The first cut at the 2012 Farm Bill is expected to reach the House floor for a vote tomorrow. While it is still early, and the final bill will look very different than what they vote on Tuesday, American Farm Bureau has compiled some analysis on the legislation below. And remember, it is never too early to start communicating with your representatives in DC about your priorities for the 2012 Farm Bill.

FY 2012 Agriculture Spending Bill 

ISSUE: 

The House Rules Committee is expected to approve a rule for the fiscal year (FY) 2012 Agriculture Appropriations bill tonight.  The bill will reach the House for a floor vote on Tuesday, June 14.  The bill is expected to be brought forward under an open rule, which allows for amendments.  To view the House Appropriations Committee report visit here.  A summary of the adopted Appropriation Committee amendments can be found here.  AFBF will notify state Farm Bureaus regarding additional actions as more amendment information becomes available.  AFBF will also send a letter to the House prior to the vote listing its concerns.  Farm Bureau has numerous concerns with this bill including:

Direct Payments:  The Appropriations Committee adopted Rep. Jeff Flake’s (R-Ariz.) amendment to prohibit funds for certain direct farm bill payments for applicants with adjusted gross incomes (AGI) exceeding $250,000.  

House Ag Committee Chairman Frank Lucas (R-Okla.) intends to request that the Rules Committee strip this provision from the bill.  We believe he will be successful in convincing the Rules Committee that the amendment is not germane.

We also believe Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) will offer an alternative on the House floor to the payment limit amendment if Chairman Lucas is successful in the Rules Committee.   

Brazil Cotton Case:  Rep. Flake’s amendment to the House Ag Appropriations bill directs the secretary of agriculture to reduce direct payments to upland cotton growers by the amount necessary to offset the $147 million in payments by the Commodity Credit Corporation to the Brazil Cotton Institute.  Rep. Rosa DeLauro’s (D-Conn.) amendment directs that no funds from the Agriculture Appropriations bill be used to provide payments to the Brazil Cotton Institute.  The DeLauro amendment also redirects $147 million to the Women, Infants and Children (WIC) nutrition program.

House Ag Committee Chairman Lucas intends to raise a point of order with the Rules Committee to strip the provisions from the bill.  We believe he will be successful in convincing the Rules Committee that the amendments are not germane.

We believe Rep. Flake will offer an alternative on the House floor regarding the Brazil Cotton Case amendment if Chairman Lucas is successful in the Rules Committee.  We also believe Rep. DeLauro will offer an alternative to the shift of $147 billion if Chairman Lucas is successful in the Rules Committee.

Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA):  The Appropriations Committee did not change language in the bill that prohibits USDA from implementing a GIPSA rule on livestock and poultry marketing.  

Farm Bureau opposes this language.  Farm Bureau wants USDA to complete reviewing the 60,000 comments received and move forward with the proposed rule entitled “Implementation of Regulations Required Under Title XI of the Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008; Conduct in Violation of the Act.”  Farm Bureau also supports allowing USDA to continue its economic analysis of the rule.  

Horse Processing:  The Appropriations Committee adopted Rep. Jim Moran’s (D-Va.) amendment to prohibit funding for USDA inspections at U.S. horse processing facilities.  This amendment essentially prevents horse processing at these facilities.  

AFBF opposes.  AFBF supports federal funding for horse processing inspections, similar to the process for other species.  We are working with other groups to determine if there is sufficient support for a floor amendment to remove the language from the bill.

Broadband Program:  Farm Bureau is concerned with the removal of broadband funding from the distance learning, telemedicine and broadband program.  The lack of high-speed, modern Internet service in rural America prevents rural Americans’ access to educational, medical and business opportunities, and hampers the economic growth of rural America.  

AFBF would support an amendment offered to reinstate funding for broadband programs.

Biomass Crop Assistance Program:  Farm Bureau opposes the language that would prohibit funds from being used to administer or pay the salary of personnel who administer the Biomass Crop Assistance Program (BCAP).  BCAP provides assistance to support the production of eligible biomass crops on land within approved BCAP project areas.   

Wildlife Service:  Farm Bureau opposes any amendments that would reduce funding or restrict Wildlife Services programs.  Wildlife damage to U.S. livestock, aquaculture, small grains, fruits, vegetables and other agricultural products has been estimated at almost one billion dollars annually.  Wildlife Service works to prevent, minimize or manage this damage, and to protect human health and safety from conflicts with wildlife. 

Conservation Programs:  Farm Bureau is concerned with the large cuts to an important working lands program, the Environmental Quality Incentives Program.  Farm Bureau strongly supports working lands conservation programs.

This week a coalition of employer organizations, including Farm Bureau, filed a motion for summary judgment in our lawsuit over the 2011 minimum wage rate.

That rate, set to go into effect on Jan. 1, 2011, will be 12 cents higher than the current rate of $8.55 per hour. Washington already has the highest minimum wage in the country and will continue to have the highest wage if the increase is adopted.

A superior court judge in Kittitas County will hold a hearing later this month in the case, Kittitas County Farm Bureau v. Schurke.

A copy of the motion for summary judgment can be found here: http://www.wsfb.com/system/files/MinWageMotionSummaryJudgment.pdf  

Does Washington law require the minimum wage to be increased when the index it is tied to has not rebounded to its pre-recession levels? Two state agencies disagree on the answer -- Washington’s attorney general says no, but the Washington Department of Labor & Industries says yes. Now Farm Bureau, along with a coalition of trade associations, is seeking a “final answer” in Kittitas County Superior Court.

It’s a legitimate question of interpretation that has significant economic implications, particularly to the thousands of small businesses across the state. And so, it must be addressed by the court.

The legal action filed Nov. 8 challenges the decision of L&I to raise the state’s minimum wage in 2011. The AG’s opinion (AGO) was requested by L&I before a decision was rendered on October 15, 2010. The coalition believes the AGO correctly interprets state law and that it is appropriate for the court to reconcile the issues.

Farm Bureau v. Schurke argues that L&I’s decision to increase the minimum wage is inconsistent with state law because the Consumer Price Index (CPI-W) does not reflect a net increase in the cost of living since 2008. The AGO includes a reasoned legal analysis supporting this position.

The coalition includes Kittitas County Farm Bureau, Washington Farm Bureau, the Washington Restaurant Association, the Washington Retail Association, and the Washington Food Industry Association.

This is the first time this workshop has been offered in Washington state! As the old saying goes, "In this world nothing is certain but death and taxes."  Add one more to the list:

On January 1, 2011, we know with certainty that the federal estate tax laws will change - either as a result of Congressional action or Congressional inaction (the more likely scenario).  At Washington Farm Bureau, we think that this imminent change in the estate tax law is a good opportunity for you to take a new look at an old issue.

Part I - The 'Plan Success' Workshop Monday, Nov. 15, from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. at the Yakima Convention Center. The long-term health of your family farm, and your legacy of hard work, depend on the plan you put in place.  This workshop will provide you with the tools to ensure that your farm will continue to serve as a source of pride, financial strength and opportunity for generations to come.  A complete workbook and lunch will be provided. The 'Plan Success' workshop is offered by Kevin Spafford, the founder of Legacy Design and the national expert on this subject.  It is being held on Monday, Nov. 15 from 10 a.m. until 3 p.m., preceding the Washington Farm Bureau’s Annual meeting.

Click here for details and Flyer. To register, contact Sandy McCaig or 1-800-331-3276. 

Bring it!  Food, that is!

Washington Farm Bureau Young Farmers & Ranchers are holding a food drive in conjunction with Second Harvest at the WFB Annual Meeting in Yakima  Our goal is to fill the Second Harvest Semi Truck with 40,000 lbs of nutritional food.

Donations are being accepted Monday, Nov. 15 –Tuesday Nov. 16 at the YF&R booth located inside the
Yakima Convention Center. The Second Harvest semi truck will be on site Tuesday from 10 a.m. - 2 p.m. to collect and
load additional donations.

WFB members --If you are unable to attend this year’s Annual Meeting, please consider having your food
donations transported by someone from your county who is attending. YF&R has created two incentive programs to encourage participation.

We are asking counties to donate packaged food, perishable and/or non-perishable farm products or cash. Second
Harvest can accept bulk potatoes, apples, onions, carrots, fresh fruit, and vegetables. You can deliver on the days we are holding the food drive or complete a voucher on site instead. We have the ability to accept all types of donations from raw product in storage to fresh commodities!

If you plan to donate a raw product, please let WFB know so we can be properly prepared!

At a time when job creation and retention is critically important for every Washingtonian, Gov. Chris Gregoire and the Department of Labor & Industries today called for an increase in the state minimum wage -- potentially costing the state more jobs. This decision will only further stifle our state's already flailing economy.

Washington state already has the highest minimum wage in the nation. Yet the governor and L&I have chosen to read Initiative 688, which places the state minimum wage on an automatic escalator tied to the urban consumer price index, in such a way that next year's wage will increase 12 cents per hour beginning Jan. 1, 2011. The new wage will be $8.67 per hour.

Recently, the attorney general issued an official opinion (at L&I's request) regarding the correct way to interpret the minimum wage calculation. Using that opinion, the minimum wage should not have risen at all.

Any wage increase further places our businesses at a competitive disadvantage -- meaning fewer jobs here in Washington.

This is another example of L&I engaging in election-year politics that will cost us jobs and harm our economic recovery.

This is why the 2010 elections are vitally important. Whether the issue is minimum wage, workers' comp, water right fees, or tax increases, we must change course!

Elections have consequences, and we need you to vote.

Here are links to the list of Farm Bureau-endorsed candidates and initiatives. We believe these candidates and ballot measures can help lead us out of this fiscal crisis and reignite our economy.

The Department of Labor & Industries is thumbing its nose at Attorney General Rob McKenna and the rest of Washington businesses.

For the second time in the past two weeks, L&I has delayed a crucial decision – this time on the 2011 minimum wage rate. In mid-September the department declined to announce workers’ comp rates for 2011 because I-1082 is on the November ballot.

This latest round of indecision stokes rumors that the agency, which should be making objective decisions, is instead running headlong into the election-year political milieu.

Last week the state attorney general’s office released an official opinion (made, ironically, at the request of L&I) regarding the correct way to calculate the minimum wage rate. The AG’s office interpreted Initiative 688, which places the state minimum wage on an automatic escalator tied to the urban consumer price index, in such a way that next year’s wage would be similar to this year’s. Organized labor, however, is pressuring the governor to follow the lead of Oregon, which saw an automatic increase for 2011.

L&I says it will decide by Oct. 15, after the governor returns from her trade mission and can review both arguments.

This delay only places a crucial decision closer to the fall elections. Washington already has the highest minimum wage in the nation. Any wage increase further places our businesses at a competitive disadvantage – meaning fewer jobs here in Washington.

L&I should be focusing on how best to offer their services to help businesses, not playing politics.

Today L&I Director Judy Schurke announced that the agency would not announce next year’s anticipated workers’ comp rates until after the November election.

L&I is using the excuse that I-1082, if passed, will make changes to the system such that the rates proposed now would have to be changed anyway. This would be like Dr. Arun Raha cancelling an Economic and Forecast Council meeting because the vote on I-1098 may impact future tax revenues.

Unfortunately, L&I doesn’t seem to understand that it is supposed to move forward under today’s laws – not those that may be adopted by the voters in November.

What this announcement really means is that L&I doesn’t want to show how much workers’ comp rates will need to go up next year just to keep the trust funds solvent. Their tactic is to duck and cover and hope I-1082 doesn’t pass.

Here is L&I’s press release, followed by the press release from the Save Our Jobs campaign.

Farm Bureau supports I-1082 because our members simply want to have a choice of where to purchase insurance. The only way to hold the public insurer accountable and have competitive rates is to have private options available, too.

In other news, the Save Our Jobs coalition released a new video in support of I-1082 today. Take a look.

On Friday the Economic & Revenue Forecast Council, a group of lawmakers and agency heads, received more grim budget news from the state’s Chief Economist. Dr. Arun Raha told the group that 2011 employment forecasts have been cut in half, and that prerecession employment numbers will not be reached until at least 2013. While we won’t know the new revenue forecast numbers until mid September, the poor employment outlook is sure to be reflected in the revenue receipts.

This news will only add to the uncertainty heading into the next legislative session, and will surely lead to state agencies seeking new sources of funding. While they may call them fees for PR purposes, we all know that these are just new taxes on the citizens of Washington State.

The Farm Bureau government relations team remains very busy addressing “brush fires” that originate in the field or within the bowels of the bureaucracy. There is a frenzied effort to find ways to raise fees and taxes and implement new public policy right now. Whether setting instream flows, carbon policy, climate change “adaption” strategies, reinterpretation of tax policy, or labor policy, agencies are working feverishly to “improve” things.

Recently it seems that every agency meeting we attend has a conversation focused on the state budget woes and the need to raise taxes or fees to enable government to continue to provide the same level of service. Farm Bureau is on the point of the spear as we offer an alternative-- cut spending and regulatory burdens to not only balance the budget but also enhance the economic climate of the state and thus help fill the state coffers once again.

The 2010 session will be focused on efforts to raise taxes and fees or make cuts in order to balance a budget that is short at least $3 billion. These tax and fee proposals already include the income tax initiative I-1098, increased water right permit application fees, new fees for hydraulic project approvals (HPAs), and most recently a proposal to charge a fee (tax) on all existing water rights. Apart from a serious shakeup in Olympia (and Washington DC) we will have an almost impossible task of stopping these proposals. Farm Bureau fought hard to stop several of these proposals during the 2010 session when the state was only looking for about $1 billion, but with a need to find at least $3 billion all bets are off.