), who led the same subcommittee in the last Congress. For this reason, King is seen as a potential Heritage ally. But he’s also a man eyeing a potential statewide race for an open Senate seat in 2014. “‘I want to get a farm bill through the committee and this Congress,’ King told POLITICO. ‘It’s really the art of the possible.’” Also, Teresa Watanabe reported in Friday’s Los Angeles Times that, “L.A. Unified teachers and administrators this week expressed wildly differing views of a classroom breakfast program intended to ensure that students don’t start the day hungry. “United Teachers Los Angeles gave the program a ‘failing grade’ Monday as it released results from an online survey that said the effort had increased pests, created messes and cut down on instructional time. “But David Binkle, the district’s food services director, on Tuesday said that the program — which serves 193,000 students in 280 schools — was a ‘smashing success.’ Schools that participate have reported better attendance, less tardiness, calmer and more focused students and fewer visits to the school nurse, Binkle said.” And DTN’s Urban C. Lehner penned an interesting update on Friday, “There’s More Than One Way To Reform Food Stamps,” that pointed to “a 2011 essay in the Maine Policy Review, ‘Healthy Food Access and Affordability: ‘We Can Pay the Farmer or We Can Pay the Hospital.’’” Mr. Lehner noted that, “In short, for most of the program’s [SNAP] critics and supporters improving health and helping farmers are marginal concerns. “Which is a shame, because the authors of the Maine Policy Review essay — August Schumacher, Michael Nischan and Daniel Bowman Simon — have some interesting ideas for encouraging the use of SNAP benefits to promote more healthful eating and assist local produce growers.” In other policy news, Ken Anderson reported on Friday at Brownfield that, “U.S. Representative Kurt Schrader of Oregon says he plans to reintroduce the so-called ‘egg bill’  by the end of this month. “The legislation would set federal standards on cages for egg-laying hens. Schrader and Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California sponsored companion bills in the last Congress requiring egg producers throughout the country to switch to larger cages for hens.” From a political perspective, Corey Mitchell reported on Friday at the Minneapolis Star Tribune Online that, “Further evidence of the never-ending federal election cycle is cropping up in western Minnesota. “In its first targeted campaign of the season, the National Republican Congressional Committee, the campaign arm of House Republicans, aired televised attack ads this month against Rep. Collin Peterson, D-Minn. — more than 18 months before voters go to the polls.” Mr. Mitchell noted that, “But the numbers and rhetoric haven’t added up for Republicans in almost two decades. That was the last time an election challenger came within 10 percentage points of Peterson. In 2012, Peterson captured 60 percent of the vote, defeating his opponent by 26 percentage points.”   Agricultural Economy Reuters writer Karl Plume reported on Friday that, “Barge shipping was halted on Friday on parts of the Illinois and Mississippi rivers as flooding forced the closure of several locks until at least the middle of next week, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said. “The closures come three months after near-record-low water along the Mississippi River near St. Louis threatened to halt commercial barge traffic. Some 60 percent of U.S. grain export shipments are moved on barges on the Mississippi and its tributaries from production centers in the Midwest to export terminals at the Gulf of Mexico.” The National Weather Service tweeted on Saturday that, “Flooding will continue for several days in the Midwest,” and provided a link to river level flood forecasts. Also, Chicago area meteorologist Tom Skilling tweeted on Friday that, “Check out this Midwestern Regional Climate Center plot of rainfall the past 7 days.” Nick Timiraos reported in today’s Wall Street Journal that, “Communities in six states along the upper Mississippi River and its tributaries were hoping for a dry spell as heavy rains and melting snow threatened to keep rivers at uncomfortably high levels this week. “The U.S. Coast Guard said surging waters had caused 114 barges to break loose just south of St. Louis on Saturday night, prompting a shutdown of a 15-mile stretch of the Mississippi. “Officials said they will close a 3½-mile stretch of the Illinois River to boat traffic on Monday due to high water. Travel was restricted on Sunday.” A brief AP update in today’s Washington Post reported that, “Those who were fighting floods in several communities along the Mississippi River were mostly successful Sunday despite the onslaught of water, but an ominous forecast and the growing accumulation of snow in the upper Midwest tempered any feelings of victory. “The surging Mississippi was at or near crest at several places from the Quad Cities south to near St. Louis — some reaching 10-12 feet above flood stage. Problems were plentiful: hundreds of thousands of acres of farmland swamped as planting season approaches; three people dead; roads and bridges closed, including sections of major highways such as U.S. 61 in Iowa and Missouri and crossings at Quincy, Ill., and Louisiana, Mo. “The forecast calls for heavy rain Monday night and Tuesday throughout much of the Midwest.” Perry Beeman reported in Friday’s Des Moines Register that, “Nearly the entire eastern half of the state is now listed as drought-free, but some parts of western Iowa remain in severe drought, the U.S. Drought Monitor reported Thursday.” “The National Weather Service on Thursday said the next month is a coin flip in Iowa for both temperature and precipitation. For the next three months, there’s a slight chance of higher than normal temperatures, but no clear indication of whether precipitation will be above normal, below, or average,” the Register article said. Bloomberg writer Whitney McFerron reported on Friday that, “U.S. winter wheat crops developing in the Great Plains are at risk from another round of freezing temperatures today after the region was hit by cold weather earlier this month. “In Kansas, the biggest wheat-growing state, temperatures were as low as 25 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 4 degrees Celsius) in Liberal and Dodge City as of 3:52 a.m. local time, according to the National Weather Service. In Hereford, Texas, in the panhandle southwest of Amarillo, it was 23 degrees Fahrenheit. Areas of Texas, Oklahoma and New Mexico are under a hard freeze warning until at least 9 a.m., in which temperatures will be low enough to kill or harm crops, the weather service said.” On Friday, USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) released its Cattle on Feed report, which stated in part that, “Cattle and calves on feed for slaughter market in the United States for feedlots with capacity of 1,000 or more head totaled 10.9 million head on April 1, 2013. The inventory was 5 percent below April 1, 2012 [related graph].” In its Milk Production report on Friday, NASS indicated that, “Milk production in the United States during the January – March quarter totaled 50.5 billion pounds, down 1.1 percent from the January – March quarter last year [related graph].” In trade news, Reuters writer Kaori Kaneko reported on Saturday that, “Japan won approval from participating countries to join talks on a U.S.-led Asia Pacific free trade agreement, central to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s plans to open the economy to more competition and revive growth. “The formal invitation for Tokyo to join the negotiations was extended at a meeting of members of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) on Saturday on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation gathering in Surabaya, Indonesia, according to a joint statement. “Japan will join 11 nations already in talks on the TPP: the United States, Canada, Mexico, Peru, Chile, Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei, Australia and New Zealand. Members hope to reach a deal by the end of this year.” In addition, an update posted on Saturday at the Southeast Asia Real Time Blog (The Wall Street Journal) indicated that, “The acting U.S. trade representative, Demetrios Marantis, spoke late Saturday with The Wall Street Journal’s Ben Otto.” According to the update, which contained a transcript of the interview, acting USTR Marantis stated that, “Integrating Japan into the TPP does a number of things. One, it helps to realize the goal of TPP as being a platform for integration in the Asia-Pacific, and having Japan and the size of its economy and population increases the economic significance of the TPP not just to the U.S. but to all the TPP countries. It provides a huge market for exports and for the jobs that are supported by those exports. Bringing Japan in really just increases the economic significance of the TPP.” In a separate trade related issue, Steve Conner reported late last week a The Independent (UK) Online that, “The case for genetically modified (GM) food is getting stronger because of its importance as a tool to feed a growing global population, according to the Government’s new chief scientific adviser. “Sir Mark Walport, who is one month into his new job, said today that he will aim to offer ministers the best and most accurate advice on all aspects of science policy, including the introduction of GM crops. “‘The issue is European regulation, which is that Europe grows remarkably little genetically modified crops so I don’t think this is something that is going to change overnight,’ Sir Mark said. “‘But I think it is inexorably rising up the agenda again because as a technology it is showing its value more and more obviously in terms of the crops that are able to feed the world,’ he said.”   Budget Nancy Cook reported late last week at National Journal Online that, “Just one day after the Senate failed to pass any gun-control measures, the prospect of a spring budget deal seemed equally elusive. “There is no formal budget conference on the horizon between House Republicans and Senate Democrats to reconcile the two parties’ wildly different visions and blueprints for spending and taxes. This is after weeks of both parties promoting the benefits of ‘regular order,’ during which Congress conducts its business through committees instead of looking to leadership to cut deals. “The other path to a budget compromise—the White House’s charm offensive and its private dinners and lunches with lawmakers—seems similarly stalled.”   Biofuels Christopher Doering reported in yesterday’s Des Moines Register that, “The battle between U.S. ethanol producers and oil companies has reached a turning point, with the winners poised to gain an advantage over the future of the country’s energy mix and the losers forced to cede profits and jobs to their bitter rival. “Ground zero of the battle is the country’s Renewable Fuel Standard — an 8-year-old law that requires refiners to produce alternative fuels from corn, soybeans and other products in an effort to reduce the country’s dependence on foreign oil. “The drop in corn production caused by last summer’s drought pushed the mandate into the spotlight. Critics complained the requirement led to higher corn prices and more expensive feed costs for livestock producers while forcing consumers to pay more for meat at the supermarket. In an unusual alliance, representatives from the livestock industry and consumer and other groups joined forces with the powerful oil and gas industry to attack the embattled policy.”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    April 19 Farm Bill; Ag Economy; Biofuels; Budget; and, Immigration- Friday Posted By Keith Good On April 19, 2013  Farm Bill, Policy Issues David Rogers reported yesterday at Politico that, “House Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas (R-Okla.) said Thursday that he will move ahead a farm bill markup May 15 despite pressure from the Republican leadership to take more time first and consider tougher changes in the food stamp program to win over conservative votes. “Lucas told POLITICO that he was fully prepared to hold listening sessions first with the Republican whip’s office over the next month. But he wants to keep to his schedule and produce a bipartisan bill together with his ranking Democrat, Minnesota Rep. Collin Peterson. “‘They suggested I take a little more time,’ Lucas said of a meeting Thursday with Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) and his top staff. ‘I said I wanted to go May 15 but would be happy to hold the listening sessions to hear what my colleagues think.’” Mr. Rogers added that, “As the floor leader, Cantor is said to be worried still about the ability to win over conservative support for any farm bill, and Lucas has felt pressure from the leadership to steer more to the right and consider tougher work requirements for food stamp beneficiaries, for example.” In a teleconference call with reporters yesterday, Sen. Mike Johanns (R., Neb.) was asked by a reporter, “Senator, there’s talk that the Senate farm bill markup is kind of falling by the wayside right now in Washington. It might be pushed back to the month of May. Are you getting that same feeling in D.C.?” Sen. Johanns indicated that, “My impression is that the markup is going to be in May. But I also get the impression that it’s not really lagging or falling back. The impression I get is that everybody’s trying to work through a variety of issues. “You know, you do have some — some different dynamics this time. You have a new ranking member. He has a view of the world, justifiably so, so there are just some things we have to work through. “I would say this. I continue to tell people who are visiting my office or calling me that I’m optimistic that the Senate can get a farm bill done. I’d love to have markup occurring right now, but I also believe you’ve got to lay down the necessary steps. I believe that’s what’s happening today. My hope is we go to markup in May then, get a bill to the floor. I would love to see that bill debated and voted on. I think we can pass it on the floor. And then my hope is we can get something out of the House so we can get to conference and hopefully get this done before we run out of time.” More specifically on the nutrition policy variable, a news update yesterday from Sen. John Thune (R., S.D.) stated that, “[Sen. Thune] and Congressman Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.) today introduced legislation that would save $30 billion over 10 years from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) by eliminating loopholes, waste, fraud, and abuse, while ensuring those who meet the current income and asset eligibility requirements continue to receive the benefits they need.” The update explained that, “The Thune, Stutzman bill would limit the automatic qualification of an individual for SNAP benefits due to enrollment in other low-income programs, known as categorical eligibility to only those individuals receiving cash assistance. Additionally, their bill would close a loophole that allows states to send small energy assistance checks to SNAP participants in order to increase SNAP benefit payments, eliminate duplicative training programs and state performance bonuses, improve the quality control measures to ensure states are more aggressively penalized for improper payments, and reform the nutrition education and obesity program. This bill would not affect current benefit levels for SNAP recipients, but instead saves money by ending duplicative programs and holding states accountable for accurate program administration. “For a one-page outline of the specific reforms to the SNAP program in the Thune, Stutzman bill, click here. For related charts, click here.” Also yesterday, a news release from Sen. Pat Roberts (R., Kans.) stated that, “Today, Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee Chairman Tim Johnson (D-SD) and [Sen. Roberts] introduced a bill to ensure that hundreds of rural communities across the nation remain eligible for rural housing development programs administered by the USDA.” “The bill would grandfather currently eligible communities that meet the population threshold until 2020, and raise the population cap from 25,000 to 35,000. A similar measure was passed with bipartisan support in the Senate last year as an amendment to the Farm Bill, but did not ultimately become law after the bill stalled in the House of Representatives. Without Congressional action, hundreds of communities could lose their eligibility in the coming months, which could have serious negative consequences for local economies and homebuyers,” yesterday’s update said. Meanwhile, The Washington Post editorial board indicated today that, “The United States has a proud tradition of supplying food aid to hungry people around the world, whether their plight is due to chronic poverty or sudden natural disaster. Still, food aid was never a purely altruistic exercise. In 1954, President Dwight D. Eisenhower kicked off the program that would become known as Food for Peace by saying that it would ‘lay the basis for a permanent expansion of our exports of agricultural products with lasting benefits to ourselves and peoples of other lands.’ In the six decades since, global food aid has generated sales for U.S. farmers, business for U.S.-flagged cargo vessels and jobs for U.S. seamen.” The Post item noted that, “Fortunately, President Obama’s budget for fiscal 2014 includes a plan to modernize and reform the $1.5 billion U.S. food aid program. Mr. Obama would end ‘monetization,’ the inefficient practice whereby the federal government buys commodities from U.S. farmers and ships them abroad to governments and nongovernmental organizations, which sell them in the local market and use the proceeds for development projects.” “The people who have a legitimate claim on the American taxpayer’s aid are the hungry millions overseas. Mr. Obama is right to want to supply it as quickly and cost-effectively as possible,” the Post editorial said. In other news, Julian Hattem reported yesterday at The Hill’s RegWatch Blog that, “The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) wants to grow its oversight of farmers and imports, but lawmakers are concerned about the burdens the agency already imposes on small and organic agriculture producers. “In a review of the USDA’s requested 2014 budget for regulatory and marketing procedures on Thursday, legislators on the House Appropriations Committee’s Agriculture subcommittee were skeptical about giving regulators more money to do their jobs.” Yesterday’s article noted that, “Though the USDA as a whole requested about 6 percent less money for 2014 than in 2013, the marketing and regulatory programs want to increase their budgets by about 6 percent.” In news regarding food safety, Ben Goad reported yesterday at The Hill’s RegWatch Blog that, “A coalition of dozens of food industry trade groups is urging Congress to do away with a set of proposed food safety fees they say would be passed along to families at supermarkets across the country. “The fees, set out in President Obama’s 2014 budget proposal, stem from the 2011 Food Safety Modernization Act, which in January prompted a set of sweeping new regulations now under consideration. “To help pay for the changes, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) would seek to collect $59 million in food facility registration and inspection fees from food producers and distributors in the next fiscal year. An additional food import fee would cost the industry $166 million.” An update yesterday at the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition Blog reported that, “At a Senate Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee hearing today, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Hamburg said that the comment period on the two proposed food safety regulations currently open for comment would be extended by 120 days. The comment period was originally set to close on May 16, and with the extension, the comment period is now scheduled to close in mid-September.” And Bill Tomson reported in today’s Wall Street Journal that, “Human infections from dangerous bacteria linked to food contamination rose last year, with a sharp increase in illnesses from organisms found in shellfish, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said Thursday. “The number of infection cases reported in a sample group of states increased 3% in 2012 from the previous year, an agency calculation showed.”   Agricultural Economy AP writer David Pitt reported yesterday that, “Soaking rain across a large swath of the nation’s midsection has helped further alleviate drought conditions in some of the major crop-growing states, including Iowa, Missouri, Minnesota and Wisconsin, according to a weekly drought monitor. Small portions of Nebraska also saw improvement. “Snow in parts of Nebraska and heavy rain soaking Iowa have farmers now hoping for a dry spell to allow them to get into the fields for spring planting. “Much of the Plains and Midwest were seeing snow or rain on Thursday that isn’t included in the monitor’s report, which measures conditions for the seven days up to Tuesday morning. It is released each Thursday.” Mr. Pitt added that, “Persistent wet conditions are preventing farmers from getting into the fields to till and apply fertilizer. It’s particularly frustrating for corn farmers in states such as Iowa, Nebraska and Illinois who prefer to plant corn by mid-May.” Owen Fletcher reported yesterday that, “The High Plains region was 86.43% in drought as of Tuesday morning, down 5.24 percentage points from a week earlier, the monitors showed, as conditions improved in the Dakotas and Nebraska. But severe drought conditions still threaten wheat crops growing in the southern Plains.” In trade related news, the AP reported yesterday that, “The European Union’s top trade official says negotiations with the U.S. on what would become the world’s largest free trade agreement should be concluded before the end of next year. “Commissioner Karel de Gucht told reporters after a meeting of the 27-nation bloc’s trade ministers in Dublin that the talks with Washington should be concluded by October 2014, when the term of the European Commission ends and a month before U.S. holds midterm elections.” Meanwhile, an update yesterday at the U.S. Trade Representative’s Office Online noted that, “The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative’s (USTR) Chief Agricultural Negotiator, Ambassador Isi Siddiqui, met with a delegation from the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) this afternoon to discuss agricultural trade issues. The NCBA delegation included approximately 25 members from across the United States who engaged with Ambassador Siddiqui in a dialogue about bilateral beef trade with China, Japan, and Russia, as well as updates on agricultural issues under the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.”   Biofuels Gregory Meyer reported yesterday at The Financial Times Online that, “The US ethanol lobby has asked Washington to put the brakes on government biofuels targets, in an acknowledgment of a widening gap between policy goals and reality at petrol stations. “The request is a significant policy reversal by the Renewable Fuels Association, which was a powerful force behind the passage of the US’s aggressive ethanol mandate in 2007.” The FT article indicated that, “This year’s draft mandate requires the sale of 16.55bn gallons of biofuel inside the US. Citing ‘uncertainty’ over how to meet this goal, the Renewable Fuels Association advised the government to pursue a ‘reduction in the overall RFS’ in a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency. “This was the first time the association recommended cutting the total renewable fuel mandate, the association confirmed. ‘We’re trying to be reasonable,’ Bob Dinneen, president, told the Financial Times.” “The fuels association said it asked Washington for the reduction because production of ‘advanced biofuels’ made from biomass other than grain was falling short of its 2.75bn-gallon portion of the mandate,” the FT article said.   Budget Lori Montgomery reported in today’s Washington Post that, “Erskine Bowles and Alan K. Simpson, the deficit-cutting duo who have been trying for three years to broker a budget deal, are back in Washington with a new message for the nation’s policymakers: “You’ve done the easy stuff. You’ve done the stupid stuff. Now it’s time to get serious. “With another fight over the federal debt limit looming later this year as perhaps the final crucible for forging bipartisan consensus, the former chairmen of the famed Bowles-Simpson debt-reduction commission began briefing lawmakers Thursday on their latest plan for getting the nation’s runaway debt under control.” The Post article added that, “In a major concession to political reality, Bowles-Simpson 2.0 seeks far less in new taxes than the original, and it seeks far more in savings from federal health programs for the elderly. “But it would end the sequester, the sharp, across-the-board cuts to agency budgets that took effect March 1. And it would eliminate the legal cap on government borrowing, proposing a new system that would let the U.S. Treasury keep borrowing as long as the debt does not grow as a percentage of the nation’s economy. “All told, the plan urges policymakers to enact $2.5 trillion in new taxes and savings over the next decade, significantly more than the $1.8 trillion plan President Obama has put on the table. In a report set for public release Friday, the pair argue that Obama has set his sights too low and that more must be done to push down a debt that is now higher, as a percentage of the economy, than at any time in U.S. history except for the end of World War II.” Erik Wasson and Sam Baker reported yesterday at The Hill’s On the Money Blog that, “The former chairmen of President Obama’s 2010 fiscal commission, Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson, on Friday will release a new deficit reduction plan in the hopes of reviving a debt grand bargain this year.”   Immigration Ron Nixon reported in today’s New York Times that, “Any chance of getting immigration legislation through the House will most likely depend on representatives like Doc Hastings. “While he has not been the most outspoken about immigration issues, proponents of an overhaul are counting on Mr. Hastings, a Republican, for one reason: His Congressional district, which cuts a wide path through the center of Washington State, depends heavily on agriculture, an industry with a significant stake in the outcome of the debate.” Mr. Nixon noted that, “A coalition of 11 agriculture groups has launched a major lobbying campaign in support of an immigration overhaul. Members of the effort, known as the Agricultural Workforce Coalition, see representatives from districts where thousands of jobs depend on agriculture as key to any effort to pass the legislation. “Agriculture Department data shows that Republicans represent 17 of the top 20 districts where agriculture is a major industry. And farm groups are hoping that local concerns will trump national politics as the legislation moves forward in the Republican-controlled House, where it will most likely face a tough challenge from conservatives who have been hostile to previous attempts to change the system.” “The agriculture groups, which lobbied heavily on Capitol Hill as a group of senators worked to draft an immigration bill, say they will soon began a similar campaign in the House,” the Times article said.   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    April 17 Policy Issues; Ag Economy; Budget; and, Immigration- Wednesday Posted By Keith Good On April 17, 2013  Policy Issues: Appropriations Committee Hearing, Farm Bill Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack testified at a House Appropriations Agriculture Subcommittee hearing yesterday; the lawmakers met to consider the Administration’s priorities for USDA and make a closer inquiry of the President’s 2014 budget. Subcommittee Chairman Robert Aderholt (R., Ala.) noted at the outset of yesterday’s hearing that, “The budget includes proposals to eliminate direct payments to farmers, modify the Conservation Reserve Program, and change the crop insurance program. While these proposals may or may not have merit, they do have to go through the authorizing committees. One of the things that the authorizing committees agreed on last year, on a bicameral and bipartisan basis, as they were developing their respective versions of the farm bill was to reduce spending on SNAP. The Senate bill had a $4 billion reduction that passed the Democratic-controlled body, and the House bill had a $16 billion reduction that passed the full committee. Yet your budget proposes to maintain the increase that was provided in the Recovery Act at an additional cost of $2.3 billion. There just seems to be a disconnect here. “Finally, I look at the President’s overall request and find that it is paid for by an additional $1.1 trillion in new taxes, and never balances. In a sense, this whole proposal really does fit the axiom, ‘dead on arrival.’” In part, Sec. Vilsack pointed out that, “Agriculture remains a bright spot in our economy. The resilience of American farmers and ranchers has helped to support 1 in 12 U.S. jobs. Net farm income remains strong, and the farm debt-to-asset ratio is at a record low today. Fueled by new trade agreements with Panama, Colombia and South Korea, American agricultural exports are surging – with more than $478 billion in exports over the last four years. Our farmers and ranchers achieved these results even in the face of the worst drought in generations, and the uncertainty posed by the lack of a comprehensive, multi-year Food, Farm and Jobs Bill. Challenges still remain for agriculture – especially for America’s livestock and dairy producers, who continue to struggle today with low margins and high input costs.” Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (R., Neb.) asked the Secretary about land values and the possibility of a “bubble” in one round of questioning. Sec. Vilsack pointed out that, “I don’t think we are faced with nearly the same circumstance we were faced with in the 80s where people were over-leveraged.” USDA Chief Economist Joe Glauber added that higher farmland prices “is fully consistent with the fact that we have had very strong farm income and low interest rates. I think both of those have been very big factors in seeing the sorts of increases that we’ve seen, particularly in the Midwest.” (Note: an audio clip of this exchange from yesterday is available here (MP3- 2:15)). Rep. Fortenberry also sought additional information on the SNAP program (food stamps)- audio replay of the discussion here (MP3- 2:43). Meanwhile, Rep. Kevin Yoder (R., Kans.), who noted that his father had driven his tractor to Washington, D.C. in 1978, along with many other farmers at that time who were drawing attention to policy and economic issues, sought the Secretary’s long-term policy perspective on important policy variables beyond the typical five-year window of a Farm Bill. Sec. Vilsack highlighted the following broad issues: immigration reform, the impact of extreme weather conditions, ag research, a strong farm safety net- including credit issues, and the issue of “who is going to farm,” in a reference to statistical indictors of an aging average U.S. farmer (related audio clip (MP3- 4:28)). AP writer Mary Clare Jalonick reported yesterday that, “Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack says 15,000 low-income elderly and disabled people in rural areas could lose rental subsidies because of across-the-board budget cuts that went into effect earlier this year. “USDA’s rural rental assistance program helps low-income tenants live in government-funded housing. Vilsack said the money for that program could run out in August or September and the lack of rental assistance could not only have an impact on the tenants but also the owners of the apartment complexes.” An update yesterday at the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition Blog reported that, “Following questions by Ranking Member Farr, Congressman Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE) asked the Secretary to talk about what the Agency is doing to mitigate and adapt to drought. Secretary Vilsack highlighted USDA’s efforts to promote key conservation practices that help retain soil and water on the land. The Secretary pointed specifically to the work that the Agency is doing to promote the use of cover crops and multicropping. As part of this effort, the Secretary is bringing together the Risk Management Agency (RMA), NRCS, and external experts to address crop insurance rules that discourage cover crop adoption. “Conservation management practices are key to drought mitigation and preparedness, and we commend the Secretary for this effort. The Secretary also noted that USDA will soon be announcing a climate change initiative.” In other developments, an update yesterday at the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Online stated that, “The number of people receiving benefits from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly called Food Stamps) has risen sharply in recent years—from about 26 million in 2007 to nearly 47 million in 2012. Total spending on SNAP has also grown significantly—from $35 billion in 2007 to $80 billion in 2012.” The CBO update also included this interesting graph. Also on the nutrition issue, an update yesterday at USDA’s Economic Research Service (ERS) Chart Gallery stated that, “ERS researchers compared U.S. consumers’ at-home food purchases, as recorded by Nielsen Homescan panelists, with USDA food spending guidelines for obtaining a diet that meets the Dietary Guidelines. The ERS analysis found that food spending patterns showed little improvement between 1998 and 2006, except for an increase in the share of spending devoted to whole grains, coupled with a decline in refined grains’ share” [related graph]. With respect to dairy policy, a news release yesterday from the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) indicated that, “A new analysis released today by a group of university economists demonstrates that the Dairy Security Act (DSA) – the farm bill proposal advocated by [NMPF] – provides the most effective economic safety net for farmers. The DSA provides catastrophic risk insurance, helps enhance farmer revenue, and does so in a way that minimizes government outlays.” Yesterday’s update added that, “‘This new report provides independent corroboration of why the DSA is the best choice for saving dairy farmers while protecting taxpayers. Congress needs to heed this report and pass the Dairy Security Act in 2013 as part of the farm bill,’ said NMPF President and CEO Jerry Kozak.” Lloyd Riter, a co-director of the Agriculture Energy Coalition penned a column yesterday at The Hill’s Congress Blog regarding energy provisions contained in the Farm Bill; while Ben Goad reported yesterday at The Hill’s RegWatch Blog that, “The Produce Marketing Association (PMA) named Dr, Jim Gorny to serve as its vice president for food safety and technology, the industry group announced Tuesday. “Gorny, formerly an advisor at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), comes to the group at a time when the food safety world is in flux, thanks to a sweeping overhaul proposed by the Obama administration in January. If enacted, the new regulations would reflect the biggest changes to American food safety policies since the 1930s.” On the issue of biofuels, The Wall Street Journal editorial board indicated today that, “This month Democrats Jim Costa of California and Peter Welch of Vermont and Republicans Bob Goodlatte of Virginia and Steve Womack of Arkansas introduced a bill that would eliminate the specific volume mandates and simply cap ethanol at 10% a gallon. The mandate would then float with gas consumption—still a genuflection to the farm belt but far better than the status quo. “Their proposal would also declare that ethanol is ethanol, regardless of type, erasing the EPA’s artificial mandate distinctions for corn ethanol, cellulosic ethanol, biodiesel and more. Most of these fuels are not commercially available and may never exist.” The Journal added that, “Over in the Senate, Energy and Natural Resources Chairman Ron Wyden—an ethanol supporter—conceded last week at a Georgetown conference that ‘I’m not convinced that the current requirements are achievable’ and said his panel would spend ‘a lot of time’ rethinking renewable fuels. “Other reasons for optimism? We count ourselves students of Bob Dinneen, the Renewable Fuels Association lobby president whose rhetorical stridency tends to be inversely proportional to his political prospects. Mr. Dinneen has recently accused ethanol opponents of ‘living in a fantasy parallel universe’ and attacked the House bill as ‘backwards, silly, circular logic.’ He’s worried it could pass.”   Agricultural Economy A news update yesterday from University of Missouri Extension stated that, “With good weather in 2013 crop production could increase, pushing prices down. “‘I think corn and beans are going to ratchet lower,’ said University of Missouri Extension agricultural economist David Reinbott during the MU Spring Ag Marketing Conference.” The update pointed out that, “The recent USDA crop report predicted 97.3 million acres of corn, down from the 99 million acres Reinbott projected in January. “‘With the wet April and maybe even May, plus the snow and wet conditions in the Dakotas and upper Midwest, we might even lose another million or two,’ Reinbott said.” USDA’s Economic Research Service released its Livestock, Dairy, and Poultry Outlook report yesterday (by Rachel J. Johnson) which stated in part that, “While drought has all but disappeared in the Southeastern United States, it continues in the Central and Southern Plains and Southwestern United States, although it appears to be moderating in most areas. Over the next 2 months, rains, or their absence, will set the stage for much of the summer grazing season in most of the Plains States. “Feeder cattle prices have improved following the most recent precipitation. With normal spring and summer precipitation in the Plains States and resulting improvements in pasture conditions, producers that culled deep into their cow herds since 2010 could begin to retain heifers to start rebuilding cow herd inventories. This heifer retention would also reduce feeder cattle supplies and provide support for feeder cattle prices. If corn prices decline as forecast (as a result of more normal precipitation) and pasture conditions improve, prices for feeder cattle could receive an additional boost.” The ERS report explained that, “On the other hand, continued drought could again force feeder cattle into feedlots prematurely. These premature placements would likely increase beef supplies during the latter part of 2013 and into 2014. Increased supplies would likely exert downward pressure on fed cattle prices, which, along with increased feeding costs from longer feeding periods required by lighter weight placements, would likely reduce cattle-feeding profit potential.” A separate University of Missouri Extension item from yesterday noted that, “Cattle prices have been at record highs the last few years. The reason is less meat on the market. “‘Last year’s meat supply was 217.9 pounds per person, down 19.7 pounds from 2007 and the lowest since 1991,’ said Ron Plain, University of Missouri Extension agricultural economist at the MU Spring Ag Marketing Outlook Conference. ‘Less meat on the market drives meat prices up. That allowed for record slaughter cattle prices.’ “Plain says the forecast is for slightly more meat in 2013, changing the downward trend. The key to increased meat production is going to be better weather and higher yields so there is more feed to support more animals.”   Budget David Rogers reported yesterday at Politico that, “The most regular thing about ‘regular order’ in Congress these days may be the regularity of its disarray. “Nearly a month after the great budget debates of March, there’s no prospect soon of even appointing a formal House-Senate conference to try to resolve the differences. And rather than be the fall guy again, Appropriations Committee leaders are making plans to move ahead with what could be wildly different assumptions come May and June.” Mr. Rogers pointed out that, “[House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers (R., Ky.)] is being asked to meet a discretionary spending target of $966.4 billion for the new fiscal year that begins Oct. 1, with just $414.4 billion for nondefense spending. “His counterpart, Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) will operate from a level of $1.058 trillion with $506 billion for nondefense spending. “That’s a $91 billion gap — more than three times the difference from a year ago. And when adjusted for inflation, the House’s $414.4 billion target takes Washington back to what domestic appropriations were in 2001, before the great surge in veterans and homeland security spending of the past decade.” The Politico article added that, “Senate Budget Committee Chairwoman Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and her House counterpart, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), met last week and have talked since. But after pounding the Senate for years to produce a budget, the House GOP turns out to be reluctant to move to the next step in regular order: appointing conferees to a formal House-Senate conference.” Erik Wasson reported yesterday at The Hill’s On the Money Blog that, “Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Tuesday blasted House Republicans and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), saying they are stalling on the creation of a budget conference committee.”   Immigration Reuters writers Richard Cowan and Rachelle Younglai reported yesterday that, “A group of Democratic and Republican senators on Tuesday unveiled long-awaited landmark legislation to remove the threat of deportation for millions of illegal immigrants and give them an opportunity to eventually become U.S. citizens. “Under the proposal, undocumented immigrants who came to the United States before December 31, 2011, and had stayed in the country continuously could apply for ‘provisional’ legal status as soon as six months after the bill is signed by the president.” The article noted that, “Even with the many caveats, the proposal faces months of debate, scores of amendments and potentially significant opposition, particularly in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives. “‘It’s nothing but a starting point,’ Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa told reporters on Tuesday. He is the senior Republican on the Judiciary Committee, the panel that will manage the immigration bill.” Also yesterday, President Obama indicated in a statement that, “I urge the Senate to quickly move this bill forward and, as I told Senators Schumer and McCain, I stand willing to do whatever it takes to make sure that comprehensive immigration reform becomes a reality as soon as possible.”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    April 16 Farm Bill; Ag Economy; Biofuels; Budget; and, Immigration- Tuesday Posted By Keith Good On April 16, 2013  Farm Bill- Policy Issues Sen. Pat Roberts (R., Kans.) was a guest on yesterday’s AgriTalk radio program with Mike Adams where he discussed a variety of issues, including farm policy. In part, Sen. Roberts pointed to legislation he introduced last week relating to crop insurance. Noting the drought conditions on the high plains, he stated that, “We’re in desperate need of moisture, but we’re also in desperate need of crop insurance. That’s the number one item of concern, I don’t care what farm hearing you have, what region of the country you have, where you are, both the lender and the farmer need the crop insurance.” Sen. Roberts added that, “What we do is we simply reauthorize the federal crop insurance program, we expand the coverage options for producers through something called a supplemental coverage option—that’s the SCO—based on an area yield and loss. It amends that act to make available separate enterprise units for the irrigated and the non-irrigated acres. The bill addresses the declining actual production history yield problem by increasing the county transitional yield. “That could be a real help to us out there where we’re so dry. And it sets some budget limitation on any kind of future renegotiation with a standard reinsurance agreement with the RMA [Risk Management Agency].” During yesterday’s AgriTalk program, Mike Adams inquired: “So you’re hopeful this will be part of this year’s Senate version of the farm bill, but in case it isn’t, you would offer it as a standalone bill?” Sen. Roberts explained: “That’s correct, Mike. I just wanted to…I want to put down a marker. I put down a marker on two things. Number one is crop insurance, because that’s the number one issue that, as I’ve said, if you go to any farm hearing or sit around a coffee shop, that’s the thing that everybody has to have. “The other marker we set down is that we say 36 billion over ten years with SNAP, or the food stamp program, and we try to restore integrity to the program. We’ve got a lot of problems there.” In other news, Ben Goad reported earlier this week at The Hill’s RegWatch Blog that, “The U.S. meat industry is joining with the Canadian government in opposing proposed labeling regulations that they say would shutter beef packing plants and cripple the industry across North America. “The proposed country-of-origin (COOL) labeling requirements from the Obama administration are meant to address a finding by the World Trade Organization that the United States’ current meat and poultry labeling rules violate international standards.” The Hill update noted that, “The World Trade Organization (WTO) last year ruled that the country-of-origin rules give American meat products an unfair advantage over those from Canada and Mexico. If the WTO violation is not remedied by May 23, America’s top two meat-trading partners could impose retaliatory tariffs against U.S. meat producers and packers.” A news release Friday from the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) on this issue stated that, “The [NCBA] submitted comments yesterday on the United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) proposed amended Mandatory County of Origin Labeling Rule (MCOOL). In the comments, NCBA stated that the proposed rule changing MCOOL will not satisfy the World Trade Organization (WTO) or the beef industry’s largest trading partners, Canada and Mexico, who originally brought the WTO complaint.” In a separate news development, Kelsey Gee reported in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal that, “The U.S. dairy industry is clashing with several consumer groups over an unusual request that regulators allow low-calorie chocolate milk to be sold without declaring prominently on the label that it is reduced-calorie. “Dairy-industry groups submitted a petition to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to drop special labeling requirements for chocolate, vanilla and other flavored milks that contain artificial sweeteners such as aspartame. Currently, those products must say ‘reduced calorie’ or ‘less sugar’ on the front of the packaging. Otherwise, they can’t be called milk. “Many companies, from soft-drink to potato-chip makers, promote low-calorie products to target a growing market of weight-conscious consumers. But the dairy industry says it wants to avoid having to make such claims because they are a turnoff for kids and require very specific reductions in sugar or calorie content. The industry wants flexibility to use its own formulas and simply disclose sugar substitutes in the ingredients.” And with respect to the issue of antibiotic resistance and animal production, a recent correspondence in The New England Journal of Medicine stated that, “Antibiotic use is an important factor in the spread of antibiotic resistance. It is estimated that 50% of antibiotic prescriptions may be unnecessary…[H]ealth care providers prescribed 258.0 million courses of antibiotics in 2010, or 833 prescriptions per 1000 persons.” Meanwhile, Washington Post columnist Michael Gerson indicated in today’s paper that, “The only thing more difficult than reforming an unsuccessful program is reforming a relatively successful one. U.S.-grown food aid has saved countless lives. But it can’t be accused of efficiency. The commodity mandate delays delivery and raises costs — more than 16 percent of program expenses go to ocean shipping. So the Obama administration has proposed a major reform of American food aid, which would free up nearly half the program for local and regional purchasing. It would also end the selling, or ‘monetization,’ of food by charities — a practice that wastes about a quarter of every dollar and can depress food prices and crowd out local farmers. “The administration is not proposing to end commodity purchases, just scale them back. But it estimates this shift would allow the program to provide help 11 to 14 weeks faster, with a cost savings of 25 percent to 50 percent. Entirely through efficiency, the United States could serve 4 million additional people.”   Agricultural Economy- Trade Cheri Zagurski and Anthony Greder reported yesterday at DTN (link requires subscription) that, “The nation’s corn crop is 2% planted as of April 14, according to USDA’s weekly Crop Progress report , well behind last year’s 16% and the five-year average of 7%. University of Illinois Agricultural Economist Darrel Good noted yesterday at the farmdoc daily blog (“Early Season Corn Production Concerns”) that, “New crop futures have been choppy over the past two weeks as the start to planting in the Corn Belt has been delayed…[A]s usual, planting delays raise questions about the likely magnitude of corn acreage and the potential impact on average yields. Some indication of the potential acreage impact of continued delays in planting is revealed in the historic acreage response in years of late planting.” After additional analysis, yesterday’s farmdoc update indicated that, “Agronomic research that has quantified the relationship between planting date and corn yields has clearly identified a yield penalty associated with late planting. In the Corn Belt, that penalty accelerates for planting dates after about the third week of May. However, planting date is only one factor that influences corn yields. Over a fairly wide planting window, yields are more influenced by growing season weather than by planting date. As a result, the U.S average yield relative to trend yield has varied considerably regardless of the percentage of the crop planted late. In the 10 years since 1990 with the largest percentage of the crop planted late, the U.S. average yield was below trend in five years, about equal to trend in two years, and above trend in three years. The largest of the five yield shortfalls were in the extreme late planted years of 1993 (widespread flooding) and 1995 (very hot summer). Ironically, the largest yield shortfalls relative to trend in modern history were in the early planted years of 1988 and 2012 and in 1983 when plantings were delayed modestly. “The likely size of the 2013 U.S. corn crop is still very uncertain at this early stage of the season. With recent beneficial precipitation in much of the Corn Belt, prospects for only modest losses in corn acreage, and ample time remaining to plant the crop, prospects for a large crop are still very much in play.” In more specific news highlighting trade issues, Bloomberg writer Brian Wingfield reported yesterday that, “U.S. rice farmers say they expect Japan will open its market to imports as American agricultural groups push a Pacific-region agreement that would create the world’s largest free-trade area. “‘Rice will be a difficult topic in these negotiations,’ Bob Cummings, chief operating officer of the Arlington, Virginia-based USA Rice Federation industry group, said today at a press conference in Washington with U.S. farm groups. ‘We expect to see improvement in access.’” Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack was also a guest on yesterday’s AgriTalk program with Mike Adams, where a wide-ranging discussion focused in part on trade developments. Commenting on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement and Japan, Sec. Vilsack pointed out that, “Well, it’s a huge opportunity, obviously, for agriculture in the United States because Japan is a market that is important to us, and this will allow it to expand. We’ve seen a Japanese government that’s far more amenable to breaking down barriers. We saw them basically make it a little bit easier for our beef to enter the Japanese market, which was certainly a good, positive sign.” Sec. Vilsack added that, “And this should also, I think, help to inform our work with the EU. We want a similar type of relationship with the EU, but there are a lot of difficult ag issues that have got to get worked out in both the TPP and the EU issue in trade agreements, and obviously we’re going to be involved in making sure that happens.” On yesterday’s program Mike Adams noted, “You mentioned the European Union. How close are we, or where are we in negotiations with the European Union on getting a trade deal done?” Sec. Vilsack stated that, “I think we’re a ways away. There’s still work to be done, obviously. We’re just beginning that process. And I think that there are enormous issues confronting us in terms of this discussion. I had a chance to visit with Minister Ritz from Canada, whose country was also engaged in discussions with the EU. And these ag issues are very difficult. There are biotech issues that have to be worked through, and I think the EU has got to take a much different view than they have in the past. “So I think there’s a lot of work yet to be done, Mike.”   Biofuels Zack Colman reported yesterday at The Hill’s Energy Blog that, “The federal government extended a research program to develop biofuels for use in commercial airplanes by five years on Monday. “Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood announced the agreement at a conference outside Washington, D.C.”   Budget Erik Wasson reported yesterday at The Hill’s On the Money Blog that, “The Senate on Monday evening sent its 2014 budget resolution to the House for consideration. “The procedure was a necessary first step before the House could move to convene a conference committee to reconcile its own budget with the vastly different Senate-passed version. The Senate passed the budget in a marathon session last month. “It remains unclear if the House GOP will now move to create a conference, although the move is considered likely even though the conference is unlikely to succeed in reconciling the House and Senate spending visions.” Also, more broadly on the budget debate, Lori Montgomery reported in today’s Washington Post that, “President Obama’s offer to trim Social Security benefits has perplexed and angered Democrats, but GOP leaders are embracing the proposal and rushing to jump-start a debate that will delve even more deeply into the touchy topic of federal spending on the elderly. “This week, two House subcommittees plan to hold hearings on ‘reforms to protect and preserve’ programs for retirees, starting with Obama’s proposal to apply a less generous measure of inflation to annual increases in Social Security benefits.” Today’s article added that, “The developments signal an important shift in the budget battle as party leaders nervously prepare again to raise the federal debt limit. After more than two years of talking about taxes and ‘wasteful’ government spending, policymakers appear ready to move into the more serious and sensitive realm of entitlement programs.”   Immigration Sara Murray reported in today’s Wall Street Journal that, “The bipartisan plan to overhaul the nation’s immigration law would drastically rewrite the system for awarding visas to live in the U.S., giving preference based on skills and economic needs and putting less emphasis on family ties. “The sweeping immigration legislation, which a group of eight senators is expected to unveil this week, creates a pathway to citizenship for the more than 11 million immigrants living in the U.S. illegally, increases border security and overhauls a bevy of visa programs, many tied to employment opportunities.” The Journal article noted that, “Immigrants with provisional status will have several routes to gaining citizenship. One would be a new merit-based system that may consider how long they have been in the country or education level and employment. “The path would be faster for many unauthorized immigrants brought to the U.S. as children and people working illegally in agricultural jobs. Many of them would be eligible for green cards in five years, and those brought to the U.S. as children would eligible for citizenship as soon as they received their green cards.” David Nakamura reported in today’s Washington Post that, “The Senate Judiciary Committee has scheduled hearings Friday and Monday on the bill, which is hundreds of pages long. Opponents of a deal have denounced portions of the plan, and some senators are expected to offer a flurry of amendments designed to upset the fragile balance of the agreement. Similar tactics helped doom the 2007 effort.” Sens. John McCain (R., Ariz.) and Charles Schumer (D., N.Y.) noted in a column in today’s Wall Street Journal that, “This week, we join a bipartisan group of six senators to introduce comprehensive immigration-reform legislation. This is the first step in what will be a very difficult but achievable process to fix the nation’s broken immigration system once and for all. The legislation’s approach is balanced: It is firm in cracking down on illegal immigration but sensible when it comes to legal immigration.” Meanwhile, Rebecca Kaplan reported yesterday at National Journal Online that, “House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., isn’t interested in waiting on immigration. “While a bipartisan group of House members works behind closed doors toward a comprehensive reform package, Goodlatte is going to start considering single-issue immigration bills in his committee. “In the coming days, several single-issue immigration bills will be introduced in House Judiciary to address parts of the system that the chairman thinks need reform, according to a committee aide. The purpose of the move, Goodlatte told National Journal, is ‘to move the process forward, to get good discussion, [and] good debate on a lot of the different issues.’”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    April 15 Immigration; Budget; Ag Economy; Farm Bill; and, Biofuels- Monday Posted By Keith Good On April 15, 2013  Background Scott Wilson and Zachary A. Goldfarb reported in yesterday’s Washington Post that, “Five months after his resounding reelection victory, President Obama is bumping up against the boundaries of his political power in Washington as the core of his second-term legislative agenda moves into a still-divided Congress. “His ability to secure the three high-profile legislative items now confronting Congress — gun-control measures, reform of the immigration system and his long-term budget priorities — is likely to determine his domestic legacy.” The Post writers noted that, “After outlining what he wants in an immigration bill, Obama has largely taken a hands-off approach to designing the legislation, now the subject of negotiations among a bipartisan group of senators known as the Gang of Eight…[O]bama’s continuing struggles over the budget, perhaps more than anything else, show the limits of his power.” Yesterday’s article added that, “Now the administration is trying to coax Republicans into a budget compromise that would replace across-the-board spending cuts, known as the sequester, that took effect last month and undercut Obama’s vision for how to build the economy.” News items regarding two of these high-profile legislative items, immigration and the budget, are included in today’s report, as well as other policy developments that are germane to agriculture.   Immigration- Farmworkers Brian Bennett and Lisa Mascaro reported in Saturday’s Los Angeles Times that, “Agreement was reached late Friday between farm labor unions and growers on one of the last major components of a sweeping immigration bill being drafted in the Senate — a deal that would set the terms of wages, visas and working conditions for migrant agriculture workers. “The accord, struck after weeks of touch-and-go talks between representatives of industry leaders and workers and brokered by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), would establish a new ‘blue card’ for migrant workers already in this country without legal permission, and allow up to 336,000 visas for farmworkers. “The three-part package is hugely important for California’s agriculture industry. It will be folded into a comprehensive immigration overhaul being written by a bipartisan group of eight senators, who are aiming to unveil the far-reaching legislation as soon asTuesday.” The LA Times article noted that, “Kristi Boswell, director of congressional relations for the American Farm Bureau Federation, who represented a consortium of growers in the negotiations, said in an interview late Friday the deal was ‘a positive step in the direction for ensuring agriculture has access to a stable and legal workforce.’” Sara Murray reported in Saturday’s Wall Street Journal that, “The new visa program would allow employers to hire as many as 112,000 foreign laborers to work in agriculture in its first year after implementation. An additional 112,000 slots would open up in the program’s second year, and so on for five years, according to a member of the Agriculture Workforce Coalition, the collection of business groups negotiating the deal. The number of farm-worker visas can never exceed 337,000 in a three-year period. “After five years, the Department of Agriculture will be charged with setting an appropriate cap for the program.” The Journal article added that, “The existing agricultural visa program would overlap for a year with the new program and then be phased out. “The new agricultural visas would last for three years and could be used year-round, a big difference from the existing program. That allows employers such as dairy farmers, whose labor needs last all year, to tap the new system.”  [Note, see related article from Saturday’s New York Times, “Focus on Dairy Farmers in Immigration Debate”]. Manu Raju and Anna Palmer explained the basics of the agreement this way on Friday: “The proposal would set a cap of 112,000 visas per year for three-year visas, essentially allowing for 337,000 over a three-year period, a person familiar with the matter said Friday. Wages would vary depending on occupation category, and they would be increased between 1.5 percent and 2.5 percent, the source said. The plan would allow foreign farm workers to apply for green cards in a five-year timeframe. That is quicker than the timeframe for the 11 million undocumented immigrants under the soon-to-be-unveiled Senate bill, who could apply for green cards after 10 years and citizenship after 13 years.” And Reuters writer Charles Abbott explained on Friday that, “A wage base would be set for six occupational categories with a mechanism to adjust wages annually. The four major job categories would be crop workers, livestock workers, sorters and graders who work in packing houses, and equipment operators.” Bloomberg writer Alan Bjerga reported on Saturday that, “Along with the wage and visa issues, job-advertisement requirements that farm-owners said were onerous are being relaxed. Workers will also have the ability to switch employers, which the farmworkers’ union, the largest for migrant laborers, indicated was a key protection. U.S. Department of Agriculture will oversee the program for dispensing three-year guest-worker visas rather than the Labor Department, a change from current practice sought by growers. “The length of stay will help year-round industries, including dairy producers, which have chafed at shorter-term visas under the current H-2A agricultural guest-worker program. A path to citizenship has also been included, with an expedited route for workers who agree to remain in farm-related jobs.” Arturo Rodriguez, president of the United Farm Workers, issued a statement on the agreement Friday, as did Bob Stallman, president of the American Farm Bureau Federation.  Western Growers and the Agriculture Workforce Coalition also issued related updates on Friday. Ramsey Cox reported on Friday at The Hill’s Floor Action Blog that, “On Wednesday afternoon, the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing to discuss immigration reforms. Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano is expected to testify.” And Sara Murray and Damian Paletta reported in today’s Wall Street Journal that, “Sen. Marco Rubio kicked off his hard sell for an immigration overhaul to skeptical fellow Republicans Sunday, just ahead of the expected unveiling of legislation he has helped craft. “Mr. Rubio, of Florida, will be key to pitching the immigration plan to conservative lawmakers. In a Sunday television blitz, the possible 2016 presidential contender focused on the bill’s border-security measures and hurdles that immigrants would need to clear before they gain citizenship. Those components could make the broad legislation easier to swallow for some Republicans, who worry that awarding citizenship to people in the U.S. illegally would amount to amnesty.”  [See related article in today’s Washington Post, “With endorsement of immigration plan, Rubio makes first major policy gambit of his career”].   Budget With respect to conflicting perspectives between the Senate and House on the budget, Erik Wasson reported yesterday at The Hill’s On the Money Blog that, “[House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R., Wis.)] and Senate Budget Committee Chairwoman Patty Murray (D-Wash.) have had preliminary process-oriented talks about setting up a conference committee.  Ryan is looking for a ‘framework’ to be agreed to before committing to going to conference, an aide said. “‘House Republicans want an agreement, and conversations are continuing to build a framework for constructive negotiations. But until we have that framework, establishing a conference committee won’t bridge the significant differences between the two sides,’ a House GOP aide said.”   Agricultural Economy: Trade, Spring Weather, GMO Labeling Issue James Politi and Jonathan Soble reported on Friday at The Financial Times Online that, “The US and Japan struck a deal paving the way for Asia’s second-largest economy to join the trans-Pacific Partnership trade talks this year, following more than a year of talks on thorny issues such as US access to the Japanese car and insurance markets.” The FT writers noted that, “Japan’s entry into the TPP has to be approved by all the countries negotiating the deal – and with Friday’s deal the US is giving its green light after what Demetrios Marantis, the acting US trade representative , described as an agreement on a ‘robust package’ of bilateral measures.” “Mr Abe’s decision to pursue the TPP talks has angered Japanese farmers as well as many members of his own Liberal Democratic party, which has traditionally drawn much of its support from rural areas. They worry that Mr Abe will not be able to keep a promise to shield the heavily-protected agricultural sector – particularly rice farming – from the effects of freer trade,” the FT article said. Vicki Needham pointed out Friday at The Hill’s On the Money Blog that, “Besides the United States, Australia, Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam, Mexico and Canada are all part of the talks.” In a Reuters article Friday, Kaori Kaneko and Doug Palmer provided perspective on this trade development from the U.S. auto sector, as did Hill writer Vicki Needham in an article titled, “Lawmakers threaten to oppose trade deal unless Japan lowers auto barriers.” Senate Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D., Mich.) noted in part on Friday that, “For decades, Japan has implemented egregious barriers that have blocked the import of American automobiles, drastically increased our trade deficit and cost Americans their jobs…[B]ut if Japan does not ultimately agree to stop blocking American companies from its markets, I will urge the President and the Congress not to ratify this trade agreement.” Sen. Sherrod Brown (D., Ohio) stated on Friday that, “The Administration can’t allow Japan’s entry to the Trans-Pacific Partnership to undermine the impressive gains made by the American auto industry.” Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D., Mont.) called the TPP development “encouraging news,” while Sen. Mike Johanns (R., Neb.) indicated on Friday that, “This is also great news for America’s ag producers.” Rep. Adrian Smith (R., Neb.) called the TPP news a “positive development;” and, the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, National Pork Producers, and Farm Bureau president Bob Stallman, all issued generally positive statements on the Japan TPP news on Friday. In other news, AP writer David Pitt reported on Friday that, “With the farm belt’s soil recharged by melted snow and spring rains, farmers are anxious to start working the fields and planting seed for the 2013 crop season. “Above-average snow cover and a chilly, wet spring have helped restore moisture to many states burdened by last year’s drought, which has eased large portions of Illinois, Iowa and Wisconsin. Portions of drought-stricken Texas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska have seen some rain, but many counties remain woefully dry.” And Reuters writer Sam Nelson reported late last week that, “Winter snow and early spring rains have helped ease the drought in the United States crop belt, but there is still a lack of moisture in lower levels of soils, leaving crop yields vulnerable, an agricultural meteorologist said on Thursday. “Kyle Tapley, senior agricultural meteorologist for MDA Weather Services told a weather conference in Chicago that the U.S. Plains and the western Midwest are still in the worst drought in more than 50 years.” And on the issue of GMO labeling, Robert Paarlberg, a professor of political science at Wellesley College, indicated in today’s Wall Street Journal (“The World Needs Genetically Modified Foods”) that, “But if America, through a labeling system, joins Europe in embracing a new norm against the cultivation of GMO crops for human food, governments in developing countries, already skittish thanks to activist campaigns, will likely follow suit. The result would be a needless setback for the world’s poorest and hungriest people.”   Farm Bill A news release Friday from Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R., Tex.) stated that, “[Rep. Neugebauer] introduced legislation today that would improve the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as food stamps.  H.R. 1510, the SNAP Improvement Act, would reduce waste and loopholes in the program so that it better serves families in need.” Also on Friday, an update from Rep. Steve King (R., Iowa) noted that, “The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has released new standards that have left children across the nation hungry during the school day because of calorie rationing.  The ‘No Hungry Kids Act’ [H.R. 1503] repeals this USDA rule that created the new standards, prohibits the USDA’s upper caloric limits, and protects the rights of parents to send their children to school with the foods of their choice.” The editorial board at The Columbus Dispatch Online indicated on Friday that, “The USDA has said that it does not collect detailed information on how SNAP funds are spent; that information is held by third-party organizations, including retailers and banks that administer the program. “The USDA has refused to hand over to the public and the press any information on how food stamps are being spent.” The opinion item added that, “Several reports have highlighted the fact that lobbyists for big retailers and snack-food makers have spent millions over the years to fight any attempts to exclude such items as soda and candy from the food-stamp program. But taxpayers have a right to know if their money is being spent wisely and effectively.” Also on the nutrition issue, in an article published in the Metro section of today’s Washington Post, Lynh Bui (“A gnawing school snack debate: Parents, food service directors debate snacks sneaking into kids’ diets at school”) noted that, “The proposed minimum USDA guidelines wouldgenerally require snack foods to contain fewer than 200 calories a serving, with no more than 35 percent of the calories or weight coming from sugar or fat and less than 200 milligrams of sodium a portion. The guidelines would prohibit trans fats and require that less than 10 percent of snack calories come from saturated fats.” Meanwhile, Meghan Grebner reported on Friday at Brownfield that, “During a call with reporters Friday afternoon, [Sen. Joe Donnelly (D., Ind.)] said he’s confident there will be a Farm Bill this year.  ‘There will be strong, bipartisan support for it, not only in our committee but in the Senate itself,’ he says.  ‘We hope to be able to then send a bill over to the House that we hope they’ll be happy with.’ “Even though the President’s proposed budget cuts the Crop Insurance Premium Subsidy, Senator Donnelly has pledged to make crop insurance a cornerstone of the upcoming Farm Bill.  And he says a number of legislators are also in favor of crop insurance.”   Biofuels Reuters writer Ayesha Rascoe reported on Friday that, “The chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee on Friday questioned whether the United States would be able to meet federal biofuel targets and pledged to take a closer look at the mandate’s link to gasoline prices. “Democrat Ron Wyden of Oregon said the panel plans to spend ‘a lot of time’ examining the nation’s renewable fuel mandate, especially as it relates to the gasoline costs Americans pay at the pump. “‘I’m not convinced that the current requirements are achievable,’ Wyden said at a policy event sponsored by the law firm Arent Fox and the Georgetown Public Policy Institute.” And University of Illinois Agricultural Economist Nick Paulson penned an update on Friday at the farmdoc daily blog titled, “An Update on the 2012 RIN Carryover Controversy.”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    April 12 Farm Bill; Ag Economy; EPA; Biofuels; and, Immigration- Friday Posted By Keith Good On April 12, 2013  Farm Bill- Policy Issues In a radio interview earlier this week with Mick Kjar (Ag News 890, Terry Loomis, Farm Director (Fargo, ND)), House Agriculture Committee Ranking Member Collin Peterson (D., Minn.) discussed several policy variables regarding the Farm Bill. Rep. Peterson pointed to the likelihood that the House could move on the Farm Bill before the Senate does and highlighted the possibility of the legislation being marked up in the Committee around the week of May 6. (Ag News 890 audio clip here (MP3- 1:05)). Rep. Peterson stated that he had met with the new Senate Agriculture Committee Ranking Member Thad Cochran (R., Miss.) on two separate occasions and indicated that, “I think it is fair to say at this point that [House Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas(R., Okla.)] and I– and Cochran are kind of on the same page, and the Senate, not so much.  That is part of why they are going to have, I think, trouble working this out, because if they don’t get Cochran on board, they are going to have problems getting this done.” (Ag News 890 audio clip here (MP3- 1:11)). In a related clip, Rep. Peterson noted that the Congressional Budget Office had updated its score of the Senate and House Farm Bill legislation since the last Congress (Ag News 890 audio clip here (MP3-1:25)) . Separately, Rep. Peterson explained that after each Census and Congressional district reapportionment, fewer Members come from agricultural districts, which, over time, leads to greater difficulty in getting a Farm Bill passed.  The number of Members with an interest and knowledge of agriculture has diminished and will likely continue to go down over time (Ag News 890 audio clip here (MP3- 0:36)). During the discussion with Mick Kjar, Rep. Peterson also explained the importance of crop insurance and stated that, “it is pretty well a consensus on the Committee to leave crop insurance alone.” Noting that the U.S. experienced one of the worst droughts since the Great Depression, Rep. Peterson reminded listeners that there was not a single piece of legislation introduced regarding ad hoc disaster assistance during this trying time for producers.  “What that tells you is that crop insurance worked,” he said (Ag News 890 audio clip here (MP3- 1:46)). The discussion also turned to the President’s budget proposal generally with a specific focus on crop insurance; however, Rep. Peterson stated that, “What happens with these budgets that the President puts out, whether it’s a Republican President or a Democratic President, they mostly get ignored, and I think that’s kind of what’s going to happen with the part of the Obama budget that affects agriculture.” (Ag News 890 audio clip here (MP3- 1:32)). Marcia Zarley Taylor reported yesterday at the DTN Minding Ag’s Business Blog that, “President Obama’s proposed 2014 budget released this week outlines five potential cuts in crop insurance subsidies. Altogether they’d trim an estimated $11.7 billion from crop insurance’s federal budget over 10 years, with some targeted at raising the cost of producer premiums and others raising administrative costs of private insurers.” The update stated that, “So far, Congress has shown little appetite for trimming a program that kept farmers and farm communities on even keel after the Great Drought of 2012. “On Tuesday, Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas), a House Agriculture subcommittee chair, told the North American Agricultural Journalists that Congress will recognize previous haircuts crop insurance companies have taken since 2008–and that companies are still working through. ‘Food security is a national security issue,’ he argued, and the move away from direct payments and toward an insurance-based safety net is far superior to previous farm programs. Senate Ag Committee Chair Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) agreed.  ‘With crop insurance, a farmer has skin in the game. It’s not like direct payments which pay whether the price is high or low,’ she added. Making sure that premiums are affordable is one of her priorities.” A news release yesterday from the American Soybean Association (ASA) noted in part that, “‘As ASA has said many times over, soybean farmers are willing to do our part to address the nation’s fiscal challenges, and we have a vested interest in ensuring that the cuts needed are made in a strategic manner, with all potential consequences taken into account. As many farmers still struggle to recover from the worst drought in generations, now is not the time to make such a deep cut to the federal crop insurance program,’ said Danny Murphy, ASA President and a soybean farmer from Canton, Miss.” An update yesterday from National Crop Insurance Services noted that, “Although it is early in the year, farmers are already purchasing their crop insurance policies. As of April 8, 2013 more than 232,000 policies have been purchased, protecting more than 85 million acres representing more than $19 billion in liabilities, accounting for $800 million in farmer paid premium. These numbers will continue to grow as we move further into spring.” Meanwhile, a news release earlier this week from Rep. Rosa DeLauro (R., Conn.) stated that, “[Rep. DeLauro] today called for a farm bill that supports a strong farm and food security safety net for American producers and families.  She urged those working on the national farm bill to support the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as food stamps, and to consider the President’s request to reform the federal crop insurance program as outlined in his budget request to Congress.” Jerry Hagstrom, writing on Wednesday at National Journal Online, reported that, “Senate Agriculture Committee ranking member Thad Cochran, R-Miss., defended federal nutrition programs Tuesday to a group of agricultural journalists, and in the processdemonstrated why dealing with food stamps may be harder this year than in 2012 when it comes to writing a farm bill.” The article added that, “He went on to defend federal nutrition programs, including food stamps and subsidized school meals. ‘I come from a state where we have higher-percentage participation [than the national average]. It is part of my representation of the state that I make sure that those interests get represented,’ Cochran said. “‘I have never had to apologize in Mississippi for supporting it,’ he said, referring to food stamps.” Mr. Hagstrom noted that, “Some House Republicans, often from the rural Midwest, began proposing putting food stamps—which make up more than 70 percent of the Agriculture Department budget—into a separate bill. This would be a way to reduce food-stamp spending or get the program turned over to the states. These members seem to have forgotten that Congress created food stamps as part of the farm bill in the 1960s, when the declining rural population translated into fewer rural representatives in the House and fewer votes for the farm bill, and that the number of rural representatives continues to decline.” In a separate policy issue, Julian Pecquet reported yesterday at The Hill’s Global Affairs Blog that, “The top Democrat on a House panel that oversees foreign aid is backing President Obama’s call for an overhaul of the nation’s $1.5 billion food aid program [See relatedBloomberg article by Alan Bjerga  for more details and analysis on the President’s food aid proposal]. “‘I am pleased the Administration is working to make food aid more efficient and effective,’ Rep. Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.), the ranking member on the House Appropriations panel on State and Foreign Operations, said in an email. Secretary of State John Kerry is scheduled to testify before the subcommittee about the president’s budget on April 17, The Hill has learned.” Meanwhile, a Reuters news article from Wednesday reported that, “The U.S. Agriculture Department lowered its forecast on Wednesday for domestic sugar supplies in the current 2012/13 marketing year as production estimates dropped, though import forecasts from Mexico rose. “The lower forecast will mitigate a severe oversupply in the North American market, but it will likely not be enough to keep the USDA from needing to intervene and keep processors from defaulting on loans, sugar policy experts said. “The monthly supply/demand report showed the closely watched stocks-to-use ratio stood at 18.0 percent, down from 20.0 percent last month and up from 17.2 percent in the previous marketing year. Despite the reduction, the ratio is well above the 14.5-percent level that the agency targets.” The article explained that, “[Jack Roney, director of economics and policy analysis for the American Sugar Alliance] noted that sugar prices have fallen to historical average prices. Against this backdrop of falling prices, the USDA has requested the White House approve the USDA’s sugar-to-ethanol program, created through the 2008 farm bill but never implemented. “Through the Feedstock Flexibility Program, the USDA would support the U.S. sugar market by buying 247,300 tons of surplus sweetener at a net cost of $66 million for sale to ethanol producers in efforts to avoid large forfeitures by processors, which used sugar as the collateral for the loans. “The proposal has garnered opposition from lawmakers, who say that U.S. sugar policy increases food costs for taxpayers and increases the deficit.”   Agricultural Economy- Trade A Dow Jones article from yesterday (posted at DTN, link requires subscription) reported that, “Recent rain and snowfall significantly eased drought conditions in the Plains, especially in Nebraska, but the region is still very dry overall, the latest U.S. Drought Monitor map showed Thursday. “The proportion of the High Plains in ‘exceptional’ drought–the worst category–nearly halved in the week through Tuesday morning, the monitor showed. The region is now 11.7% in exceptional drought, compared to 22.17% a week ago.” University of Illinois Agronomist Dr. Emerson Nafziger noted in a recent paper (“Corn Planting Time in a ‘Normal’ Spring”) that, “Yes, a year does make a lot of difference – in 2012, we had 5 percent of the Illinois corn crop planted by April 1 and 17 percent planted by April 9. This year, the April 8 issue of Illinois Weather & Crops from the Illinois office of NASS gives no percentage planted as of April 7, which means that less than 1 percent had been planted. There has been some planting this week, but with soils still cool and rain in the forecast, along with a drop in temperatures into the 30s at night later this week, many producers are proceeding with caution.” After additional analysis, the update indicated that, “While we hope to get most of our crop planted by the end of April, what happens after planting remains a lot more important to the corn crop than the exact date we are able to plant. We need look back only one year to see that early planting does not guarantee high yields.” On trade issues, Reuters news reported yesterday that, “Canadian retaliation against the United States for its country- of-origin meat-labeling rules may target more products than U.S. beef and pork, Canadian Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz said on Thursday.” Also, the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) issued a news release yesterday titled, “NPPC Urges U.S. To Comply With WTO Rules.” Meanwhile, James Politi reported yesterday at The Financial Times Online that, “The US has delivered a blistering critique of the status of multilateral trade talks, saying a ‘serious course correction’ was needed to salvage even small elements of the Doha round agenda. “In January, trade ministers from World Trade Organisation countries agreed to pursue a narrow package of measures from the Doha round that seemed most ripe for compromise while the rest of global trade talks remained stalled. “But Michael Punke, deputy US trade representative, told the WTO on Thursday that those efforts were also faltering. ‘There was genuine hope that intensive work could deliver such a result. Yet only three months later, the picture is grim,’ he told the trade negotiations committee.”   EPA- Nominee Administrator Hearing Todd Neeley reported yesterday at DTN (link requires subscription) that, “The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has faced a public-relations nightmare when it comes to its interaction with U.S. farmers, on everything from the release of personal information about concentrated animal feeding operation owners to the expansion of the Clean Water Act. “EPA administrator nominee Gina McCarthy didn’t pull any punches Thursday when asked during her Senate confirmation hearing about what is perceived to be the agency’s deteriorating relationship with U.S. agriculture. “‘I think the EPA has bridges to build with the agriculture community,’ she said. ‘I want the opportunity to change that relationship with the ag community.’” Mr. Neeley explained that, “Even EPA’s harshest critics in the Senate indicated during the hearing that McCarthy would be confirmed as the agency’s next administrator. Yet she was faced with a number of questions about EPA’s treatment of rural America and overall transparency with the American public. “McCarthy indicated the agency is already trying to undo some of the damage agriculture groups say has been done in the past four years. “Sen. Deb Fisher, R-Neb., stood as one of the few agriculture voices on the Senate Environment and Public Works committee quizzing McCarthy on issues farmers have raised about EPA’s expanding reach onto U.S. farms.” The DTN article added that, “‘Farmers and ranchers are increasingly frustrated by bureaucracy that doesn’t seem to understand the nature of our business,’ Fisher said. ‘There is a perception out there that there is collusion out there’ between EPA and environmental groups. ‘Would you commit to not creating a national database?’ “McCarthy answered, ‘What I will commit to is to continue on the path forward to get that information back and that we really improve the system at EPA. Understand that we will do everything to make sure those errors are not repeated.’” A news release yesterday from the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) noted in part that, “‘Whether it is releasing producers’ personal information to activist groups or trying to regulate all ponds and puddles across the U.S., EPA has not worked cooperatively with the cattle industry under the current administration,’ said NCBA Deputy Environmental Counsel Ashley McDonald. ‘We sincerely hope Ms. McCarthy, if confirmed by the Senate, would work to improve this relationship which will ultimately have a more positive impact on the environment than the current anti-agriculture attitude that is prolific within the agency.’”   Biofuels University of Illinois Agricultural Economists Scott Irwin and Darrel Good noted on Wednesday at the farmdoc daily blog (“Freeze It – A Proposal for Implementing RFS2 through 2015”) that, In our farmdoc daily post on February 13 of this year, we traced through the implications of implementing RFS2 as currently quantified through 2015.” The update added that, “Here, we present a proposal for implementing the RFS2 through 2015 that recognizes the constraints implied by the E10 blend wall and will avert the impact of the issues identified in the previous analysis. We believe the proposal is realistic because it balances the competing interests of various parties in the policy process and allows some additional time for regulators, legislators, and industry participants to consider any adjustments to RFS2 that might be needed in the longer-run.Our proposal is to simply cap or ‘freeze’ the advanced biofuels and total mandates for 2014 and 2015 at the 2013 level of 2.75 billion gallons for advanced biofuels and 16.55 billion gallons for all biofuels. The RFS2 currently requires 3.75 billion gallons of advanced biofuels in 2014 and 5.5 billion gallons in 2015. The mandates are for 18.15 billion gallons of all biofuels in 2014 and 20.5 billion gallons in 2015.”   Immigration Brian Bennett and Lisa Mascaro reported yesterday at the Los Angeles Times Online that, “Senators writing a landmark immigration bill broke a logjam between farmworker unions and growers Thursday, reaching a tentative agreement on the number of future agricultural visas and pay scales for foreign farmworkers. “Labor unions and agricultural industry leaders had been stuck for three weeks on how to legally bring foreign labor into the United States to pick crops and tend livestock at competitive wages. The issue, which is important to California and other farming states, became a major stumbling block in bipartisan efforts to craft a comprehensive immigration bill.” The article noted that, “The most two contentious issues were solved, according to officials familiar with the closed-door talks, although they did not release details. “‘We have a wage and cap agreement,’ Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) told reporters.” Yesterday’s article pointed out that, “The eight senators overseeing the bill met Wednesday night and signed off on the outline, leaving staffers to work out final details. Senators were optimistic Thursday that a deal was close. “‘All that’s left is the drafting,’ said Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.).” Bloomberg writer Kathleen Hunter reported yesterday that, “The bipartisan group of eight senators settled disputes over visa caps and wage levels for a farmworker program, devised a proposal to enhance border security and agreed to details of a path to citizenship for the estimated 11 million undocumented workers in the U.S., according to senators and people familiar with the talks. “‘I feel like we’ve come together in a fashion that will hold and that we’ll have a good product to submit to the Senate for their consideration,’ said Senator Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican who is part of the negotiating group. ‘People will have a chance to amend it, they will certainly have a chance to read it, they’ll have a chance to make it better or try to kill it. But I think we’re going to produce a product that I will be proud of.’ “In a sign that a final product is near, the group canceled a planned meeting yesterday, and a person familiar with the talks said only staff-level work and bill-drafting remains.”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    April 8 Farm Bill; Ag Economy; Budget; Immigration; and, Regulations- Monday Posted By Keith Good On April 8, 2013  Farm Bill- Policy Issues In a radio interview late last week with Mick Kjar (Ag News 890, Terry Loomis, Farm Director (Fargo, ND)), Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D., N.D.) discussed the Farm Bill and Ag Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow’s (D., Mich.) commitment to working on the legislation. Noting that the Ag Committee will be marking up a bill this month, Sen. Heitkamp stated that, “We’re hoping that by the end of the month we will have a Farm Bill that will be ready for floor action- we want to move it as soon as possible” (Ag News 890 audio clip here(MP3- 1:29)). Sen. Heitkamp also discussed the importance of regional and geographic differences as a policy variable in formulating farm legislation (Ag News 890 audio clip here (MP3- 1:03)). Meanwhile, Julian Hattem reported today at The Hill’s RegWatch Blog that, “A rule to allow the government to trade excess sugar for biofuel has gone to the White House for final approval, according to a review of records from the Office of Management and Budget. “Under the program, called the Feedstock Flexibility Program for Bioenergy Producers, the federal government would buy excess sugar and sell it to biofuel manufacturers. “The White House’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs received the rule from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) on Wednesday and now has up to 90 days to review it for publication.” The Hill update explained that, “As it does with other crops, the government operates a price-control program with sugar. The USDA gives loans to sugar producers that guarantee a minimum price for their product, and uses the crops as collateral. If prices drop dramatically, the government would be on the hook for the loss. “This year, sugar producers insist they need the program to stabilize prices because of prosperous crop yields and expected over-saturation of the market. They claim that domestic sugar production is threatened by increased imports from Mexico stemming from a loophole in the NAFTA trade deal. If sugar producers in both the Untied States and Mexico have a good year, they say, the excessive supply will lower prices and devastate producers, unless the Feedstock Flexibility Program acts as a safety net.” As the bulk of Farm Bill spending is allocated to nutrition programs, several news items in recent days focused on the National School Lunch Program. Christopher Doering reported on the front page of Friday’s Des Moines Register that, “School districts must now limit the calories that students consume, phase in whole grains, gradually lower sodium levels, and offer at least one fruit or vegetable per meal, among other requirements.” The article noted that, “The new [USDA nutrition] regulations have been widely criticized by students, parents, lawmakers and administrators for being too costly and not providing enough flexibility to adjust them if necessary. Opponents have argued the lunches are too small and lack enough calories for active children, especially high school students who are active in sports and other activities. “Iowa Rep. Steve King plans to reintroduce legislation in the next few weeks that would roll back the USDA rule that limits how many calories children can be served.” Mr. Doering added that, “Lifting controversial rules in December that limited the number of grain and protein servings, however, have made students and parents happier. “‘Those were the guidelines that were causing us some problems,’ said Sandy Huisman, nutrition director for Des Moines Public Schools. ‘It allowed us to add back in some things that we couldn’t have before.’” Meanwhile, Kathleen Schassler reported last week at the West Harford News Online that Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, Connecticut Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D., Conn.), Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D., Conn.) and Rep. Joe Courtney (D., Conn.) attended lunch at Wolcott Elementary School on Friday. The article indicated that, “American students now have healthier and more nutritious school meals due to improved nutrition standards implemented as a result of the historic Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 , said Sec. Vilsack.” And a news release Friday from USDA stated that, “Vilsack said that USDA is focused on improving childhood nutrition and empowering families to make healthier food choices by providing science-based information and advice, while expanding the availability of healthy food.” In an update posted Friday at the USDA Blog, Sec. Vilsack stated that, “In recent days, we have had some positive developments in this work.  USDA released a promising new report on the impacts of providing our children with healthy snacks. We also took new steps to provide families with better information to combat obesity. “The new report examined the results of USDA’s Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, which provides fruits and vegetables at no cost to students in more than 7,100 schools in low income areas. “We found that as students are introduced to fresh fruits and vegetables, they try them – and in most cases, they enjoy these snacks. Students participating in the program ate 15 percent more fruits and vegetables than their peers.” [See: “Evaluation of the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program- Summary,” March 2013.] Sec. Vilsack added that, “Research by USDA’s Economic Research Service has also found that these healthy foods are often no more expensive than less-nutritious foods.” [See: “The Food Costs of Healthier School Lunches,” by Constance Newman.  Amber Waves. April 1, 2013]. With respect to the SNAP program (food stamps), Phil Izzo reported on Friday at the Real Time Economics Blog (Wall Street Journal) that, “Food-stamp use rose 1.8% in the U.S. in January from a year earlier, with 15% of the U.S. population receiving benefits. (See an interactive map with data on use since 1990.) “One of the federal government’s biggest social welfare programs, which expanded when the economy convulsed, isn’t shrinking back alongside the recovery, the Journal reported last month. In other USDA news, Emily Heil reported on Friday at the In the Loop Blog (Washington Post) that, “[USDA is] consolidating its multitude of agencies and offices under a single, crisp logo…Gone will be the dozens of logos, crests and banners used by the likes of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, or the Foreign Agricultural Service. Say goodbye to the Rural Development’s nifty logo featuring a distinctive grain silo, and adieu to the water-drop image that graced the Natural Resources Conservation Service’s signage. “The department recently issued a ‘Visual Standards Guide’ letting department employees know that all other logos were being phased out and replaced by the USDA’s main logo.” Separately, Richard A. Oppel Jr. reported on the front page of yesterday’s New York Times that, “[A dozen or so state legislatures have] proposed or enacted bills that would make it illegal to covertly videotape livestock farms, or apply for a job at one without disclosing ties to animal rights groups. They have also drafted measures to require such videos to be given to the authorities almost immediately, which activists say would thwart any meaningful undercover investigation of large factory farms.” The Times article stated that, “‘It definitely has had a chilling effect on our ability to conduct undercover investigations,’ said Vandhana Bala, general counsel for Mercy for Animals…[T]he American Farm Bureau Federation, which lobbies for the agricultural and meat industries, criticized the mistreatment seen on some videos. But the group cautions that some methods represent best practices endorsed by animal-care experts.”   Agricultural Economy Reuters writer Sam Nelson reported late last week that, “Early corn plantings will be delayed in the drought-stricken U.S. Midwest because of cool temperatures and significant rainfall next week that will also add valuable soil moisture, agricultural meteorologists said on Friday.” While Reuters writer Michael Hirtzer reported on Friday that, “A cool spring in the U.S. Midwest has farmers antsy for soils to warm up before rolling their big corn planters across fields to seed what is expected to be the largest area of the country’s biggest crop since 1936. “This week marks the first official days farmers can begin planting corn in many spots across the upper Midwest, according to crop insurance policies that cover costs if they have to replant in the event of a flood or killing frost.” The article pointed out that, “‘I don’t think very many people are nervous yet. The best days to plant are later than this anyway,’ said Emerson Nafziger, an extension agronomist at the University of Illinois.” Dan Piller reported in Friday’s Des Moines Register that, “Iowa’s drought conditions have eased slightly in the past three months, according to the U.S. Drought Monitor, but the state’s farmers still can’t get into the fields because the chilly March and early April weather has left soil temperatures well below the 52- to 55-degree warmth needed for seed germination.” Also, Stephanie Strom reported in Saturday’s New York Times [note that the Online article includes an excellent video presentation as well] that, “The persistence of the drought here [Blooming Grove, Tex.] has forced ranchers to use all the creative techniques they can muster to survive…[T]he state’s beef cattle inventory fell even more, to 4.02 million head, down 12 percent from 2012, when similarly precipitous declines occurred. The sharp contraction, brought on by two years of drought in Texas followed by a year of drought across the Great Plains that drove feed prices sky high, has left some wondering if the state will ever again have herds as large as it once boasted.” Ms. Strom explained that, “The situation is so dire that several times during a drive around his ranch, tears sprang to [Don Smith’s, proprietor of the Starridge Land and Cattle Company] eyes as he spoke about the challenges he has faced maintaining not only his beef herd, which now stands at roughly 130 cows, but also some remaining dairy cows. That business, too, is no longer profitable.” Kate Galbraith also addressed issues associated with the drought and water in Texas in yesterday’s New York Times, “Getting Serious About a Texas-Size Drought.” And Ian Berry reported in Saturday’s Wall Street Journal that, “U.S. soybean prices slumped to a fresh 10-month low amid fears that export demand for the oilseed will slow due to a bird-flu outbreak in China.” The Journal article added that, “Corn futures declined one cent, or 0.2%, on Friday to $6.29 a bushel, a fresh nine-month low. Corn has fallen 14% since last month’s USDA report showed greater-than-expected supplies of the grain.” With respect trade developments, Reuters writer Doug Palmer reported on Friday that, “The United States hopes to use a proposed regional free trade agreement in the Asia-Pacific and another with the European Union to reshape global rules for trade, Vice President Joe Biden said on Friday. “‘Our goal is for high standards for the Trans-Pacific Partnership to enter the bloodstream of the global system and improve the rules and norms,’ Biden said in a speech at the U.S. Export-Import Bank’s annual meeting.”   Budget Zachary A. Goldfarb and Karen Tumulty reported in Saturday’s Washington Post that, “President Obama will propose a budget next week that embraces a risky strategy of courting Republicans for a grand bargain on the debt while angering Democratic allies with cuts to the nation’s entitlement programs. “White House officials said Friday that Obama’s budget would cut Medicare and Social Security and ask for less tax revenue than he has previously sought. The budget, to be released Wednesday, will fully incorporate the offer Obama made to House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) during December’s ‘fiscal cliff’ talks — which included $1.8 trillion in deficit reduction through spending cuts and tax increases.” The Post writers noted that, “The budget proposal slices $200 billion from already- tight defense and domestic budgets. It would cut $400 billion from Medicare and other health programs by negotiating better prescription drug prices and asking wealthy seniors to pay more, among other policies. It would also generate $200 billion in savings by scaling back farm subsidies and federal retiree programs, among other proposals.” Janet Hook and Colleen McCain Nelson reported in Saturday’s Wall Street Journal that, “However, Mr. Obama’s plan, described by administration officials Friday and set for release Wednesday, drew fire from both House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio) and the president’s liberal base.” “The next step in the push to re-energize budget talks may come not with the formal announcement of Mr. Obama’s plan Wednesday morning, but rather at a private dinner that evening with a select group of Senate Republicans. It will be the second such dinner in which he is seeking GOP negotiating partners outside the party’s leadership, hoping they might be willing to join him in a deficit deal,” the Journal article said. Michael D. Shear reported in Saturday’s New York Times that, “Advocates of taking action to confront the nation’s debt praised Mr. Obama’s proposals. Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, said the president’s proposals ‘point the way toward an emerging bipartisan consensus between the administration and Congressional leaders over essential fiscal issues.’”   Immigration Reuters writer Philip Barbara reported yesterday that, “A bill to overhaul the immigration system would likely be completed by the end of this week, two senior senators said on Sunday. “Democratic Senator Charles Schumer of New York said that senators in the bipartisan ‘Group of Eight’ have resolved all major issues in a pending deal and that their staffs are putting the bill into legislative language.” However, David Nakamura reported in today’s Washington Post that, “A bipartisan Senate group on immigration legislation is attempting to craft an agreement so secure that the eight members will oppose amendments to its core provisions, an arrangement that could delay the introduction of a bill, people familiar with the negotiations said. “The senators had said they hoped to present their proposals this week, but Republican members expressed skepticism about that timetable Sunday. The group continues to negotiate issues related to new visa programs for agricultural and high-tech workers and has not reached agreement on a guest-worker program for low-skilled foreign laborers, said the individuals, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private deliberations.” Meanwhile, Sara Murray reported in Saturday’s Wall Street Journal that, “Farm workers who are in the U.S. illegally could earn a green card in as few as three years—far sooner than other unauthorized immigrants—under a plan that senators are considering as part of their bipartisan immigration bill, according to a person familiar with negotiations. “The proposal would allow agricultural workers to gain permanent legal status, otherwise known as a green card, in three to 10 years, depending on how long they commit to working in the farm industry. The Senate plan allows most other immigrants in the U.S. illegally to qualify for permanent legal status after a decade. “The faster timeline for farm workers would reflect the difficulty that employers in the sector say they have in attracting workers to often grueling farm jobs. The expedited options are supposed to provide incentives for agricultural workers to stay in the industry, which would help stabilize the workforce for employers.” The Journal article explained that, “Sens. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.) and Michael Bennet (D., Colo.), both members of a bipartisan Senate group crafting immigration legislation, have been working with Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) and Orrin Hatch (R., Utah) on the agricultural component. They are negotiating with farm-worker unions and growers. “Growers and farm-worker unions are still battling over the size of the agricultural visa program and how high the minimum wage should be for workers who participate.”   Regulations Pete Kasperowicz reported on Friday at The Hill’s Floor Action Blog that, “Senate Republicans on the Environment and Public Works Committee this week criticized the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for improperly releasing private personal and business information to environmental groups. “Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), the lead Republican on the committee, and other committee Republicans charged that the EPA answered a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request last year by including business information that should have remained private. “In a Thursday letter to Acting EPA Administrator Bob Perciasepe, the GOP said the information relates to concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs). Included in the response to environmental groups was detailed information including the size of various cattle operations in several states, personal contact info and email addresses.”     -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    April 5 Farm Bill; Ag Economy; Budget; Immigration; and, Regulations- Friday Posted By Keith Good On April 5, 2013  Farm Bill- Policy Issues Ron Nixon reported yesterday at The New York Times Online that, “An Obama administration plan to change the way the United States distributes its international food aid has touched off an intense lobbying campaign by a coalition of shipping companies, agribusiness and charitable groups who say the change will harm the nation’s economy and hamper efforts to fight global hunger. “Proponents of the plan, however, say it would enable the United States to feed about 17 million more people each year, while helping to fight poverty by buying the crops of farmers in poor countries. “According to people briefed on the soon-to-be released fiscal year 2014 budget, the administration is expected to propose ending the nearly 60-year practice of buying food from American farmers and then shipping it abroad.” Mr. Nixon explained that, “The administration is proposing that the government buy food in developing countries instead of shipping food from American farmers overseas, a process that typically takes months. The proposed change to the international food aid program is expected to save millions in shipping costs and get food more quickly to areas that need it. “The administration is also reportedly considering ending the controversial practice of food aid ‘monetization,’ a process by which Washington gives American-grown grains to international charities. The groups then sell the products on the market in poor countries and use the money to finance their antipoverty programs.” The Times article noted that, “Efforts to reform the food aid program are not new. “In 2007, President George W. Bush proposed similar changes. The proposal, however, also ran into stiff opposition from the potent alliance of agribusiness, shipping and charitable groups, and Congress quickly killed the plan. “But now, amid tight federal budgets, reform proponents say Congress might be more receptive to changing the food aid program.” AP writer Mary Clare Jalonick reported yesterday that, “After the 2010 earthquake in Haiti, former President Bill Clinton apologized for long championing food aid policies that helped Arkansas rice growers but made it harder for the impoverished country to grow its own crop. “Floods of imports of U.S. rice had put many of the country’s growers out of business, and Clinton called his policies a ‘mistake.’ “Three years later, aid groups are pushing President Barack Obama to make the kind of change Clinton argued was needed and send cash in lieu of crops.” Ms. Jalonick explained that, “At issue is whether the government should ship U.S.-grown food overseas to aid developing countries and starving people or simply help those countries with cash to buy food. Currently, the United States is shipping food abroad under the ‘Food for Peace’ program started almost six decades ago by President Dwight Eisenhower to help farmers get rid of food surpluses and boost the country’s image during the Cold War.” Meanwhile, a news release yesterday from the National Milk Producers Federation stated that, “Milk prices for Midwest dairy farmers would have been more than $1.00 per hundredweight higher last year if the proposed federal Dairy Security Act (DSA) program had been available to them, a national dairy industry official told cooperative farm leaders gathered here Wednesday for the Minnesota-Wisconsin Dairy Policy Conference. “Jim Mulhern, Chief Operating Officer for the National Milk Producers Federation and a Wisconsin native, said a farmer with 200 cows, who purchased margin coverage at a level of $6.50 per hundredweight, would have received more than $44,000 in additional payments in 2012 under the Dairy Security Act that is now pending before Congress.” In other policy news, Rep. Louise Slaughter (D., N.Y.) was on the On Point radio program with Tom Ashbrook (NPR- WBUR- Boston) yesterday discussing antibiotic use and animal production.  A clip featuring remarks by Rep. Slaughter from yesterday’s program can beheard here  (MP3- 0:38). Kansas State University veterinarian Mike Apley was also on yesterday’s program, some of his remarks with Tom Ashbrook can be heard here (MP3- 2:41). Charles L. Hofacre, a professor of veterinary medicine at the University of Georgia penned a letter to the editor in today’s New York Times regarding antibiotic- animal production issue: “Re ‘Antibiotics and the Meat We Eat,’ by David A. Kessler (Op-Ed, March 28): “Farmers and ranchers share consumer concerns about antibiotic-resistant bacteria and are continuously improving herd health practices to minimize risk. “About a third of livestock antibiotics used today are not used at all in human medicine. And in accordance with the Food and Drug Administration’s Guidance 209 and 213, antibiotics important to human medicine used for growth purposes will be eliminated from farm use within three years… [A]ccording to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, antibiotic-resistant diseases with the greatest effect on human health, like the contagious staph bacteria MRSA, are spread by human-to-human contact.No clinical case of MRSA in a human related to livestock has been identified in the United States.”   Agricultural Economy A recent news update from North Dakota State University stated that, “North Dakota cropland values increased by about 42 percent during 2012, according to Andrew Swenson, North Dakota State University Extension Service farm management specialist. “His estimate is derived from the published results of a January 2013 county-level survey commissioned by the North Dakota Department of Trust Lands. The 42 percent increase is similar to the 46 percent increase reported by the North Dakota Chapter of the American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers. “‘The question is whether this huge increase has capped a 10-year rise in land values, which has been the largest in the past 100 years, even exceeding what occurred from 1973 to 1981,’ Swenson says. ‘North Dakota cropland values are now the highest ever, even when adjusting for inflation.’” Jeff Plagge, the chairman-elect of the American Bankers Association, indicated in a letter to the editor in The New York Times earlier this week that, “‘As Crop Prices Surge, Investment Firms and Farmers Vie for Land’ (Business Day, March 19) doesn’t address the fundamental differences between the farm crisis of the 1980s and the current farm boom. Today’s interest rates are at an all-time low compared with the extremely high rates of the ’80s. “Land prices are high, but farmers are mostly using cash, not leveraged credit, to buy land. Only a small percentage of land is actually changing hands, part of the supply-and-demand reason land prices have climbed.” Owen Fletcher reported yesterday at The Wall Street Journal Online that, “U.S. soybean futures fell to a fresh ten-month low Thursday, pressured by higher-than-expected domestic supplies and concerns about a bird flu outbreak in China.” Mr. Fletcher added that, “Corn futures also fell Thursday, pressured by the high domestic supplies reported last week. Corn plummeted after the report, and bargain-hunting earlier this week fueled some buying in futures, but prices are now falling again as traders remain focused on the higher supply levels than expected.” In a related item, University of Illinois Agricultural Economist Gary Schnitkey indicated yesterday at the farmdoc daily blog (“Recent Price Changes Alter Relative Corn and Soybean Returns”) that, “USDA’s March 2013 estimates of corn stocks were substantially higher than trade estimates (see here), initiating a substantial decline in both corn and soybean prices during the past week. In this article, the relative profit impacts for 2013 crops of these price changes are examined. During the first quarter of 2013, price changes have increased expected soybean returns relative to expected corn returns.” And Reuters writer Sam Nelson reported yesterday that, “Cold and wet weather in the U.S. Midwest and much of the Plains will continue to slow spring fieldwork and early corn plantings while dry weather will continue to stress wheat and grazing lands in the far Southwest Plains, an agricultural meteorologist said on Thursday. “‘Temperatures will remain cold and it definitely will keep soil temperatures low, so plantings will remain behind normal,’ said Don Keeney, a meteorologist for MDA Weather Services.” Meanwhile, the U.S. Drought Monitor was updated yesterday and stated in part that, “Precipitation totals exceeding one inch were widespread from northeastern Texas and northwestern Louisiana northward through southwestern Missouri and part of southeastern Kansas. Some of the northern reaches of this area, extending as far south as central Arkansas and east-central Oklahoma, measured 2 to 4 inches of rain. As a result, drought classifications improved in several areas which were generally in the D0 to D2 range last week. “Elsewhere, most locations in the central Plains received anywhere from a few tenths of an inch to slightly over an inch while only isolated measurable precipitation was reported in central and southern Texas, the High Plains, and the northern Great Plains. Some areas of degradation were introduced in roughly the southwestern half of Texas and the northwestern Plains, but conditions remained essentially unchanged in most areas.” Also yesterday, Ben Geman reported at The Hill’s Energy Blog that, “Global warming will make cases of ‘extreme’ rainfall even more intense and worsen flood risks, federal researchers say in the latest warning that climate change will likely worsen violent weather.” With respect to trade issues, Reuters writer Doug Palmer reported earlier this week that, “The United States would welcome South Korea joining negotiations on an Asia-Pacific free trade agreement, a senior U.S. trade official said on Wednesday, as Washington continues to weigh Japan’s bid to enter the same set of talks. “‘We do think it’s natural and logical for Korea to join this negotiation. We think they would have a lot to offer,’ Assistant U.S. Trade Representative Wendy Cutler said in a speech at the Wilson Center, a foreign policy think tank.”   Budget Jackie Calmes reported in today’s New York Times that, “President Obama next week will take the political risk of formally proposing cuts to Social Security and Medicare in his annual budget in an effort to demonstrate his willingness to compromise with Republicans and revive prospects for a long-term deficit-reduction deal, administration officials say. “In a significant shift in fiscal strategy, Mr. Obama on Wednesday will send a budget plan to Capitol Hill that departs from the usual presidential wish list that Republicans typically declare dead on arrival. Instead it will embody the final compromise offer that he made to Speaker John A. Boehner late last year, before Mr. Boehner abandoned negotiations in opposition to the president’s demand for higher taxes from wealthy individuals and some corporations.” Today’s article added that, “Congressional Republicans have dug in against any new tax revenues after higher taxes for the affluent were approved at the start of the year. The administration’s hope is to create cracks in Republicans’ antitax resistance, especially in the Senate, as constituents complain about the across-the-board cuts in military and domestic programs that took effect March 1. “Mr. Obama’s proposed deficit reduction would replace those cuts. And if Republicans continue to resist the president, the White House believes that most Americans will blame them for the fiscal paralysis.”   Immigration Bloomberg writer Alan Bjerga reported yesterday that, “An immigration deal for the farmworkers who harvest the bulk of U.S. fruits and vegetables poses one of the most elusive, and essential, challenges to an attempt by lawmakers to recast the nation’s immigration laws. “As negotiators near agreement over future visas for lower- skilled and higher-skilled workers, programs for largely seasonal, lesser-paid agricultural laborers are still being negotiated by the American Farm Bureau Federation, the United Farm Workers and groups representing companies including Chiquita Brands International Inc. and Sunkist Growers Inc. “With an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants already in the U.S., about 25 percent of the farm workforce is unauthorized — more than 300,000 workers without papers — according to a 2009 study by the Pew Hispanic Center. This includes heavy concentrations in fruit and vegetable harvesting as well as workers in ranching, dairy and grain operations.” Mr. Bjerga noted that, “Under the outlines of a tentative agreement between the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and AFL-CIO that is part of the Senate negotiations, the government would open an employer-funded bureau to monitor labor-market data and oversee a new program of visas for lower-skilled workers. “Yet specific provisions for farmworkers, currently handled under the H-2A visa program, aren’t included in those talks. About 55,000 workers gained such visas in 2011 — 94 percent Mexicans, according to the Government Accountability Office. The Bloomberg article pointed out that, “Broad agreement exists for a visa program more market-based and flexible than H-2A, while sticking points remain over placing numerical caps on visas and wage rates, said [Craig Regelbrugge, co-chair of the Agricultural Coalition for Immigration Reform in Washington], whose group includes fresh-produce associations and farmer cooperatives. “Farm employers need a flexible enough cap on visas to ensure that workers are available to meet employer needs, said Bob Stallman, president of the American Farm Bureau Federation, in an interview last month. “‘The two biggest issues for immigration in agriculture will be the caps, and what the wage rates will be,’ he said.” Ramsey Cox reported yesterday at The Hill’s Floor Action Blog that, “Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) said Wednesday that any immigration reform being considered by Congress should ‘prioritize securing our borders.’” On the issue of border security, Brian Bennett penned an interesting article in yesterday’s Los Angeles Times titled, “Radar shows U.S. border security gaps.”   Regulations Aaron Lucchetti and Julie Steinberg reported in today’s Wall Street Journal that, “Jon S. Corzine, the former New Jersey governor who revved up risky trading as chief executive at MF Global Holdings Ltd., deserves much of the blame for the firm’s 2011 demise, according to a bankruptcy trustee’s report released Thursday. “The report mentioned Mr. Corzine’s name a total of 284 times—an average of more than once per page—and concluded that he and his management team engaged in ‘negligent conduct.’ “The 174-page document, filed shortly after midnight Thursday in a federal bankruptcy court by former Federal Bureau of Investigation chief Louis J. Freeh, represents the most thorough look into management’s role in MF Global’s failure—and the toughest yet on Mr. Corzine.” Meanwhile, Scott Patterson and Jamila Trindle reported in today’s Wall Street Journal that, “The Commodity Futures Trading Commission, under the leadership of Gary Gensler, has long been seen as the most aggressive regulator in terms of passing rules mandated by the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial overhaul. “No more. Rule making at the CFTC has slowed sharply in recent months amid internal squabbling, lobbying pressure from the financial industry and the sheer complexity of the rules themselves. “The delays threaten to undermine a central plank of Dodd-Frank, which was to push the trading of swaps—contracts in which two parties swap assets or cash flows—into the open. Conflicts inside the commission have repeatedly delayed votes on rules governing the creation of new trading venues required by lawmakers to make swaps trading more transparent.”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    April 3 Farm Bill; Ag Economy; and, Immigration Posted By Keith Good On April 3, 2013  Farm Bill- Policy Issues A news release yesterday from Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D., N.Y.) indicated that, “As the Senate gets set to again take up the Farm Bill in the coming weeks, [Sen. Gillibrand] today announced a comprehensive plan to help provide long-term support and certainty for New York’s dairy farmers by providing a fair safety net for small producers, and improving inventory reporting and transparency. The cornerstone of Senator Gillibrand’s plan is the new, bipartisan Gillibrand-Collins Dairy Pricing Reform Act to reform the way the USDA sets dairy prices.” The release noted that, “‘The squeeze facing our dairy farmers is driving them out of business and preventing them from growing to meet demand,’ said Senator Gillibrand, New York’s first member of the Senate Agriculture Committee in nearly 40 years. ‘We can’t afford any more delay in Congress. We need to take action now to set the environment for our dairy farmers to thrive. These commonsense proposals can give our dairy farmers the certainty and stability they need to grow their businesses, and help strengthen our state’s rural economies.’ “While dairy remains New York’s leading agricultural product – producing nearly 13 billion pounds for a value of $2.75 billion – dairy farmers are suffering from a range of setbacks. High fuel costs, and severe grain and hay shortages continue to push up the cost of production, yet the price paid to farmers remains stagnant– putting a squeeze on farmers, preventing New York from maintaining its competitiveness among other dairy states, and holding our farms back from a growing business.” Yesterday’s news item also indicated that, “Senator Gillibrand and Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) will be introducing the Dairy Pricing Reform Act next week when the Senate returns to session.  This bill forces the USDA to begin the hearing process to restructure the pricing system and direct the Secretary of Agriculture to release the Department’s recommendations to Congress. This bill builds on language Senator Gillibrand secured in the Senate Farm Bill (S. 10) that requires the USDA to study different methods of determining prices, including competitive pay pricing or shifting from a 4 class system to a 2 class system. “Senator Gillibrand introduced and is leading the effort to pass the Dairy Income Fairness Act, legislation that would give farms with 200 cows or less a guaranteed $6.50 margin – the cost of milk minus the cost of feed – and exempts the first 200 cows from supply management.  The bill would also extend the current Milk Income Loss Contract (MILC) program for nine months, pegged to inflation, while the USDA establishes a new and more sustainable program for dairy farmers.” Also, Robert Barron reported earlier this week at the Enid (Okla.) News & Eagle Online that, “U.S. Rep. Frank Lucas told Enid Rotary Club members Monday although nothing is getting done in Washington, Congress and the president are a reflection of what the people have decided. “‘We have a very conservative House, a very liberal president, and a Senate where if no one gets 60 percent of 100 members, no one is in charge,’ said Lucas, a Republican. ‘The voters left it that way.’” The article added that, “Half the membership of the House Agriculture Committee has changed, [Chairman Lucas] said, reflecting the massive changes to House membership. When Lucas entered Congress 19 years ago, he was 434th in seniority. Today, he is No. 69 in seniority and is chairman of the House Agriculture Committee.” Mr. Barron also noted that, “As chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, Lucas said he has spent more time on the farm bill — important in the heavily agricultural 3rd District — than anything else. He said this year’s bill will spend less money. About 80 percent of the farm bill concerns nutrition programs, such as school lunches, food stamps and the Women, Infants and Children program. Roughly 20 percent concerns actual food programs. “The bill the House Agriculture Committee approved spends $35 billion less than to the current farm bill. About 16 percent of the cuts will be made in nutrition programs, Lucas said. “‘We want to make sure those who need help will get it, but those who qualify actually meet the qualifications,’ he said. “Responding to questions from Rotarians, Lucas said he believes the president will sign the farm bill.” Meanwhile, Chris Clayton reported yesterday at the DTN Ag Policy Blog that, “A coalition of 229 groups sent a letter Tuesday to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack supporting USDA’s proposed modifications to the Country-of-Origin Labeling law. “Some major livestock, meatpacking and agricultural groups have opposed USDA’s changes, as have Canadian and Mexican livestock groups that helped bring the World Trade Organization case against the U.S. over the labeling law. The WTO ruled the Country-of-Origin Label discriminated against imported livestock from Canada and Mexico.” And Bloomberg writers Alan Bjerga and Derek Wallbank reported earlier this week that, “A plan to let farmers grow genetically modified crops developed by Monsanto Co. during legal appeals has drawn criticism from food-safety advocates and backers of open government over how the proposal became law. “The measure, tucked into a bill to fund the federal government through Sept. 30, was backed by Republican Senator Roy Blunt from Monsanto’s home state of Missouri. The provision allows farmers to plant products developed by the world’s biggest seed seller while their approval is being challenged in federal court. “Critics including the Center for Food Safety and the American Civil Liberties Union have said the legislation passed last month allows Monsanto to circumvent due process and potentially place unapproved products into the U.S. food supply. The provision, though,applies only to crop approvals overturned by a federal judge, and it probably won’t have much effect unless extended beyond the bill’s Sept. 30 expiration.”   Agricultural Economy Nathan Phelps reported earlier this week at the Green Bay Press Gazette Online that, “Area [Wisconsin] producers may still have some uncertainty over exactly what — and how many– acres will be planted to a specific crop this year, but major shifts are not expected. “Valders dairy producer Loren Ulness said his final decisions will come down to just how long it takes for planting weather to roll around.” The article explained that, “Optimal times for planting corn are in early- to mid-May with soybeans following shortly after. In some less-than-ideal years, producers have been in the fields planting past July 1.” Andrew Johnson Jr. reported yesterday at The Wall Street Journal Online that, “U.S. corn futures extended their downturn for the third straight session Tuesday, settling at a fresh nine-month low as investors continued to shed risk in the market.” Reuters writer Tom Polansek reported yesterday that, “U.S. farmers who tasted record-high prices for corn during last summer’s historic drought are abandoning long-held selling strategies in hopes that the market serves up another rally. “Farmers say they are turning away from the traditional practice of making early sales of corn, the most widely produced grain in the United States, after missing out on big profits when prices peaked last September.” The article also pointed out that, “Rain and snow have recently replenished soil moisture in key growing states like Illinois and Iowa, said Andy Karst, meteorologist from World Weather Inc. States in the western Corn Belt, like Kansas and Nebraska, are still suffering from dangerous dryness.” University of Illinois Agricultural Economist Gary Schnitkey noted yesterday at the farmdoc daily blog (“Shifts in Planting Acres across States Largely Follow Previous Trends”) that, “USDA’s 2013 Planting Intentions report provides detail on prospective plantings by state. These state figures will change as plantings progress through the growing season. Moreover, these state values have a margin of error around them. Hence, one should not read too much into state changes at this point. Given these caveats, state acre changes are interpreted below, as many of the state changes continue trends observed in recent history (see here).” Yesterday’s update added that, “Nationally, corn acres are expected to be near the same in 2013 as in 2012: 97.3 million acres in 2013 as compared to 97.1 million acres in 2012. While the national acreage is expected to remain the same, shifts across states are projected. Illinois is projected to loss 600,000 acres. Many expected a decline in Illinois acres, as corn-after-corn yields have experience large yields drags in central and southern Illinois in the last two years, leading some farmers to shift away from corn to soybeans. “It is interesting to note that corn acreage is projected to decease in states where the 2012 drought was the worst: Illinois (-600,000 acres), Missouri (-200,000), Indiana (-150,000), Kansas (-100,000) and Kentucky (-50,000). In other corn producing acres where the drought had less of an impact on yields, corn acres are projected to remain the same or increase: Iowa (no change), Minnesota (250,000 increase), and North Dakota (500,000). The drought areas experienced adverse conditions leading to larger corn-after-corn yield drags. It will be interesting to see if Iowa, Minnesota, and North Dakota experience corn-after-corn yield drags when more adverse years occur, leading to reduced corn acres.”   Immigration AP writer Erica Werner reported today that, “Sweeping immigration legislation taking shape in the Senate will aim to overhaul the nation’s agriculture worker program to create a steady supply of labor for farmers and growers, who rely more than any other industry on workers who have come to the country illegally. “Farm workers already here would get a speedier path to legal status than other immigrants in the country illegally, and a likely new visa program would make it easier for foreign workers to come to the U.S. Policymakers aim to install such workers in place of the half or more of the nation’s farm labor workforce estimated to be in the country illegally. “Negotiators have been working to finalize an agreement in time for the measure to be included in bipartisan legislation expected to be released next week, but disagreements on wages and numbers of visas are proving tough to solve.” The AP article pointed out that, “Labor groups are accusing growers of pushing to lower farmworkers’ wages, while growers dispute that and say they want to pay a fair wage. Meanwhile, labor is resisting growers’ attempts to increase the potential numbers of new workers who would come in, as growers argue their industry’s viability depends on a strong new labor supply. “‘It comes down to either we’re importing our labor or we’re importing our food, and if we don’t have access to a legal supply of labor we will start going offshore,’ said Kristi Boswell, director of congressional relations for the American Farm Bureau Federation.” Ms. Werner added that, “The reason agriculture uses so much illegal labor has to do with the need for workers, but also the inadequacy of current immigration programs. There is a 10-month visa program for farm workers, called the H2A visa, but growers argue it’s so hard to use that once they’ve completed the paperwork whatever crop they needed picked may well have withered. “There were about 55,000 H2A visas issued in 2011, representing a small percentage of the nation’s approximately 2 million farm workers. “Part of the solution, growers and unions say, is to create a more permanent agricultural workforce. Senators would likely accomplish this by giving a new ‘blue card’ visa granting legal status to farm workers who’ve worked in the industry for at least two years and intend to remain in it for at least five years more.” Today’s article stated that, “Separately, growers are pushing to replace the H2A visa program with an entirely new program with visas offering multiyear stays. But there is disagreement over how many such visas would be offered and how much money workers would make — the same issues that hung up a deal between the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the AFL-CIO over nonagricultural low-skilled workers before a resolution was reached over the weekend…The two-pronged structure of the emerging deal is similar to legislation called AgJobs negotiated in years past that never became law. Because of that history, the agriculture issue is being handled differently from other parts of the Senate immigration bill. It’s being negotiated by four senators —Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and Michael Bennet, D-Colo. — only two of whom, Rubio and Bennet, are part of the so-called Gang of Eight senators writing the overall bill.” Meanwhile, Manu Raju reported yesterday at Politico that, “Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy vowed to move swiftly on immigration legislation despite calls from conservatives, including Sen. Marco Rubio, to slow down the process. “Reacting to a letter from Rubio over the weekend calling for extensive hearings on the soon-to-be-unveiled immigration bill by a group of eight senators, the Vermont Democrat said his panel would ‘consider’ holding a single hearing on the measure when it is introduced. But Leahy raised concerns that waiting too long could undermine the larger effort to pass the comprehensive bill, calling the matter ‘urgent.’” The article noted that, “A Rubio aide said the senator was pleased to see Leahy promise to consider scheduling a hearing on the forthcoming proposal as it had been unclear he would do so, even though other GOP aides scoffed at the response.” Mike Allen and Jim VandeHei reported yesterday at Politico that, “Immigration reform is alive and kicking because Sen. Marco Rubio was there at conception. It will likely die if Rubio bolts in the end. “The possibility that Rubio could walk away, more than any other dynamic, is shaping the final details of new immigration laws, participants tell us. “Without Rubio, GOP leaders — and many Democrats — worry any bipartisan deal will be impossible to sell to conservatives.” And, The Washington Post editorial board indicated today that, “Hence Mr. Rubio’s public wavering on an immigration accord. A member of a bipartisan group of eight senators trying to hammer out the details of an immigration bill, Mr. Rubio appears paralyzed — orto be trying to have it both ways . At first he led the charge, trying to brand an overhaul of the immigration system as his signature achievement. Then, when progress was made last weekend, he backed away, warning that talk of a breakthrough was premature. “Is the Florida senator the once and future darling of the tea party, throwing bombs from the sidelines? Or is he a substantive architect of a workable new system? It’s one or the other; Mr. Rubio needs to decide.” The Post added that, “If GOP stars such as Mr. Rubio decide once and for all to lead, that may be enough to sway fence-sitting Republicans in the House. If they waver, this year’s attempt at immigration reform, like those of past years, is as good as dead.” More specifically with respect to the House, Ashley Parker reported in today’s New York Times that, “In the shadow of a bipartisan Senate group preparing to roll out broad immigration legislation next week, shortly after Congress returns from its holiday break, a bipartisan group of eight House members is readying its own bill. “In contrast to the Senate plan — which would provide one clear, if difficult, path to citizenship for the 11 million illegal immigrants already in the country — the House legislation will most likely offer three distinct paths to legal status. “Young immigrants in the country without legal papers, who often call themselves ‘Dreamers,’ and low-skilled agricultural workers would qualify for an expedited road to legal status, people familiar with the negotiations said. The Dreamers should not be punished for being brought illegally to the country by their parents, House aides said, and the members agreed that the agricultural workers perform crucial work for the economy.” The Times article noted that, “The House group is still debating what benefits, if any, immigrants would receive during their provisional legal status, though a Republican with knowledge of the talks said the group had agreed that no government-subsidized benefits would be included. The group is also discussing what border security standards would need to be met before any path to legal permanent residence could begin. “Another sticking point is a guest worker program. Though the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the A.F.L.-C.I.O., the nation’s largest federation of unions, have reached an agreement that the Senate group is adopting, Republicans in the House group remain wary of the deal.” Also, Damien Cave reported in today’s New York Times that, “All across Mexico’s ruddy central plains, most of the people who could go north already have. In a region long regarded as a bellwether of illegal immigration — where the flow of migrants has often seemed never-ending — the streets are wind-whipped and silent. Homes await returning families, while dozens of schools have closed because of a lack of students. Here in El Cargadero, a once-thriving farm community of 3,000, only a few hundred people remain, at most. “‘It’s not like it used to be,’ said Fermin Saldivar Ureño, 45, an avocado farmer whose 13 brothers and sisters are all in California. ‘I have three kids, my parents had 14. There just aren’t as many people to go.’” Today’s article explained that, “As Congress considers a sweeping overhaul of immigration, many lawmakers say they are deeply concerned that providing a pathway to citizenship for the estimated 11 million immigrants living illegally in the United States would mean only more illegal immigration…But past experience and current trends in both Mexico and the United States suggest that legalization would not lead to a sudden flood of illegal immigration on the scale of what occurred after 1986. Long-running surveys of migrants from Mexico found that work, not the potential to gain legal status, was the main cause of increased border crossings in the 1990s and 2000s. And as Mr. Saldivar points out, times have changed. “The American economy is no longer flush with jobs. The border is more secure than ever. And in Mexico the birthrate has fallen precipitously, while the people who left years ago have already sent their immediate relatives across, or started American families of their own.”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    April 2 Ag Economy; Farm Bill; Immigration; and, Biofuels Posted By Keith Good On April 2, 2013  Agricultural Economy- Trade Gregory Meyer reported yesterday at The Financial Times Online that, “Grain prices collapsed for a second straight session on Monday as the market absorbed the implications of a report showing higher than estimated US corn stocks. “The falls came after a pair of surveys released last Thursday by the US that highlighted its continued importance as a food commodities supplier even as rivals such as Argentina, Brazil and Ukraine took bigger shares of world exports. “In Chicago, CBOT May corn closed down 7.6 per cent on Monday to $6.4225 a bushel, the lowest since last June. This followed a 5.4 per cent fall on Thursday before a break for the Easter holiday weekend. Corn prices have experienced their largest two-day fall in percentage terms since 1996.” Reuters writer Rod Nickel reported yesterday that, “Chicago corn tumbled to its biggest two-day drop since mid-1996, touching the lowest price in nine months, as larger-than-expected U.S. stockpiles weighed down the market. “Pressured by corn, Chicago wheat also registered its lowest nearby price in nine months, and soybeans touched a nearly three-month low.” The Reuters article pointed out that, “Investment bank Goldman Sachs added to the bearish mood on Monday by lowering its price forecasts for corn, soybeans and wheat, citing the larger than expected stocks, trade sources said. Goldman lowered its three-month price forecast for Chicago Board of Trade corn futures to $6.50 per bushel from $7.50 previously.” Bloomberg writers Tony C. Dreibus and Katia Dmitrieva reported yesterday that, “U.S. corn inventories on March 1 totaled 5.399 billion bushels, the Department of Agriculture said March 28. While down from a year earlier, that’s still above the 4.995 billion forecast by analysts surveyed by Bloomberg News. Farmers will plant 97.282 million acres this year, the most since 1936, the USDA said. Prices reached the lowest since June today.” More specifically regarding the USDA’s stocks report, University of Illinois Agricultural Economist Darrel Good indicated yesterday at the farmdoc daily blog (“Another Surprising Corn Stocks Estimate”) that, “The USDA’s quarterly estimates of U.S. corn inventories have become a source of substantial surprises for the corn market. Dating from March 2010, 11 of the past 13 quarterly stocks estimates have deviated from expectations by enough to generate large price movements. During that period, USDA stock estimates have been both much larger and much smaller than generally expected…[W]hile it should be expected that the market will not always correctly anticipate USDA estimates, the recent pattern of large and seemingly alternating direction of the surprises in the quarterly corn stocks estimates is problematic.” Yesterday’s farmdoc update noted that, “While planting intentions for corn and soybeans revealed on March 28 were near expectations, new crop prices have also weakened as expectations for larger stocks at the end of the current marketing year provide some additional supplies for the 2013-14 marketing year. Focus will now turn to planting conditions and planting progress. Without widespread planting delays, new crop price weakness is expected to continue.” Meanwhile, Owen Fletcher reported in today’s Wall Street Journal that, “First begun in the 1600s, the cultivation of rice in the U.S. has fallen on tough times. The number of acres dedicated to rice likely will decline 3% this spring compared with last year, to 2.61 million acres, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. “That represents a decrease of 28% from 2010 plantings, and would be the lowest level since 1987, according to the USDA…[U].S. rice prices haven’t kept up in the past few years with corn and soybean prices, which notched records last year amid a drought in the Midwest.” The Journal article added that, “While the U.S. ranks only No. 12 in the world in rice output, it is the largest exporter in the Western Hemisphere. Some commodities traders are wagering that fewer planted acres in the U.S. could lead to tighter supplies in the Americas and higher prices.” And Anthony Greder and Katie Micik reported yesterday at DTN (link requires subscription) that, “The condition of the nation’s winter wheat crop was considerably lower than it was the same time a year ago, according to USDA’s first weekly crop progress report of the season released on Monday. “Only 34% of the winter wheat crop was rated in good-to-excellent condition during the week ended Sunday, March 31, compared to 58% a year ago, according to the NASS report.” The DTN article added that, “Another notable aspect of the first crop progress report of the season was the absence of corn planting progress. In last year’s first report, issued on April 2, NASS reported that 3% of the nation’s corn crop was planted. This year’s report had no update on corn planting.” In news focused on trade issues, Julian Pecquet reported yesterday at The Hill’s Global Affairs Blog that, “The Obama administration claimed credit Monday for breaking down technical barriers to U.S. exports around the world even as an ambitious trans-Pacific trade deal remains a work in progress and an agreement with Europe announced in this year’s State of the Union address is still far off…[T]he president had hoped to wrap up the Trans-Pacific Partnership talks with 10 other countries last year, and conversations about a U.S.-European Union trade pact have barely begun. With that backdrop, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative released three reports this week highlighting progress the administration has made in tackling technical barriers to trade.” The Hill update pointed out that, “[T]his year’s report on sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures — the rules and procedures that governments use to ensure that foods and beverages are safe to consume and to protect animals and plants from pests and diseases — notes the administration’s success in tackling a number of barriers to trade. “These include the removal of specific SPS barriers in El Salvador, Hong Kong, Japan and Mexico for exports of U.S. beef; working with Taiwan to implement a maximum residue limit for beef containing ractopamine, a drug used as a feed additive; successfully petitioning the European Union to allow the use of a pathogen reduction treatment on beef; resolving barriers for U.S. rough (paddy) rice and poultry products for export to Colombia; improving the import procedures for U.S. cherries entering South Korea; and gaining access for certain U.S. pears into China.” The “Washington Insider” section of DTN noted in part yesterday (link requires subscription) that, “Liberalizing trade in dairy products among the nations negotiating a Trans-Pacific Partnership free trade agreement is shaping up to be among the more difficult issues to resolve. The United States, Canada and Japan (if it joins the TPP negotiations) operate protectionist programs to shield their dairy industries from competition as do Mexico and several other of the 11 nations involved in the talks. Accordingly, it may be politically difficult for negotiators to part with those protections.” Former US trade representative and World Bank president Robert Zoellick noted in a column posted yesterday at The Financial Times Online that, “Pascal Lamy, the current director-general, made every effort to complete the Doha round of global trade negotiations. But that deal, launched in 2001, has foundered on differences between developed economies and major emerging markets. As a result, the WTO is at risk of being pushed aside. “The action is shifting to other venues, with the announcement of a US-EU trade negotiation being just the most recent. The next DG needs to have a policy agenda to modernise trade multilateralism to meet new challenges.”   Farm Bill- Policy Issues Brad Lubben, a Policy Specialist at the University of Nebraska, noted recently at the AgChallange2050 Blog (Farm Foundation) that, “The continuous focus on fiscal cliff issues and farm bill deliberations in Washington has most of the agricultural policy attention focused on pending farm program changes and the role of the federal farm income safety net. Yet, for a large sector of U.S. agriculture, the policy watch is not so much on what to fight for in the proposed farm bill on Capitol Hill, but what to fight against from almost every other direction in Washington. “The livestock sector is expected to generate nearly 40% of the total value of agricultural production in 2013, substantially more than the 31% of the crop sector predominantly participating in federal farm programs. While the farm bill provides a regular platform for the crop sector to discuss farm policy that can benefit crop producers, the livestock sector—other than dairy—primarily focuses on what is being done or is proposed to be done to producers. In recent weeks, numerous issues showed up on that list.” After additional analysis, Dr. Lubben indicated that, “One of the items on the policy list for livestock producers is actually an issue where government action is desired—namely providing funding for disaster assistance. Some limited emergency assistance programs exist, such as loans and CRP haying/grazing. However, the primary livestock disaster assistance programs for death losses, forage losses and other disaster losses expired in 2011, just as the 2012 drought set in over most of the country. These programs were reauthorized in the fiscal cliff tax legislation but were not funded and remain in limbo, even as Hurricane Sandy disaster assistance was passed through Congress earlier this year.” In other news, AP writer David Gutman reported late last week that, “The West Virginia Senate hopes that instituting public-private funding partnerships will enable the state to become the nation’s first to give free breakfast and lunch to all schoolchildren. The program would initially focus on elementary schools with hopes to expand it to all students as funds become available. “The state Senate unanimously passed a bill Friday that would create the partnerships in each of the state’s 55 counties. The bill also attempts to increase participation in the current meal programs which would bring the state more federal funding. It now heads to the House for consideration.” And Ruth Simon reported in today’s Wall Street Journal that, “The U.S. Department of Agriculture is pulling back on its efforts to collect money owed by borrowers in foreclosure…The agency’s collection practices were the subject of a page-one article in The Wall Street Journal in May 2012.” Ms. Simon noted that, “Under a new policy, the USDA will stop pursuing borrowers for unpaid loan balances after foreclosure if the borrowers can demonstrate that they are unable to pay the debt. The policy applies to loans issued or guaranteed by the Department after Oct. 22, 2012.”   Immigration Humberto Sanchez reported yesterday at Roll Call Online that, “How long does ‘full and careful consideration’ [related article] of an immigration bill take? “That’s a question Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick J. Leahy, as well as the bipartisan group of eight senators working on legislation, will have to weigh as they move forward in the coming weeks with a comprehensive immigration overhaul.” The article pointed out that, “Though it was easy for the Vermont Democrat to dismiss calls for a lengthy debate from longtime opponents of an immigration rewrite, such as Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, the decision this weekend by a key member of the ‘gang of eight’ — Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla. — to demand ‘full and careful consideration’ of any immigration bill significantly complicates Democratic leaders’ calculations. “Leahy and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., don’t want to be seen as jamming a bill through the chamber, but they also don’t want so much time to elapse that the measure loses momentum and is brought down by opponents’ ability to vilify it.” With respect to executive branch perspective, Justin Sink reported yesterday at The Hill Online that, “The White House said Monday it was ‘encouraged’ by progress on bipartisan immigration reform in the Senate, but cautioned that lawmakers were ‘not there yet’ on an agreement.” While Tim Mak reported earlier this week at Politico that, “David Axelrod, a former top adviser to President Barack Obama, says the president views the issue of immigration reform as a ‘legacy item.’ “‘He wants this accomplishment. This is a legacy item for him. There is no doubt in my mind he wants to pass comprehensive immigration reform,’ Axelrod said Sunday on NBC’s ‘Meet the Press.’” Also, Jake Sherman reported yesterday at Politico that, “A small, bipartisan House group is nearly finished with its immigration reform plan, which it hopes to announce the week of April 8 when Congress returns from recess. “But lawmakers and leadership are carefully eying several significant lingering technical issues to bring it across the finish line. The article noted that, “The key issues causing concern are fears about the price tag of immigration reform, the pathway to citizenship for the nation’s 11 million illegal immigrants and the process by which a slow-moving House Republican Conference might introduce and vote on a bill that would overhaul the system. “These items — described by several sources involved in the secret talks — are under active consideration by the group and the senior members of the Republican leadership as the House group readies for its roll-out when Congress returns from a two-week long break.”   Biofuels Tracy Samilton reported yesterday at National Public Radio (NPR) Online that, “The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency could soon issue a final ruling that aims to force oil companies to replace E10, gasoline mixed with 10 percent ethanol, with E15. “This move could come just as widespread support for ethanol, which is made from corn, appears to be eroding.” The NPR item added that, “The switch to E15, however, is being driven by the renewable fuel mandate, which directs the EPA to require a greater volume of ethanol in gasoline every year, pretty much, no matter what…[T]he problem is that the mandate applies only to the oil companies, not the people who blend the ethanol into the gas, and not the gas stations that buy the blended product. “There’s that ‘horse to water’ problem again. Because half of all gas stations are completely independent of the oil companies, they could just keep ordering lower-ethanol gas, and they probably will.” Christopher Doering reported yesterday at The Des Moines Register Online that, “The Iowa Renewable Fuels Association said the amount of biodiesel blended into diesel in Iowa has more than tripled from 7.4 million gallons in 2010 to 23.3 million gallons in 2012. “The figures, which came from data released by the Iowa Department of Revenue, also found biodiesel is blended in 42.6 percent of all Iowa diesel sales, an increase of more than 10 percent since 2010. Of those sales, the average biodiesel content has more than doubled since 2010 from 3.1 percent to an 8.1 percent blend of biodiesel.”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.    April 1 Immigration; Ag Economy; Farm Bill; Budget; and, Biofuels Posted By Keith Good On April 1, 2013  Immigration Ashley Parker and Steven Greenhouse reported in Saturday’s New York Times that, “The nation’s top business and labor groups were near agreement Friday on a guest worker program for low-skilled immigrants, closing in on a deal that would eliminate one of the last significant obstacles to a new proposal for a broad overhaul of immigration laws, officials involved in the talks said. “The progress in the talks, which stalled late last week, had members of a bipartisan group of eight senators that has been working on an immigration bill increasingly optimistic that they would be able to introduce comprehensive legislation in the Senate when Congress returns the second week of April.” The Times article explained that, “Some involved in the negotiations remained hopeful that a deal would be reached by the weekend, but the Congressional recess, along with the Good Friday observance, made it difficult to lock all the moving pieces in place, those close to the talks said. And, while the members of the bipartisan group were optimistic, aides cautioned that no deal would be final until all the senators had signed off on every piece of the legislation.” Writing in Saturday’s Wall Street Journal, Sara Murray reported that, “The Chamber of Commerce and AFL-CIO have been negotiating the details of a new visa program that would allow a future crop of immigrants to come to the U.S. to work in year-round, low-wage jobs such as landscaping and meatpacking. Wages had been a sticking point that caused talks to stall last week. The Journal article pointed out that, “Unions worry that setting wages too low will depress pay for Americans. Businesses worry that setting wages too high will discourage employers from using the program, and that they will again turn to illegal immigrant labor.” Meanwhile, David Nakamura, also writing about the evolving immigration deal, reported in yesterday’s Washington Post that, “But the complexity of the matter was highlighted when one member of the business community said Saturday afternoon that the lead negotiators on the business side had not seen written details of a final agreement and cautioned that declaring the matter resolved was premature…[M]embers of the Senate working group also declined to confirm the deal. Alex Conant, a spokesman for Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), wrote on his Twitter account, ‘Senate negotiators are making good progress on immigration reform, but we’re not done yet.’” The Post article added that, “The person who disclosed the guest-worker deal said that all eight senators had not formally signed off on the terms but said that could happen over the next few days because all had been briefed at each stage of the talks.” Ashley Parker and Steven Greenhouse reported in yesterday’s New York Times that, “But Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida and a member of the bipartisan group, sent a letter Saturday to Senator Patrick Leahy, Democrat of Vermont and the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, urging against ‘excessive haste’ in considering the soon-to-be-introduced legislation. The support of voters will be crucial for passing any immigration law, Mr. Rubio said in the letter, and ‘that support can only be earned through full and careful consideration of legislative language and an open process of amendments.’” Tim Mak reported yesterday at Politico that, “Sen. Lindsey Graham [R., S.C.] said on Sunday that senators have agreed to a conceptual deal on immigration reform, signed off by business, labor and the Gang of Eight that will be rolled out within the next week or so.” But Mike Allen, also writing yesterday at Politico, reported that, “Sen. Marco Rubio issued an Easter morning statement saying he is ‘encouraged’ by progress in talks on immigration reform but added: ‘Reports that the bipartisan group of eight senators have agreed on a legislative proposal are premature.’” Also, Roll Call writer Ben Weyl reported yesterday that, “Members of the Senate’s bipartisan ‘gang of eight,’ which is crafting a comprehensive immigration bill, said they have not signed off on a proposal just yet, but are likely to unveil it next week. “‘With the agreement between business and labor, every major policy issue has been resolved,’ Sen. Charles E. Schumer said Sunday on NBC’s ‘Meet the Press.’ “The New York Democrat, who is a member of the group, said senators have not explicitly agreed to the proposal because the bill’s language has not been fully drafted, but Schumer said he is ‘very, very optimistic’ there will be an agreement next week, when the Senate returns from its spring recess.” David Nakamura reported in today’s Washington Post that, “Democrats and immigration advocates say Rubio is crucial to the process of overhauling the nation’s laws in a way that offers a path to citizenship for 11 million illegal immigrants, and they areenthused by his participation in the Senate working group. They recognize the need for Rubio to move deliberately as he attempts to pull more conservative factions into the fold on immigration. “But at the same time, many liberals are concerned about the mixed signals Rubio, whose parents immigrated from Cuba, has offered in public pronouncements and wonder if he is looking for a potential escape hatch if the political heat becomes too great.” Sara Murray and Patrick O’Connor reported in today’s Wall Street Journal that, “Senate staffers have put together a proposal, but there is still disagreement over how big the program should be. Setting a minimum wage and a cap on the number of immigrant farm workers has proved contentious. “‘The cap is still an issue,’ said Kristi Boswell, director of congressional relations for the American Farm Bureau Federation. She said she was encouraged the Chamber and AFL-CIO agreed to cap a visa program for nonagricultural workers at 200,000 and said farm employers want the number of farm workers at least that high.” And more specifically with respect to agriculture, Alana Semuels reported on the front page of yesterday’s Los Angeles Times that, “Much of the debate over immigration reform has focused on the millions of undocumented workers living in the United States. But many say fixes must also be made to the programs that bring tens of thousands of guest workers to America every year to work at farms, hotels and restaurants. Such programs were among those that led to a standoff between congressional negotiators before their spring recess. A tentative agreement reached over the weekend covered some low-wage workers but not agricultural employees. “Employers say that the H-2A agricultural visa program, under which [Rodolfo Benito Coy Garcia, a worker who travels from Mexico] is employed, is broken and that the complicated rules and high costs push employers to hire undocumented workers. Labor advocatessay that the programs create a group of second-class citizens who are brought here to do grueling and often dangerous work without protection against abuses. “Placating both sides will be a challenge.” The LA Times article noted that, “Although the H-2A program is the only legal way to bring foreign farmworkers to the United States, most employers don’t use it. H-2A workers fill an estimated 6% of U.S. farm jobs, the majority in states such as North Carolina and Georgia, where employers are hard-pressed to find anyone else willing to do the work. Undocumented workers fill most of the 1 million or more farm jobs open nationally every year; California, which hires more farmworkers than any other state, uses H-2A workers less frequently because its location close to Mexico makes it easier for employers to find undocumented workers.” Yesterday’s article added that, “A coalition of farmers has proposed a more flexible alternative to H-2A. The Agricultural Worker Visa Program would allow two options for guest workers. One would give workers visas good for 11 months — one month longer than is now permitted — and would allow them to move from employer to employer, which is difficult under existing rules. In theory that would allow undocumented workers to leave abusive employers and find jobs elsewhere, worker advocates say. “The other option would allow an employee to work for an employer under contract for a fixed period, but would give the worker a visa term of up to a year. The visa could be renewed indefinitely as long as the worker returned to his home country for at least 30 days over a three-year period. This option would, in theory, ensure employers a more predictable supply of workers and would give workers more stability.”   Agricultural Economy Perry Beeman and Dan Piller reported on the front page of yesterday’s Des Moines Register that, “There’s still a lot of computer-assisted guesswork involved, but climatologists say an enduring drought likely will touch Iowans’ daily lives again this year, even as conditions improve at least slightly. “That means a spring of worry for Iowans.” The Register article stated that, “Farmers wonder whether the state’s world-class soil will get the long, cool drink it has needed for a year and a half. If not, expect the impact of high commodity prices again. Last year, high corn prices prompted ethanol plants to close or curtail production, livestock producers to cull herds, and supermarkets to raise meat prices.” “State climatologist Harry Hillaker’s review of 20 previous droughts showed the weather this year is likely to be both warmer than average and drier than average. The drought conditions should lessen compared with last year, and the National Weather Service still thinks conditions will improve here this year. How much is still up to debate,” the Register article said. Also, Dan Piller reported in Friday’s Des Moines Register that, “Iowa farmland has doubled since 2008 to $8,690 per acre as the state’s farmland boom continues through the drought and political uncertainty in Washington. “The latest survey by the Realtors Land Institute shows a 17.7 percent increase in farmland prices since last March.” Meanwhile, Ricardo Lopez reported on the front page of Saturday’s Los Angeles Times that, “Other states have long poached California manufacturers and jobs. Now they’re coming for the cows. “Seizing on the plight of the state’s dairy industry, which is beset by high feed costs and low milk prices, nearly a dozen states are courting Golden State dairy farmers. The pitch: cheaper farm land, lower taxes, fewer environmental regulations and higher prices for their milk.” The LA Times article pointed out that, “The state’s $8-billion dairy industry leads the country in milk production. California cows produced 41.5 billion pounds of milk, or about 4.8 billion gallons, in 2011. That’s 21% of the nation’s milk supply. The next top milk-producing states, Wisconsin and Idaho, produced a combined 39.4 billion pounds of milk in 2011. “Although the migration is not yet a stampede, some California dairy farmers have left for what they see as better opportunities.” Saturday’s article added that, “In recent years, an average of 100 dairies have closed annually, said Leslie Butler, an agriculture economist at UC Davis who studies the dairy industry. “‘Ten years ago, California was the low-cost producer,’ Butler said. With low milk prices and high feed costs, ‘it’s become more difficult to dairy here.’ “Dairy farmers also complain that environmental standards in California are more burdensome than in other states. Those standards have been strengthened as environmentalists try to address water and air quality issues that arise from large-scale dairies, which on average have about 1,100 cows.” And from an international perspective, David D. Kirkpatrick, writing from Qalyubeya, Egypt, reported on the front page of yesterday’s New York Times that, “A fuel shortage has helped send food prices soaring. Electricity is blacking out even before the summer. And gas-line gunfights have killed at least five people and wounded dozens over the past two weeks. “The root of the crisis, economists say, is that Egypt is running out of the hard currency it needs for fuel imports. The shortage is raising questions about Egypt’s ability to keep importing wheat that is essential to subsidized bread supplies, stirring fears of an economic catastrophe at a time when the government is already struggling to quell violent protests by its political rivals.”   Farm Bill- Policy Issues Tim Krohn reported late last week at the Mankato Free Press (Minn.) Online that, “Sen. Al Franken [D., Minn.] thinks the election results and a growing restlessness by farm and nutrition groups will mean a long-stalled farm bill will be passed this session.” And Joanie Stiers reported on Saturday at The Register-Mail (Galesburg, Il) Online that, “While the farm bill proves important for policy regarding America’s farms and food supply, Congress deals with bigger issues, including the budget. An environment of sequestration and deficit reduction will drive the farm bill debate this year, according to the Congressional Research Service.” “‘My hope is that we will have a five-year farm bill,’ said Congresswoman Cheri Bustos, who now serves the 17th District and is a member of the House Committee on Agriculture. ‘I will do everything within my power to work in that direction.’” The article added that, “‘I’ve met with farmers from all over the district and what I hear more than anything from farmers is making sure we have a strong crop insurance program,’ Bustos said.” Also, Bloomberg writer Alan Bjerga reported late last week that, “A 1.5 percent decrease in plantings of sugar beets in 2013 may increase pressure on the government to buy the commodity, as the acreage drop won’t reduce excess supplies enough to stave off purchases. “Farmers intend to plant 1.211 million acres of the crop this year, down from 1.23 million last year, a U.S. Department of Agriculture survey of producers said today. The drop in plantings of beets bought by American Crystal Sugar Co. and sold to processors including Mondelez International Inc. won’t ease pressure on the government to implement a program to buy surplus sweetener for ethanol plants, said Michael McDougall, a senior vice president at Newedge Group in New York.” Also last week, in news regarding nutrition, Carl Bialik took a closer look at “the food industry’s vow to cut a trillion calories from what it sells each year,” while Stephanie Strom reported in Friday’s New York Times that, “A new study of the nutritional quality of meals for children on the menus of the nation’s largest chain restaurants has found that 91 percent do not even meet the standards set by the National Restaurant Association’s Kids LiveWell program.”   Budget Issues David A. Fahrenthold and Lisa Rein reported on the front page of today’s Washington Post that, “The sequester  was supposed to be something new in Washington: a budget cut you couldn’t beat. Once it hit, it hit. The money was gone, and nobody could get it back. “That turned out to be true — for about three weeks. Then somebody beat it. “Last week, President Obama signed a spending bill that gave the Agriculture Department’s food inspectors what everybody else wanted: a get-out-of-the-sequester card. Their program got $55 million in new money, which replaced almost all of what the sequester took.” More broadly on the budget, Damian Paletta reported in Friday’s Wall Street Journal that, “The White House is strongly considering including limits on entitlement benefits in its fiscal 2014 budget—a proposal it first offered Republicans in December. The move would be aimed in part at keeping alive bipartisan talks on a major budget deal. “Such a proposal could include steps that make many Democrats queasy, such as reductions in future Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security payments, but also items resisted by Republicans, such as higher taxes through limits on tax breaks, people close to the White House said. “These measures would come as President Barack Obama continues his courtship of the Senate GOP in an effort to thaw tax-and-spending talks.”   Biofuels Dan Piller reported on Saturday at The Des Moines Register Online that, “Put two prominent Iowa politicians on the same stage these days, even when they’re from opposite parties, and an immediate defense of the U.S. Renewable Fuel Standard breaks out. “U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, a former Iowa governor, and incumbent Gov. Terry Branstad both used a ceremony at DuPont Pioneer’s research center in Johnston on Friday to get in licks in favor of the federal mandate that at least 10 percent of gasoline used in U.S. motor cars be ethanol.” The Register article pointed out that, “The ceremony at Pioneer marked a new cooperative venture between the Natural Resource Conservation Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture to study and improve ways to manage the cornstalks and leaves left behind.”   -- Keith Good President FarmPolicy.com, Inc. Champaign, IL (t) 217.356.2269   FarmPolicy.com is a FREE newsletter and is made possible by the generous support of McLeod, Watkinson & Miller- Attorneys at Law. To subscribe to the FarmPolicy.com Email, send a note to, farmpolicy-on@list.farmpolicy.com. To unsubscribe, send a note to, farmpolicy-off@list.farmpolicy.com. For instant updates, follow me on twitter.