Welcome Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack

On Jan. 20, President-elect Barack Obama and Vice President-elect Joe Biden will be sworn into office along with the new cabinet Obama has chosen. Among the new cabinet members is Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack.

He will have the responsibility of developing federal policy on farming, agriculture, food and food safety. It will also be his duty to re-examine the nation’s biofuel policy.

Vilsack’s political career started in 1987 when he ran for mayor in Mount Pleasant, Iowa and served three terms. Vilsack was elected to the state Senate in 1992 and re-elected in 1994. He made his mark shaping tax-cut and economic-development legislation for the Democratic majority.

In 1998, Vilsack was elected Iowa’s governor, the first Democrat to win in 32 years. He won the election with strong support from organized labor and called his win a "victory for Iowa’s working- and middle-class families." He promised to focus on education, health care, the environment, a fair tax system, property-tax relief and keeping young people in Iowa. In 2008, he briefly ran for the Democratic presidential nomination, but ended his bid and endorsed Sen. Hillary Clinton.

Vilsack was orphaned at birth and raised by a Pittsburgh family. He received a Bachelor's degree from Hamilton College in New York and received a J.D. from Albany Law School.

Numerous farm groups and lawyers approve of Obama’s decision to appoint Vilsack. Democrats and Republicans alike believe his experience as Iowa governor will be to the nation’s advantage.

“His nomination is a positive thing for the state of Iowa and agriculture in general,” said Iowa state Rep. David Tjepkes, R-Gowie. “He has valuable experience with renewable energy, conservation and rural development programs.”

“He has a good basic foundation in farm issues,” said Iowa state Rep. Dolores Mertz, D-Ottosen. “He’ll have a solid working relationship with U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin, the Iowa Democrat who is chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee.”

Environmentalists also support Obama’s choice.

“We’re encouraged by it,” said Ken Cook, president of the Environmental Working Group. “He thinks we need to reform the subsidy system, recognizes the importance of the food programs and he’s very good on conservation.”

Commodity and agriculture analysts believe that Vilsack will have to act fast on unimplemented farm subsidies and lower crop prices, as well as manage controversies over trade, food safety and animal welfare. Vilsack has talked about reducing subsidies to some megafarms, supports better treatment of farm animals and wants healthier food in schools.

However, Obama’s choice is not appealing to all. He received some criticism because Vilsack supports alternative fuels like corn-based ethanol and biotechnology, which are disliked by people who want to shift government support from large-scale agricultural interests to smaller farms.

Obama says that Vilsack’s experience as governor of a rural state makes him well qualified.

“As fiercely protective of family farmers and the farm economy as he has been, he’s also been forward looking on rural development and renewable energy,” said Obama.

What do you think of Obama’s Secretary of Agriculture choice? Please comment below.

Barack Obama is the next president: What does this mean for rural America?

Barack Obama has been elected president and rural America has spoken. Agricultural groups have congratulated the president-elect on his win and already laid out suggestions for his agricultural plan.

American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) President Bob Stallman released a statement congratulating President-elect Obama and his thoughts regarding his campaign.

“Farmers and ranchers, like all Americans, have a list of issues that they expect the administration and Congress will address,” said Stallman.

He said the Farm Bureau’s issues include the economy, energy, immigration, trade, implementation of the Farm Bill and many others.

“We know there are many points of view on these issues, but we also know that our elected leaders have one thing in common: Each person elected to office ran for office to improve this country. We look forward to working with the new administration and Congress to create those opportunities that will improve agriculture and rural America,” said Stallman.

National Farmers Union (NFU) President Tom Buis listed other challenges that face rural America.

“Agriculture faces many problems, including a worldwide recession that is hurting commodity prices, the need for regulatory reform that includes greater regulation of speculators in commodity futures market and more development of biofuels and green energy sources that will bring economic development to farms and rural areas,” said Buis.

Buis said the country is going to have a president who does want to work with rural America on these issues. And because Obama supported the Farm Bill, he said he believes that the U.S. Department of Agriculture will implement the new law in the way intended by Congress.

Buis also said he’s relying on other farm groups “to organize an agricultural summit to look at ways to counter falling farm income.”

National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) President Andy Groseta laid out his own concerns.

“In the coming years, ranchers, farmers and rural Americans will be significantly impacted by tax policies, environmental regulations, international trade, renewable fuel subsidies, food safety and nutrition,” Groseta said. “NCBA worked closely with the Obama campaign on each of these concerns, and we have been assured a seat at the table when decisions are made regarding these and other issues of importance to America’s cattlemen and women.”

The National Corn Growers Association sent a similar message congratulating President-elect Obama and Vice President-elect Joe Biden and addressing its issues.

“We have appreciated Sen. Obama’s leadership on issues ranging from strong safety-net programs within the Farm Bill to the promotion of corn-based ethanol as an important source of domestic energy,” said NCGA President Bob Dickey.

NCGA’s main concerns are renewable fuels, trade and the implementation of the Farm Bill.

It seems that Obama will have a lot of different organizations to work with to help improve rural America. Which issues do you believe are the most important for America’s farmers? Please comment below.

Election 2008: Who will be the next president?

It’s crunch time with only one day until the election, and both candidates have been spending significant time in crucial battleground states.

In the 10 days from Oct. 18-28, John McCain, Barack Obama and their running mates have been to the key swing states more than once. The top three states visited were Pennsylvania (10 visits), Florida (10) and Ohio (7). Followed by Colorado with six visits and North Carolina and Virginia with five visits. States with four visits or less were Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, Indiana and Iowa.

According to RealClearPoltics.com, Florida, North Carolina, Missouri, Indiana and Montana are the top five states still up for grabs. Ohio, which has voted Republican in the past two presidential elections and is widely considered the most vital battleground state, is leaning toward Obama.

In the most recent Gallup Poll (Oct. 23-26), voters were asked, “Regardless of whom you support, and trying to be as objective as possible, who do you think will win the presidential election in November?” Seven in 10 Americans expect Obama to win. Since June, the percentage of those who said they think Obama will win has grown from 42 percent to 51 percent. Forty-nine percent of McCain supporters say that Obama will win as well. And as expected, 94 percent of Obama supporters think Obama will win. (For more information on the Gallup Polls, please visit www.gallup.com.)

With three of the battleground states being Ohio, Missouri and Indiana, the rural vote may just be more important this year than any other year. Along with those states and Iowa, the agriculture impact may determine who wins the election.

The economic impact among these battleground states alone is vast. For example, the market value of agriculture production for Iowa is $12.3 billion, which ranks third in the U.S. The market value for Ohio is $4.3 billion. One in 6 people in Ohio have an agriculture-related job, which includes wholesaling and retailing, farm production and marketing and processing. Ohio has 75,700 farms, averaging 186 acres in size per farm.

Over 90 percent of Iowa’s land is devoted to agriculture. It has 88,400 farms, the average farm size is 356 acres and Iowa agriculture employs 500,000 people.

Agriculture is more than just farming. It is a gigantic industry that includes a variety of businesses such as manufacturers, retailers, dealers and service providers. The four states mentioned above are vital to the nation’s agriculture industry.

Regardless of who you support and trying to be as objective as possible, who do you think will win the presidential election in November? Election day is tomorrow. Don’t forget to be an educated voter.

McCain’s, Obama’s support for the American farmer: Sincere or not?

Presidential hopefuls John McCain and Barack Obama are exhibiting their support for the American farmer. In July, both candidates spoke to the American Farm Bureau Federation’s Council of Presidents. Since then, focus has turned to two major issues – energy and trade – and how these issues will affect agriculture.

McCain supports trade agreements that will open markets to U.S. agriculture and lower trade barriers, decrease trade-distorting subsidies and stabilize an affordable food supply for all. He says he would form America's farm policies in favor of small farmers and rural communities. McCain wants the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to be more involved by conducting research designed to increase the production of drought-resistant, high-yield crops. He also promises to support conservation programs that encourage environmental stewardship on America’s farmlands.

Obama wants to break down trade and investment barriers to maintain American farmers' competitive presence around the world. He would promote programs that help producers develop global marketing networks. He also wants to make sure all trade agreements contain strong and enforceable labor, environmental and safety standards. And, he wants to involve the USDA and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to be able to issue and enforce recalls of contaminated food. He hopes to improve food-safety efforts by doing so. Obama has pledged to support conservation projects and industries that produce new value-added agricultural products.

Both McCain and Obama have laid out extensive agricultural plans, but Brad Lubben, a public policy specialist in the department of agricultural economics at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, says neither of the candidates have a strong agricultural background.

“The key will be whom the candidates choose to advise them on the issues,” he said.

Agricultural organizations such as the Nebraska Farmers Union Political Action Committee (NFUPAC) have endorsed the Democratic presidential candidate. According to NFUPAC President Gale Lush of Wilcox, the endorsement was based on the candidates’ voting record and their positions on economic issues that impact family farmers, ranchers and rural communities. Other key issues that determined their support include farm programs, renewable energy, rural development, market competition, fair trade and rural health care.

Other agricultural organizations, such as the California Farm Bureau and AgriPac, Michigan Farm Bureau’s (MFB) political action committee, have endorsed McCain. AgriPac’s endorsement was based on the candidates’ qualifications and how their policies would benefit the state and nation’s agriculture industries as a whole. AgriPac Chairman Andrew Hagenow acknowledged that McCain doesn’t agree with MFB on all its organizational policies, but “feels that he possesses the necessary leadership to steer the country on a path toward continued success, growth and prosperity in the agricultural sector.”

McCain’s opposition to ethanol subsidies may hurt his chance to win this election. States such as Iowa and Nebraska have historically sided with the Republican candidate, but these states are huge supporters of ethanol. There’s a probable chance that Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas will still vote Republican as many cattle ranchers in these states are heavily affected by the rise in corn prices, despite its near-50 percent decrease since June.

Not everyone believes that the candidates’ agriculture policy will be in the farmers’ favor. Chuck Hassebrook, executive director of the Center for Rural Affairs (CRA), believes that regardless of the candidates’ position on agricultural issues, policies in Washington won’t change.

“Historically, policies have supported mega-farms that drive family farms out of business and fail to invest in creating a genuine opportunity for rural people and a future for their communities,” he said.

John Crabtree, media relations officer for the CRA doesn’t think that either candidate has shown sincere concern for rural America. He believes it’s more than just picking a side.

“It’s one thing to say you oppose or support the farm bill, but neither candidate has bothered to address the various issues within the Farm Bill that affect rural communities,” he said.

“Neither party has demonstrated a real commitment to ensuring that rural people – who contribute so much to the nation’s prosperity – share in it,” Hassebrook added. “Neither party seems to understand that America will never be as strong as it can be until all of America has the opportunity to share in building wealth, assets and prosperity.”

Do you feel that the candidates’ efforts toward improving and helping the American farmer are sincere? Or do you think they’re just trying to win votes? Let me know what you think.

Who’s contributing to the candidates and how does this affect their policies?

What factors are influencing the way the candidates form their policies? Are their decisions based on past administrations? Or could these policies be what the American people want? Do advisors or lobbyists help form the candidates’ plans?

All these reasons may be important, but they are not the only factors that define the candidates’ policies. Donations from key industries are significant elements. Sen. John McCain and Sen. Barack Obama, like most modern presidential candidates, rely heavily on contributions to fund their campaigns and get their respective messages out there. Key contributors include the oil & gas industries, the coal-mining industry, green efforts/environmentalists and the agribusiness industry.

Agribusiness
The agribusiness sector includes crop producers, livestock ranchers, meat processors, the poultry and egg industry, dairy farmers, timber companies, tobacco companies, food products manufacturers, food stores and veterinarians. Though most contributions in this industry go to the Republican Party, sugar growers give more to Democrats, which other industries may eventually do if they wish to find allies in the new Democratic Congress. This year, the agribusiness industry has given $2,398,839 to McCain and $1,263,755 to Obama. Some of the contributors include American Crystal Sugar, Farm Credit Council and Reynolds American. According to OpenSecrets.org, this industry will pay close attention to reform topics related to strengthening disaster relief programs and increasing U.S. involvement in global food markets.

Oil and Gas
Obama and McCain are both receiving hefty contributions from companies in the oil & gas industry. McCain has received three times more than Obama. Whereas Obama beat McCain in contributions from companies like Exxon and BP, McCain has received more from companies like Koch Industries, Valero, Marathon Oil, Occidental Petroleum, Conoco Phillips and Hess Corp. As of Oct. 19, McCain has received $2,028,275 from the oil & gas industry this year, while Obama has received only $523,133, according to figures that were released by the Federal Election Commission and that appeared on OpenSecrets.org.

Coal Mining
As McCain and Obama have both committed to advancing clean-coal technology, they are showing support from the coal-mining industry. McCain is again receiving more from this industry than Obama at $75,596, while Obama has received just $12,900. Though his running mate has said differently, Obama knows that the coal issue swings voters and has released many ads to show that he supports clean-coal technologies. McCain is doing other things to show that he supports clean-coal technologies, including visiting one of the country’s largest coal producers, Consol, and touring its research and development campus located in Pittsburgh.

Green Efforts
The candidates are also paying close attention to the alternative energy industry, which includes wind, solar power, crop-based ethanol and other biofuels as their importance is significantly increasing. While McCain has received the majority of contributions from the other industries, Obama enjoys 73 percent of all alternative energy contributions. This industry has given him a total of $90,557. The top contributor in the industry is National Biofuels, which has given a total of $160,400 to Democrats. Environmental groups are also making donations, hoping to affect energy and agricultural legislation. Environmentalists have given $201,050 to Obama and $38,925 to McCain. The Environmental Defense Fund and Defenders of Wildlife spent the most in lobbying efforts, while the Sierra Club donates directly to issue ads rather than siding with a political party or candidate.

As you can see, financial contributions play a major role in elections, but it’s still unknown how much they will affect policy making. How do you think these contributions are affecting the candidates’ policies? Would an industry’s support sway your vote? What do you think? Please comment below.

Obama, McCain: Who will win the rural vote?

With the election four short weeks away, Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. John McCain are focusing heavily on rural America to win this election. And they’ll need it. According to the National Rural Assembly, 60 million people live in rural areas.

Rural
Obama says he wants to make sure that family farmers have fair access to markets, control over their production decisions and fair prices for their goods. He says farm programs are designed to help family farmers instead of corporations. Obama also says he wants to encourage organic agriculture and would like to see more young people become farmers. He plans to provide tax incentives to make it easier for new farmers to afford their first farm.

McCain wants to provide sustainable, market-driven risk management for America’s farmers to reflect the outcomes of the global marketplace. He claims this system would eliminate the influence of special interests on American agricultural policy. He argues this agricultural plan will meet America’s need in food, fiber, feed and energy. Technology will help to reach these needs. McCain is heavily pushing the continuation of positioning America as the leader in agriculture technology.

Both candidates want to provide jobs, education and health care for people in remote locations.

Energy
Obama said in the Oct. 7 debate that he plans to invest $150 billion a year over a 10-year period to free the United States from its dependence on foreign oil. He claims this plan will improve the bio-fuels and fuel infrastructure, accelerate the commercialization of plug-in hybrids, promote development of commercial-scale renewable energy, invest in low-emission coal plants and begin the transition to a new digital electricity grid. He also plans to execute an economy-wide cap-and-trade program suggested by scientists to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

According to McCain’s Web site, he has proposed a $300 million award for “the development of a battery package that has the size, capacity, cost and power to leapfrog the number of commercially available plug-in hybrids or electric cars.” He supports the increased use of alternative energy sources like wind, solar and natural gas. McCain’s plan also focuses on increasing the number of nuclear power plants in the United States. He wants to construct 45 new nuclear power plants by 2030.

Both candidates focus on advancing technology and green jobs. Obama plans to create an energy-focused Green Job Corps to help disadvantaged youth gain the job skills they need. Obama also wants to create a Clean Technologies Venture Capital Fund to bridge the gap in U.S. technology development. He would make a $10 billion investment per year for five years. They both also want to advance clean-coal technology. McCain plans to spend $2 billion annually to help the science, research and development to improve this technology. By doing so, he claims he will restore the jobs lost and create new ones in the coal industry.

Dee Davis, president of the Kentucky-based Center for Rural Strategies, says whoever wins the rural vote will win the presidency. At this point, it’s still hard to tell who is leading with the polls continually changing. The rural population is still torn between the two candidates. Many people living in rural communities approve of McCain’s choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate because of her understanding of agricultural issues. However, Sen. Joe Biden has repeatedly shown his support for America’s farmers as well. He supported the farm bill and has fought to maintain a competitive marketplace at home for America’s farmers.

Let’s hear your thoughts. Which candidate do you think has a better plan for developing and assisting rural communities?

Election 2008: Energy and Agriculture

With the hot-button issues of fuel, energy and food at the forefront of national and world debate, there is no question that rural America will have a huge impact on the outcome of the 2008 presidential election.

John McCain and Barack Obama both seem to realize how important the topics of agriculture and energy are to their success.

While on the campaign trail, both have agreed the United States must take steps to reduce our dependency on foreign oil, develop new technology and invest in renewable energy. The candidates understand the importance of ethanol, clean coal, lower consumer costs and a strong economy, but each has approached these goals in very different ways.

The biggest difference between the candidates’ plans are their views on the subsidization of corn-based ethanol and ethanol import tariffs.

According to a June 23 article in The New York Times, McCain strongly opposes continuing these multibillion-dollar annual payments and supports the removal of the 54-cent-a-gallon tariff on highly efficient sugar-cane ethanol. In a speech at Fresno State University in June, McCain cited the “unintended consequences” of global price distortion, high costs to consumers and a desire to “level the playing field” for all ethanol types as the reasons for his stance.

Other key components of McCain’s plan include uniform incentives for the purchase and development of flex-fuel vehicles, new nuclear power facilities, offshore drilling expansion and a $300 million prize for the development of a car battery that would jump-start the market for hybrids and plug-ins.

Obama is placing his bet on U.S. ethanol production and the continuation of subsidies and the ethanol tariff. According to his Web site, he will push for increased ethanol production and funding and research for new cellulosic ethanol development, which he believes is the future of the fuel market. Obama does not support offshore drilling or new nuclear power plants.

Obama presented his energy plan in a speech in New Hampshire in October of last year. He outlined additional portions of his proposed policy, including a focus on increasing regulations for power plants, capping carbon emissions, a $150 billion investment in clean energy development and an immediate push to phase out incandescent light bulbs.

While these two camps continue their battle for the White House, we are left to ponder the impact of their plans. Balancing our empty pockets and our desire for a healthy America will make this a tough decision. For now, the question remains: Who will be the best candidate for the American farmer?