ARLINGTON, VA – The U.S. Dairy Export Council (USDEC), the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) and the Consortium for Common Food Names (CCFN) expressed appreciation for Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue’s denunciation of geographical indications (GIs) as trade barriers.

During recent meetings with European agriculture and trade officials, Secretary Perdue made it clear that the European Union (EU) must drop its aggressive campaign to confiscate common food names in order to successfully negotiate a trade deal with the U.S.

In response, USDEC, NMPF and CCFN issued the following joint statement:

“The EU’s patently unfair trade policies, including the misuse of GI protections, have resulted in a lopsided trade dynamic where trade benefits only flow one-way: toward Europe. As Secretary Perdue rightly noted, Europe’s unfair trade barriers have less to do with preserving the rights of legitimate GIs than with restricting competition from exceptional U.S. products.

“We commend Secretary Perdue for his firm stance defending the rights of U.S. farmers and food producers to use the common names consumers know and love. Dismantling EU trade barriers that drive the dairy deficit and cause undue harm to our industry must remain a top priority in negotiations with the EU.”

ARLINGTON, VA. – Congress needs to pass the DAIRY PRIDE Act soon to ensure FDA does its job to ensure consumers have accurate information for informed decisions about what to feed themselves and their families, National Milk Producers Federation Executive Vice President Tom Balmer told a congressional subcommittee today.

Allowing non-dairy products to use dairy terms to promote goods with wildly different nutritional values has undermined public health and directly flouts the FDA’s own rules, Balmer said in testimony at a hearing on “Improving Safety and Transparency in America’s Food and Drugs” before the House Energy & Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Health. Proper labeling benefits consumers by drawing clear distinctions among products, encouraging better-informed choices, he said.

“Plant-based industrial food processors typically go to great lengths to try to replicate real milk by grinding seeds, nuts or grains into a powder, adding water, whiteners, sweeteners, stabilizers and emulsifiers, possibly blending in some vitamins and minerals, and then marketing the resulting concoction using dairy terms,” Balmer said. “By calling these products “milk” they are clearly seeking to trade on the health halo of real milk. Yet these imitators engage in misleading marketing because their products don’t have the same consistent nutritional offerings as real milk.”

Federal regulations clearly state that a product labeled as “milk” comes from a cow or certain other lactating animals, and that other dairy products are likewise made from animal milk. FDA has not been enforcing these regulations.

The DAIRY PRIDE Act, introduced by Representatives Peter Welch (D-VT) and Mike Simpson (R-ID) in the House and Senators Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) and Jim Risch (R-ID) in the Senate , would designate foods that make an inaccurate claim about milk contents as “misbranded” and subject to enforcement of labeling rules. It would require FDA to issue guidance for nationwide enforcement of mislabeled imitation dairy products within 90 days of its passage and require FDA to report to Congress two years after enactment to hold the agency accountable in its enforcement. The legislation would force FDA to act against plant-based imitators of milk, cheese, butter and other products that brazenly flout FDA rules.

Newly confirmed FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn has voiced his support for “clear, transparent, and understandable labeling for the American people.” Still, given the agency’s inability to follow up on earlier pledges to act, NMPF is calling for DAIRY PRIDE’s passage as a vehicle to require FDA action.

Read the full testimony here.

ARLINGTON, Va. – In less than a year, someone will take the presidential oath of office, charged with leading America for the following four years. To get there, whomever wins the 2020 election – a competition that starts in earnest with next week’s Iowa caucuses – will need to win over key constituencies, including farmers and rural voters.

This isn’t a revelation. So many articles have been written since 2016 taking the temperature of voters in Flyover Country that it may be difficult to find a farmer who hasn’t been interviewed by a coastal media outlet. But looking at the farm vote with a little more depth, it’s worth noting which farmers are best-positioned to hold the keys to the White House. Looking at the electoral map, those farmers may be the ones milking cows.

In 2020, dairy farmers find themselves unusually concentrated in states with large numbers of electoral votes, and in swing states, compared to producers of other agricultural commodities. A presidential candidate who wins the five biggest milk-producing states (California, Wisconsin, New York, Idaho and Texas) would gain 136 electoral votes, more than half the total needed to win the White House. Winning the top five growers of the most-valuable crops — corn and soybeans — in comparison, would only get 52 votes.

The top five cattle states garner 111 electoral votes. Top wheat states hold 28 electoral votes. Other ag products tend to be highly regional or have most of their production in a limited number of states.

Of course, barring an extreme shift in U.S. political coalitions, no candidate is likely to count California, Wisconsin, New York, Idaho and Texas in their win column on Nov. 3, so perhaps dairy’s large-state prominence isn’t relevant. After all, conventional wisdom holds that presidential contests are decided by swing states – the ones that aren’t deeply Democratic or Republican and might make the difference for a candidate.

So, how important is dairy in swing states?

Let’s look at two lists – the top eight U.S. dairy states, and the eight closest states in the 2016 presidential election. Notice anything? Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Minnesota – three states that flipped the White House to President Donald Trump in 2016, and another state that came very close – are all top dairy producers.

Dairy’s swing-state strength is the confluence of the industry’s history and America’s political evolution. Livestock and commodity crops were served by railroad networks that could transport the bounty of Midwest and Plains states to more heavily populated regions. Dairy, being more perishable, developed closer to urban areas. As U.S. politics has become increasingly polarized on urban-rural lines, dairy farmers find themselves living in states where big cities and small towns collide.

Dairy farmers live where the political battlegrounds are. They didn’t ask to be there, but if they’re potential difference-makers, it’s worth knowing what they want. Expanded exports are a start. A workable farm-labor system is needed to maintain productivity. Making sure that fake dairy products are properly labeled would go a long way toward ending consumer deception and warming a dairy farmer’s heart. And maybe a candidate could consider drinking a refreshing glass of whole milk at an event – it’s good for them, in many ways.

The next year will be exciting, and crucial for the direction of America. Dairy farmers will play an important role in this decision. We at NMPF already know how much dairy votes matter. Smart candidates will know that too.

Chris Galen, senior vice president of membership services and strategic initiatives, discusses the latest updates in trade policy and how recent developments affect the U.S. dairy industry.

ARLINGTON, VA. – NMPF is pleased that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of the Army Corp of Engineers have released a new final Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule. Today’s action puts an end to years of contentious rulemaking and will provide a common-sense approach to regulating waters of the U.S.

On Oct. 22, 2019, the EPA and the Department of the Army published a final rule to repeal the 2015 Clean Water Rule: Definition of “Waters of the United States” to restore regulatory text that existed prior to the 2015 Rule. That final rule became effective Dec. 23.

In the interim between repealing the 2015 Rule and introducing a new one, the agencies implemented pre-2015 Rule regulations, as informed by applicable agency guidance documents and consistent with Supreme Court decisions and longstanding agency practice. This action was a temporary fix as the agencies continued their work in crafting the WOTUS replacement issued today.

NMPF has engaged with EPA on this issue for years, in meetings and in numerous written comments, seeking improvements to the 1986 WOTUS rule, which lacked clarity for farmers. While NMPF will need to carefully review today’s new rule, we were pleased with the proposed rule and believe it will provide much-needed clarity and not infringe on the rights and responsibilities of state jurisdictions.

December’s CWT-assisted sales of 4.1 million pounds of cheese, butter, whole milk powder and cream cheese raised the 2019 export sales to 48.9 million pounds of America-type cheeses, 5 million pounds of butter, 46.1 million pounds of whole milk powder, and 6.8 million pounds of cream cheese. The milk equivalent of these 2019 CWT-assisted sales is 956.3 billion pounds on a milkfat basis.

These sales mean an estimated 135 million pounds of CWT-assisted dairy products have been shipped out of the U.S. and into overseas markets in 2019, the milkfat equivalent of 1.257 billion pounds of milk.

In December, CWT assisted six member cooperatives in securing 42 sales contracts for 2.1 million pounds of American-type cheeses, 332,898 pounds of butter, 1 million pounds of whole milk powder, and 634,931 pounds of cream cheese. The products will be shipped during the months of December 2018 through April 2019.

Assisting CWT member cooperatives gain and maintain world market share through the Export Assistance program positively impacts all U.S. dairy farmers by strengthening and maintaining the value of dairy products that directly impact their milk price. It does this by expanding the demand for U.S. dairy products beyond the domestic market thereby increasing the total demand for U.S. farm milk.

The amounts of dairy products and related milk volumes reflect current contracts for delivery, not completed export volumes. CWT will pay export assistance to the bidders only when export and delivery of the product is verified by the submission of the required documentation.

All cooperatives and all dairy farmers benefit from CWT’s activities and should add their support to this important program in 2019 and beyond. Membership forms for 2019-2021 are available at http://www.cwt.coop/membership.

Last month the U.S. and China struck a Phase One trade deal that covers a wide range of issues, including many relevant to U.S. agriculture. At the time of this newsletter’s publication, details of the deal remain under wraps and available only on a strictly confidential basis to trade advisors. NMPF’s staff that serve in that capacity are therefore prohibited from sharing information on the agreement until the U.S. government releases it more widely.

The agreement includes results on important areas NMPF, working side by side with USDEC, has championed the need for progress on such as geographical indications, resolution of non-tariff barriers to U.S. dairy exports, and additional purchases of U.S. agricultural products.

A major determinant of the positive impact of this agreement will be the extent to which it includes or is linked to a roll-back of the punitive retaliatory tariffs imposed on our dairy products by China. This element is one NMPF has consistently pointed out is the linchpin to restoring inroads to the Chinese market.

NMPF hosted the National Conference on Interstate Milk Shipments (NCIMS) Liaison Committee November 19 and 20 for a two-day discussion on how Grade “A” (GA) milk plants will be inspected under the Pasteurized Milk Ordinance (PMO) and the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA).

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Liaison Committee have been discussing the matter for several years without much success, but progress is finally being made. The long-term goal is to have a single inspection that will cover all products made at the facility, GA and Non-Grade “A” (NGA).  In 2018, FDA tried back-to-back inspections, first a PMO inspection, followed by an FSMA inspection. Plant personnel described that as an overwhelming experience and NMPF urged the FDA not to conduct inspections that way in the future.

The current concept is for the Office of State Cooperative Programs, Division of Milk Safety (DMS) Milk Specialists to be responsible for inspectional coverage and regulatory compliance of all food products manufactured at NCIMS-listed dairy processing facilities, with some exceptions. Those exceptions include infant formula, low acid canned food and seafood. Milk Specialists will expand their Preventive Controls for Human Foods (PCHF) review for compliance to all food products, GA and NGA products manufactured at GA plants. They will also use guidance provided by the Office for Food Safety (OFS) for decision making.

The Milk Specialist’s check rating and inspection may count as the Title 21 CFR Part 117 Current Good Manufacturing Practice, Hazard Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food inspection (limited scope Preventive Control (PC) inspection), provided that the firm had an adequate food safety plan that includes environmental testing and monitoring, and was verified by the Milk Specialist during the PC inspection.

FDA’s Milk Specialists, as part of the Check-Rating (CR) every three years, must verify that the firm has adopted comprehensive controls for both GA and NGA products as part of a food safety plan, and that the state had been doing comprehensive inspections to address preventive controls for all dairy products. If these criteria are not met, the FDA Milk Specialist, or state under contract, will conduct a traditional PC inspection for the NGA products. In most cases, one FDA Milk Specialist staff performs the inspection and check rating for all listed manufacturing facilities.

The FDA, in collaboration with state liaisons, will pilot this approach this year.

NMPF signed on to comments with the Agriculture Nutrient Policy Coalition and wrote a letter of support for Newtrient’s comments, which were submitted to the water quality trading docket December 18. The comments detailed support for Water Quality Trading as an important tool for water quality improvement in the United States.

NMPF has a long history of supporting water-quality trading, serving on the steering committee of the National Network on Water Quality Trading that published “Building a Water Quality Trading Program: Options and Considerations” and “Breaking Down Barriers: Priority Actions for Advancing Water Quality Trading.” NMPF has also been involved with Maryland’s effort to launch a water quality trading program and Pennsylvania’s water-quality procurement legislation.

In November, Clay Detlefsen, NMPF’s senior vice president for regulatory affairs, provided oral comments stating its strong support for the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) efforts to promote water quality improvements at a lower cost than traditional regulatory approaches, agreeing with EPA that the Clean Water Act allows for pollutant reductions from water quality trading to achieve compliance with regulatory requirements.

Detlefsen also said NMPF appreciated EPA‘s efforts this year to update its water quality trading policy to  encourage technologies and practices that reduce nonpoint source pollution.  NMPF also concurred with the six principles laid out in the 2019 Memorandum, namely:

• States, tribes and stakeholders should consider implementing water quality trading and other market-based programs on a watershed scale.
• EPA encourages the use of adaptive strategies for implementing market-based programs;
• Water quality credits and offsets may be banked for future use;
• A single project may generate credits for multiple markets;
• Financing opportunities exist to assist with deployment of nonpoint land use practices; and
• Encouraging simplicity and flexibility in implementing baseline concepts

In a guest column featured in Cheese Reporter, NMPF president and CEO Jim Mulhern offered an alternative approach to comments by the Cheese Importers Association of America (CIAA) regarding the WTO-authorized tariffs on European cheeses.

Mulhern noted that current dairy trade between the U.S. and the EU is mostly a one-way street. The EU’s restrictive trade policies have resulted in a deeply unbalanced, $1.6 billion dairy trade deficit, with the United States importing about $1.74 billion worth of dairy products from the EU, while the EU imported only $144 million in U.S. dairy in 2018.

That imbalance, in addition to the EU’s flooding of the global dairy market last year with government-held stocks of milk powder, has crucially contributed to the economic pressures that have driven thousands of American dairy farmers out of business.

Mulhern pointed out that cheese importers have access to some of the best cheese in the world in the U.S. and encouraged them to embrace this opportunity to support America’s dairy farmers and manufacturers by choosing to sell high-quality American products in place of European ones.

Many European cheeses and butter will still be imported if the WTO-compliant tariff penalties stay levied at their present 25% rate; higher tariffs are necessary for the United States to take the strongest stand possible against the EU’s mistreatment of American dairy products. NMPF is encouraging the administration to keep the existing dairy products on the retaliation list and increase tariffs on European dairy products, particularly those the United States is barred from shipping to the EU by geographical indications monopolies on common food names, in order to elicit action from the EU and truly establish a level playing field for U.S. farmers.