Home Farm Policy Menu Inside The Beltway -- November '99

Sustainable Farming Connection
Where farmers find and share information.

Inside The Beltway -- November '99

Ag policy update from the Midwest Sustainable Agriculture Working Group.

Jump down menu:

red ballCrop Insurance Bill Off Until New Year
red ballLast Emergency Spending Bill for the Season
red ballSecretary Announces Farm Aid Implementation Plans
red ballAg Funding Rises Again in EPA Approps
red ballWellstone Merger Moratorium Amendment
red ballHouse Ag Roughs Up EPA
red ballBiofuels Research Bills Hearings
red ballFDA GMO Hearings
red ballAnd Congress, Too
red ballEU Beef Hormone Offer
red ballUSDA Backs State Meat Inspection
red ballBriefly Noted - A Lucky Eleven News Bites


red ballPrevious editions of Inside the Beltway

Inside the Beltway is Sustainable Farming Connection's online version of the Midwest Sustainable Agriculture Working Group's Washington Report. We reproduce it with MSAWG's permission. Do not reproduce or post to any electronic network without specific permission. Contact Brad DeVries bdevries@cais.com for more information.

Of course there are plenty of important things going on here in our nation's capitol.  But the real noteworthy news comes from some of the major transitions happening in the lives of several folks we've come to know and love over the phone and at our thrice-yearly gatherings around the Midwest.  

As you certainly know by now, we wished a very fond farewell to Kris Thorp at our recent MSAWG meeting in North Dakota.  Despite an extended encore in Walthill (during which we can only hope that the Center and the rest of us became accustomed to the terrifying idea of running this Working Group without her hard work), the house lights are up, the roadies are
packing away the sound system, and Kris has left the building! 

Just as we started to resign ourselves to missing Kris, Reneé Hunt announced that she would be moving to Columbus, Ohio, and that she and her husband are expecting their first child in April.  We will do our very best to hold our heads up and wish her all the best on the former, but can be completely unequivocal in our congratulations on the latter! 

Fortunately, you do not have to wait until April to begin the pleasant task of greeting a new baby.  Just yesterday, I received an e-mail from Chris Reitz of the Wisconsin Rural Development Center and her husband Rich announcing the birth of their first child, Liam, on October 30.  This being the sunset
hours of the 1990s, you can of course view a photo of their new son with the happy parents on the web at www.meriter.com/babymail/6714t3.htm, typing in the username "happyfamily" and the password "little1" -- sans quotation marks, of course.



red ballCrop Insurance Bill Off Until New Year

As we reported in the October issue, the House of Representatives approved a crop insurance reform bill (H.R. 2559) at the end of September, at the same time Agriculture Committee Chairman Richard Lugar was introducing his very different bill (S. 1666) for consideration by his Senate colleagues. 

On October 14, the Senate Committee held a very unusual hearing to discuss -- mostly amongst themselves -- their competing visions for reform. With the chairman holding out for his "risk management payments" plan (see October issue for details), the hearing was inconclusive and kicked off about two weeks of staff negotiations over a potential compromise bill combining elements of the mainstream Kerrey-Roberts and Cochran-Lambert bills and the upstart Lugar bill.

In the end, finding a way to combine the two vastly different approaches in a manner that left enough funding in either to be acceptable proved too difficult for the end of session negotiations. Finally, on November 5, Lugar announced that a markup would occur next year, no later than the first week of March, and that negotiations would continue during the winter recess.

The March date is important because the funding for the legislation -- $6 billion over 4 years -- is included in this past year's budget resolution and there is no assurance that it will still be left on the table after Congress passes its next budget in April. The new funding would double the crop and revenue insurance program budget to over $3 billion per year.

The Sustainable Agriculture Coalition communicated with Senate offices urging adoption of improved language for crop diversification and conservation within the Lugar risk management payment program, recoupling basic conservation requirements to crop insurance subsidies, and improvements and expansion of Lugar's proposed Whole Farm Revenue Insurance Pilot Program. 

The Coalition also urged adoption of payment and subsidy limitations and inclusion of House-passed language prohibiting loss of indemnity payments merely because sustainable or organic farming practices were utilized.

Some environmental organizations attacked all the bills other than Lugar's for subsidizing excess production in disaster-prone areas, especially floodplains, at high environmental and taxpayer cost. Most farm groups supported a compromise that would adopt most of the Kerrey-Roberts bill and provide the risk management payment alternative only as a limited option or pilot project. USDA did not offer a clear cut positions in public on the major controversies.

Top of Page

red ballLast Emergency Spending Bill for the Season

Several major appropriations bills for the fiscal year that started October 1st are still pending as we go to press. Buried in the largest one of them (Labor-HHS-Education) is more emergency farm spending, including more disaster payments for North Carolina and the Middle Atlantic states plus, we expect, other ag spending "odds and ends" - we are on the alert for bad amendments.  

This vehicle is also likely to be the scene for the last dairy program show down of the year over milk marketing order reform and the dairy compact.  Senators Kohl and Feingold of Wisconsin have placed "holds" on all bill still pending in an attempt to make sure no action takes place.  The New York delegation, however, is floating a compromise that is still taking shape as we go to press.  Our next issue will report the final results on this bill.

Top of Page

red ballSecretary Announces Farm Aid Implementation Plans

USDA Secretary Glickman announced October 27 that with passage of the emergency farm aid bill (see October issue), direct farm payments in 1999 will top out at a record $22.5 billion. In answering questions from reporters, the Secretary made a point of saying the Department would vigorously enforce the new, far more liberal, payment limitations, estimating that even with the doubling of the limit to $460,000 about 20,000 farm program recipients would have payments reduced because they would exceed the limitation. 

At the same news conference, Glickman complained that Congress failed to provide any money to implement the new mandatory livestock price reporting requirements. He estimated it would cost $4.7 million per year and urged Congress to find a way to get them the money. He also indicated that Undersecretary Gus Schumacher would be in charge of developing farm program reform options to present to Congress next year. 

In response to a question, Schumacher indicated some concern over the near 50% cut in farm operating and ownership loan funds for FY 2000, but refused to say whether USDA would request a supplemental appropriation.

Top of Page

red ballAg Funding Rises Again in EPA Approps

Also on the appropriations front, the bill that includes funding for EPA was finalized in late October. The bill includes a second $5 million for the America's Clean Water Foundation to work with the National Pork Producers Council to implement on-farm environmental assessments for hog production operations. 

Another $1 million is provided for the Animal Waste Management Consortium through the University of Missouri, plus $1.5 million for FAPRI to link economic and environmental data with ambient water quality in Missouri watersheds and $1.5 million for the Univ. of Missouri Agroforestry Center.

Senator Kit Bond, the chairman of the subcommittee, added all of these earmarks. Other earmarks in the bill not requested by the Administration include $700,000 for livestock pollution abatement (Tarleton State Univ.), $750,000 for animal waste technologies at Purdue, $350,000 for a "Consortium for Ag Soils
Mitigation of Greenhouse Gases," $750,000 for a Resource and Ag Policy Systems Project, and $100,000 for sustainable agriculture practices in the Pacific islands. 

Among the programs reduced to make room for these and many other earmarks is a $4.7 million reduction in the Sustainable Development Challenge Grants program. In report language, the EPA appropriations bill directs the agency to conduct, in conjunction with USDA, a "cost and capability assessment" of the Unified National Strategy for Animal Feeding Operations (UNSAFO). 

A report is to be filed with Congress no later than May 15, 2001. We will be following up with the agencies to find out how this assessment will be carried out.

Top of Page

red ballWellstone Merger Moratorium Amendment

As we were putting this issue to bed and packing up for the Missouri MSAWG meeting, the Senate was still scheduled to debate an amendment by Senator Paul Wellstone (D-MN) to enact an 18-month moratorium on mergers between large agribusinesses.  The Senate postponed a vote on the amendment until Wednesday, November 17.  

The moratorium would terminate before 18 months if: Congress enacted legislation dealing with vertical integration or (more likely) scientists at a certain "Life Sciences" company announced the insertion of the gene for a human soul into top company executives.  Senator Wellstone described the amendment as an important opening in congressional debate over vertical integration in U.S. agriculture. 

The National Campaign for Sustainable Agriculture is circulating an important action alert urging calls to U.S. senators on this important amendment.

On a related note, Senator Orin Hatch (R-UT), chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, announced that his committee will hold hearings early next year on agriculture antitrust issues.  Senator Pat Leahy (D-VT) is nearing completion of a major ag antitrust bill.  In addition to Leahy, Senators Grassley (R-IA), DeWine (R-OH), Ashcroft (R-MO), Abraham (R-MI), Kohl (D-WI) and Feingold (D-WI) are also members of the committee.

Top of Page

red ballHouse Ag Roughs Up EPA

On October 28, 1999, the Subcommittee on Departmental Operations, Oversight, Nutrition, and Forestry of the House Committee on Agriculture held a hearing focused primarily on EPA's proposed actions and regulations for the Clean Water Act's Section 303 Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) program.  

The hearing also touched briefly on the EPA's Draft Guidance for NPDES permits for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs).  The TMDL program requires states to identify state waters for which existing pollution controls are insufficient to ensure that the waters meet the water quality standards necessary to support the state- designated uses of the waters.  The states must develop TMDL plans that limit the pollutants entering the impaired waters and allocate the allowable discharges of pollutants among the dischargers. 

Although EPA cannot directly regulate nonpoint source polluters, under the Clean Water Act, the states retain the authority to adopt more stringent regulations than the EPA, including regulation of both point and nonpoint sources of water pollution.  

The tone of the hearing was set by the introductory remarks of the Subcommittee Chair, Rep. Goodlatte (VA-6th District), who opined that the EPA's proposed TMDL program was extremist, did violence to environmental laws, and was illegal.  Chuck Fox, EPA Assistant Administrator for Water noted that the EPA's proposed program was a response, in part, to successful litigation brought by environmental groups around the country.  

Imagine that, Congress unhappy when the executive branch enforces the laws the House & Senate passed!  Fox also indicated that EPA is not proposing any new regulatory authority in the TMDL program with regard to agriculture.

Glenda Humiston, USDA Deputy Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment, stated, without providing details, that USDA was critical of some points in the EPA TMDL program and then proceeded to laud the voluntary, incentive programs of the USDA for dealing with agricultural pollution.  

John Barrett, a grain and cotton farmer from Texas who had served on the EPA advisory committee for the TMDL program, expressed his concern that a TMDL plan in development in southern Texas included the possibility of reducing fertilizer applications.  Chuck Fox replied that the decision to limit fertilizer application was being made by the state, not the EPA.  

Testimony on the CAFO NPDES permit program was provided by Arthur Nash of the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, who complained of the burden to the states of administering the proposed NPDES CAFO program, including the development of Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans. 

Top of Page

red ballBiofuels Research Bills Hearings

The House Agriculture Committee and House Science Committee both held hearings in late October on biomass research bills. The Senate Ag Committee held a similar hearing earlier in the year. The House hearings took up H.R. 2827, "The National Sustainable Fuels and Chemicals Act" introduced by House Ag Subcommittee Chairman Thomas Ewing (R-IL) and H.R. 2819, "The Biomass Research and Development Act" introduced by Mark Udall (D-CO). Both bills would set up large new competitive grants programs for biobased products and fuels through USDA and DOE, as would a similar bill (S 935) introduced in the Senate by Dick Lugar (R-IN). These bills represent the only major ag research initiatives being actively considered by Congress at the current time.

Both USDA and DOE testified broadly in favor of the bills, though both said they were too prescriptive. Both pointed to the Executive Order issued by the President in August to develop and promote biobased products and bioenergy. USDA estimated it currently spends $9 million per year on biofuels and related research, and $63 million per year on new uses of biobased products. There is a strong possibility of action on these measures in the coming year, especially with Earth Day 2000 activities centered on energy issues, including agriculture. We will keep you posted.

Top of Page

red ballFDA GMO Hearings

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has announced it will hold three public meetings entitled "Biotechnology in the year 2000 and Beyond" on issues within FDA's jurisdiction related to human and animal foods developed from bioengineered plants.  [64 Federal Register at pp. 57470-57472 (October 25, 1999)]  Essentially, the FDA seeks comments on its policy for foods derived from new plant varieties, particularly the following two major issue areas: scientific and safety issues and public information issues, including labeling. 

Background information on FDA's current policy, including the centerpiece 1992 Statement of Policy: Foods Derived From New Plant Varieties, is posted on the web at  http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/biotechm.html, which is accessible through the Foods highlighter on the agency's homepage  www.fda.gov.   

The public meetings will be held in Chicago, IL, Washington, D.C., and Oakland, CA.  Those who wish to attend or speak at the meetings must register at least 15 days before the meeting.  See the Federal Register notice for details on information that must be submitted for registration or contact the person indicated below as the contact for the meeting you wish to attend.   You may also contact Martha Noble at the SAC office for more information on the meetings.

The Chicago meeting will be held November 18, 1999 from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. at One Prudential Plaza, Plaza Club, 40th Floor, 130 East Randolph St. , Chicago IL 60601.  For information and to register to attend this meeting, contact Darlene Bailey, FDA Chicago District, Phone; (312) 353-7126; FAX: (312) 886-3280,
e-mail: dbailey@ora.fda.gov.

The Washington, D.C. meeting will be held November 30, and the Oakland, CA meeting on December 13, 1999. 

In addition to the public meetings, the FDA is accepting written comments on the issues until January 13, 2000.  Written comments should be submitted by mail to the Dockets Management Branch (HFA-305), Food & Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Room 1061, Rockville MD 20852.  Comments should refer to Docket No. 99N-4282.

Top of Page

red ballAnd Congress, Too

Members of Congress are also taking action.  On November 5, 1999, 49 members of Congress, led by Representative David Bonior (MI), sent a letter to FDA Commissioner Jane Henney, requesting that the FDA require labeling for genetically engineered or modified foods under the authority given to the agency by the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.  A copy of the letter is posted on the web at www.foe.org/safefood/bonior.html.

Representative Dennis Kucinich of Ohio has announced that he intends to introduce a bill in the House of Representatives entitled the "Genetically Engineered Food Right to Know Act".  The Act will require mandatory labeling for foods that contain genetically engineered material or are produced with genetically engineered material.  It also will require verification of genetically engineered material through the food chain from the seed company through farmers, manufacturers, and retailers to customers. The Act will provide a system for a guaranty for food that does not contain genetically engineered material, which can be used by the holder of the guarantee to avoid civil or criminal penalties under the Act.

Top of Page

red ballEU Beef Hormone Offer

A National Cattlemen's Beef Association delegation returned from a recent trip to Europe to assess "the political climate" (and, one assumes, conduct a selfless, exhaustive search for an open, assertive Bordeaux that pairs well with steak) with news of a possible interim settlement of the EU ban on hormone-fed beef.  Under the proposal, Europe would increase  the quota for U.S. non-hormone fed beef and reduce or eliminate tariffs on U.S. beef.  NCBA said it was considering supporting the measure as a temporary step before U.S. trade retaliation forced the Euros to drop their hormone ban, but delegation participants noted powerful EU willingness to absorb tariff punishment rather than give in on this issue.  Temporary or not, this may be an opportunity for U.S. "natural" labels to make inroads into European kitchens.

Top of Page

red ballUSDA Backs State Meat Inspection

The Clinton Administration sent up to Capitol Hill legislation that would allow the interstate shipment of meat and poultry from state-inspected plants.  While the bill has no current congressional sponsor, USDA says it has received a good reception on theHill.

State-inspected plants that met the federal guidelines would be eligible to use federal and state inspection seals (or possibly a single seal that combines the two) and ship outside of a state's borders.  Currently, state standards must be "equal to," though not identical to, federal standards based on the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) model.  Under the proposed legislation, states would have one year to transition to enforcement of the federal standard, and could receive reimbursement up to 60%of the cost of meeting these requirements, up from the current 50% for meeting "equal to" standards.  The Department would take over state programs that did not make the transition.

Top of Page

red ballBriefly Noted - A Lucky Eleven News Bites
  • The new, greatly improved proposed national organic rule cleared USDA on November 8 and arrived on desks at the Office of Management and Budget the next day. Should set the table for publication for public comment in February. Stay tuned... 

  • The USDA Advisory Committee on Beginning Farmers and Ranchers is proposing that the Department undertake a comprehensive assessment of progress on beginning farmer credit programs and an inventory of state beginning farmer programs, plus develop an economic and policy research agenda. SAC has taken the lead in developing the list of questions to be addressed and organizing an interagency USDA meeting to hear the Committee's presentation.

  • USDA's Farm Service Agency issued a proposed rule on State Mediation Programs in the November 9 Federal Register (page 61034-39) and a proposed rule revising Shared Appreciation Agreements terms in the November 10 Federal Register (page 61221-61223). The public comment period on both extends to January 10. We'll have more information for you in our December issue.

  • On November 9, the House Natural Resources Committee chair Don Young (R-AK) and ranking member George Miller (D-CA) reached agreement on a plan to earmark $2.8 billion of the $4 billion annually raised from offshore oil and gas drilling fees to land purchases ($900 million, split equally between state and federal) and other conservation activities. This would be a huge increase from the $600 million or so Congress has appropriated over the past few
    years. About $150 million would be set aside for conservation easements to prevent development, which might include farmland preservation. The bill may move next year.

  • The Conservation Security Act (S 1426), introduced over the summer by Tom Harkin (D-IA), is going to undergo some reworking over the winter recess, with re-introduction of a revised measure likely next year. This is the first major conservation marker for the next farm bill. We have submitted detailed comments and plan on tracking its progress closely.

  • Word from NRCS is that we should expect publication of the proposed guidance on Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans (CNMP) -- in many ways the centerpiece of the Unified National Strategy on Animal Feeding Operations -- during the second half of November, hopefully with at least a 60 day comment period. We will be issuing an action alert once it is out. Be on the lookout...

  • MSAWGers Kevin Brussell, Tom Larson, John Hall, Kim Leval, Ferd Hoefner, and hopefully others will be attending ARS' Integrated Farming Systems National Program Workshop in Denver, December 7-9, and will try to move forward our agenda to have this become the centerpiece sustainable agriculture program within the federal research agency. Partnership projects between ARS and land grants, non-profits, and farmer networks on long-term trials and other IFS research will be a main point of discussion.

  • A variety of representatives with an interest in the "terminator" (genetic seed sterilization) issue met with Secretary Glickman October 28. There was good engagement and discussion, but no promises made on the part of the Secretary. As part of the follow-up to this meeting, the National Campaign for Sustainable Agriculture is circulating a sign-on letter asking for definitive promises to cease negotiations on the patent, abandon further research on this technology, transfer funds to re-invigorate public plant breeding for sustainable agriculture, and implement a comprehensive technology assessment process.  Organizations should call the Campaign by November 19 to sign on.

  • Speaking of GMOs, high level bilateral talks will begin the week of November 15 between the US and the EC to try to at least partially resolve the long standing differences on GMOs prior the start of the World Trade Organization meeting in Seattle on November 30-December 3. Canada and Japan, meanwhile, have proposed a WTO working group on GMOs, a proposal the US is resisting, for fear it would drag on for several years at least, and many countries from the South are opposing outright.

  • WTO pre-Seattle agriculture talks appear to be stalemated over just what will be included on the negotiating table. Key disputes include the concept of "multifunctionality," the dispute settlement process, export subsidies, and whether to continue the "blue box" for agricultural subsidies coupled to production. The US position on the last item seems to be wavering as farm spending for specific commodities has mounted here as a result of Loan Deficiency Payments and the emergency farm aid measures. Tense talks are continuing in Geneva.

  • The fifth Conference of Parties (COP-5) to the Kyoto Protocol on climate change concluded on November 5 in Bonn with agreement on some technical issues but deferral of major questions until COP-6 in The Hague next November. Key issues to be resolved at that time include the role of carbon sinks, and the extent to which emissions trading will be credited. Both of these are key agriculture issues. SAC continues to work with the Climate Action Network Ag Committee to develop consensus positions and proposals.

Top of Page


red ballPrevious editions of Inside the Beltway

Top of Page

Home Farm Policy Menu Inside The Beltway -- November '99


©1999 Committee for Sustainable Farm Publishing

Please read about our usage permission policy and disclaimer.

Send comments, suggestions and questions to the site author:
Craig Cramer cdcramer@clarityconnect.com

Coded using HoTMetaL Pro 3.0. Best viewed in Netscape 3.0 or later.
Please see our credits page for more information.

http://metalab.unc.edu/farming-connection/farmpoli/msawg/wash9909.htm