Just Maybe a New Farm Bill will be passed.....

Congressional Ag Leaders announce farm bill agreement

January 27, 2014 By Bob Meyer Leave a Comment

House and Senate agriculture leaders announced a bipartisan, bicameral agreement on a five-year farm bill on Monday. The Agricultural Act of 2014 contains major reforms including eliminating the direct payment program, streamlining and consolidating numerous programs to improve their effectiveness and reduce duplication, and cutting down on program misuse. The bill also strengthens our nation’s commitment to support farmers and ranchers affected by natural disasters or significant economic losses, and renews a national commitment to protect land, water, and other natural resources.

“I am proud of our efforts to finish a farm bill conference report with significant savings and reforms,” said Rep. Frank Lucas (R-OK), Chairman of the House Agriculture Committee. “We are putting in place sound policy that is good for farmers, ranchers, consumers, and those who have hit difficult times. I appreciate the work of everyone who helped in this process. We never lost sight of the goal, we never wavered in our commitment to enacting a five-year, comprehensive farm bill. I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting its passage.”

“Today’s bipartisan agreement puts us on the verge of enacting a five-year Farm Bill that saves taxpayers billions, eliminates unnecessary subsidies, creates a more effective farm safety-net and helps farmers and businesses create jobs,” said Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Chairwoman of the Senate Agriculture Committee. “This bill proves that by working across party lines we can reform programs to save taxpayer money while strengthening efforts to grow our economy. Agriculture is a bright spot in our economy and is helping to drive our recovery. It’s time for Congress to finish this Farm Bill and give the 16 million Americans working in agriculture the certainty they need and deserve.”

“This bill reflects a lot of hard work and conscientious effort to help strengthen American agriculture and assure consumers of food and fiber that it is nutritious and affordable,” said Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), Ranking Member of the Senate Agriculture Committee. “The reforms, savings and other significant changes in this agreement will provide greater certainty to producers and rural communities, as well as American consumers. It deserves to be considered and enacted as soon as possible.”

“I am pleased that we were able to work together, putting aside partisanship to finally advance a five-year farm bill,” said Rep. Collin Peterson (D-MN), Ranking Member of the House Agriculture Committee. “Compromise is rare in Washington these days but it’s what is needed to actually get things done. While it’s no secret that I do not support some of the final bill’s provisions, I believe my reservations are outweighed by the need to provide long term certainty for agriculture and nutrition programs. This process has been going on far too long; I urge my colleagues to support this bill and the President to quickly sign it into law.”

The Agricultural Act of 2014 Overview

Enacting the Agricultural Act of 2014 will reform agriculture programs, reduce the deficit, and help farmers, ranchers and business owners grow the economy. The legislation:

• Repeals the direct payment program and strengthens risk management tools
• Repeals outdated programs and consolidates duplicative ones, eliminating nearly 100 programs or authorizations
• Helps farmers and ranchers create jobs and provides certainty for the 16 million Americans working in agriculture
• Strengthens conservation efforts to protect land, water and wildlife for future generations
• Maintains food assistance for families while addressing fraud and misuse in SNAP
•  Reduces the deficit by billions of dollars in mandatory spending

The House is expected to take up the measure this week.

Ends Direct Payments, Strengthens Risk Management

The Agricultural Act of 2014 reforms farm programs and saves taxpayer dollars by ending direct payments and other farm programs. The bill provides risk management tools that help American farmers and ranchers survive weather disasters and market volatility.

The bill also strengthens crop insurance, which is an essential cost-effective risk management tool. With crop insurance, farmers invest in their own risk management by purchasing insurance policies so they are protected in difficult times. Crop insurance also helps protect Americans from spikes in food prices. Without crop insurance farmers would have no way to recover from disaster unless the government steps in and provides unplanned disaster assistance. The effectiveness of crop insurance was underscored during the historic droughts of 2012, which impacted more than 80% of the country. Crop insurance protected farmers without the need for an emergency disaster relief bill.

Additionally, the bill provides a permanent livestock disaster assistance program for producers affected by natural disasters, and also covers producers who were affected by recent droughts, winter storms that hit the Northern Plains last year, and spring freezes that affected fruit growers in the Midwest.

Streamlines Programs, Strengthens Conservation

The Agricultural Act of 2014 consolidates 23 existing conservation programs into 13 programs while strengthening tools to protect and conserve land, water and wildlife. By streamlining programs, the farm bill provides added flexibility and ensures conservation programs are working for producers in the most effective and efficient way – an approach supported by nearly 650 conservation organizations from all 50 states.

Protects SNAP for Families, Reduces Fraud and Misuse

The bipartisan farm bill conference agreement maintains critical assistance for families while stopping fraud and misuse to achieve savings in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). The farm bill agreement closes a loophole being used by some states to artificially inflate benefits for a small number of recipients. Additionally, the bipartisan agreement stops lottery winners from continuing to receive assistance, increases program efficiency, cracks down on trafficking, fraud and misuse, and invests in new pilot programs to help people secure employment through job training and other services. Savings in this section are reached without removing anyone from the SNAP program, and will ensure that every person receives the benefits they are intended to get under the current rules of the program.

Grows the Agricultural Economy

The Agricultural Act of 2014 reduces the deficit while strengthening top priorities that help to grow the agricultural economy. The bill:

•  Boosts export opportunities to help farmers find new global markets for their goods
•  Continues investments to meet growing consumer demand for fresh fruits and vegetables, local foods and organics by helping family farmers sell locally, increasing support for farmers’ markets, and connecting farmers to schools and other community-based organizations
•  Supports beginning farmers and ranchers with training and access to capital
•  Increases assistance for food banks
•  Reduces regulatory barriers
•  Invests in state-run pilot projects to encourage and incentivize employment and training opportunities for families in need
•  Creates initiatives to help veterans start agriculture businesses
•  Grows American bio-based manufacturing (manufacturing processes using raw agricultural products grown in America)
•  Expands bio-energy production, supporting non-food based advanced biomass energy production such as cellulosic ethanol and woody biomass power
•  Invests in research to promote productivity and new agricultural innovations
•  Strengthens rural development initiatives to help rural communities upgrade infrastructure and create a better environment for small businesses

Farmers do care.

Do farmers care about their cows?

by JACKIE on JANUARY 24, 2014

Owning and working on a farm is business, and often it’s the business that supports an entire family and possibly extended family as well. With all that riding on the farm making money, do farmers have time to care about their cows?

Absolutely. Big farm or small, the whole reason dairy farmers enjoy their work is the cows. It might be hard for you or me to tell cows apart in a herd, but for the farmers who work with them every day, each cow is unique with her own special personality.

Many dairy farmers name some or all of their cows, but even if a cow doesn’t have a “name” she is still recognized as an individual in the herd by her ear tag number. The ear tag helps farmers keep data about how many calves a cow has had, how old she is, who her parents are, how much milk she normally gives, and more. Many farms use radio tags so each time a cow comes in to be milked, the farmer can collect data on her. Cows also sometimes were pedometers or activity monitors so the farmer will know if she’s feeling under the weather (maybe laying down more than normal and not walking around as much) or if she’s ready to be bred (maybe she’s very active and not resting as much).

Farmers who raise purebred cows even have registration papers for their animals, who usually have long, fancy names and even longer pedigrees.

The farmers I know all care deeply about their cows’ welfare. On many farms, each cow may be a part of the family’s history–the farmer will remember bottle feeding that cow’s mother, grandmother, and great-grandmother. While dairy cows are not pets, they are the stars of the farm.

Purdue Animal Welfare Center

New Purdue Animal Welfare Center is about Science

January 22, 2014
Andy Eubank

Vm

Purdue Animal Welfare Science

00:00

R

P

Purdue has announced the creation of the Purdue University Center for Animal Welfare Science, to be led beginning on February first by associate professor of animal sciences Candace Croney, described as a national voice on animal welfare.

The center will promote the welfare of animals through its research, education and outreach. Dean of Purdue College of Agriculture Jay Akridge says the “science” portion of the name is of key importance.

“We have a large and important research group from the College of Agriculture, the College of Veterinary Medicine and the USDA-ARS (Agricultural Research Service) Livestock Behavior Research Unit, and one of the really key elements of this center is to bring that research into the dialogue on animal welfare issues.”

Croney says for many consumers there is a heightened awareness and concern for the treatment of animals, including those in food production.

“One of the things that we’re going to be able to do with the center is show very clearly that we as scientists and as members of the land grant university, really while we care about producing food and contributing to Indiana and the nation’s economy and expanding globally and so on, really, genuinely care about the animals and what they themselves are experiencing. That matters and from an ethical perspective as well as practical perspective it’s a major priority for us.”

Will this new endeavor put Purdue closer to the spotlight of organizations like HSUS?

“I think that’s certainly a possibility,” said Akridge. “And it may be a reality. We certainly have been doing work in these areas before. We have scientists in these two colleges and the Livestock Behavior Research Unit. That work is going to be more visible and may bring more controversy as a result, but I think it’s just essential that science find its way into these dialogues and debates.”

Akridge says Croney is well prepared for all aspects of the center’s directorship. Hear more in the HAT interview:

Vm

Jay Akridge

00:00

R

P

Her appointment as director was announced jointly this week by Akridge and Willie M. Reed, dean of the College of Veterinary Medicine.

The center now hosts the largest collaborative group of scientists in the U.S. working in a variety of related fields and brings together diverse, cross-disciplinary approaches to animal well-being issues in animal and poultry science, veterinary medicine, psychology, philosophy, genetics, public health and zoology.

Croney’s responsibilities will include soliciting both traditional and nontraditional sources of extramural funding for the center’s research and outreach activities, serving as spokesperson and resource person on public policy welfare issues, and disseminating knowledge, guidance and expertise of animal welfare science through a variety of media.

She also will be charged with developing and maintaining national and international relationships with leaders in animal agriculture, animal welfare faculty at other universities and institutions, non-government organizations and the public.

Putnam Co. Farm Bureau Legislative Update session

Business tax issue dominates Legislative Update discussion

Monday, January 20, 2014

By ERIC BERNSEE Editor

Eliminate or reduce Indiana's business personal property tax? That has been the bold suggestion of Indiana Gov. Mike Pence.
But judging by local reaction to the idea at Saturday's Legislative Update session at the Farm Bureau board room in Greencastle, the governor won't be getting much support locally.
Mayor Sue Murray offered up a Greencastle City Council resolution unanimously opposed to the plan.
Greencastle/Putnam County Development Center Director Bill Dory produced some scary statistics on its potential effect locally.
And County Council President Darrel Thomas not so adoringly referred to the Pence proposal as "the elephant in the room."

District 44 State Rep. Jim Baird (left) compares notes with Bill Dory, executive director of the Greencastle/Putnam County Development Center, Saturday morning prior to a discussion of the governor's proposed elimination or reduction of the state's business personal property tax. Banner Graphic/ERIC BERNSEE [Order this photo]

Gov. Pence, however, sees the legislation as a step toward making Indiana an even more attractive place for businesses to relocate and/or expand.
Currently, the tax generates an estimated $1.1 billion for cities, counties, schools, libraries and other units of local government, according to a Legislative Services Agency report.
The tax is imposed on equipment used by businesses. Such personal property can be a newspaper's printing press, a factory's metal-stamping machinery or auto parts maker's injection-molding press. The report notes that it amounts to about 14.5 percent of Indiana's taxable property value.
In a speech earlier this month, the governor said the business tax "discourages companies from investing in new technology and expansion."
Calling Indiana the "most manufacturing-intensive state in the nation," Pence said the state is "holding back new capital investment" because of its business personal property tax.
While calling for the elimination or reduction in the tax, the governor has said he would let the Indiana General Assembly determine how or if the revenue would be replaced for local governments.
"That may be great for business," County Councilman Thomas told Rep. Jim Baird (R-Greencastle) and State Sens. Pete Miller (R-Avon) and Rodric Bray (R-Martinsville) at Saturday's first Legislative Update of the 2014 session. "But don't put it on the shoulders of the taxpayer, which is where this seems to be heading.
"The governor wants to take the bull's-eye off his back," Thomas continued, "and put it on mine. From my point of view (as a county councilman), that's not fair."
Without other changes or replacement revenue, cities and towns would be hit hardest by the tax elimination with some $175 million in total losses, according to the report. Hoosier schools would also be big losers at about $151 million.
Thomas said he couldn't imagine how he could explain the lost revenue and any replacement of it to the four local school corporations, taxpayers, Chamber of Commerce and the economic development office.
Dory's statistics, using 2013 payable tax 2014 estimates, predict the community would see estimated losses as follows:
-- Greencastle Schools, $1,463,696.
-- Putnam County, $737,955.
-- City of Greencastle, $574,512.
-- Putnam County Public Library, $87,492.
Business personal property tax would make up more than 23 percent of the city's assessed valuation for that period, the report noted.
"There's so much intertwined in this," Mayor Murray said, pointing to how the lost revenues would impact how schools are run, streets are paved or plowed and city departments operated, as well as how setbacks in all that would impact the decisions of business people thinking about relocating or expanding here.
"If I can't keep the streets up," she stressed, "they're not going to want to come here."
Mayor Murray presented each of the local legislators with a copy of City Council Resolution 2014-1, which opposes legislative to reduce or eliminate the business personal property tax.
The resolution points out "the proposed plan to reduce the business personal property tax would inevitably result in an across-the-board hike in real property tax rates, representing yet another transfer for the tax burden from businesses to individuals and disproportionately affecting homeowners in communities like Greencastle."
The measure concludes by noting that "a policy position is clearly stated by the Common Council of the City of Greencastle that the Indiana Legislature should not pass any legislation that could reduce or eliminate the business personal property tax."
Legislators present Saturday seemed to side with local representatives but indicated it is probably too early to pass judgment on the proposal.
"We have to decide if this step is necessary," Sen. Bray said, reminding the group that during opening remarks for the program, Rep. Baird indicated the business tax proposal was "going to be a long process."
"The whole General Assembly is aware (of how the measure might impact local government)," Baird assured, assuming the conversation. "There is a lot of discussion yet to happen. We're in the very early stages of this."
Nonetheless, being a one-time county commissioner, Baird said he is "very concerned about the impact it's going to have on units of local government."
A second 2014 Legislative Update session, sponsored by the Putnam County Farm Bureau, is scheduled for 8 a.m. Saturday, Feb. 15 at the Farm Bureau office at 1001 N. Jackson St., Greencastle.

© Copyright 2014 Greencastle Banner-Graphic. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Silliness by Activists

Desperation Breeds Silliness by Activists

January 12, 2014
Gary Truitt

Sometimes when people are so committed to their cause and so myopic in their perspective, they do and say things that defy rational thought and just look silly to the rest of the world. This has happened to groups opposed to biotechnology and animal agriculture in the opening days of 2014.  They were so desperate to gain attention that they just made fools of themselves and, in the long run, hurt the credibility of their cause.

A coalition of groups opposed to biotechnology called GMO Inside produced a series of blistering and one-sided press releases slamming General Mills for not offering GMO free Cheerios to US consumers.  The company does offer a GMO cereal in the EU but, in the US, labels the popular breakfast cereal as “natural”.  Absent from the release was the fact that there are no GMO oats produced in the US and that the only ingredient in the product that might have any biotech elements in it is the small amount of corn starch used.  The fact that almost all the corn produced in the US uses biotechnology and that a source of GMO free corn starch would be impossible to find in the US, even if General Mills wanted to use it, was also never considered in the attack.  What was mentioned in the release is that General Mills is a major contributor to a campaign designed to inform consumers about the truth of biotechnology. It seems to me that could be the real reasonGMO Insider went on the offensive against Cheerios.

But the silliness did not stop there. Last week General Mills announced they would change their source of corn starch and only use a biotech-free source. The company stopped short of saying they would label Cheerios as GMO free.  GMO Inside is claiming victory and says because they collected 40,000 likes on a facebook petition, they were able to change corporate policy. Groups are now targeting Kellogg’s demanding they also remove biotech ingredients from their cereals.  The group GMO Free now claims over 20,000 signatures on a facebook petition. Considering the number of people who buy and consumer breakfast cereal, a few thousand names on a social media site is laughable and does not indicate a groundswell of public support.

GMO Free claims in their release that, “The FDA currently does not oversee the nature or extent of testing of these GMOs, nor does it require ingredient labels for foods containing GMOs.” This is true, the fact not mentioned is that oversight and regulation of biotechnology is done by the EPA and USDA, not the FDA. Also not mentioned is that years of testing and continuous oversight is required before a biotech crop or crop protection product can be brought to market. Again, Kellogg’s is also a major financial contributor to efforts to educate consumers about the truth of biotechnology, most likely the reason they are being singled out for criticism.

Not all the action by these activist groups and their supporters is silly, some are just plain disgusting. Protect the Harvest reports that a 25-year-old, Italian woman, Caterina Simonsen, recently came under attack from animal rights extremists for a facebook picture she posted giving thanks to the advancements made in the pharmaceutical research industry that have allowed her to stay alive. She wrote, “I am 25 thanks to genuine research that includes experiments on animals. Without research, I would have been dead at nine. You have gifted me future.” According to PTH, “She received over 30 death threats and 500 insults from animal rights activists – That’s Insane!”  PTH went on to say “Protecting animals is one thing, saving a human life is another.” This demonstrates that there is a darker side to the silliness of these organizations. While many actions of animal activists seem silly, like the mayor of New York trying to ban horse drawn carriages from the city; the silly can turn seriously dangerous in a hurry.

By Gary Truitt

Legislative Update Sessions

The Putnam County Farm Bureau Legislative Update sessions will once again be held on the 3 rd Saturday in January and February at 8 a.m. in the FB Boardroom.  Legislators should be on hand to discuss current legislation of interest to Putnam County.  The Public is invited to attend.

Lack of Posts due to

After changing computers getting everything to work right has been a major task.  I have managed to get back to the post area but not sure I can manage to get back but will continue to try.