The NCC joined 33 other organizations on a letter to President Obama and House and Senate leaders seeking prompt action on the debt ceiling/deficit reduction negotiations that do not require disproportionate cuts in agriculture and related programs.
The agriculture and agribusiness organizations also emphasized the importance of allowing House/Senate agriculture committees’ members determine where modifications and reductions are made because these Members have the expertise to best evaluate specific programs.
The groups’ letter, on the NCC’s website at www.cotton.org/issues/2011/ceiling.cfm, stated that, “(A)griculture is prepared to take a proportionate share of budget cuts provided everything is on the table. Last year, agriculture absorbed a net $6 billion reduction, according to the Congressional Budget Office, thus making it clear we have and will do our part to help with spending and deficit control.”
Also urged was that consideration be given to providing sufficient resources to support policy that underpins the ability to produce food, fiber, feed and fuel -- the rural economy’s lifeblood.
"In this time of economic uncertainty and weather-related disasters, the farm bill provides safeguards for farmers and ranchers to consistently provide a safe and stable food supply,” the organizations emphasized. “The farm bill also provides assistance for our nation’s most vulnerable people, helps to conserve valuable natural resources, encourages the production of renewable energy, and aids in the economic development of rural communities. Agriculture is among the sectors that will continue to lead our economic recovery and ensure domestic and global food security. Reaching a rational, long-term agreement on a balanced package that addresses deficit reduction and the debt ceiling will help ensure our nation remains the leader of the global agricultural economy and will establish the certainty needed to write a strong and effective farm bill.”
Wetjen CFTC Nomination Considered
The Senate Agriculture Committee held a hearing to consider the nomination of Mark Wetjen to serve on the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). Wetjen currently serves as counsel and senior policy adviser to Senate Majority Leader Reid (D-NV). He was nominated to serve a five-year term to fill the Democratic seat currently held by Commissioner Michael Dunn, whose term expired in June.
Wetjen told the Committee that if his nomination is approved, he will work with the other commissioners to bring "clarity and certainty" to the agency's derivatives rulemaking. It is the CFTC's "duty to provide both" for market participants, he testified during his confirmation hearing. "That should always be the goal."
Committee members' comments indicated that Wetjen unlikely is to face problems obtaining committee approval. Committee Chairman Stabenow (D-MI) said she intends to hold a vote in "the near future."
In response to concerns raised by ranking member Roberts (R-KS) that the CFTC's proposed swap rules would drive liquidity from US markets, Wetjen said the goal of Dodd-Frank is to protect the US financial system, not disadvantage US firms.
Wetjen said he was confident there is a way to reach a balance.
On position limits, he said he would ensure that he was well informed on the issues before supporting any final rules noting that "Congress gave new authority to the CFTC to apply position limits if appropriate" to combat manipulation in the swaps market.
He told the Committee that the "main benefit" of his experience as a practicing attorney and then as a Senate staffer is that he understands how legislation and rules affect the private sector and businesses. He also said that to provide an independent voice on the commission, he would "listen to all viewpoints" by gathering information and talking to the other commissioners and market participants.
USDA Seeking Comments on Streamlining Initiative
USDA published a request for comments "to help us improve services and reduce duplication of effort, including collecting information from the public." The Federal Register Notice is available on the NCC's website at www.cotton.org/issues/2011/upload/11fedregisterUSDA.pdf.
The Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services (FFAS) agencies including the Farm Service Agency (FSA) and the Risk Management Agency (RMA) have been working on a joint, coordinated initiative to have a common USDA framework for producers' information reporting to participate in certain USDA programs. FSA and RMA have worked in coordination with the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) and the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) on the common reporting process.
The Acreage and Crop Reporting Streamlining Initiative (ACRSI) is a new initiative to simplify commodity, acreage and production reporting by producers; eliminate or minimize duplication of information collection by multiple agencies; and reduce the burden on producers, insurance agents, and approved insurance providers. FSA and RMA are implementing a web-based single source reporting system to establish a single data collection and reporting in the initiative. FSA and RMA are also improving the existing Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approved information collections for FSA and RMA, 0560–0004, Report of Acreage, and 0563–0053, Multiple Peril Crop Insurance, respectively.
Currently, commodity, acreage and production information is generally collected from the respondent during a personal visit to the FSA Service Center and again from the respondent during a personal visit to the insurance agent. The forms still will be available to accommodate respondents with no Internet access and those who wish to continue to personally visit the FSA Service Center and insurance agent to report the information.
When a web-based single system is fully implemented, respondents will be allowed to report the information once. The information also will be shared by FSA and RMA, as well as other USDA agencies, such as NRCS and NASS that have the authority and need for such information. In each phase of system implementation, some or the entire commodity, acreage and production information in the existing approved information collections will be reported via a web-based single source reporting system. The respondent will only have to report it one time through a single source thereby reducing the respondent's burden of reporting such information and eliminating the duplicate reporting that may be currently required. The information will then be shared with the other agency without having the producer personally visit both offices.
FSA and RMA anticipate that producers will be able to use their precision-ag systems, farm management information systems or download data files to directly report commodity, acreage and production information needed to participate in USDA programs. The information being collected will consist of, but not be limited to: producer name, location state, commodity name, commodity type or variety, location county, date planted, land location (legal description, FSA farm number, FSA track number, FSA field number), intended use, prevented planting acres, acres planted but failed, planted acres and production of commodity produced.
FSA and RMA will implement the web-based system in phases until fully implemented. USDA is requesting comments on all aspects of this information collection initiative and will consider comments received by Sept. 19, '11.
For more information -- for FSA, contact: Tony Jackson at (202) 720–3865; for RMA, contact: Pat Engel at (202) 720–8812.
Slim Chance Given For Doha Lite
Trade officials meeting in Geneva indicated they see little chance that World Trade Organization (WTO) members will reach an agreement on a "deliverables" package for the December ministerial conference. The deliverables package — also referred to as "Doha Lite" — is intended to rebuild confidence in the Doha round. The goal is to conclude an agreement that can be adopted at the WTO's Dec. 15-17 ministerial conference in Geneva.
David Shark, US deputy ambassador to the WTO, said efforts among key WTO members to construct a "deliverables package" are failing. WTO Director-General Pascal Lamy will now have to decide what to do because a growing number of WTO members believe the idea of a deliverables package should be dropped. Lamy is due to meet with key WTO members on July 25 to discuss options for moving forward before briefing the WTO membership as a whole on July 26.
WTO members generally agree that a deliverables package should focus on issues of interest to least developed countries (LDCs) but have been unable to agree on a package. Negotiators have been discussing a package that includes duty-free/quota free (DFQF) market access for LDC exports, a waiver from any market access commitments under a future Doha Round services agreement, and a "step forward" on addressing cotton subsidies.
However, key members are divided on what should be covered in the talks. The cotton issue reportedly has been one of the most divisive. The United States argues that any agreement on reducing cotton subsidies must include commitments by China and also must address other trade-distorting policies, most notably China's 40% import tariff on cotton. China so far has been silent on what concessions, if any, it is prepared to make on cotton subsidies and tariffs.
Trade officials are pessimistic about the prospects of restarting the Doha negotiations in the near term. Reports indicate that several "soft landing" scenarios for Doha have been suggested, including the idea of "stop and reboot" floated by former US Trade Representative Susan Schwab. While many officials in Geneva are currently pessimistic about the prospects for the Doha Round ever concluding successfully, no WTO member has proposed that the organization admit defeat and give up on the talks, now in their 10th year.
"I can predict with certainty that members will not declare [Doha] dead at the ministerial," Shark said. "But we don't know where we go from there, we won't know if Doha is really dead or not, only time will tell. We only know that it's not working now."
House Moves to Restrict EPA Actions on Pesticides
With a 219-196 vote, the House approved legislation, H.R. 2354, that would restrict EPA's ability to act in several key areas, including pesticide suspensions and cancellations related to endangered species protections, pesticide product brand names and Clean Water Act (CWA) permits for pesticide use on or near water. The restrictions were included in the FY12 Interior and Environment Appropriations bill, which funds EPA, among other agencies.
The bill includes language that would amend the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide & Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the CWA to exempt FIFRA-compliant pesticides from requiring a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit under the CWA.
Pesticide stakeholders see the permit as a large and unnecessary time and cost burden, given the protections already afforded by FIFRA, and have been seeking a legislative fix. The appropriations bill language is essentially the same as that contained in stand-alone legislation (H.R. 872) approved by the House. That bill is now in the Senate where Sens. Boxer (D-CA) and Cardin (D-MD) have placed a hold on it.
The committee report accompanying the appropriations bill says that requiring NPDES permits for pesticide use "would have far-reaching implications and move beyond the intended application of the Clean Water Act."
An amendment offered by Rep. Calvert (R-CA) and adopted by voice vote, also addresses a significant concern for pesticide stakeholders -- restrictions on pesticide use to protect endangered and threatened species.
EPA has been consulting with federal wildlife agencies regarding the impacts of a number of pesticides on endangered and threatened species. In one case, dealing with Pacific salmon and steelhead, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is examining the impacts of 37 pesticides on 28 species. So far, it has issued four biological opinions (BiOps) covering 24 of the pesticides.
NMFS has found that some of the pesticides jeopardize the continued existence of one or more species and/or their critical habitat. In the BiOps, it recommends a number of steps to address that jeopardy.
For the first BiOp, covering chlorpyrifos, diazinon and malathion, in April '10, EPA asked the affected registrants -- Dow AgroSciences, Cheminova and Makhteshim Agan of North America -- to voluntarily accept certain restrictions on the use of their products, including buffer zones. They refused and are challenging the validity of the BiOp in federal court.
More than a year later, EPA still has not decided how it will respond to the lack of voluntary compliance, but has indicated that cancelling the pesticides in question is an option. However, Rep. Calvert's amendment would preclude that option. It states: "None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to modify, cancel, or suspend the registration of a pesticide registered or reregistered under section 3 or 4 of [FIFRA] in response to a final biological opinion or other written statement issued under section 7(b) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973."
Lawsuits Claim Biotech Crops Oil Not Natural
Class action suits filed in federal courts in New York and California allege that ConAgra Foods is violating state consumer protection and business practices laws by claiming that its Wesson cooking oils are "100 percent natural." The claim is misleading, the complaints argue, because the oils come from "unnatural" biotech corn, canola and soybeans.
The lawyers asked the courts to find that the labelling claims are misleading and award an undetermined amount of money to their clients and all other consumers who bought the oils, believing that they were "natural" and not derived from genetically modified crops.
The suit contends that the oils are not 100% natural, citing a definition by the World Health Organization of GMOs as "organisms in which the genetic material has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally." It alleges that the claims violate California and New York false advertising and unfair competition laws and business codes.
Scientists Oppose Plan to Expand Biotech Regulation
More than 60 members of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) have written EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson to protest what they describe as a proposal "to further expand [EPA's] regulatory coverage over transgenic crops in a way that cannot be justified on the basis of either scientific evidence or evidence gained over the past several decades..."
The three-page letter, which also was signed by Nobel laureates James Watson and Gunter Blobel, among others, addresses a March 16 Federal Register notice in which EPA proposes a rule to codify data requirements for plant-incorporated protectants (PIPs). PIPs are pesticidal substances produced by plants, such as the Bt trait, as well as genetic material necessary for plants to produce such substances.
"Based on initial reviews of that draft proposal and recent EPA actions associated with biotechnology-derived crops, it is clear that the agency is departing from a science-based regulatory process, walking down a path towards one based on the controversial European 'precautionary principle' that goes beyond codifying data requirements for substances regulated as PIPs for the past 15 years," the scientists say.
They say they are "particularly troubled by proposals to expand EPA's oversight into areas such as virus resistance and weediness that have been adequately addressed by USDA since '86. Already, EPA has expanded its oversight into virus resistance, which previously had been the purview of USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and which EPA exempted from its regulations in '94. With the draft proposed rules, EPA would further expand its regulations and data demands to other areas historically covered by [APHIS] without the slightest justification based on either data or experience."
The letter adds that it is "most troubling that EPA also is proposing to increase its regulation to cover matters which are still not deemed to be threats even after years of study, such as potential gene transfer from plants to soil microorganisms. In other actions, EPA has expressed its right to regulate plants engineered for altered growth (e.g., by suppression of ethylene production), the same way it regulates synthetic plant growth regulators. The agency does so based on a generous interpretation of the enabling legislation, despite the absence of any scientifically credible hazard."
The scientists warn in their letter that EPA's proposed regulatory expansion would: (1) create a duplicative regulatory system for very low risk products; (2) increase costs, reduce efficiency and prolong the review times, thereby discouraging innovation; (3) dramatically increase the hurdles already facing academic institutions and companies attempting to improve specialty crops; and (4) adversely affect trade in commodities produced by US growers because of the stigma attached to anything characterized as a "pesticide."
Shipments Stay Steady
Net export sales for the week ending July 14 were -6,700 bales (480-lb). This brings total ’10-11 sales to approximately 15.1 million bales. Total sales at the same point in the ’09-10 marketing year were approximately 13.9 million bales. Total new crop (’11-12) sales are roughly 6.3 million bales.
Shipments for the week were 124,000 bales, bringing total exports to date to 13.9 million bales, compared with the 11.4 million bales at the comparable point in the ‘09-10 marketing year. With less than one month remaining in the marketing year, weekly shipments must average roughly 279,000 bales to reach the USDA projection of 14.5 million bales.
Effective July 22-28, ’11
Adjusted World Price, SLM 11/16
95.55 cents
*
Fine Count Adjustment ('10 Crop)
0.95 cents
Fine Count Adjustment ('11 Crop)
1.00 cents
Coarse Count Adjustment
0.00 cents
Marketing Loan Gain Value
0.00 cents
Import Quotas Open
1
Limited Global Import Quota (480-lb bales)
217,208
ELS Payment Rate
0.00 cents
*No Adjustment Made Under Step I
Five-Day Average
Current 5 Lowest 3135 CFR Far East
NA
Forward 5 Lowest 3135 CFR Far East
116.06 cents
Coarse Count CFR Far East
NA
Current US CFR Far East
NA
Forward US CFR Far East
117.95 cents
'10-11 Weighted Marketing-Year Average Farm Price
Year-to-Date (Aug.-May)
81.47 cents
**
**August-July average price used in determination of counter-cyclical payment
