Usda Government Videos

U.S. Ag Secretary Tom Vilsack tells Brownfield the health/insurance reform bill being debated needs to pass for the health of Rural America.   Vilsack says the failings in the current health care system are amplified in Rural America and one of the largest farming groups in the country recognizes the need for the bill to pass.  Further, the Secretary says the Congressional Budget Office analysis shows the bill will directly help farmers and their families who are self-insured. 640mon

Ag Secretary Vilsack says Rural America needs the Senate health insurance reform bill to pass. He says the failings in the current health care system are amplified in Rural America, “Where folks pay more for their health care than their urban counterparts, they are denied or don’t have coverage in greater numbers than their urban counterparts. Everyone who lives in rural communities knows it’s difficult to access quality care and the full range of quality care. Vilsack says he’s pleased the bill has the backing of one of the country’s largest farm groups the National Farmers Union. Further, he says the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office analysis of the bill shows a direct benefit to farmers, “Americans who are buying health care plans currently on the individual market – which is where you’ll find a lot of farm families and a lot of small business owners having to do – they’re gonna see their premiums fall 14% to 20%. This is the CBO’s findings. It’s not my findings, it’s not the president’s findings, it’s not Democrat or Republican findings Vilsack says the status quo of health care in America is NOT sustainable.  As for concerns about the federal budget deficit Vilsack says the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) also shows that the bill being debated by the Senate is a deficit-reducing document.   He says it s about redirrecting resources into a health care system that makes much more sense than the current system today. 091204_SecVilsack_healthreformetc

A proposed increase in property taxes on agricultural land has the attention of Missouri Farm Bureau. MFB Vice President Blake Hurst testified before the Missouri State Tax Commission on Tuesday saying the proposed valuation – which is formulated every two years – would nearly double the assessed valuation on Missouri farm ground. (The commission recommends a decrease on the least productive lands.) Farm Bureau is recommending against any increase. Hurst says things are just too tough right now for farmers, “Corn farmers who’ve seen the price of corn go down every month for the past year except for one. Dairy and pork producers are facing almost unprecedented difficulties with the low prices and high costs. Cotton producers are losing several hundred dollars an acre years and that assumes that they can harvest their crops and a lot of the cotton producers in the Bootheel right now can’t get their crops out.” Because of the current volatility, Hurst says, now is not the time to increase property taxes on farmland, “I don’t think that the formula – although it’s very professionally done and captures a lot of different attributes of farming – I don’t think it captures that volatility very well. And, so that’s why we recommend that the commission delay an increase in assessed valuation.” Hurst says the formula tries to capture the average returns on eight classes of farmland and predict interest rates, something he says even the formula’s authors admit is hard to do. Missouri Ag Department Director Jon Hagler has asked the tax commission to “oppose any increase in land values resulting in higher property taxes to Missouri farmers and strongly support a decrease in the values for pasture and timber land.” The state tax commission has until December 31st to set the ag productivity values and the legislature has 60 days from January first to reject them if a majority of lawmakers disagree with the numbers. 091201_BlakeHurst_MOFB_taxes Missouri Farm Bureau Missouri Department of Agriculture Missouri State Tax Commission

Disappointed and frustrated. That’s how many are reacting to the EPA’s delay on its decision to raise the ethanol blend rate from 10 to 15 percent.  Many groups contend the move is long overdue. The EPA announced Tuesday that it was still conducting tests on E15.  And while the agency hinted that it is leaning towards approving the higher blend, it also indicated a decision would not come until at least June of next year. The Renewable Fuels Association (RFA) blasted the EPA for postponing the decision. “This delay from EPA threatens to paralyze, essentially, the continued growth of America’s ethanol industry because of its decision to overanalyze this issue,” says RFA spokesman Matt Hartwig. Hartwig says the EPA should have approved an intermediate ethanol blend, such as E12, while it finishes it testing on E15. Also expressing disappointment was Monte Shaw of the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association. “While they did send some positive signals out there and I don’t want to minimize those, we are disappointed,” Shaw says. “We feel that there’s a mountain of scientific evidence that clearly indicated they could have approved E15 today.” AUDIO: Monte Shaw shaw-monte-E15 091201 Bill Chase, president of the South Dakota Corn Growers Association, says he was hoping for a positive decision on E15 or something close to it. “The fact that they’re going to go back and study it some more disappoints us,” says Chase, “but, on the other hand, they didn’t say no.” Adopting a “glass-half-full” attitude about the EPA announcement was Tom Buis, CEO of Growth Energy.  Buis says he was pleased with “the certainty that we’re going to have a firm decision by the middle of next year” and “EPA’s acknowledgement that the tests thus far are very positive for moving to E15.” Growth Energy was the organization that filed the E15 waiver request with EPA earlier this year.  Buis calls EPA’s announcement “a strong signal” that the raising of the so-called blend wall is imminent.  AUDIO: Growth Energy conference call growth energy conference call-edit 2 Ron Lamberty of the American Coaltion for Ethanol, says although they would have like the E15 waiver approved, the decision is still forward progress. “You know, they were supposed to make a decision and (they)kicked the can down the road a little further—so that’s disappointing,” says Lamberty. “We’re confident that in the long run they’re going to find out what a lot of people who have put this stuff in their own cars have figured out—and that’s E15 and even E20 and E30—I think ultimately they’ll figure out that that’s the way to go.” Also expressing disappointment was Nebraska Senator Mike Johanns.  Johanns says the  continued delays are part of what he calls “a troubling pattern that calls into question this administration s commitment to our nation s growing renewable fuels industry.” Illinois Corn Growers President Rob Elliott isn’t surprised by the EPA putting off their decision on whether to raise the allowable ethanol blend rate in gasoline from 10 percent to 15 percent.  Elliott says he anticipated that further research would be needed to support a boost in the ethanol blend.  However, he’s disappointed that EPA did not announce a slightly higher blend in the meantime. “There were indications by many that EPA might offer 12 or 13 percent as kind of an interim while they gathered the final information, with 12 or 13 being what they call substantially similar to E-10,” Elliott said from his combine cab during an interview with Brownfield.  “Obviously they chose not to; we’ll wait and find out and see where they go in the next go-around, I guess.” He says allowing a 12 or 13 percent ethanol blend would be an immediate, no-cost stimulus package to the economy.  Elliott is currently in the middle of gathering a late but plentiful corn harvest. “We’ve proven that we can provide enough for food, feed, fuel and the export market, so we welcome the opportunity to add to that E-10 blend and upwards toward E-15,” said Elliott. Disappointment aside, Elliott’s pleased with EPA’s acknowledgement that a full review of science is an important part of their decision making process. Brownfield s Tom Steever and Jody Heemstra-KWAT also contributed to this story.

Two –thirds of the “Meat the Need” rescue program proposed by the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture to help struggling dairy, pork and poultry producers has been put in place. Missouri Ag Department Director Jon Hagler is co-chairman of the NASDA working group that proposed the “Meat the Need” plan two months ago. Hagler says $350-Million dollars in dairy relief was included in the Ag Appropriations bill and Secretary Vilsack recently announced an additional $50-Million-dollar purchase of pork products for federal food programs, “I’m really pleased with Secretary Vilsack and what he’s been able to do. He’s been very, very responsive to our farmers and our farmers needs. He understands that crisis very well.” Hagler says these steps to reduce the oversupply on the market are starting to work, “So far it looks like we’ve got a market response from that. You know, things are headed in the right direction, they’re a long way from being there. Our dairy folks are still hurting and struggling and the quickest we can get this out to them, I think that’s important.” Hagler says steps at the state government level in Missouri have helped struggling dairy farmers as well, “We were able to change our single purpose facility loan program to allow for refinancing and operating costs and that’s helped some dairies. In fact, last week, we made our first loans on that. And so we’re pretty pleased with that. It’s just one more tool that we’re trying to do – that Governor Nixon’s asked us to look for every way we can to keep farmers in business.” Hagler concedes things remain tough for many dairy and pork producers – with prices still way below the cost of production. Hagler says federal and state governments must keep doing all they can to help. As for dairy relief, the Kansas City Commodity Office has announced it will solicit bids before the end of the year for the $60 million worth of cheese for food programs in the Ag Appropriations bill.  There’s still no word on the direct producer payments yet. Missourinet s Brent Martin provided audio for this story Hagler_MoNet_MeatTheNeed National Association of State Departments of Agriculture MEAT the Need

The agriculture counselor to EPA administrator Lisa Jackson says new revenue streams for producers are among the various climate change legislation directions taking shape, although legislation is not likely to pass this year. Larry Elworth told Brownfield at the NAFB Convention last week that the impact of climate change on agriculture due to shifts in related weather conditions and the issue of energy independence are important considerations. And Elworth says that whether other countries address climate change should not be a factor in whether the United States does. “Those are things that in the United States we can continue to take leadership on, irrespective of what the rest of the world has done. The United States has taken leadership on economic development and on fighting terrorism – and all of those. Our responsibility and our opportunities to take action – and bring the rest of the world along with us in that situation – because of our leadership has been a key to our policies,” Elworth says. In less than a month international negotiators will be at the table in Copenhagen for UN-sponsored talks with a goal of reducing global greenhouse gas emissions. The Obama administration wanted climate change legislation passed in the U.S. before then. This week, Senate leadership announced that debate on climate change legislation this year is being crowded out by health care, financial regulation reform and other measures and likely won’t be taken up next year. The American Farm Bureau Federation and other ag groups applaud the decision. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) AUDIO: Larry Elworth, agriculture counselor to EPA Administrator, at Trade Talk during 2009 NAFB Convention (11 min., MP3)