From Jerry Kozak, President and CEO of NMPF, and Randy Mooney, Chairman of NMPF and dairy farmer from Rogersville, Missouri:

“The passage of the 2012 Farm Bill by the House Agriculture Committee is a deeply satisfying accomplishment for the many farmers who support the measure, including America’s dairy farmers.

“In particular, the House bill includes dairy reforms modeled after NMPF’s Foundation for the Future program. These elements represent badly-needed improvements in our safety net for milk producers. We’re very appreciative that members of the Agriculture Committee have preserved the carefully-crafted economic and political compromises that went into the creation of the dairy program in the Farm Bill. The fundamental package of dairy policy reforms supported by NMPF remained unchanged throughout the Agriculture Committee’s debate this week.

“We commend Congressmen Frank Lucas and Collin Peterson for their leadership and diligence in shepherding the Farm Bill to this point. The fact that a large bipartisan majority of the committee voted in favor of the bill bodes well for its ultimate success, and we look forward to working with the full House as it considers this legislation in the near future. We are pleased at the progress made in the House, but we also know that much work lies ahead.”

The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF), based in Arlington, VA, develops and carries out policies that advance the well being of dairy producers and the cooperatives they own. The members of NMPF’s 31 cooperatives produce the majority of the U.S. milk supply, making NMPF the voice of more than 32,000 dairy producers on Capitol Hill and with government agencies.

From Jerry Kozak, President and CEO of NMPF, and Randy Mooney, Chairman of NMPF and dairy farmer from Rogersville, Missouri:

“We commend those members of the House Agriculture Committee who today defeated an amendment to the 2012 Farm Bill that would have undone years of consensus-building and compromise among dairy farmers. The Goodlatte-Scott dairy amendment was defeated by a margin of 29-17.

“We appreciate the hard work devoted to this issue by the leaders of the committee, including Chairman Frank Lucas, Ranking member Collin Peterson, and other 29 dairy reform supporters on the agriculture committee, who clearly understood the hard work that has taken us to this point.

“We urge the committee to proceed with final approval of the 2012 Farm Bill this week, and will work to help assure passage of the measure in the full House of Representatives, and ultimately, obtain a new and better safety net program for America’s dairy producers.”

The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF), based in Arlington, VA, develops and carries out policies that advance the well being of dairy producers and the cooperatives they own. The members of NMPF’s 31 cooperatives produce the majority of the U.S. milk supply, making NMPF the voice of more than 32,000 dairy producers on Capitol Hill and with government agencies.

Congress needs to make clear that regulations designed to protect the environment against toxic waste do not ensnare dairy farmers and others who raise farm animals, the House Subcommittee on Environment and the Economy was told late last month.

The hearing on Capitol Hill reviewed legislation introduced by Rep. Billy Long (R-MO), designated as H.R. 2997, or the Superfund Commonsense Act. It would clarify that manure is not included in the meaning of “hazardous substance” as defined by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) regulations, and also would eliminate the reporting requirement for releases associated with manure under the Emergency Planning & Community Right to Know Act (EPCRA) regulation.

NMPF had been working for several years with Congressman Long and others to provide greater regulatory assurances to dairy farmers that these laws and regulations are not designed or intended to impact dairy farmers. The CERCLA law was created more than 30 years ago to regulate Superfund sites, and the EPCRA law was created after that for similar purposes.

Testifying on behalf of the dairy industry, Walter Bradley, who works for Dairy Farmers of America, reminded committee members that concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) and their environmental releases are subject to both state and federal laws. Bradley told the panel that “we are not seeking an exemption from the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) or the Clean Air Act (CAA) or similar state laws including any federal or state worker protection laws. We are merely seeking clarification under CERCLA and EPCRA that animal manure does not necessitate an emergency response nor does it create a Superfund site.”

“In recent years, however, we have seen litigation challenge the use of animal manure as a fertilizer by claiming contamination and damage to natural resources. The issue of CERCLA/EPCRA’s applicability to the livestock industry has been discussed in Congress several times in the last decade. I believe congressional intent is clear. When the law was passed, Congress did not intend for manure to be regulated as a hazardous substance,” Bradley said.

In the last week of its term, the Supreme Court struck down a significant portion of Arizona’s effort to prosecute and deter illegal immigrants, but left one key part of that state’s laws intact.

The mixed high court ruling, along with the recent executive order by the Obama administration to stop the deportation of some younger, undocumented individuals, fully illustrated how that, regardless of which path is chosen, the few options for immigration reform remain controversial and divisive. At the same time, these developments also showed how critically necessary it is to resolve the immigration policy conundrum, especially for farmers and other employers concerned with maintain and recruiting a workforce.

The court upheld the law’s directive that state and local police may check the immigration status of people they stop when they suspect them of lacking legal authorization to be in the United States. The justices unanimously stated that federal law already requires immigration officials to respond to status checks from local authorities, and therefore federal immigration law does not preempt this section of the Arizona law.

However, much of SB1070 was overturned as interfering in the federal government’s role as the sole arbiter of immigration law. In a 5-3 ruling, the court said Arizona in effect had tried to set up a parallel enforcement system that punished illegal immigrants more harshly and interfered with congressional authority over the nation’s borders. The court rejected parts of the state law that made it a state crime for illegal immigrants to seek work, to fail to carry immigration papers, and that authorized warrantless arrests of people suspected by state and local police of committing deportable offenses.

This decision highlighted the need for continued efforts to reform federal immigration laws, and NMPF will continue to work with regulators and lawmakers to create workable solutions for dairy farmers and their workers.

Canada has been extended an invitation to actively join the ongoing Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement negotiations.

NMPF and the U.S. Dairy Export Council (USDEC) strongly supported Canada’s participation in the TPP negotiations. Both groups agreed that since Mexico has been invited to join the talks, it only makes sense for the third member of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) to join as well. However, whereas Mexico and the United States already have removed all dairy trade barriers between them, this is not the case with respect to trade between Canada and the United States—a situation which the two organizations said must be remedied.

According to the dairy groups, the U.S. government’s approval of Canada’s participation in the TPP talks has been accompanied by a very clear understanding of U.S. expectations that all Canadian trade barriers against U.S. dairy products must be eliminated. This requirement was fundamental to gaining the groups’ support.

“The U.S. dairy sector hopes to see significant gains from a well-negotiated TPP and welcomes Canada’s membership as an important step towards achieving this goal,” said Jerry Kozak, president and CEO of NMPF. “The United States and Canada have had a free trade agreement since 1988, but it did not include dairy products. It is time for this oversight to be changed and we welcome this opportunity to finally make that happen.”

Meanwhile, legislation was introduced in the Senate last month to extend Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) to Russia. Senator Baucus (D-MT), Finance Committee Chairman; Senator John Thune (R-SD), International Trade Subcommittee Ranking Member; Senator John Kerry (D-MA), Foreign Relations Committee Chairman; and Senator John McCain (R-AZ), Armed Services Committee Ranking Member, introduced the bipartisan legislation in order to enable U.S. companies to expand exports to Russia when it joins the World Trade Organization (WTO) this year.

Russia is expected to complete the necessary administrative and regulatory changes and thereafter to actively join the WTO this August. Those commitments include provisions relating to agricultural trade, which NMPF and USDEC believe will yield significant improvements in tariff levels as well as in how Russia deals with various regulatory requirements for imported dairy products.

The U.S. Farmers and Ranchers Alliance, of which NMPF is a member, hosted a two-day interactive session in Los Angeles last month reviewing how farming and food production are portrayed, rightly or wrongly, in the media.

Highlights from the discussions, which were broadcast live on the internet, can be found at www.fooddialogues.com. Four separate discussions – held June 20-21 – brought together entertainment movers and shakers, chefs, academics, large restaurant operators, journalists, local leaders, and farmers and ranchers for an in-depth conversation about food. USFRA will also host another dialogue on food production in New York in November.

In addition, this summer USFRA is looking for a handful of farmers and ranchers who are proud of what they do and eager to share their stories of continuous improvement with others. The winners of this nationwide search for the “Faces of Farming and Ranching” will be announced in January 2013, and will put a real face on today’s agriculture. Dairy farmers can nominate others – or themselves – by going to www.fooddialogues.com.

Now that the Senate has approved its version of the 2012 Farm Bill, the focus has shifted this week to the House of Representatives, where the Agriculture Committee is poised to begin drafting its own version of the Farm Bill.

Final passage in the Senate came on June 21st, when the 2012 Farm Bill was passed by a vote of 64 to 35. The legislation included $23 billion in cuts spread out among the commodity, nutrition, and conservation titles. The reforms that NMPF developed in coordination with farmers from around the country were also included in the legislation.

Meanwhile, in the House of Representatives, work continues on a draft Farm Bill that is scheduled to be considered on July 11th by the House Agriculture Committee. The draft contains the major elements of the Dairy Security Act (DSA), which evolved from Foundation for the Future. The core of the DSA is a margin insurance program that protects farmers from dire economic conditions caused by either low milk prices or high feed costs. The margin insurance program replaces existing dairy programs, including the MILC and Dairy Product Price Support programs. Farmers will have the option of signing up for the margin insurance program; if they choose to do so, they will then be enrolled in the Market Stabilization program through which they may be asked to periodically alter their milk output when worst-case conditions appear.

The legislation differs from the Senate version, with additional cuts to federal hunger and nutrition programs, and a significantly different commodity title. NMPF also expects that an amendment will be offered by Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), a former committee chairman, to strip out the Dairy Market Stabilization Program. It is vital that this amendment be defeated, and that both the Dairy Market Stabilization Program and the Dairy Margin Insurance Program be included in any final product approved by the Committee.

House Agriculture Committee Vote Expected Wednesday

ARLINGTON, VA – The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) today urged members of the House Agriculture Committee to reject an amendment that would undo the significant dairy policy reforms proposed for the 2012 Farm Bill.

The Agriculture Committee is expected to begin considering amendments Wednesday to its version of the 2012 Farm Bill. One of those, to be offered by Reps. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) and David Scott (D-GA), would make dramatic changes to the bill’s dairy title by eliminating its market stabilization program.

“The Goodlatte-Scott dairy amendment guts the dairy reforms that farmers have worked so hard in the past three years to create,” said Jerry Kozak, President and CEO of NMPF. “And this amendment undercuts these efforts in the worst possible way: by tearing a hole in the insurance safety net offered to farmers in the Farm Bill. Replacing a robust safety net with one that resembles Swiss cheese is bad policy and bad politics.”

As originally proposed in the Dairy Security Act, the new farm-level safety net under consideration offers dairy farmers a basic level of margin protection at no cost, while offering them the option of purchasing supplemental margin insurance to cover a wider gap between the cost of feed and the milk price. Those who choose this voluntary program would be covered by the market stabilization element, encouraging them to temporarily cut back milk production when margins are poor.

However, under the Goodlatte-Scott amendment, the market stabilization program – which helps align milk supplies with demand, and controls government farm program expenditures – is eliminated. Because this step would otherwise drive up the cost of the margin insurance program and increase federal outlays, the amendment punishes farmers who choose to use the margin insurance program by reducing the amount of insurance coverage offered to them.

“This last-minute attempt to unravel years of careful economic analysis and industry-wide collaboration is an affront to farmers, and should be rejected by the members of the Agriculture Committee,” Kozak said.

The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF), based in Arlington, VA, develops and carries out policies that advance the well being of dairy producers and the cooperatives they own. The members of NMPF’s 31 cooperatives produce the majority of the U.S. milk supply, making NMPF the voice of more than 32,000 dairy producers on Capitol Hill and with government agencies.

House Agriculture Committee Vote Expected Wednesday

ARLINGTON, VA – The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) joined 75 other farm and agriculture groups in urging rapid consideration in the House of Representatives of the 2012 Farm Bill. In a letter sent today to the leaders of the House Agriculture Committee, NMPF urged members of Congress to act quickly on the measure before current farm law expires at the end of September.

“Farmers need certainty about farm policy as they make annual operating decisions, so it is important that we get a farm bill done this year. With the September 30th deadline looming for the current law, we are pleased that the House Agriculture Committee is working hard to get the bill completed,” NMPF wrote in the letter. The Agriculture Committee is expected to begin voting on amendments to its version of the Farm Bill starting this Wednesday.

“The farm bill is tremendously important for every single American, not just farmers and ranchers. In addition to helping farmers plan ahead and mitigate risk to survive the tough times, the bill provides critical investment in rural communities, conserves precious natural resources like soil and water, provides food for those less fortunate, and creates new sources of energy made here at home,” the letter said. It was sent to Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas (R-OK), and ranking Democrat Collin Peterson (D-MN).

The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF), based in Arlington, VA, develops and carries out policies that advance the well being of dairy producers and the cooperatives they own. The members of NMPF’s 31 cooperatives produce the majority of the U.S. milk supply, making NMPF the voice of more than 32,000 dairy producers on Capitol Hill and with government agencies.

ARLINGTON, VA – The draft farm bill language released yesterday afternoon by the House Agriculture Committee includes the key components of the Foundation for the Future dairy policy reform package that was developed by the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) over the past three years.

In preparation for an Agriculture Committee markup next week, Committee Chairman Rep. Frank Lucas (R-OK), along with Ranking Member Rep. Colin Peterson (D-MN), released the provisions of the entire farm bill, including the dairy legislative language.

“The primary elements of NMPF’s comprehensive dairy reform package are incorporated into this legislative draft, for which we are grateful,” said Jerry Kozak, President and CEO of NMPF. “The bill reflects the best-possible outcome for America’s dairy farmer community, which is in great need of a better federal safety net than what we have now.” Last month, the Senate passed its own version of the Farm Bill, which also included the dairy reform legislation supported by NMPF.

“We would like to thank Rep. Lucas and Rep. Peterson for working so diligently over the past year to craft a bipartisan bill that not only provides a vastly-improved safety net for producers, but also saves taxpayer money. NMPF looks forward to working with Reps. Lucas, Peterson, and the other committee members in building support in the House of Representatives for this legislation.”

The House farm bill draft contains the major elements of the Dairy Security Act (DSA), which evolved from Foundation for the Future. It was introduced last autumn in the House by Reps. Peterson and Mike Simpson (R-ID) and was included in Sen. Richard Lugar’s (R-IN) farm bill plan. The core of the DSA is a margin insurance program that protects farmers from dire economic conditions caused by either low milk prices or high feed costs. The margin insurance program replaces existing dairy programs, including the MILC and Dairy Product Price Support programs. Farmers will have the option of signing up for the margin insurance program; if they choose to do so, they will then be enrolled in the Market Stabilization program through which they may be asked to periodically alter their milk output when worst-case conditions appear.

“We believe the approach the House Agriculture Committee is taking will generate broad, bipartisan support for the farm bill,” Kozak concluded. “The bill allows dairy farmers to better manage their risks, in a deliberate approach that offers a superior safety net, reduces government involvement in our industry, and positions our entire industry to compete in a global marketplace. It saves money compared to existing programs and will be affordable and convenient for farmers to use. Critically, it treats all farmers equally, and doesn’t produce regional or size-based outcomes that are inherently discriminatory.”

The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF), based in Arlington, VA, develops and carries out policies that advance the well being of dairy producers and the cooperatives they own. The members of NMPF’s 31 cooperatives produce the majority of the U.S. milk supply, making NMPF the voice of more than 32,000 dairy producers on Capitol Hill and with government agencies.

The recently-passed Senate Farm Bill contained a variety of farm-related items, much of which is great news for dairy farmers.

But it also came very close to including something that, while not at first glance affecting dairy farmers, those of us in the dairy business need to take note of. I’m referring to the amendment, drafted by Sen. Diane Feinstein of California, to legislate the housing specifications for egg-laying hens.

This was the legislative version of the formal agreement between the United Egg Producers (UEP), and the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). In an effort to end the state-by-state war of the ballot box over cage system for hens, the UEP decided it would rather negotiate an agreement with the animal rights community, than continue duking it out across the country.

While Sen. Feinstein’s measure was not included as part of the final version of the Farm Bill, it had momentum until nearly every farm and ranch group united to oppose it. And the takeaway lesson from this outcome is that similar battles will continue to be fought, either at the federal or the state levels – or both – where livestock issues are concerned…unless we figure out a way to get ahead of these issues.

One way we have been proactive and progressive is in the continued expansion of our National Dairy FARM program. Now in its third year, we continue to add to the number of farms enrolled in it. There remains a clear and compelling need to have a national, guideline-based, independently-verifiable dairy animal care program in place, one that is acceptable to farmers and retailers alike. Because if farmers don’t drive this process, the supermarkets and foodservice community will come up with their own programs, not all of which will take science and years of dairy experience into account.

It’s also important that the FARM program reflect the best-available evidence concerning the optimal care practices for dairy cattle and calves. That’s the impetus behind NMPF’s consideration of altering somewhat the program’s position on tail docking. Currently, the FARM program does not recommend tail docking.

As evidence continues to mount that the practice of tail docking benefits neither cows, their milk, nor workers, there is a fading rationale for allowing the practice to continue. When we talk about using sound science to base our policy decisions, here is an example of where the science does not create a case for the continued routine use of tail docking.

For this reason, NMPF is considering joining the leading veterinary organizations, including the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) and the American Association of Bovine Practitioners (AABP), in taking a stance of opposition to tail docking (as opposed to just “not recommending” it).

There are strong feelings about such a change, but as I stated a moment ago, once emotions are set aside, the intellectual and scientific basis for the practice just doesn’t stand.

Incorporating a change of position into the care standards of the FARM program does two things: first, it helps us offer ongoing education about better ways of ensuring the comfort and cleanliness of both cows and farm workers, such as switch trimming. The on-farm evaluation offers an opportunity to provide information to a farmer on practical alternatives to tail docking.

And it’s worth remembering that a criterion opposing tail docking in the FARM program does not mean those who haven’t ended the practice will be rejected. The program is not pass-fail on any one such point, allows for a process of continuous learning and improvement.

The second thing this does is to remove the argument from the political table, and avoid public battles over a legislative approach to eliminating tail docking. Already, the biggest dairy state, California, has banned the practice. Other states may soon be in the same boat.

Legislative efforts affecting poultry, pigs and cattle are certain to continue. And when industries are divided – as the egg industry has been with enlarged colony housing, and as the swine sector is with gestation stalls – our opponents can use tactics of divide and conquer to achieve their goals, and fragment the farming community.

Rather than give the animal rights community a tool with which to beat on dairy farmers, it’s more prudent to be proactive, and use our heads to handle this ourselves.

CERCLA and EPCRA Regulations Intended for Hazardous, Not Animal, Waste

WASHINGTON, DC – Congress needs to make clear that regulations designed to protect the environment against toxic waste do not ensnare dairy farmers and others who raise farm animals, the House Subcommittee on Environment and the Economy was told Wednesday.

The hearing Wednesday on Capitol Hill reviewed legislation introduced by Rep. Billy Long (R-MO), designated as H.R. 2997, or the Superfund Commonsense Act. It would clarify that manure is not included in the meaning of “hazardous substance” as defined by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) regulations, and also would eliminate the reporting requirement for releases associated with manure under the Emergency Planning & Community Right to Know Act (EPCRA) regulation.

The National Milk Producers Federation has been working for several years with Congressman Long and others to provide greater regulatory assurances to dairy farmers that these laws and regulations are not designed or intended to impact dairy farmers. The CERCLA law was created more than 30 years ago to regulate Superfund sites, and the EPCRA law was created after that for similar purposes.

Testifying on behalf of the dairy industry, Walter Bradley, who works for Dairy Farmers of America, reminded committee members that concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) and their environmental releases are subject to both state and federal laws. Bradley told the panel that “we are not seeking an exemption from the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) or the Clean Air Act (CAA) or similar state laws including any federal or state worker protection laws. We are merely seeking clarification under CERCLA and EPCRA that animal manure does not necessitate an emergency response nor does it create a Superfund site.”

Without the clarity provided in Rep. Long’s legislation, Bradley told the House panel that “the courts are left to redefine the regulation. Animal manure has been safely used as a fertilizer and soil amendment all over the world for centuries.”

“In recent years, however, we have seen litigation challenge the use of animal manure as a fertilizer by claiming contamination and damage to natural resources. The issue of CERCLA/EPCRA’s applicability to the livestock industry has been discussed in Congress several times in the last decade. I believe congressional intent is clear. When the law was passed, Congress did not intend for manure to be regulated as a hazardous substance,” Bradley said.

The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF), based in Arlington, VA, develops and carries out policies that advance the well being of dairy producers and the cooperatives they own. The members of NMPF’s 30 cooperatives produce the majority of the U.S. milk supply, making NMPF the voice of more than 32,000 dairy producers on Capitol Hill and with government agencies