by Rich Pottorff, Doane chief economist & Washington analyst 

Congress finally passed a bill that reopened the government, at least temporarily, and raised the debt ceiling enough to allow the government to pay its bills for a few months. The continuing resolution will fund the government until January 15th and the debt ceiling will allow the government to borrow money through February 7th. A committee made up of members of the House and Senate will be charged with developing a bipartisan budget by December 13th. If that doesn’t work, we could face another government shutdown in less than 3 months.

House leadership has finally appointed members to the farm bill conference committee but there is no set date for talks with Senate counterparts to begin. The appointed committee members are comprised mostly of members of the House Ag Committee and its Chairman, Frank Lucas (R-OK), will head up the conference committee. House Speaker Boehner named Representative Steve Southerland (R-FL) to the conference committee. This is significant because it was Representative

Southerland who led the fight to cut food stamp spending by close to $40 billion. His appointment suggests that House leadership will continue to insist on much bigger food stamp cuts than those likely to be readily accepted by the Senate. The Democrats’ committee members include Representative Marsh Fudge (D-OH), who staunchly opposes food stamp cuts.

The full House voted on some resolutions to help guide the members appointed to the conference committee this week. The House rejected a proposal that would have recommended changes to the sugar policy. The sugar policy was left basically unchanged in both the House and the Senate versions of the farm bill. The House did approve a resolution instructing conferees to support the Senate farm bill provision that would reduce crop insurance premium subsidies for farmers with incomes of $750,000 or more. The proposal would reduce the subsidy from a high of 62 percent to 42 percent. Conference committee members do not have to go along with this resolution – but probably will. A proposal to instruct conferees to set the term of the nutrition title of the farm bill at 5 years (the same as in the Senate) and to retain the current permanent farm legislation (the 1938 and 1949 laws) was voted down.

Getting a compromise bill through the conference committee will be difficult agrees House Agriculture Committee Ranking Member Collin Peterson (D-MN). He notes the obvious challenge will be those big differences between the House and Senate proposals for food stamps. But beyond that Peterson says there are other big, contentious issues. One is the dairy proposal. The Senate bill has a supply control provision that kicks in when prices get low. Peterson tried to get a similar provision in the House bill, but the plan was defeated on the House floor. There are also important differences on the target price-type programs with higher targets in the House version and tying payments to planted acres instead of base acres.
The American Farm Bureau Federation has also weighed in early. AFBF president Bob Stallman has sent a letter to farm bill conference committee members outlining the group’s position on key issues. Retaining permanent legislation and keeping farm-related provisions and nutrition linked were at the top of the list. The Farm Bureau opposes means-testing as part of eligibility determination for program benefits. It also opposes caps for farm program payments and has recently dropped out of a coalition that favored linking crop insurance and conservation compliance.
The Environmental Protection Agency now says the leaked documents indicating significant cuts to ethanol mandates for 2014 were only “draft proposals” and that decisions about the mandates for next year have not been finalized. EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy says that no decisions will be made on 2014 standards until stakeholders have a chance to comment on any proposals. Reductions in ethanol mandates for 2014 have been expected, but the 15.21 billion gallons indicated in the leaked documents were lower than most people had expected and put pressure on corn prices.

By John Schlageck, Kansas Farm Bureau

The end of agriculture in America is near. American agriculture will soon lose its competitive edge.

So say some agricultural opponents. They also think that….

The high costs of producing food in America, compared with the costs in other countries, are pushing American producers out of business as foreign competitors develop enough to serve the same markets. Overseas producers with lower input costs will increasingly be able to undersell American producers.

Other major factors that will change the face of American agriculture include energy shortages, exhausted land and limited water resources.

Opponents of today’s agriculture suggest stripping away the romance and nostalgia surrounding agriculture and seeing it for what it is – a business. They argue it’s a business with limited potential for long-term profits because of its competitive nature.

Look at the big picture, they say. The whole world can produce crops in 2013.

Are these startling new revelations or are they predictions of those totally out of touch with the business of farming and ranching?

Critics of American agriculture contend that crop yields will not keep up with population growth. Some predict by the year 2050, arable American farmland will decrease nearly 200 million acres.

They also say water will become scarcer, forcing a shift of farming to regions where rainfall is plentiful. Marginal rainfall regions like the western half of Kansas, eastern Colorado and the panhandles of Oklahoma and Texas may be destined to revert to grassland or the Great American Desert.

Should this happen, the United States will cease to be a food exporter. Our new diet will contain less meat and dairy products, more grains and beans and a sparser variety of vegetables.

It is hard for farmers and ranchers to stomach such predictions when American agriculture remains the envy of the world.

There is no doubt agriculture, like the rest of the U.S. economy, will continue to face challenges. True, this country is already impacted by higher input costs, dwindling avenues of trade and the constant wrath of Mother Nature.

In spite of these challenges, farmers and ranchers remain dedicated to staying on the land and continuing in their chosen vocation. They, better than anyone, understand the land they depend on for their livelihood is finite.

Care for this critical resource continues to improve. Today’s farmers are increasing their organic matter in the soil. With the continuing practice of no-till and reduced tillage farming, farmers continue to build organic matter and improve the soil tilth. There is no reason to consider this practice will be discontinued.

New and improved crop varieties are continually coming down the pike. Production practices continue to evolve and improve.

As for the question of water, this is always a major concern in farm and ranch country. Producers constantly chart rainfall amounts and monitor weather conditions. In Kansas, farmers are aware of changes in the Ogallala Aquifer.

They are tuned into water and the conservation of this vital resource. Some, especially in the western half of the state are concerned about the potential of long-term climate change. If such a phenomenon should occur, there is the possibility Kansas could become more arid – more like New Mexico, for example.

Barring a major shift in our climate, crops will continue to be planted in western Kansas. Production could be less than now, but this land will be farmed and farmed wisely.

Without question, today’s crop of agricultural detractors raises some interesting possibilities. But American agriculture is up to the task. This country has the minds, machinery and dedication to continue producing for people around the globe.

John Schlageck is a leading commentator on agriculture and rural Kansas. Born and raised on a diversified farm in northwestern Kansas, his writing reflects a lifetime of experience, knowledge and passion.

You thought it was rough at Arrowhead for Chiefs games?  This Jets fan is caught on tape punching a woman during Sunday’s Jets Patriots game.

(AP) — The president and CEO of The Associated Press says that governments that try to force citizens to decide between a free press and national security are

creating a “false choice” that weakens democracy.

Gary Pruitt said Saturday that the U.S. Justice Department’s secret seizure of records of telephone calls to and from AP reporters in 2012 was one of the most blatant violations of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that the news cooperative has ever encountered.

The Justice Department was trying to identify who leaked information for an AP story that revealed the foiling of a plot in Yemen to bomb a U.S.-bound airliner. It didn’t tell AP about its records seizure until a year after the story was published.

Pruitt said that action had consequences far beyond the U.S. — including Latin America, where journalists long have fought to exercise press freedoms under authoritarian regimes.

Pruitt spoke Saturday to the Inter American Press Association in Denver. The association promotes press freedom throughout the Americas.

 

The views and opinions expressed in this post are solely those of the author. These views and opinions do not represent those of the Post News Network and/or any/all contributors to this site

by  Alan Jilka, Businessman and former Mayor of Salina

“While we’ve been busy promoting democracy abroad our own has kind of gone off the rails at home.” – Thomas Pickering, retired U.S. diplomat

Individuals channel surfing late at night a couple months ago might have come across an interview with Thomas Pickering on PBS in which he uttered the above statement. His comments came back to me this past week while watching our federal government sit paralyzed with dysfunction.

Pickering has the experience and perspective to offer insightful commentary on the subject. During a long and distinguished career in the Foreign Service he served as U.S. Ambassador to Russia, India, Israel, El Salvador, Nigeria, Jordan and the United Nations. In addition to his native English he speaks fluent French, Spanish and Swahili, and is proficient in Arabic, Hebrew and Russian. In short, he has seen quite a bit of the rest of the world and has in-depth knowledge of how various peoples try to govern themselves around the globe.

During most of the interview he offered his thoughts on foreign policy – issues ranging from the Arab Spring to Syria and China. But for the final moments the interviewer brought him back home and asked a few questions regarding domestic policy. Pickering offered a few general comments before zeroing in on the partisan polarization that grips Congress, frequently grinding the business of governing to a halt.

A couple months later the problem to which he alluded is on display for all to see. Clearly the U.S. House is no longer the part of our government that reflects the popular will. Public opinion surveys at the beginning of this month consistently showed that over seventy percent of those polled opposed linking the Affordable Care Act to keeping the government open or to raising the debt ceiling. Even majorities of those opposed to the new health care law also opposed efforts to hold the government hostage to demands to defund it. Yet here we are in a place where few wanted to be.

Our partisan polarization has real consequences in the international sphere as well as fostering an attitude of cynicism among our own citizens. Ian Bremmer, President of the Eurasia Group, an international political consulting firm, wrote this past week that “American dysfunction at home is undermining our credibility abroad.” He singled out the fact that President Obama had to cancel a trip to an Asian summit to deal with the government crisis at home, effectively ceding the leadership position at the gathering to the ascendant Chinese. The group photo of leaders taken at the summit showed Chinese President Xi Jinping front and center with American Secretary of State John Kerry (not a head of state) in the back row.

So where do we start to get our government functioning again? Never mind whether one likes/dislikes President Obama or John Boehner. How do we address the systemic problems that lead to this inability to deal with critical issues facing us?

Pickering suggests a starting place – undoing the gerrymandering of congressional districts. Due to extreme gerrymandering the majority of congressional races nowadays are decided in primaries. Politicians respond by running towards the extremes. With so few members of the “people’s house” coming from competitive districts (only nineteen Republican congressmen, for example, come from districts won by President Obama in 2012), there is little reason to compromise. Competitive congressional districts would give members more incentive to compromise and appeal towards the political center where most of the populace lies.

We can only hope that the current crisis will give added impetus to efforts to “fix” flaws in our democratic system. The wisdom of retired public servants like Thomas Pickering can guide our efforts and help channel our anger and frustration in a positive direction. Hopefully our current quagmire will give impetus to movements to refine and perfect our country’s great experiment with democracy.

 

Food and agricultural experts from around the world gathered in Des Moines, Iowa this week for the 2013 Borlaug Dialogue hosted by the World Food Prize Foundation, in conjunction with World Food Day. During a Wednesday morning breakfast ceremony, Elanco President Jeff Simmons received the Council for Agricultural Science and Technology 2013 Borlaug CAST Communication Award, recognizing his vision in addressing the challenges of feeding the world’s growing population.
During the program, Simmons previewed his new white paper, “ENOUGH: – The Fight for a Food Secure Tomorrow.” Instead of focusing on the problem, Simmons is focused on the solutions.
He notes that as the world population grows to 9 billion by 2050, the global middle class will more than double in size, reaching nearly 5 billion by 2050. However, the fastest part of that growth will actually occur between now and 2020, meaning billions of people living better lives and demanding access to better diets, specifically meat, milk and eggs.
But when agriculture productivity lags, food gaps appear. Simmons cites the 2013 Global Protein Gap Analysis, conducted for the paper with validation from Informa Economics and Global AgriTrends. Today, on a global average, people have access to about a glass of milk, or dairy equivalent, per day, although the recommended intake is two glasses. And according to the report, by 2020 on our current productivity path, access will fall below one glass of milk each day on average, with more than 500 million falling short of one glass and 4.5 billion falling short of the two glasses a day our bodies really need for growth and cognitive development.
In addition the 2013 Global Protein Gap Analysis, the white paper will outline the results of these research projects:
International Consumer Foods Attitudes Study: 2nd edition Spring 2013.
Food Chain Decisions in a Social World: New Ways to Measure What the Consumer Wants.
Center for Food Integrity 2013 Hunger Solutions Survey.
Simmons says among potential solutions, experts, history and practical global execution prove the following three stand out as the most significant, that can have the most impact and can be acted upon the quickest.
Innovation. The products, practices and genetics that help farmers produce more food more sustainably – innovations that, in many cases, are already available and proven. Experts from scientists to economists say it’s the biggest part of the solution – 70 percent. We must enable innovation more than any time in our history. We must continue to raise the bar on safety, but regulatory bodies that approve innovations must be the ultimate authority. We also can’t allow fringe movements or non-factual information to turn into wrong policies and/or marketplace confusion that ultimately takes away proven solutions.
Choice. Farmers need to be able to choose the right practices for their operations. Consumers need to be able to choose food that fits their price, taste and nutritional needs. And we need regulators and policy makers to make science-based policy choices. Choice must not be taken away without a fact-based, legitimate reason from science-based regulators.
Trade. Trade is the mechanism that allows us to produce food where it’s more economical and sustainable and deliver it to people who need it. Pure economics and the environment prove that food must move from the most to the least productive areas for a food secure tomorrow. Politics need to be reduced while trade needs to increase in parallel with local advances in food production.
Simmons stresses that Food security is solvable. We have a window of opportunity to meet the challenge, he says, and a healthier, more sustainable, more peaceful world is possible.—  John Maday, Managing Editor, Drovers CattleNetwork

(AP) The bipartisan compromise on Wednesday to avoid a financial default and end a 16-day partial government shutdown cast a spotlight on Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas and Mike Lee of Utah.

The two lawmakers had precipitated the crises with their demand that President Barack Obama gut his 3-year-old health care law.

Senate Republicans warned the two about their quixotic move, but they’re taking little pleasure in saying ‘I-told-you-so.’

The final deal hardly nicked the health care law while the shutdown and near default left the GOP reeling.

Cruz and Lee are being wildly cheered by outside conservative groups that have made money on the months-long dispute.

The far right flank is hailing Cruz and Lee for what they’re calling a principled and courageous stand.

By John Schlageck, Kansas Farm Bureau

U.S. agriculture depends on world trade for its continued viability. More than $141 billion in agricultural goods were exported last year.

Still U.S. port facilities and waterway infrastructures are decades behind international competitors due to lack of funding.

“Three things continue to obstruct U.S. agricultural exports that could be delivered to all regions of the world, especially the rapidly growing Asian markets,” says Steve Baccus, an Ottawa County grain farmer who serves as Kansas Farm Bureau president. “This includes too many rules, regulations and a lack of investment in export facilities by Washington; the lack of cooperation between countries pertaining to international trade and regulations and trade requirements imposed by individual countries on one another.”

During the last two years Baccus has served as chair of the American Farm Bureau Federation’s trade advisory committee. Throughout this time, this committee has, traveled to countries, port facilities and waterways around the world to identify the many impediments to U.S. exports. During these travels they’ve also visited with food producers and seen crops first hand.

Illustrating his point about the need to upgrade and improve U.S. port infrastructures, Baccus used the example of Singapore, the largest port in the world. This facility was built by its government and one private businessman.

“In Singapore the cranes load and unload ships with one individual sitting in a computer booth two miles away,” Baccus said. “No union labor, no union guy crawling up and operating each (individual) crane each shift, each day.”

Yet, in this port facility half way around the world, a loaded ship leaves the port of Singapore every 12 minutes, Baccus said. A loaded ship leaves a U.S. port every one and one-half hours.

The same businessman who helped build the Singapore port is looking at building a similar port in Tijuana, Mexico.

If this investor has the resources to build the port in Singapore, he probably has the resources to build in Tijuana, Baccus said. If he has the resources to build these ports, he has the resources to build the infrastructure to move the goods from Tijuana to the U.S. border.

“What happens to West Coast ports if he builds a port like Singapore in Tijuana?” Baccus asks. “He’ll cause major problems all along the West Coast.”

And if this potential nightmare with Mexico isn’t enough, Baccus witnessed another real challenge facing the United States and its agricultural exports.

During a recent trip to the Pacific Northwest, the Ottawa County grain farmer visited with several California fruit and vegetables growers. These food producers don’t have enough labor to harvest their valuable crops.

“We talked to a producer who grows string beans and garlic,” Baccus said. “He didn’t have enough labor to harvest both fields so he had to choose between the crops. This grower decided to mow down his string beans so he would have the labor to harvest his garlic. These beans cost him between $2,000-3,000 an acre to plant.”

Another California grower was forced to leave 20 acres of vegetables in the field to rot, Baccus said. This crop could have yielded him nearly $8 million.

In California and other parts of this country agricultural producers are shifting to different crops that can be harvested by machines because they cannot find available labor.

“Farmers can’t find the labor from south of our border to pick crops that must be harvested by hand,” Baccus said. “Americans won’t do this work. Farmers in California have tried. They work for an hour or two and quit.”

There are legal immigrants who are accustomed to working for $2.50 a day in Mexico who want to come to the United States, he continued. They’ll work for $10, $12 or $15 an hour and send their money back to Mexico to support their families.

They’re not interested in staying here, Baccus said. Most don’t want to be U.S citizens. They’re willing to pay taxes. They want to be legal immigrants. They’re willing to do whatever it takes to work here.

“It’s a real shame we cannot design an immigration program to fix this situation,” Baccus said. “If we don’t get this job done and our U.S. Congress fails, we’re going to see all the fruit and vegetables grown south of the border.”

If that happens what could happen to food safety and the safeguards ensured by our highly regulated food industry?

How much control will this country have with the food produced in Mexico?

Zero?
John Schlageck is a leading commentator on agriculture and rural Kansas. Born and raised on a diversified farm in northwestern Kansas, his writing reflects a lifetime of experience, knowledge and passion.

Library Events October 14-19

CHILDREN AND YOUNG ADULT (YA) PROGRAM

Monday, Oct.14

10:00 AM Storytime

11:00 AM Storytime

4:00 PM Movie Mondays

4:00-4:40 PM Bal-A-Vis-X (Preregister at www.hayspublib.org or 785-625-5916)

6:30 PM Storytime

Tuesday, Oct. 15

10:00 AM Storytime

11:00 AM Storytime

3:30 PM Video Game League (YA)

4:00 PM Whoa Did you See That? Science Experiments.

Wednesday, Oct. 16

10:00 AM Storytime

10:00 AM Hora De Leer en Espanol

10:45 AM Lapsit

3:30 PM Wavering Wednesdays (YA)

4:00 PM Mini Mites

4:00 – 4:40 PM Bal-A-Vis-X (preregister at www.hayspublib.org or 785-625-591)

Thursday, Oct. 17

10:00 AM Storytime

11:00 AM Digital Storytime

3:30 PM Make-n-Take (YA)

4:00 PM Kids in the Kitchen: “Scrumptious Spiders”

Friday, Oct. 18

10:00 AM Cre-8-tive Moments: New York, New York

4:00 PM Chess Club

Saturday, Oct. 19

10:00 AM Lego Club

ADULT PROGRAMS AND EVENTS
Tuesday, Oct. 15

6:00 PM Budgeting Workshop
6:00 PM Line Dancing Lesson III

Wednesday, Oct. 16

12:00 PM Feed and Film
6:30 PM Tea & Trouble: A Cozy Mystery Book Club *Author Duffy Brown Speaking via Skype*

Thursday, Oct. 17

6:00 PM Creative Writing Group *Open Mic Night*
6:00 PM Computer Class

Friday, Oct. 18
7:00 PM Haunted Heartland

Saturday, Oct. 19
5:00 PM Trivia Night