House Committee on Agriculture Chairman K. Michael Conaway (TX-11) and Conservation and Forestry Subcommittee Chairman Glenn ‘GT’ Thompson (PA-5) released the following statement in response to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Army Corps of Engineers final “waters of the United States” (WOTUS) rule. This rule further obscures the original intent of the Clean Water Act (CWA) by significantly expanding waters subject to federal jurisdiction.
Agriculture Groups Still Publicly Oppose Cap & Trade Bill
Tamara Hinton (202) 225-0184
WASHINGTON – The number of agriculture and food groups opposed to the Waxman-Markey bill (H.R. 2454) has grown to 120. Not a single one of these groups has changed its position to support the bill despite an amendment from Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-MN) that is included in the bill. Here are excerpts of statements from groups commenting after the inclusion of the Peterson amendment.
“The American Farm Bureau strongly opposes this bill and urges all members to vote ‘No’ on final passage. Congress is on the threshold of debating a program that will unquestionably impose enormous costs on the American economy, including agriculture.”
– Bob Stallman, President, AFBF
“Many pork producers now are at risk of being put out of business, and passage of this climate change bill would only make that risk greater and put more producers in jeopardy…. The organization doesn’t believe that revenues from the sale of offset credits for the majority of pork producers would counterbalance the energy and input cost increases associated with bill.”
– Statement from National Pork Producers Council
“Our industry cannot support legislation that would have the sole effect of driving up our production and processing costs resulting in a competitive disadvantage while providing little, if any, opportunity to make up for the added costs by participating in an agriculture offset program. Therefore, on behalf of the U.S. rice industry, we ask that you oppose H.R. 2454 when it comes before the House for a vote.”
– Statement from USA Rice Federation
“Our members remain very concerned, however, about the effects the overall climate bill could have on their costs of fuel, electricity, feed, fertilizer, equipment and other inputs necessary to maintain a cattle operation, as well as the costs of potential future regulation.”
– Gary Voogt, President, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association
“Climate change legislation will have significant direct and indirect impacts on the nation’s supply chain of food and beverage providers, and, in turn, profound impacts on the food security of our nation. Legislative approaches must be carefully crafted not only to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, but also to avoid adverse impacts on food prices and food accessibility…. Unfortunately, H.R. 2454 in its current form fails to resolve these issues.”
– Statement from American Feed Industry Association, American Meat Institute, National Chicken Council, National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, National Grain and Feed Association, National Meat Association, National Oilseed Processors Association, National Turkey Federation, North American Millers Association