McLaughlin Writers Goup, LLC.
  • Home
  • Profile
  • Services
  • Work
    • Magazines & Organizations
  • Contact
  • Blog

What's In Store For Agriculture in the 112th Congress?

2/22/2011

1 Comment

 
While a change in the majority in the House of Representatives along with a new speaker has put a different face on the 112th Congress, the impact it might ultimately have for agriculutre could emerge from subtler factors. Scott Shearer, vice president of the Bockorny Group, a leading bipartisan government affairs consulting  firm in Washington, D.C., described the last general election as historic with its huge turnover of legislators: 96 freshmen representatives were sworn into the House and 16 to the Senate. But just because many of the new legislators are Republicans from agricultural states, agribusiness shouldn't be looking for automatic guarantees or favorable legislation to come its way. For one thing, redistricting in many states has resulted in representation of agriculutral regions by lawmakers with no direct connection to farming, ranching and food animal production. There are 23 new members on the House Ag Committee, and 60 percent of the current committee did not serve on it  during the 2008 Farm Bill discussion.

As he addressed attendees at the February meeting of the Agriculture Business Council of Kansas City, Shearer implied agriculture could find itself on the backburner as Congress focuses on righting the economy and prioritizes foreign policy, health care, trade and oversight/government regulations ahead of ag issues. This latter concern, however, might be a bright spot for agriculture. With more Republicans in the House, he indicated there could be aggressive hearings on how regulations are hurting the economy and causing job losses. Shearer mentioned EPA's Lisa Jackson might want to get a permanent place on the Hill, since she could be spending a lot of time there answering questions.

Uppermost on the minds of the lawmakers involved in the 2012 Farm Bill is the regular list of aggie issues: input costs, commodities (acreage, yields, prices), dairy, crop insurance, CRP, as well as livestock issues of export competition, animal welfare, food safety and anitbiotics. As for anitbiotics, he noted, the issue has been around for ten years and won't be going away soon. But with the turnover in Congress bringing in more representatives who are unfamiliar with animal agriculture but are weighing in  on the issue of whether anitbiotics should be given to food animals as preventative health care could be a problem for the industry.

Proponents of antibiotic use in food animals argue the meds prevent animal disease that could be transported to humans as food-borne diseases. When antibiotics are routinely given to food animals they generally are healthier overall, and because of that they grow larger faster.Opponents fear the anitbiotics given to food animals are done so only to promote faster growth (and earlier entry to the market at higher weights, which translates to higher prices). When the meat is consumed by humans, says the anti-antibiotic crowd, their systems can build up resistance to antibiotics which may be called on at some time  to combat a disease the person has contracted. So far, the science has come down in favor of food animal producers who use antibiotics to keep their animals healthy. But public sentiment has been roused by anti-agriculture forces who argue that the distant, faint potential of developing resistance to life saving, healing antibiotics is more dangerous than the probability of coming down with a food borne disease carried by a sick animal that went untreated by antibiotics.

Under the weight of the negative press about agricultural practices and the proliferation of anti-agriculture ballot inititatives sponsored by animal rights and so-called consumer advocates, agribusiness has taken an image beating in the last couple of years. But the farmers are fighting back, finally, with campaigns  organized by agribusiness giants such as Monsanto and groups like the U.S. Farmers and Ranchers Alliance which has organized more than 20 separate ag associations to show how farmers have been practicing responsible land stewardship, conservation and animal care long before "sustainability" became a regular but misinterpreted  term in the lexicon of the environmental movement.  For more information go to: www.usfraonline.org


 

.




 

 



1 Comment

Post Title.

12/7/2010

0 Comments

 
“What’s The Matter With Kansas?”

                          …..or Texas or Nebraska for that matter.

Most Kansans would tell you, “Nothing.” What’s more, they’d take exception to being associated with the book of the same title that appeared on the New York Times Best Seller List for 18 weeks in 2004. It’s about how the state shifted from a traditionally populist political bearing to one with a stanchly conservative  bent.  But that’s not the issue.

There really could be something the matter with Kansas, the nation’s top meat processing state, as well as with the other food animal production and packing states, if a federal ban on the use of some antibiotics is enacted.  There could be real problems also for American meat eaters and the swelling global population demanding more protean in its diet – and not just because the costs of meat products will skyrocket when producers pass along the medical expenses of treating herd illnesses that antibiotics would have prevented. 

If Congress passes the Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act (PAMTA: H.R.1549/S. 619) in 2011, consumers will be exposed to health risks that don’t necessarily have to emerge. The CDC’s Center for Zoonotic, Vector-Borne and Enteric Diseases maintains that 75 percent of major new infectious diseases are transmitted to humans by animals. PAMTA legislation calls on the agriculture industry to voluntarily end the “injudicious” use of drugs to help animals grow. But the passage of PAMTA – whose more strident supporters want to do away with the “voluntary” language of the bill, making it mandatory – would limit food animal producers in their efforts to prevent, treat and control disease outbreaks.

Who Else Gets Hurt?

Consumers will feel the pain in their pocketbooks, and they will be exposed to dangerous food-borne diseases. But if PAMTA becomes law, the food animal agriculture, processing and packing industry will also suffer, which will infect the U.S. economy. An ailing economy is always hazardous to everyone’s health. 

Here’s what’s at stake, or what could be endangered if unwarranted regulations were to be imposed on the food animal production and processing industry:

·         A significant reduction in the $850 billion it contributes to the U.S. economy or about 6% of the GDP.
·         A significant cutback of the 525,000 direct jobs it provides with a payroll of $19 billion, and of the 6.2 million more jobs it creates for  Americans involved in the meat and poultry product packaging, transportation,  marketing, wholesaling, retailing and food and restaurant service industries – with their payrolls of $200 billion.
·         A significant pullback from the $81 billion in tax revenues it generates for  the federal government and $2.6 billion to state coffers.

 

This  commentary appeared in the Fall 2010 issue of ProfitBuilder, published by Durvet, Inc.  

0 Comments

From Breadbasket to Bioscience

11/15/2010

1 Comment

 
There’s More to Kansas Than Beef, Wheat and Sunflowers

Kansas appears on the verge of outgrowing its agricultural roots – at least as its primary economic mainstay. While each Kansas farmer and livestock producer continues to feed about 144 Americans every day, the state has literally burst from nowhere to a ranking of fifth nationally for its biotechnology strength and bioscience innovation, investment and development.



This latest ranking issued in July, 2010, by Business Facilities magazine, the leading site selection publication in the country, puts Kansas in the company of such biotech powerhouses as Massachusetts, Illinois, North Carolina, Texas and California.



“Biotechnology strength is one of our most important and fiercely competitive rankings categories, said Jack Rogers, editor-in-chief of Business Facilities. His editorial board also ranked Kansas in the Top Ten of eight of its 20 categories: Economic Growth Potential (#10); Biotechnology Strength (#5); Biofuels Manufacturing Research (#10); Alternative Energy Industry (#10); Wind Energy Manufacturing (#3); Quality of Life (#3); Employment Leaders (#5); Best Education Climate (#3).



But you don’t have to take Business Facilities’ word for it– five other business journals rated the state high or singled it out for its favorable business environment. Southern Business & Development had Kansas at number three in its “Top Deals and Hot Markets” class.  Pollina Corporate ranked Kansas the seventh most “business friendly” state, while CNBC placed it eleventh among “America’s Top States for Business.” Area Development magazine named Kansas the winner of its Silver Shovel Award for job creation and capital investment. Site Selection magazine also cited the state as one of the nation’s ten most competitive states for capital investment and facility development.



Spearheading Kansas’s emergence as a leader in biotechnology is the Kansas Bioscience Authority founded by the state in 2004. In its short existence, the KBA has invested $600 million in the dynamic bioscience industry to nurture the growth of startups, create new jobs, attract private venture capital and increase research and business investments in the state. Through June of this year, these investments have resulted in 1,184 new jobs, $151.7 million in capital expenditures, $75.2 million in research funding and $34.4 million in equity investments.


Investors from the coasts flying over the state no longer wonder what those big circles on the ground are. They know they’re center pivot irrigation systems. What they want to know now is how quickly they can land on Kansas soil and get down to business.

1 Comment

    McLaughlin

    Scientific, Technical, Engineering, Agricultural
    Communications

    Archives

    January 2014
    October 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010

    Categories

    All
    Agriculture
    Communications

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.