S P E C I A L R E P O R T
‘Priority Issues’
‘Ag Angst’
The “war on agriculture”
threatens our ability to feed
the world | 3
‘Haiti’
U.S. farmer advocates strength-
ening country through
agriculture | 7
Regulations, ag
economy challenge
rural businesses
By Terri Magruder
In 1979 I was working at a door factory
in rural Klamath County, Ore., thinking
about what the future might be. I de-
cided to become a large animal veteri-
narian. My husband and I found renters
for our home and moved to Corvallis,
where I attended Oregon State Univer-
sity, enthusiastic to meet the require-
ments for acceptance into the College
of Veterinary Medicine.
Continued on Page 2
n e w s p a p e r
Congress sets sights on clean energy,
backs away from cap-and-trade
With climate change legisla-
tion already facing a rocky road
in the Senate, proponents are
rethinking their strategy after
the Republican victory in the
special U.S. Senate election in
Massachusetts left Democrats a
vote short of the 60 they’d likely
need to move the measure.
Lawmakers once hot-to-trot
over cap-and-trade are acknowl-
edging that it’s a political risk
that many of their colleagues
may be unwilling to take in a big
Obama’s budget would cut farm payments
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA’S State of the Union address in which he called for increased renewable energy production and more
trade opportunities was better received by farmers and ranchers than his budget, which would reduce support for farm payments and
conservation.
President Barack Obama on
Feb. 1 proposed a federal bud-
get for 2011 that would shrink
farm payments, crop insurance
funding and conservation pro-
grams, changes the administra-
tion says would reduce govern-
ment spending by $10 billion
over the next decade. However,
the proposal met with disapprov-
al from Farm Bureau and farm-
state lawmakers.
President Obama outlined in
his Jan. 27 State of the Union ad-
dress his administration’s goals
of increasing production of re-
newable energy and expanding
trade opportunities, and AFBF
President Bob Stallman said in
a statement issued the next day
that Farm Bureau welcomed
those parts of the speech.
However, the budget proposal
Farm Bureau has outlined
the issues it will focus on in
2010 | 4
February 8, 2010 Vol. 89
election year. Instead, their focus
is shifting to clean energy and
further exploration and develop-
ment of domestic fuel sources.
Such legislation could include
expanding drilling in the eastern
Gulf of Mexico, modernizing
the country’s electrical transmis-
sion system and requiring that
electric utilities generate more of
their electricity from wind, solar
and other renewable sources. De-
veloping clean coal technology
and ramping up nuclear power
Official White House photo by Chuck Kennedy
that followed shortly thereafter
received a less favorable response.
While Farm Bureau supports a
balanced budget, the president’s
budget is not the right approach,
says Tara Smith, AFBF farm poli-
cy specialist. She said the budget
would be a rural economic “de-
stimulus.”
“Cutting support for farms and
conservation practices would
take money out of the rural econ-
omy. That is not going to help
rural America recover from the
recession,” Smith said.
The budget proposes to lower
farm payment eligible income
limits to $250,000 in off-farm in-
come and $500,000 in on-farm
income. The limits under the
2008 farm bill are $500,000, off-
farm, and $750,000, on-farm.
In addition, direct farm payment
No. 3 fbnews.org
and renewable fuels production
have also been mentioned.
While President Barack Obama
in recent weeks has made a point
to say that climate change leg-
islation remains an administra-
tion priority, during his State of
the Union address on Jan. 27, he
did not mention cap-and-trade
specifically. Instead, he called for
the creation of more energy jobs
through the expansion of the use
Congress Continued on Page 8
limits would be lowered to
$30,000 from $40,000 per year.
The budget also would slash
crop insurance funding by $8
billion over the next decade.
“We support a balanced bud-
get, but at the same time we have
serious concerns about reopening
the 2008 farm bill,” Smith ex-
plained. “The current farm bill
will expire in 2012 and it’s rea-
sonable to debate changes that
should be considered then. But
opening the farm bill before
its expiration would upset the
hard-won balance in the bill.”
Smith also pointed out that
the farm program changes pro-
posed in the administration’s
budget would not reduce USDA
spending or the budget deficit;
Budget Continued on Page 6
 fbnews.org February 8, 2010
Viewpoint 2|

Health care debate gets personal for rural America

H
ealth care is on the tip of every-
one’s tongues. Most Americans are
either adamantly for or against
proposed health care changes, igniting a
national debate with a passion and fervor
rarely seen on legislative issues. Under-
standably, the health care issue is very per-
sonal for Americans. It is also an issue with
serious ramifications for rural residents.
Throughout the health care debate Farm
Bureau has focused on two issues that are a
make-it-or-break-it deal for producers and
rural America: reducing health care costs
and improving rural access to health care.
Health care costs must be reduced
Health insurance costs are an ongoing
and significant expense for farmers and
ranchers whose businesses are cyclical, with
unprofitable years nearly as common as
profitable ones.
Simply put, it’s not that we don’t want
better health care, we just don’t want some-
thing we cannot afford.
To help ease the burden on producers and
rural America, Farm Bureau policy favors
tax credits to help the self-employed pur-
chase health insurance and to help farm
and ranch employers afford insurance for
their employees. Mandating that individu-
als purchase health insurance will only
work for rural America if costs are brought
under control and if tax credits are gener-
ous enough to make insurance affordable.
Further, market-based reforms like the
proposed “exchange,” which is a national
insurance marketplace where individuals
and small businesses will be able to buy
insurance, would benefit rural areas by ex-
panding competition between private insur-
ance providers to reduce the cost of private premiums. Because of this, the health
health care. It is important that the definition care issue is very personal to farmers and
of “small employers” who are eligible to use ranchers.
the exchange allow farms, ranches and small
businesses to have access to the exchanges
for purchasing insurance. Ag producers who The
have seasonal workers shouldn’t be automati-
cally disqualified from using the exchange.
Rural America needs access to health care
It is also vital that rural Americans have
access to doctors and hospitals. There con- Bob Stallman
tinues to be a critical shortage of health care President
facilities and qualified health care profession- American Farm Bureau Federation
als in rural areas. According to the Depart-
ment of Health and Human Services, 20 per-
cent of Americans live in rural locations
while only 9 percent of physicians in America
practice in those areas.
To correct this growing disparity in health
care access between rural and urban areas,
federal programs should enable health care
professionals to practice in underserved areas.
For example, Farm Bureau believes Medicare
reimbursement rates to rural doctors and
health care facilities should be increased so
that payment rates for rural medical services
are comparable to urban areas.
If rural Americans have insurance but there
are no doctors or health care facilities where
they live, then incentives are needed to in-
crease service to people who live in rural Ameri-
ca. Increasing the number of doctors and health
care providers who will practice in underserved
areas is more important now than ever.
The contents of the health care package are
very important to rural America because rural
areas have the highest percentage of people
without health insurance, the least access to
competitive markets and pay the highest

Regulations, ag economy challenge rural businesses

Continued from page 1
Going to undergraduate school
during the day while also work-
ing the 4 a.m. shift at the univer-
sity’s sheep barns during the
lambing season was difficult, and
economic reality was setting in.
College was expensive and my
school loan debt was rising.
My husband, Glenn Archam-
bault, and I bought an older
home on a land sales contract.
The half-acre property was zoned
industrial and we developed an
electrical repair service business
for cars, trucks and farm equip-
ment. The business and property
provided a training ground in
government regulations and all
the demanding realities of keep-
ing a business alive.
During the four years I attended
the College of Veterinary Medi-
cine, my education debt continued
to grow rapidly. It would take 20
years to pay off my school loans.
After I graduated in 1986, with
both diploma and debt in hand, I
realized that practicing large ani-
mal medicine would not pay the
bills. I worked for others in small
animal veterinary hospitals. Four
years later, with the funds from a
home credit line, I established a
feline-only veterinary hospital in
Phoenix, Ore. Centrally located
in the Rogue Valley of southern
Oregon, Exclusively Cats Veteri-
nary Hospital is surrounded by
pear, hay and cattle farms.
In 1993 my husband and I
bought a house on 20 acres zoned
for farm use. Whenever I want to
practice large-animal medicine,
I go home to our farm where
Glenn raises a few hundred ewes
and lambs. Unfortunately, in
Oregon, it is against land-use
laws to have a veterinary hospi-
tal on land zoned for farm use.
Under Oregon’s state and local
land-use laws, it would be cost-
prohibitive to establish or relo-
cate Exclusively Cats Veterinary
Hospital. Our local planning
department requires tens of thou-
sands of dollars for system devel-
opment charges and the current
“vision” of the town of Phoenix
(pop. 4,060) is to require that
businesses, including agriculture,
provide showers and lockers for
employees who may ride their
bicycles to work. In the 20 years
that Exclusively Cats Veterinary
Hospital has been in business,
I have had only one employee
who rode a bike to work, and he
did not require shower facilities.
You learn to pay close attention
to government and its plans.
Running a business in a rural
area, you realize that agriculture
has a huge impact on the econo-
my. As a small business owner in
our region, I hope for a good pear
crop. I’ve had a decreasing client
base as the timber mills close and
clients lose their jobs in agricul-
ture and construction. Exclusive-
ly Cats Veterinary Hospital is di-
rectly dependent on the local
economy; we know when rural
development is failing. The peo-
ple who have lost their jobs are
our clients.
Years of business experience in
a rural economy have taught me
an important lesson: Adapting a
business in a rural area means
learning who your customers are.
The major rural markets, including
agriculture, timber and the energy
industries, depend on the global
economy. But the local economy,
the small businesses like mine,
must sell in the local market.
As a community, we have to
support our regional economy
and pay attention to changing
government regulations to help
our local businesses employ peo-
ple. And, most important, we
need to take care of and provide
the best for the local people who
are our clients and customers.
Terri Magruder, DVM, is the pro-
prietor of Exclusively Cats Vet-
erinary Hospital (www.exclusive-
lycatsvet.com). Her story is part
of a series on rural development
opportunities and challenges.

FBNews
Don Lipton, Director, Public Relations
Lynne Finnerty, Editor
Erin Anthony, Assistant Editor
Phyllis Brown, Assistant Editor
February 8, 2010 Vol. 89 No. 3
Published semimonthly, except monthly in August and December, by the
American Farm B ­ ureau Federation, 600 Maryland Ave., SW, Suite 1000W, Washington, DC 20024.
Phone: 202-406-3600. E-mail: fbnews@fb.org. Web site: http://www.fb.org.
Periodical postage paid at Washington, D.C., and additional mailing offices. Subscription rate for officers
and board members of county and state Farm Bureaus—$6, which is deducted from dues.
For other subscribers—$10.
Postmaster: Send address changes to FBNews,
600 Maryland Ave., SW, Suite 1000W, Washington, DC 20024. (ISSN 0197-5617)
February 8, 2010
America’s
agricultural
angst
Reprinted by permission of Forbes Media LLC© 2010
By Joel Kotkin
In this high-tech informa-
tion age few look to the most
basic industries as sources of
national economic power. Yet
no sector in America is bet-
ter positioned for the future
than agriculture—if we al-
low it to reach its potential.
Like manufacturers and
homebuilders before them,
farmers have found them-
selves in the crosshairs of ur-
ban aesthetes and green activ-
ists who hope to impose their
own Utopian vision of agri-
culture. This vision includes
shutting down large-scale sci-
“Troublingly, the assault on mainstream
farmers is moving into the policy arena. It
extends to cut-offs on water, stricter rules on
the use of pesticides, prohibitions on the cag-
ing of chickens and a growing movement to
ban the use of genetic engineering in crops.”
•  Joel Kotkin
entifically run farms and re-
placing them with small or-
ganic homesteads and urban
gardens.
Troublingly, the assault on
mainstream farmers is mov-
ing into the policy arena. It
extends to cut-offs on water,
stricter rules on the use of
pesticides, prohibitions on the
caging of chickens and a
growing movement to ban
the use of genetic engineering
in crops. And it could under-
mine a sector that has per-
formed well over the past dec-
ade and has excellent long-
term prospects.
Over the next 40 years the
world will be adding some 3
billion people. These people
will not only want to eat, they
will want to improve their in-
take of proteins, grains, fresh
vegetables and fruits. The U.S.,
with the most arable land and
developed agricultural pro-
duction, stands to gain from
these growing markets. Last
year the U.S.’ export surplus
in agriculture grew to nearly
$35 billion, compared with
roughly $5 billion in 2005.
The overall impact of ag-
riculture on the economy is
much greater than generally
assumed, notes my colleague
Delore Zimmerman of Praxis
Strategy Group. Roughly 4.1
million people are directly
fbnews.org
employed in production agri-
culture as farmers, ranchers and
laborers, but the industry directly
or indirectly employs approxi-
mately one out of six
American workers, including
those working in food process-
ing, marketing, shipping and
supermarkets.
Yet none of this seems to be
slowing the mounting criticisms
of “corporate agriculture.” A typ-
ical article in Time, called “Get-
ting Real About the High Price of
Cheap Food,” assailed the “U.S.
agricultural industry” for pre-
cipitating an ecological disaster.
“With the exhaustion of the soil,
the impact of global warming
and the inev-
itably rising
price of oil—
which will
affect every-
thing from
fertilizer to
supermarket
electricity
bills—our in-
dustrial style
of food pro-
duction,” the
article pre-
dicts, “will
end sooner
or later.”
The roman-
tic model be-
ing promoted by Time and agri-
intellectuals like Michael Pollan
hearkens back to European and
Tolstoyan notions of small fam-
ily farms run by generations of
happy peasants. But this really
has little to do with the essential
ethos of American agriculture.
Back in the early 19th century
Alexis de Tocqueville noted that
American farmers viewed their
holdings more like capitalists
than peasants. They would sell
their farms and move on to other
businesses or lands—a practice
unheard of in Europe. “Almost all
the farmers of the United States,”
he wrote, “combine some trade
with agriculture; most of them
make agriculture itself a trade.”
Despite the perceptions of a
corporatized farm sector, this
entrepreneurial spirit remains.
Families own almost 96 percent
of the nation’s 2.2 million farms,
including the vast majority of
the largest spreads. And small-
scale agriculture, after decreasing
for years, is on the upswing; be-
tween 2002 and 2009 the number
of farms increased 4 percent.
This trend toward smaller-scale
specialized production represents
a positive trend, but large-scale,
scientifically advanced farming
still provides the majority of the
average family’s foodstuffs, as
well as the bulk of our exports.
Overall, organic foods and bever-
ages account for less than 3 per-
|3 Capitol View
cent of all food sales in the U.S.— 450,000 acres have already
hardly enough to feed a nation, been allowed to go fallow.
much less a growing, hungry Nearly 30,000 agriculture
planet. jobs—held mostly by Latinos—
Then there’s the even more have been lost, and many farm
fanciful notion—promoted by towns suffer conditions that
Columbia University’s Dickson recall “The Grapes of Wrath.”
D. Despommier—of moving food Not satisfied with these
production into massive urban results, the green lobby has
hothouses. In a recent op-ed in prompted the National Marine
The New York Times he argues we Fisheries Service to further
are running out of land and need cut water supplies, in part to
to take agriculture off the farm. improve the conditions for
According to Despommier, whales and other species out
“The traditional soil-based farm- in the ocean. Given these at-
ing model developed over the titudes, farmers, including
last 12,000 years will no longer those I have worked with in
be a sustainable option.” Salinas, are fretting about
Yet Praxis Strategy’s Matthew what steps federal and state
Lephion, who grew up on a fam- regulators may take next.
ily farm, points out that such One particular concern re-
projects hardly represent a cred- volves around the movement
ible alternative in terms of food against genetically modified
production. Urban land is far food. Already there are calls for
more expensive—often at least banning GMOs in Monterey
10 times as much as rural. Energy County. Local officials worry
and other costs of maintaining this would cripple the area’s
farms in big cities also are likely nascent agricultural biotech
to be higher. industry as well as the long-
Furthermore the notion that term ability of existing farmers
America is running out of land— to compete with less regu-
one justification for subsidizing lated competitors elsewhere.
urban farming—seems fanciful The fact that a less advanced
at best. The past 30 years have form of genetic engineering
seen some loss of farmland, but also sparked the “green revo-
the amount of land that actu- lution” that greatly reduced
ally grows harvested crops has world hunger after 1965 seems,
remained stable. Though some to them at least, irrelevant.
prime farmland close to metro- When viewed globally,
politan centers should be pro- the anti-big farm movement
tected, agriculture has over the seems even more misguided.
past decades returned to nature— As Chapman University’s
forests, wetlands, prairie—mil- professor of food science
lions of acres, far more than the Anuradha Prakash observes,
land that has been devoted to India’s own organic farms
housing and other urban needs. serve a small portion of the
However ludicrous the argu- market and cannot possibly
ments, the Obama administra- meet the nutritional needs
tion remains influenced by green of the country’s expanding
groups and is the cultural prison- population. “You just don’t
er of the lifestyle left, with its get the yields you need for
powerful organic foodie contin- Africa and Asia from organic
gent. That leaves farmers and the methods,” she explains.
small towns dependent on them A formula that works for
with little voice. high-end foodies of the Bay
The ability of greens and others Area or Manhattan can’t pro-
to wreak havoc on agriculture duce enough affordable food
can be seen in the disaster now to feed the masses—whether in
unfolding in California’s fertile Minnesota or Mumbai. The
Central Valley. Large swaths of emerging war on agriculture
this area are being de-developed threatens not only the liveli-
back to desert—due less to a mild hoods of millions of American
drought than to regulations de- workers; it could undermine
signed to save obscure fish spe- our ability to help feed the
cies in the state’s delta. Over world.
Joel Kotkin is a distinguished presidential fellow
in urban futures at Chapman University. He
is also an adjunct fellow at the Legatum Insti-
tute in London and serves as executive director
of newgeography.com. He writes the weekly
New Geographer column for Forbes. His new
book, “The Next Hundred Million: America in
2050,” was published by Penguin on Feb. 4.

H ENERGY H H
Tax incentives to advance
renewable energy production
and use have been a tremen-
dous success, resulting in etha-
nol makers developing the ca-
pacity to produce 9 billion gal-
lons and growing. Tax incen-
tives also have proven valu-
able in promoting the produc-
tion of biodiesel made from
oilseed crops and animal fats.
Tax credits designed to spur
the development of electricity
made from biomass and wind
also are effective in reducing
our dependence on fossil fuels.
Unfortunately, existing re-
newable energy tax incentives
are temporary, with varying
expiration dates.
AFBF Policy: Farm Bureau
supports the extension and ex-
pansion of existing renewable
energy tax incentives and sup-
ports new incentives to expand
the production of cellulosic fu-
els, cellulosic-generated power,
and biogas. Farm Bureau also
supports further exploration
and development of conven-
tional energy sources, such as
oil, coal and nuclear, to meet
America’s energy demand.
Farm Bureau opposes current
legislation to establish a car-
bon credit cap-and-trade pro-
gram to address global warm-
ing (H.R. 2454), because it
would increase the cost of en-
ergy and fertilizer made from
natural gas and farmers would
have little ability to pass on
higher production costs when
selling their products.
Status: The Farm Bureau-
supported Biodiesel Tax Incen-
tive Reform and Extension Act
(S. 1589), introduced by Sens.
Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and
Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa),
would extend the biodiesel
tax incentive for five years.
The House passed a cap-and-
trade bill in June 2009. Sens.
Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and
John Kerry (D-Mass.) in Sep-
tember 2009 introduced a sim-
ilar bill (S. 1733) in the Senate,
but that bill faces opposition
from conservatives in both po-
litical parties and an arduous
trip through several commit-
tees, including the Agriculture
Committee.
Priority I
Farm Bureau to work on
TAXES H H
In 2011, the estate tax will
be reinstated with a $1 mil-
lion exemption and a top rate
of 55 percent. The return of
the estate tax will strike a
blow to farm families trying
to transition farm and ranch
operations from one genera-
tion to the next.
Capital gains taxes also
threaten the transfer of land
between generations.
A new 3 percent withhold-
ing tax on government pay-
ments (including many USDA
payments to farmers and
ranchers) is scheduled to be-
gin in 2012. The withholding
tax is refundable at the end of
the year if taxes withheld are
more than taxes due; however,
the withholding can create
cash-flow problems.
Action is needed to preserve
several farm-related tax provi-
sions that expired at the end
of 2009 or will expire at the
end of this year.
AFBF Policy: Farm Bureau
believes that estate taxes
should be eliminated perma-
nently but, in the absence of
elimination, there should be a
large-enough exemption to ex-
clude farms and ranches; cap-
ital gains taxes should be cap-
ped at 15 percent, with land
that remains in agriculture ex-
cluded; the 3 percent withhold-
ing tax should be repealed; and
all expiring tax provisions that
benefit farmers and ranchers
should be extended.
Status: The House last year
passed the Permanent Estate
Tax Relief for Families, Farm-
ers and Small Businesses Act
(H.R. 4154) to provide a per-
manent $3.5 million exemp-
tion with a top rate of 45 per-
cent. The Obama administra-
tion’s budget for 2011 pro-
poses raising the top capital
gains tax rate from 15 percent
to 20 percent. A bipartisan
group of House members have
introduced a Farm Bureau-
supported bill (H.R. 275) to
repeal the 3 percent withhold-
ing tax. The House last year
passed the Tax Extenders Act
of 2009 (H.R. 4213) to extend
certain tax provisions that
were set to expire at the end
of 2009. The Senate, however,
has yet to act on the bill.
CLEAN AIR H H CLEAN WATER H
The Environmental Protec-
tion Agency is pressing ahead
with plans to regulate green-
house gas (GHG) emissions as
“air pollutants” under the
Clean Air Act (CAA). Under
Title V the CAA, once the GHG
emission rule becomes final it
will trigger certain provisions
that would impose costly per-
mitting requirements on farm-
ers and ranchers. While it is
impossible to predict how the
regulation would apply to agri-
culture, it seems almost certain
that a significant number of ag-
ricultural operations not previ-
ously regulated under the CAA
would become thus regulated.
Regulation of GHGs under the
CAA could also have impacts
for farmers and ranchers seek-
ing to build new structures or
renovate existing ones. The
New Source Review (NSR) and
Prevention of Significant Dete-
rioration (PSD) permitting re-
quirements could impose cost-
ly, burdensome permit require-
ments for GHG sources falling
under those programs, a situ-
ation that could well arise for
certain agricultural operations.
AFBF Policy: Farm Bureau
opposes regulating greenhouse
gases under the Clean Air Act.
Status: In order for Title V
and NSR/PSD to be triggered,
two regulatory actions have to
occur. First, EPA must make a
finding that GHGs endanger
public health or welfare. EPA
did that on Dec. 6, 2009. Sec-
ond, EPA must finalize regula-
tion of gases for any one sec-
tor of the economy. This step
is expected to be completed
by March 31, 2010, with the
promulgation of final motor
vehicle GHG emission rules.
In addition, EPA has pub-
lished a final rule that would
require manure management
systems that emit more than
25,000 tons of GHGs per year to
report those emissions to EPA
under a rigorous scheme that
includes monitoring and verifi-
cation of the emissions. EPA es-
timates that this rule will only
affect about 110 dairy, beef and
swine operations, but poultry
operations may be more vulner-
able to reporting requirements.
These reporting requirements
will take effect next year.
H FOOD S
After two Supreme Court rul- National food
ings upheld the Clean Water cent years have
Act (CWA) distinction that sumers’ concern
federal regulation under the safety and, as a
Act only extends to navigable gress is consider
waters and those waters that food safety laws
are significantly connected to AFBF Policy:
navigable waters, environmen- believes that an
tal groups and some in Con- by Congress sho
gress have worked to expand on sound scienc
the Act by replacing “navi- risk assessment,
gable waters” with “waters of USDA should be
the U.S.” in the Act’s language. cy in the develo
The effect would be the largest safety guideline
expansion of the CWA since it ports some chan
was enacted in 1972, and farm- safety programs
ers and ranchers would have better funding f
to get federal permits in order food and feed sa
to plow, construct ponds, dig tions, accurate a
ditches or make other structur- responses to inc
al changes on any land where tamination in o
water might accumulate. the affected pro
AFBF Policy: Congress has market and min
generally maintained that tion to produce
some waters are federal waters nification for pr
and others are state waters. suffer market lo
Legislation to remove “naviga- accurate govern
ble” from the CWA would be or warnings.
a significant departure from Status: The Fo
that well-established frame- forcement Act (H
work. Farm Bureau opposes introduced last y
efforts to expand the federal en the governme
government’s regulatory reach respond to a foo
under the CWA, which would dent. The House
open the floodgates to fed- in July 2009, sen
eral regulation of all waters. Senate for consid
Environmental groups claim
bill does not inc
legislation is needed to “re-
cation for produ
store” protections that the
it is an improvem
Supreme Court stripped away.
version of the bi
Farm Bureau says the CWA
first introduced,
always limited federal control
have imposed im
to navigable waters and the
cord keeping req
Supreme Court merely upheld
the limits in current law.
Status: The Farm Bureau-
opposed Clean Water Restora-
tion Act (S. 787), which would
remove the requirement that
waters be “navigable” or con-
nected to navigable waters to
be federally regulated, was
passed by the Senate Environ-
ment and Public Works Com-
mittee in June 2009.

Issues
S P E C I A L
ambitious roster in 2010
SAFETY H H TRADE H H IMMIGRATION H
d recalls in re- The U.S. has negotiated three
increased con- trade agreements—with Co-
ns about food lombia, Panama and South
result, Con- Korea—that promise to in-
ring reforms to crease U.S. farm exports by
s. more than $3 billion each year.
However, Congress must pass
Farm Bureau
implementing legislation in
ny action
order for the trade deals to
ould be based
take effect.
ce and prudent
Global trade negotiations in
, and that
the World Trade Organization
e the lead agen-
were launched in November
opment of food
2001. The goals for agriculture
es. AFBF sup-
in the Doha Round are sub-
nges to food
stantial improvements in mar-
s, including
ket access, reduction and ulti-
for government
mate elimination of all forms
afety func-
of export subsidies and reduc-
and timely
tion of trade distorting do-
cidents of con-
mestic supports.
order to remove
oducts from the AFBF Policy: AFBF supports
nimize disrup- ratification of the Colombia,
ers, and indem- Panama and South Korea
roducers who trade agreements.
osses due to in- Farm Bureau believes that
nment recalls agriculture’s best opportunity
to address critical trade issues
is in the multilateral arena.
ood Safety En-
H.R. 2749) was Status: President Bush sent
year to strength- the Colombia agreement to
ent’s ability to Congress in April 2008, but
od safety inci- the House passed a resolution
e passed the bill postponing consideration in-
nding it to the definitely. President Obama
deration. The will need to resubmit draft
clude indemnifi- implementing legislation for
ucers; however, it to be considered in the
ment over the 111th Congress.
ill that was Neither the Bush nor Obama
, which would administration has sent draft
mpractical re- legislation to Congress to im-
quirements. plement the Korea-U.S. free
trade agreement.
The 110th Congress did not
take up the Panama agreement;
implementing legislation will
need to be passed in the cur-
rent Congress in order for the
agreement to take effect.
In the WTO talks, agreement
has been reached that trade
distorting domestic supports
will be reduced, and the coun-
tries with the largest support
levels will make the deepest
reductions. Market access has
been the difficult area in the
negotiations. Negotiations
have made more progress on
the issue of export subsidies,
with agreement to eliminate
export subsidies by the end of
2013.
R E P O R T
American agriculture needs
access to an adequate, legal
workforce in both the short
and long terms.
AFBF Policy: AFBF seeks a
comprehensive approach to
reforming the nation’s immi-
gration laws. AFBF supports
strengthening the system for
employers to verify the status
of workers, giving some farm
workers the chance to apply
for legal status as part of a
program to provide growers
with an adequate workforce,
and developing a usable
guest worker program. Cur-
rently farmers and ranch-
ers face a “Catch 22” when
verifying the status of their
workforce. It is illegal to
knowingly hire or employ
someone who is not autho-
rized to work in the U.S., but
an employer is limited in
what he or she may ask to
determine who is authorized.
In addition, farmers and
ranchers may recruit work-
ers from abroad under the
H-2A temporary guest worker
program; however, partici-
pating in the program is ex-
pensive. It requires employ-
ers to offer free housing and
transportation in addition
to an “adverse effect wage
rate” that has historically
been above market levels.
Status: The Stronger Econ-
omy, Stronger Borders Act of
2009 (S. 9), a bill to enhance
border enforcement and re-
form avenues for legal im-
migration, was introduced
in January 2009. The bill
currently does not contain
much language, but it could
be fleshed out later this year.
The Labor Department in
2009 finalized a regulation
to reform the H-2A program.
The regulation became effec-
tive on Jan. 17, 2009; how-
ever, the Obama adminis-
tration revoked it.
February 8, 2010
H DISASTER H H DAIRY H
The 2008 farm bill included Milk producers were faced
a supplemental disaster pro- with a severe drop in prices
gram for a variety of agricul- and income from late 2008
tural sectors for 2008 through through 2009. As milk prices
2011. However, the crop por- have fallen, numerous pro-
tion of the disaster package— posals have been discussed
the Supplemental Revenue to bring more stability and
Assistance (SURE) program— transparency to milk pricing.
leaves many farmers without
AFBF Policy: AFBF sup-
hope for meaningful assis-
ports changes to the structure,
tance when they are hardest
formula and price classes of
hit by natural disasters. Farm-
Federal Milk Marketing Or-
ers with diversified operations
ders—agreements on which
and those who grow com-
milk prices are based—in
modities that don’t have com-
order for milk prices to bet-
petitively priced buy-up crop
ter reflect market conditions,
insurance programs available
enhance transparency and ac-
to them are unlikely to ben-
count for regional differences
efit from SURE. Because SURE
in the cost of milk production.
does not provide all farmers
AFBF also supports a market-
with assistance when they
oriented dairy program.
are faced with natural disas-
ter, ad hoc disaster assistance Status: Sens. Arlen Specter
will be necessary at times. (D-Pa.) and Robert Casey (D-
Pa.) in April 2009 introduced
AFBF Policy: Farm Bureau
the Federal Milk Marketing
has consistently supported
Improvement Act of 2009 (S.
ad hoc disaster assistance
889), which would direct the
and, specifically, has fought
secretary of agriculture to
for disaster assistance that
base the minimum price of
directs aid only to those farm-
Class II milk (the kind that is
ers who suffered a disaster,
processed into products such
provides assistance without
as ice cream) on the aver-
opening the farm bill, is avail-
age cost of milk production
able to all types of farmers
across the U.S. The bill was
and ranchers who experience
referred to the Senate Agri-
losses not covered by other
culture Committee, where it
programs and offers assis-
has not moved. The House
tance to farmers with both
Agriculture Committee has
quality and quantity losses.
held a hearing on dairy pric-
Status: Sens. Blanche Lin- ing and is expected to have
coln (D-Ark.), Roger Wicker more hearings on the issue.
(R-Miss.) and Thad Cochran
(R-Miss.) in November 2009
introduced S. 2810, a bill to
provide a second direct pay-
ment to program crop farmers
in primary disaster counties
by Nov. 17, 2009. In addition,
the bill would provide state
grants for specialty crop pro-
ducers, direct assistance for
cottonseed producers and first
handlers in primary disaster
counties, and reinstatement
of the Livestock Assistance
Program and Livestock Com-
pensation Program. Reps.
Marion Berry (D-Ark.) and
Travis Childers (D-Miss.) in-
troduced similar legislation
(H.R. 4177). The House bill
would cover all primary disas-
ter declarations in 2009, not
just those prior to Nov. 17.

Capitol View 6|
A special approach to international agreements
By David Salmonsen
The recent climate summit
in Copenhagen brought viv-
idly to mind a guiding force in
international relations today:
the impact of the growing eco-
nomic competition between
developed and developing
countries on the ability to
reach multilateral agreements
and address world issues.
In both the climate discus-
sions, operated by the United
Nations, and the Doha Round
of international trade talks,
overseen by the World Trade
Organization (WTO), the ap-
proach to these international
challenges is strikingly simi-
lar: special treatment for the
entire developing world. The
developed countries, led by
the United States, seek partici-
pation from developing coun-
tries, especially China, India
and Brazil. These developing
countries, following the “spe-
cial treatment” approach, re-
sist making any commitments
Administration: Biofuels Obama’s 2011 budget
key part of energy portfolio would cut farm payments
The White House last week an-
nounced a series of initiatives ad-
ministration officials said are
part of a wide-ranging effort to
boost American energy independ-
ence and establish a clean energy
economy while creating millions
of new jobs.
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vil-
sack emphasized that President
Barack Obama’s plans to increase
the production and use of home-
grown fuels are a key element of
the effort. As part of that USDA
released a proposed rule for the
new Biomass Crop Assistance Pro-
gram (BCAP) that is designed to
spur the expansion of dedicated
non-food crops for renewable
energy and biofuel production.
“Advancing biomass and bio-
fuel production holds the poten-
tial to create green jobs, which is
one of the many ways the Obama
administration is working to re-
build and revitalize rural Ameri-
ca,” said Vilsack. “Facilities that
produce renewable fuel from bio-
mass have to be designed, built
and operated. Additionally, BCAP
will stimulate biomass produc-
tion and that will benefit produc-
ers and provide the materials
necessary to generate clean ener-
gy and reduce carbon pollution.”
BCAP, authorized in the 2008
farm bill, provides for matching
payments to biomass growers of
$1 for each $1 per dry ton paid
by a biomass conversion facility.
Carbon capture and storage is
also central to the administra-
tion’s plan. A new interagency
task force will work on a strategy
to speed the development and
deployment of clean coal tech-
nologies. The task force plan will
consider a variety of incentives
for carbon sequestration and
will make recommendations for
overcoming financial, economic,
fbnews.org
while demanding greater support
from the developed world.
In the Doha Round of trade ne-
gotiations, WTO members are at-
tempting to reduce barriers to
trade while remaining committed
to the “development” goals of the
trade round’s mandate. The con-
flicts between the U.S. and the
“advanced developing” countries
(China, India and Brazil) are high-
lighted by the contention over the
amount of market access and pro-
tection afforded for their agricul-
tural products.
While the U.S. is willing to
make reductions to trade-dis-
torting domestic support spend-
ing, key developing countries
are unwilling to make conces-
sions for increased agricultural
product imports. The “special
and differential treatment” ap-
technological, legal, institutional
and other barriers to deployment.
In addition, Obama called for
five to 10 commercial carbon cap-
ture and storage demonstration
projects to be underway by 2016.
Also last week, the Environmen-
tal Protection Agency finalized its
rule for implementing the Renew-
able Fuels Standard of 36 billion
gallons by 2022. EPA Adminis-
trator Lisa Jackson said the rule
was part of the administration’s
overall effort to address climate
change and create more jobs.
American Farm Bureau Federa-
tion President Bob Stallman said
growers were pleased with the
rule.
“America’s farmers and ranch-
ers are encouraged that the rule
will help keep the nation’s re-
newable fuel standards on a path
toward greater energy indepen-
dence,” Stallman said. “By rais-
ing the volume of biofuels avail-
able for our nation’s transporta-
tion fuel supply, the administra-
tion is building on the strong bi-
partisan efforts that began years
ago to provide a home-grown
solution to the energy challenges
facing our nation.”
However, he cautioned that
growers’ concerns about the mea-
surement of indirect land use
remain.
“Continuing to utilize indirect
land use changes to calculate
greenhouse gas emissions is un-
fair to domestic biofuels,” he
said. “Using it as a measurement
of biofuels’ carbon impact is still
highly controversial and scien-
tifically unproven.”
Stallman said the group will
continue its efforts with policy-
makers on both sides of the aisle
and in the administration to en-
sure that biofuels live up to their
enormous potential.
proach ensures that these na-
tions, all of them major agricul-
tural producers, remain focused
on protecting their own mar-
kets rather than expanding trade
liberalization.
In the climate change nego-
tiations, developed nations are
seeking binding actions by all
nations, including those in the
developed world. The operation
approach to developing nations
here is one of “common but dif-
ferentiated responsibilities,”
where developed nations com-
mit to take stronger actions than
the developing world, while the
developing countries should
commit to some specific actions.
Advanced developing nations,
such as China—the world’s larg-
est emitter of greenhouse gases—
strenuously and successfully ob-
Continued from page 1
rather, it would shift funding
to other programs. A graph in-
cluded in USDA’s Budget Sum-
mary document shows that
USDA spending would actually
increase by $4 billion in 2011.
And that’s an increase over 2010,
which included millions in tem-
porary economic stimulus funds.
Conservation funding also
would be reduced in the presi-
dent’s plan. The budget would
increase spending for the Envi-
ronmental Quality Incentives
Program (EQIP) over last year’s
actual spending level, but it
would cut the amount of pro-
gram funding authorized in the
farm bill by $380 million. EQIP
helps landowners install buffer
strips between fields and streams,
fence livestock away from water-
ways and make other ecological
improvements. The Farm and
Ranch Lands Protection Program
and Conservation Security Pro-
gram also would face sizable
cuts.
USDA OUTLAYS
Source: USDA
February 8, 2010
jected in the Copenhagen talks
to developing countries ac-
cepting binding commit-
ments to combat climate
change. Instead, they favor
the idea of an international
development fund to help
them in their efforts to deal
with climate change.
The divide among the
world’s nations—what used
to be called the North-South
divide and is now referred to
as developed-developing—has
been given an operational
status in the ongoing trade
and climate talks. While we
don’t know if this approach
will prove ultimately fatal to
international negotiations,
this “special approach” has
been a huge obstacle to reach-
ing multilateral agreements.
David Salmonsen is senior
director of congressional rela-
tions, dealing with multilateral
trade issues, for the American
Farm Bureau Federation.
The president’s annual budget
proposal is little more than a
wish list; Congress enacts the fed-
eral budget and annual appropri-
ations bills. The administration’s
plan to cut farm and conserva-
tion programs got an unsuppor-
tive response from the House and
Senate Agriculture committee
chairs.
No one on Capitol Hill wants
to reopen the farm bill after the
tough battle to pass it just a year
and a half ago, said Rep. Collin
Peterson (D-Minn.), House Ag
chair.
Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.),
Senate Ag chair, said the budget
proposal picks winners and
losers.
“I thank the president for his
recommendations,” Lincoln
said, “but Congress writes the
budget. I intend to support mea-
sures to reduce the deficit but
fight many of the president’s
proposed cuts that will harm
farmers, ranchers and rural
communities.”
February 8, 2010
New York farmer: Ag key to empowering Haitians
While the world is focused on
Haiti’s most immediate relief
needs, one New York apple and
pear producer thinks now is also
a good time to consider how U.S.
growers can take the lead in
helping farmers there establish
profitable operations and bolster
rural communities and the coun-
try as a whole.
Charles Hurd, of Clintondale,
N.Y., made eight trips to Haiti
between 2006 and late 2008. Dur-
ing his first visit, to see a friend
teaching English at an orphanage
with 60 hectares of farmland,
Hurd helped the orphanage with
its irrigation needs. Hurd’s under-
standing of the challenges and
potential of Haitian agriculture
and his affinity for the people
grew with each trip.
While the U.S. does provide
food aid to Haiti, much of it
grain, Hurd said the U.S.’ most
important agricultural export to
that country is expertise. He envi-
sions U.S. farmers playing a ma-
jor role in helping Haitians profit
from high-value produce like
guava and plantains, for which
the climate and soil are ripe.
Hurd pointed out that U.S.
farmers would be growing their
own markets while they’re help-
ing the Haitians.
“If we can help them create
niche markets, create an econ-
omy of high-dollar food down
there, that’s good for the United
States because you’re creating a
lot of strong consumers for Amer-
ican farm products that they
would never be able to grow in
State Focus
Idaho senator goes on the
offensive on animal care
Idaho state Sen. Tim Corder is working on
two measures that he hopes will thwart
any attempts by organizations such as
the Humane Society of the United States
to alter animal agriculture in that state.
One bill will define what animals fall
into the production animal category,
while the other will give the Idaho State
Department of Agriculture the authority
to determine what constitutes the proper
care of production agriculture animals.
According to Corder, there are numer-
ous people and groups that see Idaho’s
animal welfare laws as a target. “We
want Idaho to decide what cruelty is or is
not,” he said. Previous attempts to make
animal cruelty a felony in the state have
failed because of concern that poorly
written laws could be used against agri-
culture. Idaho Farm Bureau is involved in
the discussions about Corder’s proposals,
but the group has not taken a stand on
them. “We support good animal hus-
bandry, yet good agricultural production
as well,” said Wally Butler, IFB range and
livestock specialist.
fbnews.org
enough volume to support that
huge population,” Hurd said.
The most basic techniques
used in the United States would
have a huge impact on produc-
tion in Haiti, he believes.
“Take a simple thing like the
Florida Weave system for toma-
toes,” Hurd said. “Something like
that would allow Haitian farm-
ers to grow 10 times what they’re
growing, on the same amount
of land.”
In the Florida Weave system
stakes are driven between each
second plant. String is tied to the
large stake at the end of each row
and looped around each stake
down the row. At the end of the
row, the string is passed down
the other side of the plants so
that each plant is growing be-
tween two strings.
As important as American
farmers’ knowledge is their time,
according to Hurd. While plenty
of people are willing to be there
to plant a tree, few stay to nur-
ture it.
“We need people to be down
there the whole time, from seed
to fruit,” he explained. “The Hai-
tians need to be shown things
like crop rotation and compost-
ing. Building soil takes a long
time.”
Hurd sees U.S. nursery and
grain specialists working with
Haitians to find just the right
stock for different parts of the
country.
“We need to figure out what
will work and what the right
economy of scale is,” Hurd said.
Ohio FB agrees with farmland-
related court case decision
A recent Ohio Supreme Court ruling that
townships could base zoning resolutions
on countywide land use plans rather
than bear the costs of developing their
own individual plans has won the sup-
port of the Ohio Farm Bureau. The case,
according to OFB, has implications for
property rights and farmland preserva-
tion. “Overall, this case flew under the
radar, because it did not directly involve a
large number of people,” said Larry Gear-
hardt, OFB senior director of local policy.
“But it could have had significant impacts
for rural residents across Ohio.” The case
resulted from officials in Wayne County’s
Congress Township telling a fireworks
company it couldn’t build a new store on
land zoned for agriculture. The company
argued that because the township had
not developed a comprehensive land use
plan, its zoning ordinances were invalid
under Ohio law. OFB and Wayne County
Farm Bureau filed briefs with the Su-
preme Court stating that cash-strapped
rural townships do not have the re-
sources to develop their own plans.
|7
Over the course of eight trips to Haiti, Charles Hurd came to know both the Haitian
people and their land very well. Hurd is optimistic that with U.S. farmers’ help, Haiti
can establish a strong agriculture economy that will bolster the whole country.
“It’s important to find the right
balance of energy in on the part
of the Haitians and energy out,
in terms of both profit and meet-
ing the country’s food needs.”
Hurd’s observations were not
limited to agriculture. He also
got a good sense of how the
country operates.
“Things get done at the local
level, not through the govern-
ment,” Hurd said. “The most suc-
cessful communities I’ve seen are
the most remote because people
there are forced to do everything
themselves. People will look first
Pennsylvania FB seeks
long-term ag access at port
The Pennsylvania Farm Bureau and
state Sen. Mike Brubaker, chair of the
state Senate Agriculture and Rural Af-
fairs Committee, recently met with the
chairman of the Philadelphia Regional
Port Authority and officials represent-
ing Gov. Edward Rendell’s office and
GROWMARK to discuss a long-term ar-
rangement at the port for a bulk cargo
facility serving agriculture and other in-
dustries. GROWMARK is the agricultural
cooperative that acquired and operates
the former Agway facility at the port.
According to PFB, the goal of the on-
going discussions is to preserve a small
portion of the port for bulk shipments,
such as production inputs for agricul-
ture, while not hindering plans to make
the port a major “containerized cargo”
facility. “Farm Bureau believes that a
bulk shipping facility at the Philadelphia
port is vital to agriculture’s future, and
we appreciate discussions by all parties
that will hopefully produce a workable
arrangement,” said Carl Shaffer, PFB
president.
State FB Links
to their neighbors. Smaller, ru-
ral communities are the places
to start empowering people.”
Hurd directed anyone inter-
ested in helping Haiti to contact
ORE, which runs agriculture de-
velopment and marketing proj-
ects in Haiti, or Theo’s Work,
Inc., an organization that helps
protect Haitian children. Their
Web sites are below.
OREworld.org
Freethekids.org
Anderson joins
AFBF economic
analysis team
John Ander-
son last month
joined the
American
Farm Bureau
Federation’s
economic
analysis team
as livestock
economist. He
is responsible
for analyzing the impacts of
policy changes on livestock
producers and providing a reg-
ular livestock market outlook.
For the previous eight years,
Anderson was an Extension
agricultural economist at Mis-
sissippi State University, where
his work has focused on live-
stock production economics
and marketing, agricultural
policy and risk management.
Anderson received a Ph.D.
in agricultural economics
from Oklahoma State Univer-
sity in 1998. He was raised on
a beef and poultry farm in
Stone County, Ark.
Anderson succeeds Jim Sart-
welle, who is now Texas Farm
Bureau’s director of public
policy.
Anderson’s contact informa-
tion is johna@fb.org or 202-
406-3623.
 fbnews.org February 8, 2010
Grassroots 8|

Idaho farmers take getting in shape to a higher level

By Jake Putnam
A little out of shape and approaching his
50th birthday, Vaughn Jensen decided it
was time to change his lifestyle. So the Em-
mett, Idaho, farmer and his wife, Lisa, de-
cided to tackle one of the most grueling
sports in existence, and it’s given them a
new perspective on life.
“He could do his farm work,” said Lisa.
“But he was getting out of shape and get-
ting heavy, and you just don’t feel good
and you don’t feel good about yourself
when you get fat.”
“I was feeling my age and weight and de-
cided that I wanted to get back in shape,”
Vaughn said.
There is nothing unusual in that. Hun-
dreds of thousands of people make New
Year’s resolutions. But the farmer and Gem
County Farm Bureau board member chose
the most challenging road to fitness he
could find.
The Ironman is the Holy Grail of fitness
competitions and is definitely not for week-
end athletes. The race is an almost impos-
sible test of strength and willpower.
Ironman triathlons are a series of long-
distance races organized by the World Tri-
athlon Corp. Events consist of a 2.4 mile
swim, a 112 mile bike ride and then a 26-
mile marathon run.
Triathletes run the Ironman without a
break, and all the events have strict time
limits. Competitors must complete the
events in just 17 hours or face disqualifica-
tion. The races typically start at 7 a.m. in
open water, and the competitors need to
finish the swim within 2 hours and 20
minutes.
The racers spend the bulk of the morn-
ing and afternoon on the massive bike ride
that has to be finished by 5:30 p.m. Then
runners must finish the marathon by
midnight.
Vaughn’s goal seemed impossible at first.
But, with Lisa’s support, he was able to put
in the hours of training it takes to become
an endurance athlete. The Jensens trained
together for all three events.
At first, they started jogging together and
later bought road bikes and a membership
in the Ontario, Ore., YMCA for the early-
morning swims.
They also researched and studied their
Vaughn Jensen, pictured with his wife and training
partner Lisa Jensen, says exercise has made him a bet-
ter farmer.
sport. More importantly, they decided to
make the journey together.
They got to work with early-morning, noon
and early-evening workouts. They learned
how to eat and compete all over again. Lisa
grew up playing sports and played basketball
in college. Vaughn, however, grew up work-
ing on his family’s dairy farm and didn’t
have time for school athletics.
When they began training for the swim
race, the Jensens got a wake-up call. “When
we first started swimming, we couldn’t even
swim the length of the pool,” said Lisa. “We
didn’t know how to swim with our faces in
the water.”
But together they persevered and kept prac-
ticing until the swimming became second na-
ture. They learned technique and endurance
in the water, efficiency and pace on the bikes
and how to overcome the pain during long
runs.
“The knees start to ache about 13 miles into
a run,” said Vaughn. “We run on our farm
roads and I really like that. The bicycle
is easier on the joints and Lisa does real-
ly well on the bike. I like the long bike
rides because you have to focus on pac-
ing and endurance. It also gives you
enough time to take a break from the farm
work.”
Vaughn says triathlon training has im-
proved his farming operation despite all
of the time that it takes.
“I do think the workouts help, because
when I’m running, cycling or swimming I
think about things that are going on in my
farming operation, and I think it has given
me renewed energy and a fresh outlook on
things. It’s helped me with goal setting.”
Listening to Vaughn talk, the work “mar-
athon” pops up constantly as a metaphor.
Building a farm is a marathon; creating
and growing a family life is a marathon.
The Jensens took the metaphor to a liter-
al interpretation last summer. June marked
Vaughn’s 50th birthday, and he competed
in the Boise 70.3 Ironman (a qualifying
event for the Ironman World Champion-
ship). After that, he ran a marathon in Her-
miston, Ore., in October. He and Lisa have
competed in the Emmett Olympic Distance
Triathlon twice.
Swimming presented the biggest obstacle
for Vaughn during the Boise Ironman event.
“It was windy,” he explained, “there
were waves and the water was rough. I
didn’t realize how rough until I got out of
the water. The wave action affected my
equilibrium and I staggered a bit.”
After that it was smooth sailing. He made
excellent time on the bike and did reason-
ably well in the marathon.
“I finished in about the 45th percentile
for my age group,” recalled Vaughn. “So I
was in the middle. I’m looking forward to
see what I can do to improve that time.”
Lisa also looks forward to the next test.
“When we did our first marathon, our
goal was to finish,” said Lisa, fighting back
tears of pride. “And we did. Whether you
cross that finish line in first place or dead
last, you still feel like a winner because you
did it.”
The Jensens have proven that they clear-
ly are winners.
Jake Putnam is director of news services for
the Idaho Farm Bureau Federation.

Congress sets sights on clean energy, Corner Post

backs away from cap-and-trade
Continued from page 1
of nuclear power and biofuels.
“And yes, it means passing a
comprehensive energy and cli-
mate bill with incentives that
will finally make clean energy
the profitable kind of energy
in America,” Obama said.
American Farm Bureau Feder-
ation President Bob Stallman
said farmers and ranchers are
fully on board with efforts to
boost the production of home-
grown fuels and reduce America’s
dependence on foreign oil.
“We also strongly back his com-
mitment to opening new offshore
areas for oil and gas development,”
Stallman said. “And we believe
[Obama] was right on target with
his stated commitment to contin-
ued investment in advanced biofu-
els and clean coal technologies.”
While clean energy and job
creation are in the spotlight now,
congressional cap-and-trade sup-
porters are waiting in the wings,
cautioned Rick Krause, AFBF cli-
mate change specialist.
U.S. Annual & Cumulative
In addition, the Environmen-
tal Protection Agency is moving
Wind Power Installations
forward with the regulation of Strong Growth Seen in 4th Quarter of 2009
greenhouse gases under the Clean
Air Act, although the agency is
getting pushback in the form of
a resolution of disapproval spon-
sored by Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-
Alaska) and backed by more than
35 other senators, including Sen-
ate Agriculture Committee Chair
Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.).
Stallman emphasized that
AFBF’s support for clean energy
legislation does not mean the
organization has dropped its
objections to cap-and-trade.
“We cannot support climate
change legislation in its current
form,” Stallman said. “As we
have continually stressed, cli-
mate change legislation currently
before Congress will sharply cut
the numbers of acres devoted to
U.S. food production and will
increase energy costs for Amer- Source: American Wind Energy Association
ica’s farmers and ranchers.”