Breaking News: Senate Passes Farm Bill

Wilmer Stoneman
Associate Director
Governmental Relations

Many thought the odds were against it, but the farm bill has made it over a major hurdle. Senators approved their version of the bill (S. 3240) in a strong bipartisan vote of 64 to 35.

But this is just the first step. We still have a lot of concerns that need to be addressed as the farm bill moves forward. The House Agriculture Committee announced earlier this week that it was postponing its consideration of a farm bill draft until July 11. The committee was originally slated to take the legislation up next week.

American Farm Bureau Federation President Bob Stallman said this yesterday: “There is still a lot of hard work ahead to fully secure the kind of policy we believe our farm and ranch families need, but we applaud the Senate for approving a workable bill and moving this process forward. The Senate has provided us solid footing by approving a bill that stands firm on $23 billion in savings, yet protects and strengthens the federal crop insurance program and provides a commodity title that attempts to encourage producers to follow market signals rather than make planting decisions in anticipation of government payments."

 In votes taken Wednesday, Farm Bureau was successful in: opposing an amendment that would have prohibited any program to promote and provide research and information for a particular agricultural commodity without reference to specific producers or brands (a check-off program) from being mandatory or compulsory; opposing an amendment that would have eliminated the $4 billion cut to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) program and added $50 million annually to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program from the current $150 million authorization; opposing an amendment that would have imposed a $250,000 Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) means test for all programs in the farm bill, including conservation; and opposing an amendment that would have reduced loan rates and eliminated other changes to the sugar program made in the 2008 farm bill.

Farm Bureau was not successful in efforts: to oppose an amendment requiring conservation compliance as a requisite for crop insurance; and to oppose an amendment establishing payment limits for marketing loans and loan deficiency payments at $75,000 a year for individual farmers and $100,000 a year for couples. 

Farm Bureau's position was also unsuccessful when an alternative amendment passed that would limit crop insurance premium subsidies to any person with an adjusted gross income exceeding $750,000. AFBF had supported a related unsuccessful amendment that called for a study of such an eligibility requirement and to disallow the action if it carried negative ramifications for the cost, availability or administration of the crop insurance program.

Child Labor Update: Know the Facts

Wilmer Stoneman, Associate Director
VFB Govermental Relations

With the introduction of legislation designed to block implementation of the Department of Labor’s (DOL) proposed child labor regulations, press coverage of the issue – both positive and negative – has increased.  Some articles critical of the effort to block the DOL proposal contain inaccuracies and misstatements.  One recent instance occurred  in which Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) was criticized for supporting AFBF’s position.

It's important to remember the facts when you come across one of these articles.

America’s farm and ranch families place a high priority on assuring that everyone who works on our farms and ranches, especially young people, are protected by appropriate safety measures. There is no doubt that the Department of Labor’s proposed rules regarding child labor will have a direct negative impact on our families and our farms and ranches.

Clearly, Congress intended there to be a parental exemption regarding the jobs they ask their children to carry out on the farm. It is clear that DOL has the authority to draft regulations relating to agricultural child labor that restrict youth 16 and under from performing tasks that are “particularly hazardous.” These regulations, known as hazardous occupation (HO) orders, are issued under the Fair Labor Standards Act and stipulate what tasks a youth may not perform on a farm. The law, however, also clearly states that a youth working for a parent or person standing in the place of the parent may perform any task.

The parental exemption has been violated. DOL has traditionally interpreted this parental exemption to include all farms substantially owned by the parent or guardian. Last September, however, DOL proposed to change that traditional interpretation, limiting the parental exemption only to farms “wholly-owned” by a parent or person standing in the place of a parent. This proposed interpretation meant that a brother and sister who jointly owned a farm themselves through a partnership or limited liability corporation would no longer be allowed to hire their nieces, nephews or grandchildren to help work on the farm. Such a proposed interpretation significantly restricted the statutory exemption. It was only after an outpouring of critical comments – numbering nearly 10,000 – from interested individuals and members of Congress that DOL announced it would re-propose the parental exemption portion of the rule; however, it is unclear what the new proposal will include or when it will be announced.

Wilmer Stoneman: Sunday hunting poised to be a hot topic in the General Assembly

Hello, everyone! My name is Wilmer Stoneman, and one of the issues I cover for Farm Bureau is game laws.

With the first day of the 2012 General Assembly behind us, there are already rumblings of several bills to be introduced regarding Sunday hunting. It's too early to tell any specific details, but the Farm Bureau Governmental Relations team is monitoring the situation and will send any updates through the Capitol Connections Action Center. So please keep an eye on your e-mail!

Historically Farm Bureau, through our grassroots policy process, holds the position: “We oppose hunting on Sunday.” Representatives of a vast majority of our farmer members have annually discussed and voted for such a position since 1993. In the discussions, our members cite faith-based beliefs, as well as the ability of horse owners and riders and landowners to use the outdoors one day a week without worry from hunters.

Below are some questions that frequently get asked regarding Sunday hunting. It's important to remember these points as we move forward in the General Assembly.