POLICY

Rooted in Resilience: The Non-Traditional Journey of Swine Veterinarian Dr. Anna Forseth

Fri, 24 Apr 2026 20:27:35 GMT

Dr. Anna Forseth didn’t just follow a path; she carved one. While many people associate Montana with Yellowstone and cattle, Forseth grew up with a much different perspective.

The daughter of two successful pork producers, Bruce and Marie Samson, her family operated Samson Family Farm, a 300-sow, farrow-to-finish confinement hog farm in the southwest part of the state. They marketed about 5,500 pigs a year to packing plants in Twin Falls, Idaho, and Modesto, Calif.

She and her five siblings grew up with a deep appreciation for the family farm, 4-H and the great outdoors. So, how did this Montana native find herself serving 60,000 U.S. pork producers as the director of animal health for the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC)?

A Non-Traditional Journey to National Policy

“Nothing about my path is traditional,” Forseth points out.

While attending Montana State University, she interned with the National Pork Board. During that time, she worked with the science and technology team where she was exposed to a unique way of serving the industry as a veterinarian. She then went to Colorado State University for veterinary school.

“My husband Rocky and I got married during my fourth year of vet school, or should I say ‘our’ fourth year of vet school,” Forseth laughs. “That’s not because he is a vet, but because it’s hard to leave vet school at school. I brought a lot of it home and he was right there in the trenches with me. In fact, my parents gave me a beautiful saddle when I graduated from vet school, but they also gave him one because they thought he deserved one, too.”

Anna Forseth met her husband, Rocky, in an undergrad beef management class. He came from a long line of cattlemen and cattlewomen, and she hailed from Gallatin County, drove a Subaru, and much preferred the pig barn at the county fair over the steer barn. “How this worked is still a mystery to some, but it created quite a team,” she says.

(Anna Forseth)

As a new veterinarian, she went to work for the Swine Medicine Education Center at Iowa State University. She also spent some time working with Smithfield before being hired by the Montana State Veterinarian’s Office in 2018.

Heading back west was important to the young couple who wanted to be closer to family. In 2022, the opportunity to work for NPPC allowed her a unique opportunity as the director of animal health for America’s pig farmers.

Although her roles have changed over the years, her focus has remained the same.

“When I thought about visiting a farm, it was about helping the pigs so that I could help the producer,” Forseth says. “What could I do for the producer that they couldn’t do for themselves? I would often, by default, be helping the pigs, but my focus is always on the producer.”

A Voice for the Producer

Although she no longer sees pigs on a daily basis, she talks to farmers often about their pigs. She points out that her role allows her to help farmers in a way that they can’t do for themselves because they are busy caring for their pigs and raising a protein that so many people in the world rely on.

“I am the bridge between policy and the producer,” Forseth says. “I’m not necropsying pigs and submitting samples to the diagnostic lab anymore, but I’m representing the industry domestically and internationally. I’m so proud to be doing that on their behalf.”

When she started in 2022, almost all of her time was spent on preparedness and response planning for African swine fever, post detection of ASF in the Dominican Republic. She continues to spend time on ASF response planning, though the diseases of focus have expanded since she began working for NPPC. Lately, she’s been engaged in foot-and-mouth disease, highly pathogenic avian influenza and New World screwworm planning.

“I think foot-and-mouth disease scares me the most because of its potential impact on multiple species,” she says. “Even if the swine industry were to manage the disease, we would be dependent on other domestic species’ ability to manage it. Remember that particular virus affects cloven-hooved animals, to include wild cervids and feral swine.”

During Forseth’s time at NPPC, annual funding for the National Animal Disease Preparedness and Response Plan (NADPRP) has surged from $18 million to $70 million. She currently serves on the NADPRP advisory board, ensuring these historic resources are strategically deployed to protect producers through enhanced state engagement and emergency readiness.

NPPC has also secured other legislative and funding victories, including the passage of the Beagle Brigade Act and the transition of the US SHIP program to the USDA. Central to these efforts is the “three-legged stool” of animal health—funding the national laboratory network, the vaccine bank, and the veterinary stockpile.

Rooted in Resilience

When she’s not working on behalf of pig farmers, Forseth keeps busy supporting her husband on their registered SimAngus cattle ranch and caring for their two young kids.

“It’s one big, but fun, balancing act,” she says. “I enjoy everything I’m doing, from being a mom to being a rancher’s wife to being a veterinarian for NPPC. I’m thankful for the example I had with my mom, who raised six kids and supported the farm. When work needed to be done and someone needed to step up, that someone was always her. While she was balancing all of our lives, I was watching and learning.”

Forseth is quick to point out that she learned a lot from her dad, too. He passed away in 2023 after a courageous battle with multiple myeloma.

“I will always remember him as a fighter, even before his cancer diagnosis, but certainly after,” Forseth says. “Despite pain and his prognosis, he stayed optimistic and focused on others.”

She vividly remembers the day she found out that he had cancer during a routine morning drive to a histology lab in vet school.

“I cried so hard on my way to school that I gave myself a bloody nose,” she says. “I got myself into class and sat down in front of the microscope. I hadn’t looked at the schedule for the day. To my surprise, we were looking at cancer cells – that was salt in the wound for me that morning. After class, I asked the professor to tell me what she knew about multiple myeloma.”

When she got back to her car, she called her dad and told him she was going to take the rest of the day off because she didn’t feel like sitting in a lecture hall in light of the news he just shared.

“He asked, ‘Why in the world would you do that?’” Forseth says. “He tried to perk me up by telling me about all the great advances. He just kept talking about the science and how cool it was. I loved that so much – it was never about him, even on his hardest days, it was always about somebody else.”

Unique Times Call for Unique Leadership

Forseth gets her passion for putting others first from her dad. It fuels her decisions every day as she strives to represent U.S. pig farmers from coast to coast.

Whether she’s navigating global meetings with the World Organization for Animal Health or tackling feral swine management with her trademark “Montana grit,” Forseth’s unique perspective is an invaluable asset. She is a reminder of how agriculture can be strengthened by those who take non-conventional paths.

“We can’t sustain this industry on a ‘how it has been done’ mentality,” she says. “Today’s consumer is different. The industry structure is different. The workforce is different. The policy pressures are very different. It’s going to take new and unique ideas to address new and sometimes unique challenges.”

Discover more about Forseth’s journey by watching “The PORK Podcast” on YouTube or by listening to it anywhere podcasts are found.

Xylazine Legislation Advances as Veterinarians Push to Protect Access

Fri, 27 Mar 2026 16:53:43 GMT

The Senate Judiciary Committee today advanced the Combatting Illicit Xylazine Act by a vote of 19–3, marking a significant step forward for bipartisan legislation aimed at addressing the growing role of xylazine in overdose deaths. The bill is led by Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), and has drawn broad bipartisan support from lawmakers, veterinary organizations and federal agencies.

As momentum builds in Congress, veterinary leaders are working to ensure those efforts do not unintentionally disrupt animal care. The focus has shifted to how regulation can be implemented without restricting access for the veterinarians and producers who rely on the drug every day.

In the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee hearing held Thursday afternoon, stakeholders from law enforcement, public health and veterinary medicine outlined the risks and realities surrounding xylazine use.

Xylazine’s Dual Reality

Xylazine occupies a unique position in the U.S. drug landscape. It is a widely used veterinary sedative with a long track record of safety and effectiveness, yet it has also emerged as a concerning component of the illicit drug supply, frequently detected alongside fentanyl and other opioids.

Its growing presence in human drug use has raised alarm among lawmakers and public health officials. Federal officials and lawmakers have pointed to the growing presence of xylazine in the illicit drug supply as a key driver of concern. Because xylazine is not an opioid, its effects are not reversed by naloxone, complicating overdose response and increasing risk.

At the same time, veterinary professionals emphasize its role in animal care is both established and difficult to replace.

Speaking during the hearing, Fred Gingrich, DVM, executive director of the American Association of Bovine Practitioners, underscored the need for balance:

“We believe this legislation represents a thoughtful, balanced and urgently needed solution that both addresses the serious human health threat and preserves access to this essential drug for legitimate veterinary use. The veterinary community is deeply concerned about the public health crisis caused by the rapid proliferation of illicit xylazine being found in combination with fentanyl and other opioids.”

A Cornerstone of Veterinary Practice

For more than five decades, xylazine has been a foundational tool in veterinary medicine, particularly in large animal practice. Its value lies not only in its pharmacologic effects but also in its practicality in real-world conditions.

“As a non-narcotic, FDA-approved veterinary sedative, xylazine has been used for over 50 years to facilitate the safe handling, restraint and treatment of a broad range of animal species. It is particularly important for use in livestock, zoo and wildlife species, as well as in research settings,” Gingrich says.

In cattle, its importance is even more pronounced. Effective sedation is not simply a matter of convenience — it is essential for safe handling, proper treatment and minimizing stress.

“In cattle, there is no safe practical alternative for sedation. Without xylazine, veterinarians and producers face significantly increased risks of injury, and animals may be subjected to unnecessary stress or harm during medical procedures,” Gingrich says.

The Risk of Regulatory Overreach

As concern about illicit xylazine has grown, so too has interest in bringing the drug under federal control. The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration has indicated a desire to schedule xylazine under the Controlled Substances Act.

However, current law presents a critical limitation. The Controlled Substances Act does not allow the DEA to create exemptions for specific user groups, including veterinarians. Gingrich emphasizes administrative scheduling alone could restrict veterinary access, increase regulatory burden and disrupt supply.

“Administrative scheduling would unintentionally restrict how veterinarians use the drug and create burdensome regulatory barriers and jeopardize the continuing availability of the drug in the legitimate marketplace. A disruption in the availability of xylazine would have profound consequences,” Gingrich says.

Gingrich also notes supply constraints could amplify the impact of regulatory changes, with only a limited number of manufacturers currently producing the drug. In a low-margin market, additional regulatory or financial burdens could further threaten availability.

A Legislative Path Forward

The Combatting Illicit Xylazine Act would classify xylazine as a Schedule III substance under the Controlled Substances Act, enabling better tracking of its manufacture and distribution while strengthening enforcement against illicit use. At the same time, it includes provisions to ensure veterinarians, producers and researchers can continue to access the drug.

The bill also addresses how veterinary medicine differs from human healthcare, particularly in how drugs are prescribed, dispensed and used in real-world settings. In large animal practice, veterinarians often work with farm owners, employees and caregivers rather than a single individual patient and may rely on responsible on-farm use under veterinary oversight.

Support for the bill is broad, spanning veterinary organizations, law enforcement groups and federal agencies, reflecting a rare alignment across sectors.

What Is at Stake for Veterinary Practice

For veterinarians, the implications of the legislation not passing are immediate:

Increased risk of injury during handling and procedures
Reduced ability to perform timely and humane interventions
Greater stress on animals during restraint
Operational challenges for producers, particularly those with limited facilities

These risks extend beyond clinical settings, affecting the broader agricultural system where safe and efficient animal handling is essential.

Avoiding a Fragmented Approach

In the absence of federal action, several states have already begun exploring or implementing their own restrictions on xylazine. While well-intentioned, these efforts raise concerns about a potential patchwork regulatory system that could complicate compliance and disrupt supply chains.

A unified federal framework aims to prevent that outcome by establishing consistent standards while maintaining access for legitimate users.

Veterinary organizations, including the American Veterinary Medical Association and the AABP, have taken an active role in shaping policy discussions.

“Legislative action on xylazine is not only preferable, but it is essential. The legislation has been endorsed by all 50 state veterinary medical associations and numerous national stakeholder groups,” Gingrich says.

As lawmakers weigh next steps, the challenge is clear: addressing a growing public health threat without disrupting a long-established tool in veterinary medicine. Regulation must be precise enough to target misuse while preserving access to a drug that remains central to safe and humane animal care.

Rep. Cleaver Requests Information from U.S. Veterinary Schools Over Student Workload Concerns

Tue, 16 Dec 2025 14:04:41 GMT

U.S. Representative Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo., has formally requested information from 36 accredited colleges of veterinary medicine, raising concerts about student workload and clinical training practices. Letters sent last week to schools across the country are seeking details on how institutions monitor clinical duty hours, ensure student welfare and prevent students from being overextended during required rotations.

While colleges should provide rigorous curriculums that guarantee students will receive the best education and experience possible, we must also ensure students are not being exploited.

With numerous allegations of abuse at veterinary schools, I’m demanding answers.…
— Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (@repcleaver) December 10, 2025

“I write today concerning troubling allegations of systemic abuse taking place within American veterinary medicine schools,” Cleaver wrote. “Despite a relatively small number of veterinary schools across the country, recent years have seen an explosion of students speaking out about the conditions at these programs.”

In December 2023 , fourth-year veterinary students from the School of Veterinary Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania penned a letter to their administration outlining how they were consistently working 100 hour weeks, when the Student American Veterinary Medical Association guidelines call for a cap of 80 hours per week. A similar situation was revealed at the College of Veterinary Medicine Iowa State University, with students lacking the required eight hour rest period between shifts and not having proper time for meals while on shift, despite university policies on duty hours.

“I believe strongly that our higher education institutions should provide rigorous curriculums that guarantee students will receive the best education and experience possible, ensuring they are capable and qualified when they enter into the workforce,” Cleaver said in a press release . “However, just as we have taken steps to ensure colleges and universities are not taking advantage of student athletes for institutional monetary benefit, we must ensure that students at veterinary medicine schools are not being exploited. Unfortunately, with numerous allegations of abuse, it appears we have more work to do, and I’m hopeful that these institutions will provide information to address these concerns and ensure proper protections are in place.”

The letter underscores the tension in academic medicine of balancing clinical service demands with student learning, supervision and well-being. Excessive duty hours are not only a student wellness issue, but could also affect patient safety and education quality, particularly when fatigue limits learning or decision-making.

What Veterinary Schools are Being Asked to Provide

Rep. Cleaver’s letter requests information on:

Policies governing veterinary student clinical duty hours
How schools track and enforce workload limits
Mechanisms for students to report excessive hours or unsafe conditions
Protections against retaliation for students who raise concerns
How institutions balance educational objective with clinical service demands

Cleaver requested a response from schools by year-end.

A Conversation With Ag Secretary Rollins on Labor, Disease and MAHA

Thu, 13 Nov 2025 13:33:15 GMT

U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins stuck to streamlining the federal government labor rules to alleviate dairy’s worker crisis and said more aggressive measures are coming to prevent and contain disease, in an interview with Dairy Herd Management. Rollins this week was at the joint annual meeting hosted by National Milk Producers Federation, the United Dairy Board and the United Dairy Industry Association in Arlington, Texas.

While there, she said the H-2A visa program is particularly broken for dairy, which requires year-round support instead of seasonal workers. She also said measures, such as mandatory testing for lactating dairy cattle prior to interstate movement, are not aggressive enough to address modern biosecurity threats.

Below is a summary of Dairy Herd’s 20-minute conversation with Rollins, who discussed labor, disease prevention as well as her feelings on the “Make America Healthy Again” movement.

What Federal Efforts Are in the Works to Ensure Adequate Labor for U.S. Dairies?

One of the central concerns among dairy producers, and the entire industry, is comprehensive immigration reform. To put it in perspective, more than two-thirds of today’s 9.36 million dairy cows are milked by immigrant laborers in the U.S., according to the National Milk Producers Federation.

Currently, the H-2A visa applies strictly to seasonal or temporary labor. Dairy operations, however, require consistent, skilled workers every day of the year. Milking and caring for cows, managing processing facilities and ensuring food safety are daily tasks that don’t pause between seasons. This mismatch leaves dairy farmers and processors nationwide without a legal means to fulfill their guestworker needs.

In addition to the need for year-round help, Secretary Rollins notes farmers must interact with three different federal agencies to use the H-2A program. Moreover, the costs associated with securing labor have significantly increased, with reports from farmers in south Texas indicating average hourly costs, including transportation and housing, reaching $30 to $35 per hour. Comparatively, similar labor across the border is $2 per hour, Rollins says, illustrating a system that is both unsustainable and inherently unfair.

Ideally, any H-2A program changes will reduce costs and red tape, but comprehensive solutions ultimately require congressional action.

In addition to visa programs, Secretary Rollins says the current administration remains focused on sealing borders and mass deportations.

“Everyone understands the dynamics of an open border, and the millions and millions, we’re unable to count how many, that crossed during the last administration. The President’s No. 1 promise as a candidate in 2022 through 2024 was sealing the border and mass deportations,” she says. “Looking at this challenge through the lens of understanding labor is absolute when we can’t feed ourselves, combined with where we are in terms of immigration, those are the nuances.”

How is the Administration Addressing Threats to Animal Ag?
On day 1, after being sworn in as Secretary of Ag, Rollins was briefed on HPAI . She made it clear that while some measures, such as mandatory testing for lactating dairy cattle prior to interstate movement , had been enacted, a broader and more aggressive approach is necessary. Recognizing that maintaining the status quo was insufficient, a comprehensive strategy was essential — not just from USDA but across the entire federal government.

“I realize there are lots of opinions on my boss, President Trump, but I think the one thing that most people would agree on is that he leaves it all in the field. And, that we have to do everything we can for this moment that we were given to fix a very broken system, whatever that system may look like, in this case, which is animal disease,” Rollins says.

In February 2025, the Trump administration set forth a five-point plan to combat HPAI . Rollins notes the dairy sector, in particular, showcased remarkable adaptability to HPAI threats, demonstrating industry resilience and proactive measures.

Significant investments, such as a $100 million innovation grant , have been allocated to explore vaccines and therapeutic solutions. However, the complexities of viral mutations necessitate caution, especially regarding vaccination strategies, to prevent potentially more dangerous strains from emerging.

“I think we’re going to make more progress than perhaps has been made. Having said that, it’s a virus and the virus always wins,” she says, noting they are worried about New World screwworm and took aggressive actions to combat that by closing several ports.

“We’ve not imported new animals, which is one of the reasons beef prices are up, but we are looking now to figure out how to start reopening ports. I think we’ve gotten our arms around exactly what the problem is,” she says. “We’re building out new sterile fly facilities, which is the only way we eradicated it 30 to 40 years ago, but we have a really good system in place.”

Rollins shares collaborations with international counterparts are stronger, creating an unprecedented partnership with Mexican authorities to manage and preempt future animal agriculture outbreaks effectively. Enhanced border protocols, including disinfection and ivermectin treatments for imports, underscore a commitment to protecting livestock health.

“I feel confident that we are aggressively attacking all pieces of NWS,” she says.

What Does the MAHA Movement’s Mean for Dairy?
The “Make America Healthy Again” movement aims to revamp the nation’s food system, and Rollins offers reassurance dairy products at the forefront.

“Health care costs too much. We’re not getting the care we need, especially to vulnerable populations. How do we fix that?” she asks. “Over the last year, it is completely flipped to, what are Americans eating? What are we serving in our schools? What are we serving in our SNAP program, which 42 million Americans are on the food stamp program.”

While the current economic situation is troubling, Rollins is confident in the long-term potential for profitability and sustainability in the dairy industry.

“What milk, cheese and other dairy products mean as we completely and fundamentally shift our entire food system is our dairy industry is at the very front tip of the spear,” she says, noting the response markets are answering and the dairy industry, too, with the $11 billion in new processing plants, U.S. dairy is riding a wave of momentum that is fueled by consumer demand.

“In the long term, I’m not sure there is an agriculture industry that has more to gain and that will see more of a pivot toward real profitability and real sustainability than this [dairy] industry. I could not be more excited to help lead on that,” she says.

Your Next Read:
Beef-on-Dairy Silver Linings in the Current Margin Equation

UDSA to Hold Listening Sessions Addressing the Rural Veterinary Shortage

Tue, 23 Sep 2025 17:26:29 GMT

Last month, Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins announced the Rural Veterinary Action Plan, which will enhance the support available for rural veterinarians across the US. The plan includes the following action items:

Improve Veterinary Grant Programs
Better Understand the Rural Veterinary Shortage
Recruit and Retain Veterinarians
Catalog Federal Resources Available to Veterinarians
Work with Stakeholders to Understand the Barriers to Entry and Increase Recruitment in Rural Areas

This plan aims to address the rural veterinary shortage due to the low percentage of veterinary school students that come from rural areas or express an interest in rural practice, along with the low number of recent grads entering production animal medicine.

As a part of the working with stakeholders action item, USDA will be hosting two virtual listening sessions for the veterinary workforce on Sept. 29 and 30. The following USDA agencies will be represented at these sessions:

National Institute of Food and Agriculture
Economic Research Service
Food Safety and Inspection Service
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Rural Development

These sessions will begin with a short update on the current veterinary landscape followed by stakeholder comments for the remainder of the meeting. Interested parties are invited to participate and must register for these sessions in advance. Both sessions will cover the same topics.

Register for the September 29 Session

Register for the September 30 Session

Emphasizing Nutrition in Medical Education is Welcome and Overdue, Meat Institute Says

Thu, 28 Aug 2025 14:30:20 GMT

The Meat Institute applauded the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the U.S. Department of Education’s announcement urging leading medical education organizations to provide more comprehensive nutrition education and training.

“Americans trust their doctors for advice, including advice on nutrition,” Meat Institute President and CEO Julie Anna Potts said in a release. “This initiative should make nutrition and medical advice synonymous for the well-being of the patient and the consumer.”

Potts believes this initiative can help counter confusing and misleading information about nutrition, including the vital role of meat and poultry in health dietary patterns.

“Meat and poultry products provide consumers with a convenient, direct and balanced dietary source of all essential amino acids,” the Meat Institute said earlier this year. “Per serving, meat, poultry and fish provide more protein than dairy, eggs, legumes, cereals, vegetables or nuts. Protein is critical for developing, maintaining and repairing strong muscles; is vital for growth and brain development in children; and is essential to prevent muscle loss during aging.”

In February, Meat Institute President Vice President of Regulatory and Scientific Affairs Susan Backus said a modified Healthy U.S.-Style Dietary Pattern risks the potential for unintended consequences for nutrient and energy intakes.

“Americans need to improve their eating patterns to promote health,” Backus pointed out. “Considering dietary choices based on taste and cultural preferences, health and economic status, and food availability will be key to improving the dietary habits of Americans. A recommendation to reduce, limit or avoid nutrient dense products like meat and poultry will have significant unintended nutritional consequences across all life stages.”

Potts said improving nutrition education for medical professionals is “welcome, commonsense and overdue.”

5 Reasons Consumer Distrust In Our Food Supply Is Rising

Wed, 29 Jan 2025 16:04:41 GMT

Bread, check. Blueberries, check. As I wheel my grocery cart alongside the deli case, I’m taken aback at what I see. Rather, it is what I don’t see that has me wondering, “What in the world?” This section of my favorite grocery store is now almost completely empty, except for a couple of ham loaves and a renegade block of cheese.

In a slightly distraught tone I ask the worker behind the counter, “What’s going on?” He hesitates for a moment, then replies, “The store is in the process of changing suppliers for our deli products. We should have more of a selection next week.” Then it dawns on me: my favorite brand of deli meat and cheese, Boar’s Head, has officially been blacklisted by my go-to grocery store.

I should not have been surprised. Boar’s Head began its fall from public grace on July 26, 2024, when the company issued a recall for more than 207,528 lb. of product due to potential listeria contamination. The CDC linked the contamination to 61 illnesses and, tragically, 10 deaths. It was the worst listeria outbreak in the U.S. in over a decade.

The outbreak was ultimately traced to a production line at the company’s Jarratt, Va., plant. According to USDA inspection reports, which USA Today had to obtain through a Freedom of Information Act request, 69 reports of non-compliance were recorded at the Jarratt plant between 2023 and 2024. What was in those reports was unsettling. Documentation of insects live and dead, black and green mold, mildew, dripping and standing water, as well as other unsanitary conditions within the plant in the weeks leading up to the July recall. In a move that was too little too late, Boar’s Head announced on Sept. 13, 2024 that the Jarratt plant would be closed permanently.

In 1906, Upton Sinclair published his famous novel “The Jungle,” which exposed the horrific conditions in the meatpacking industry at the time. The writer’s work proved to be an instant bestseller to the masses. The irony is that nearly 120 years later, one might find it hard to discern whether they’re reading a current USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) report or a chapter straight out of “The Jungle.”

Just One Of Many
The Boar’s Head case was only one the high profile food recalls last year. Remember the E. coli contaminated onions on McDonald’s quarter pounders? Then, Costco issued a massive recall on their Kirkland Signature brand of organic eggs because of a threat of Salmonella. And to cap off the year with the scariest illness yet, on Dec. 18, 2024, the CDC confirmed a patient in Louisiana had been hospitalized with the nation’s first severe case of avian influenza A (H5N1) virus, aka the “bird flu.”

If it seems that the number of food recalls are coming at us at a more fast and furious pace than ever, then your gut instinct is spot on. The Food and Drug Administration, which reports food and cosmetics together, says 1,908 such products were recalled in the fiscal year that ended in September. That’s the highest number since 2019. Such a constant barrage of warnings is having a serious affect on consumers’ overall psyche — and not in a positive way. According to a September 2024 Gallup report, only 57% of Americans say they have a “great deal” or “fair amount” of confidence in the government to keep food safe. This number is a 27 point decrease since 2019, and is a record low for the Gallup Consumption Habits Poll since its inception in 1999.

This explosion of 20th century foodborne illnesses has me asking the same question I asked the worker behind the deli counter: “What’s going on?”

5 Reasons To Be Skeptical
There are multiple reasons consumers have good reason to be less confident in the safety of their food.

First, there’s the government. Second, more and more of our food is imported, which makes it harder to inspect. Third, you have a growing quest for more natural food, which sometimes circumvents traditional inspection channels. Fourth, industry consolidation means only a handful of players control both the production and processing. That’s not inherently a bad thing, but if something goes wrong, it’s probably going to be big. Finally, we now have the ability, through more technology and data, to find, detect and isolate the specific source of contamination and document it.

Time For An Overhaul
Food safety policy and implementation at the government level is in need of a serious overhaul. There is a chance it could actually happen. In 2018, the previous Trump administration proposed consolidating federal food oversight into a single agency with USDA.

There are so many common sense things that a fully functioning food agency could do. For one, start with better and more noticeable country of origin labeling (COOL) on imported foods. It should be prominent, displaying the country’s flag as the primary indicator of origin. If nothing else, we’ll all get better at geography. Next, companies that embrace new technologies that prevent contamination should be rewarded with tax credits. We do it for electric cars. Why not for safer food?

Finally, the most important change needs to come in the form of accountability and transparency both from the food industry itself and the government that regulates it. That didn’t happen in the case of Boar’s Head, and 10 people lost their lives because of it. In the age of AI and social media, those FSIS plant inspection reports should be posted on platforms such as X and Facebook for the public to see in real time. Without such transparency, we’re no better off than we were back in 1906.

The Impact of Immigration Reform on U.S. Dairy Farms

Mon, 27 Jan 2025 20:10:06 GMT

The conversation surrounding mass deportation has sparked widespread debate across various sectors of the American economy. Among these, the dairy industry stands out, heavily reliant on immigrant labor to keep up with production demands. Recent reports highlight this dependency, showing that over half of all dairy labor is performed by immigrant workers. In fact, dairies employing immigrant laborers contribute to 79% of the U.S. milk supply. This statistic, brought to attention by the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF), emphasizes the crucial role of immigrant workers in maintaining this industry.

Growing Reliance on Immigrant Workforce
Dr. Robert Hagevoort of New Mexico State University, in his presentation at the Dairy Cattle Reproduction Council (DCRC) Annual Meetings in Arlington, Texas, in mid-November, suggests that the figures from the NMPF report, dating back to 2015, may even underestimate the current reliance on immigrant labor.

“Dairy herd sizes have grown considerably and so have the number of employees on the farm,” he says.

Reflecting on past immigration policies, Jaime Castaneda, executive vice president of policy development and strategy for the NMPF, points out that immigration issues are not new to the industry. He references President Obama’s administration, which saw significant immigration enforcement actions, resulting in the deportation of 2.7 million individuals over eight years. As a result, President Obama was often labeled the “Deporter in Chief.”

Fast forward, and with newly re-elected President Trump’s tenure, there is an anticipation of stricter immigration policies. His campaign’s promise to tighten illegal immigration has started taking shape through a series of executive actions aimed at revamping the U.S. immigration framework. This has put the dairy industry on high alert.

Preparing for Possible Enforcement Actions
With an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States, dairy producers are advised to stay vigilant and prepared. Castaneda urges dairy owners to keep necessary documentation, such as I-9 forms, social security copies, and identification like driver’s licenses, well-organized and readily accessible. Ensuring all paperwork is in compliance with federal and state laws is paramount if faced with an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) inspection.

Farm owners are also encouraged to have open dialogues with their employees, advising them against actions that might attract legal attention, such as minor traffic violations. Moreover, Castaneda suggests that dairy farmers communicate with peers in the community who also rely on immigrant workers to foster a supportive network.

The Indispensable Role of Immigrants
Voicing a critical perspective on the ultimate survival of U.S. dairy without immigrant labor, Rick Naerebout, CEO of Idaho Dairymen’s Association, asserts that American citizens are typically unwilling to undertake these demanding jobs.

“Americans don’t want these jobs,” he says, underscoring the necessity for immigration reforms that are not only fiscally viable but also ethically sound, benefiting Idaho and the broader United States.

The continued viability of the U.S. dairy industry heavily depends on the backbone provided by immigrant labor. As the nation grapples with immigration policy debates, the livelihoods of those within the dairy sector hang in balance, underscoring the urgent need for balanced reform that considers both economic imperatives and humanitarian values.

Your Next Read:
Discover How Innovation Transforms at Grotegut Dairy

Looking Back and Ahead: Insights from NMPF Chief Economist Peter Vitaliano

Wed, 15 Jan 2025 14:50:42 GMT

The dairy industry, a sector in constant evolution, owes much of its transformation and adaptation to visionary leaders such as Peter Vitaliano. After nearly four decades serving as the Chief Economist for the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF), Vitaliano recently retired, leaving behind a legacy of insight and progress. In a recent episode of the Dairy Defined podcast, Vitaliano reflected on the changes he has observed over his tenure and shared his vision for the future of the industry.

A Journey Through Time
Vitaliano’s journey with NMPF began shortly after the 1985 Farm Bill, a time of significant policy implementation, such as the whole herd buyout program and adjustments to federal orders. Reflecting on the industry back then, Vitaliano highlighted the larger number of smaller farms and cooperatives in traditional dairy regions like the upper Midwest and the Northeast. These areas, although rich in dairy history, were not expanding in production, contrary to the rapid growth witnessed in the Western states with their larger farms. The Southeast, meanwhile, was experiencing a notable decrease in milk production capacity.

This geographical shift brought about challenges in unifying the industry’s policy approach. Vitaliano noted the difficulty NMPF faced during those early years in reconciling different regional needs. The overarching issue was how to manage the substantial dairy surpluses created by peak price support levels—a dilemma that dominated the industry discussions during Vitaliano’s early years.

Future Outlook: Continuing Trends and New Challenges
The trajectory that Vitaliano foresees suggests a continued decline in the number of smaller dairy farms, as larger farms, and potentially another wave of cooperative consolidation, take precedence. Interestingly, he anticipates the emergence of dairy farms so sizeable that they may opt-out of the traditional cooperative marketing structures.

This trend introduces specific challenges, particularly concerning the volume of milk that may fall outside the eligibility criteria for NMPF membership, prompting potential policy overhauls. According to Vitaliano, these changes will call for adjustments in federal orders, dairy margin coverage, and policies that are increasingly accommodating to the evolving industry. Crucial areas of focus include immigration reforms favorable to dairy, progressive trade policies, accurate food labeling, and the expansion of farm programs to meet modern consumer demands.

A Promising Future Built on a Solid Foundation
Despite potential challenges, Vitaliano remains optimistic about the future of the dairy industry. His confidence stems from the progressive nature of farms and farmers, alongside the leadership and robust infrastructure present within dairy organizations. He emphasizes that this dynamic foundation was evident when he joined NMPF, remains today, and will continue to be a fundamental aspect of the industry’s future.

While Vitaliano may be stepping back from his role at NMPF, his reflections and forecasts provide invaluable insights into the past, present, and future of dairy. As the industry navigates consolidation and policy evolution, it is the innovative spirit and strong community leadership that will guide its ongoing success.

To listen to the whole conservation between Vitaliano and Alan Bjerga, NMPF’s Executive Vice President of Communications and Industry Relations: Vitaliano’s Valedictory: Economist Shares Thoughts on Dairy’s Evolution - NMPF

Your Next Read:
Discover How Innovation Transforms at Grotegut Dairy

What The Trump Administration's Mass Deportation Plans Could Mean for Agriculture

Mon, 23 Dec 2024 16:47:42 GMT

Farmers and food industry leaders are warning that President-elect Donad Trump’s plans to deport millions of immigrants could devastate agriculture — an industry in which immigrants make up a good chunk of the workforce.

Nearly half of all farmworkers are undocumented, and industries such as dairy and meatpacking plants are especially vulnerable to labor shortages.

“Admittedly, there are some people who slip through,” says Scott VanderWal, vice president of the American Farm Bureau Federation. “Perspective employers are required to take documentation that appears to be legal and valid. There are times when that’s not the case and then ICE [U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement] comes in and cleans house, the workers disappear and go wherever they take them and the employers are left without help.”

While the H-2A visa program has grown, it only covers seasonal work and cannot replace year-round jobs at meat processing plants and on dairy and pork farms.

“Our packing plants need labor. Many of our farms use temporary visa labor — educated, skilled individuals work on our sow farms,” says Lori Stevemer, president of the National Pork Producers Council. “We have been experiencing an increased number of denials over the past year, which really makes it a challenge to find workers. The H-2A visa doesn’t work well when we have animals that need care 24/7, year-round.”

Experts say mass deportations would disrupt food production, raise prices and jeopardize the stability of U.S. agriculture.

Deportation falls under the Department of Homeland Security. President-elect Trump has selected South Dakota Republican Gov. Kristi Noem to lead that agency.

“With Governor Noem at the helm, she’s going to bring common sense to that discussion and make sure we don’t close businesses, make sure we get everyone in line, get the workforce in line and then make sure we’re following our country’s rules,” says Hunter Roberts, secretary of South Dakota’s Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources.

Meanwhile, farm groups continue to urge for reforms to immigration policies or a guest worker program to secure a stable workforce.

“At the same time as controlling the border, we need to overhaul our labor system,” VanderWal says. “We need to make H-2A apply to your own workers or come up with a decent program that will help.”

We need some type of H-2A visa reform to allow those workers to stay year-round, Stevemer adds.

Even then immigration is likely to continue to be a political hot potato in 2025, and labor shortages will continue to top the list of challenges for agriculture.

Denver Voters Reject Slaughterhouse Ban: Win for Animal Ag

Thu, 07 Nov 2024 14:38:59 GMT

Denver residents rejected Ordinance 309 to ban slaughterhouses in the city. Denver, a hub of lamb processing for the state and nation, represents 15% to 20% of U.S. lamb harvest capacity. It also provides many jobs in one of the city’s poorest neighborhoods.

“Activists from New Orleans and California used dark money from out of state to try and shut down this local company, but they lost to Colorado workers, farmers, ranchers and restaurateurs,” Ian Silverii, campaign spokesperson for “Stop the Ban. Protect Jobs,” said in a statement. “We have one message for those who tried to cone to our city and our state to run their experiment to upend the lives of so many hardworking people: it was a baaaaaaaad idea.”

According to the Denver Post , at 11:30 pm, 64.6% opposed the slaughterhouse ban, with very little change in the split for and against throughout the evening.

Opponents of the ban declared victory Tuesday night and Pro-Animal Future, which put the question on the ballot, issued a statement appearing to concede on both measures, the article said.

“This was a bold campaign, and no one said changing the status quo was going to be easy,” Pro-Animal Future spokesperson Olivia Hammond said in a statement. “Over a hundred thousand meat eaters voted for a world without slaughterhouses, and that’s a foundation we’ll continue building on. Voters aren’t used to seeing animal rights on the ballot, and we are paving the way with this campaign.”

The measure titled “Prohibition of Slaughterhouses” tried to outlaw “the construction, maintenance, or use of” any meat processing facilities in Denver beginning Jan. 1, 2026, as well as “require the city to prioritize residents whose employment is affected by the ordinance in workforce training or employment assistance programs.”

This ban put 160 jobs at stake and according to one study, at least $215 million in economic benefits, which could be as high as $860 million, counting indirect factors. In addition, the ban also threatened more than 2,700 jobs including independent ranchers, truckers, distributors, retailers, butchers and restaurant owners and employees, according to a Colorado State University study .

“Stop the Ban, Protect Jobs” raised money from an array of donors including Superior Farms, the American Sheep Industry Association, the National Pork Producers Council, the National Cattleman’s Beef Association, Visit Denver, the Colorado Livestock Association, United Food & Commercial Workers International, Concience Bay Research, LLC, Political Action Trust, and the Colorado Livestock Association.

Voters also rejected Ordinance 308, which would ban the manufacture, distribution, display, sale or trade of certain animal products within Denver city limits, with limited exceptions, such as for Native American cultural uses or for cow leather. Had the ordinance passed it could have affected sales of cowboy and other hats made of beaver, rabbit or hare hides, as well as fly-fishing lures that include animal fibers. The Denver Post reported the ordinance reported nearly 58% of voters opposed the fur ban.

Your Next Read: Buoyed by Stronger Support from Rural America than 2016, Trump Wins Second Term as President

Lab Cultivated Meat Making News in Florida and Other States

Wed, 16 Oct 2024 18:11:38 GMT

A federal judge has rejected the request of a California-based company for an injunction against the new law banning the sale and manufacturing of cultivated meat in Florida, according to a news source.

A 21-page decision denying the preliminary injunction motion was made on Friday, Oct. 11, by Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Walker, citing the “ban imposes an inconsistent ‘ingredient requirement’ by prohibiting the sale or distribution of food products that contain cultivated chicken meat as an ingredient.” He wrote UPSIDE Foods could not identify a law or regulation “that creates a federal ‘ingredient requirement’ with respect to ‘cultivated meat.’”

The law makes it a second-degree misdemeanor to sell or manufacture cultivated meat, often known as lab-grown meat, a. The manufacturing process includes taking a small number of cultured cells from animals and growing them in controlled settings to make food.

Florida made news in May for becoming the first state to ban the sale of lab grown meat.

Michigan farmer introduces cultivated meat ban legislation
In June Michigan lawmaker and state cattle association member Jim DeSana introduced legislation to ban lab-grown meat from being sold in Michigan. His legislation defines “cultivated meat” as “a meat or meat product that was produced from cultured animal tissue produced from in vitro animal cell cultures outside of the animal from which the cells were derived.”

“Eating real meat is healthy,” DeSana said.

DeSana, who is currently serving his first term as a lawmaker, decided to run for office after his son was prevented from competing on a rowing team during his senior year due to covid.

He also introduced a resolution to enshrine the right to hunt in Michigan’s constitution.

“This is about protecting our ranchers and about protecting the integrity of our food supply,” said DeSana, R-Carleton. “This is also about protecting your right to provide food for yourself and your family.”

Ohio legislation introduced to regulate imitation protein products

In Ohio, House Bill 661 was legislation introduced earlier this summer that regulates imitation meat and egg products. It was introduced by State Representative Roy Klopfenstein (R- Haviland) and State Representative Jack Daniels (R- New Franklin).

“Addressing this false perception that the manufactured protein products have begun to create in the agricultural industry will ensure that Ohioans can safely purchase agricultural food animal products without having to decipher a label,” Klopfenstein said in a release.

The measure will also prevent school boards from purchasing misbranded meat and egg products and alternatives to protect students.

“This bill will not only protect farmers from losing business to lab-grown, manufactured products, but it will also help customers not be misled by false advertising,” Daniels said.

The bill would classify imitation meat or egg products as “misbranded” if the label includes an “identifying meat term,” such as beef, wing or cold cut. A product would not be considered misbranded if it had a word such as imitation, fake or vegan in a uniform size directly by the meat term.

House Bill 661 awaits committee assignment.

Nebraska could become the next U.S. state to ban cultivated meat

In September, Nebraska’s Governor Jim Pillen signed an executive order to limit the sales of cultivated meat.

Pillen agreed to create “strict guidelines when it comes to state agencies and its contractors from obtaining lab-grown meat”, according to a statement.

He has also directed the Nebraska Department of Agriculture (NDA) to initiate a rulemaking process to make sure that any lab-grown meat products sold in stores are “properly labelled” and are not marketed next to natural meat on the same shelves.

Iowa became the third state in the country to pass legislation regarding lab-grown meat
Beginning July 1, lab-grown meat and plant-based imitation meat and egg products had to be labeled with words such as fake, lab-grown, meatless, imitation or vegan, if sold in Iowa stores. The labeling requirements also apply to meat alternatives made with insect protein.

Alabama also passed a law banning the sale of the cell cultured alternative meat product in May 2024.

If Trump Wins in November, There Are 2 Front-Runners For Ag Secretary, And There Were Both at Saturday's Rally

Thu, 12 Sep 2024 15:42:17 GMT

Two potential candidates in the running for Ag Secretary if former President Donald Trump wins in November were also at the rally in Butler, Pa., when Trump was shot in the ear on Saturday. Sid Miller, Texas Ag Commissioner, and Kip Tom, an Indiana farmer who served as the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations during the Trump administration, were both in attendance Saturday.

Both men recounted their first-hand experience, while also saying the silver lining after the event is how Americans — especially those at the rally — came together to help one another. And what’s followed since, has been a sense of unity and patriotism that is changing the tone of the Republican National Convention taking place in Wisconsin this week.

“It almost feels a little bit like what 911 did,” Tom told “AgriTalk’s” Chip Flory Monday morning during an exclusive interview. “People seem more unified. When I watched the people leave where the rally was being held there in Butler, Pa., you saw people that didn’t know at the other ones, they’re helping the elderly get out, they helped them with their children. Everybody put their arms around each other and worked as one as they left in a very calm situation. I can think of other things that could have happened, it could have been people stampeding out the place, but the reality is people remain calm, they reunify, they’re talking to each other. And I’m telling you, today I’m up here at the RNC convention in Milwaukee, and you just feel the vibes of what it’s like to see a unified party and how people are trying to make sure we make America great again.”

Tom joined “AgriTalk” Monday morning to explain what he saw and heard during the assassination attempt on Saturday as he had a front-row seat.

“I want to start out by saying, you know, my heart and condolences go out to the family that lost a husband and a father, a neighbor, a firefighter who was sitting about 50' behind me with his family when bullets that were coming into the theater area where the President was speaking. So I also want to say thank you to all of the Armed Service guards who were there from the Secret Service through the local sheriffs and counties that were there to make sure that we had a safe environment,” Tom said. “Unfortunately, I feel that there was probably a failure at the very top of the Secret Service, providing adequate resources in terms of human talent, and the technical knowledge to get things done at that event to protect us all.”

Tom says there were tens of thousands of people in attendance on Saturday, which started when the gates opened at 8 a.m. He describes it as a hot and humid day, with temperatures reaching 95°F.

“These people were here to hear Donald Trump speak and talk about his plan for America,” he says. “I had a front row seat, but I think everybody in that audience actually had a front row seat, just see what happened on July 13 in Butler, Pa. So once the shooting started, people took notice to it.”

Tom says as soon as he heard the gunfire and saw Trump immediately go down, the first thing that flashed in his mind was the JFK assassination.

“Just all that transpired after the JFK assassination, and how our nation actually changed course, when we went under Lyndon B. Johnson, and just how the administration at that time dealt with plenty of issues that our country was facing at that time. So this could have been a big event changing the pathway for our nation going forward in the future. But fortunately, for the president, he’s okay,” Tom says.

Tom went on to say the assassination attempt should have never happened, and the failure falls on the Secret Service considering the Secret Service determines what level of security they want to provide different diplomats of the U.S.

“In the case of a former president, when someone is the presumed nominee, it really doesn’t change anything. When they’re the nominee, it elevates a little bit more. And of course, when they’re the president they have full on support of the Secret Service to make sure that a commander in chief remains safe,” Tom explains. “But in the case here, obviously Donald Trump isn’t the presumed nominee, he is the nominee, even though we’re holding convention this week, he’s got the ballots. He’s got the votes to make it happen.”

Tom says what he hopes to see is an increase in security for Trump, but also an investigation into Saturday’s shooting.

“I think there will be a hearing probably in the Senate or the House very soon, or maybe both chambers to address these issues with the director of the Secret Service to say, ‘How could this happen?’ This isn’t just about the president, it’s about Americans who were in that audience that were not protected from a man who’s 140 yards from the podium,” Tom says.

Farm Journal Washington correspondent Jim Wiesemeyer reports Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller was close to former President Donald Trump when Trump was shot in the ear at the rally this weekend. Standing just 30' away, Miller described the scene to KHOU-11, a Houston TV station. Wiesemeyer says Miller initially mistook the gunshots for a balloon pop and then a firecracker, Miller realized the danger when Trump stopped speaking. It wasn’t until the third shot that Miller realized it was gunfire. The incident lasted about five to six seconds.

Miller, who is a potential candidate for USDA Secretary if Trump wins the presidency again, shared his experience on social media, expressing shock and gratitude that Trump was not seriously injured. He also expressed sorrow for the innocent bystander who was killed and emphasized the need for unity and courage. Miller plans to campaign for Trump this summer and was heading to the Republican National Convention after the rally. His presence at the shooting has garnered significant media attention in Texas.

In the aftermath of the shooting, Miller observed that three people directly behind him were hit:

• A man who was struck in the head and died
• A woman hit in the chest, who remained in critical condition
• Congressman Ronnie Jackson’s, R-Texas, nephew, who sustained a superficial neck wound

In response to the incident, Miller called for increased mental health support and a reevaluation of security measures for political candidates. He also urged the Biden administration to provide security detail for Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who currently lacks such protection.

During the RNC this week, the tone is changing to a more unified one, according to Tom, who is representing Indiana at the convention his week.

“I know Trump is changing many of his speeches that he’ll be delivering throughout the convention time frame from Monday through Friday,” Tom says. “I know that he’s going to try to get people more unified, and he wants to unify the nation. Let’s face it, we’ve had fringes in both parties that have been kind of controlling the narrative, and I hope that we can bring those together and make sure we get our country on the right path to make sure we do always stand for all Americans.”

Also of note during the RNC this week, Wiesemeyer reports Jim Chilton a fifth-generation rancher from Arivaca, Ariz., will be speaking. His family has been in the cattle business for nearly 140 years. Chilton’s ranch extends to the U.S./Mexico border and is located in a top corridor for drug smuggling and human trafficking.

Wiesmeyer says Chilton appears to have been selected to speak at the convention to address immigration and border security themes from the perspective of a rancher whose property is directly affected by these issues.

He has testified before Congress multiple times about the challenges faced by ranchers in border areas. His inclusion aligns with the Republican Party’s focus on border security and immigration policy for the upcoming election.

In 2003, Chilton was named Rancher of the Year by the Arizona Cattle Growers’ Association. He has also received other awards, including: The True Grit award from the Arizona Cattle Growers, the Individual of the Year award from an unspecified organization, the Arizona Farm Bureau Oscar for outstanding achievement and the Farm Bureau Environmental Stewardship award. His wife, Sue Chilton, purchased the ranch near Arivaca with her husband in 1987, and they later expanded their operation by buying the neighboring Flying X ranch in 1991. Together with Jim, Sue implemented grazing management programs and conducted detailed environmental monitoring on their ranch.

They have been recognized as cooperators with the U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) since 1980. Sue was appointed by Arizona Governor Jane Hull to serve a five-year term on the Arizona Game and Fish Commission. In this role, she worked to improve relations between the Game and Fish Department and rural residents who provide wildlife habitat.

Kevin McCarthy Finally Won the House Speaker Gavel, Now What?

Mon, 09 Jan 2023 20:43:57 GMT

After four days and 15 rounds of voting , Kevin McCarthy’s (R-Calif.) wait to become Speaker of the House of Representatives ended.

A caucus of 20 hardline Republicans had initially blocked his path, but several key concessions, including allowing a single lawmaker to force a vote on ousting the speaker, was the key to unlocking the GOP chaos. The final tally on the 15th roll-call vote was 216 for McCarthy, 212 for Democrat Hakeem Jeffries and six present.

Two past GOP speakers, John Boehner and Paul Ryan, left office amid divisions in their conference.

New Agenda

McCarthy, a 57-year-old native of Bakersfield, Calif., said that the new GOP House will be a crucial “check” on the Biden administration, and he vowed to stop wasteful spending, the rise in the national debt, and the rise in prices at the pump and grocery store.

“I hope one thing is clear after this week: I never give up,” McCarthy said during his first speech as House speaker

During his first year as Speaker, McCarthy will need to raise the debt limit and fund the government — both major fights ahead. Lawmakers got a commitment to voting on specific bills and the promise to tie spending cuts to a debt-ceiling increase.

McCarthy said the very first bill Congress will take up will be to “repeal the funding for 87,000 new IRS agents” and that one of the first hearings will be on the “crisis” on the southern border. He also announced the reopening of the Capitol complex to the public. It had been closed since the start of the Covid pandemic.

Concessions

McCarthy agreed to appoint more members of the far-right House Freedom Caucus to the powerful House Rules Committee, that sets the terms for floor debate and amendments, and the Appropriations Committee. They won two seats on the Rules Committee that could narrow McCarthy’s maneuvering room as he tries to put together majorities for legislation. More symbolically, he also allowed a rules change that will enable just one member to be able to call for a vote to oust the Speaker.

Other accommodations McCarthy reportedly made to sway Freedom Caucus members included mandating 72 hours between the posting of bills and votes on them, and trying for a constitutional amendment that would impose term limits on members of the House and Senate.

They also won a pledge that the top-line budget figure for domestic discretionary spending in fiscal 2024 won’t exceed what it was in fiscal 2022. That includes defense spending, which would have to fall by $75 billion if the cuts are split with nondefense accounts.

He also agreed to open government spending bills to a freewheeling debate in which any lawmaker could force votes on proposed changes. Also: separate votes on the 12 appropriations bills approved each year and a Judiciary Committee investigation into government collaboration with tech companies.

The rules resolution would:

• Eliminate proxy voting and remote committee proceedings spurred by the COVID-19 pandemic

• Rename some House committees

• Adopt budget procedures aimed at restricting mandatory spending increases

• Repeal collective bargaining rules adopted last year

“I ran out of things to ask for,” said Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz, a GOP holdout against Kevin McCarthy’s bid for speaker

McCarthy tried to downplay the idea that the protracted conflict was a bad omen for a highly dysfunctional House in the coming years.

“This is the great part,” McCarthy told reporters Friday night. “Because it took this long, now we learned how to govern. So now we’ll be able to get the job done.”

The concessions McCarthy agreed to will make it more difficult to pass legislation, particularly when it comes time to fund the government later this year. The Rules panel is usually staffed by loyalists to the speaker, so the head of the party retains control of the schedule.

Six of the panel’s 13 seats are expected to be saved for lawmakers close to McCarthy, led by incoming Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.). If the panel’s four Democrats opposed a bill, three Republicans from the Freedom Caucus could potentially join them and block the measure from coming to the floor.

Next up in the House is to approve a rules package, a key component to the deal struck between McCarthy and the faction of Republicans against his speakership.

More on policy:

Senate Ag Committee Chairwoman Will Not Run for Office in 2024
Policy and Payments: What Producers Can Expect in 2023

Democrat's Green New Deal Wants to Eliminate "Farting Cows"

Sat, 09 Feb 2019 01:12:00 GMT

A proposed set of legislative goals released by a pair of Democratic freshmen members of Congress mentions getting fewer emissions from “farting cows,” but they want to work with farmers, too. The Green New Deal was released on Feb. 7 by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and aims to eliminate greenhouse gas emission while revamping the U.S. economy.

The Green New Deal has been drawing some attention because it would drastically change how many facets of the economy operate in an effort to address climate change. Components of the Green New Deal – that tries to fashion itself similar to President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal – focuses on utilizing renewable energy, cutting fossil fuels, overhauling health care and addressing the wealth divide.

The Green New Deal also contains mention of “working collaboratively with farmers and ranchers in the United States to remove pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural sector as much as is technologically feasible.”

The initiative aims to support family farmers, invest in sustainable agriculture practices to increase soil health and building a sustainable food system that ensures access to healthy food.

While the legislation doesn’t have much more in details about the role agriculture will play in this effort, a FAQ sheet released with the Green New Deal does paint a different picture.

In a section of the FAQ sheet asking about the difference between the goal of going “100% clean and renewable” versus “100% renewable” there is a call out about methane emissions in cattle.

“We set a goal to get to net-zero, rather than zero emissions, in 10 years because we aren’t sure that we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast, but we think we can ramp up renewable manufacturing and power production, retrofit every building in America, build the smart grid, overhaul transportation and agriculture, plant lots of trees and restore our ecosystem to get to net-zero,” the FAQ sheet reads.

Voices From Agriculture

The mention of “farting cows” drew concerns from groups representing agriculture and farmers on social media.

The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) has been working to address sustainability through efforts like the Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef (GRSB) . Also, NCBA recently released a Cost/Benefit Principles that serves as a guide for decision-making on various policy proposals regarding climate change.

“Despite all the progress we’ve made on the environmental front in recent decades, some policymakers still seem to think targeting U.S. beef producers and consumers will make a huge impact on global emissions,” says Colin Woodall, NCBA senior vice president of government affairs. “That’s why we drafted our Principles – to give the folks who are proposing new public policies the opportunity to outline the specific costs and estimated benefits of their proposals.”

You may think the #GreenNewDeal is some far out but case dream. If you're involved in #agriculture you'd better view it as a threat to your entire way of life. https://t.co/Gp6Oe53HdX
— Casey Kimbrell (@CBKimbrell) February 8, 2019

Like the part where is says "work with farmers & ranchers to create sustainable, pollution and greenhouse gas free food". So basically the gov't will retrain us how they think we should farm & ranch. No thanks!
— Brandon Bell (@bjbell60) February 8, 2019

The language is very vague. Almost like those who drafted it don't know much about agriculture in the US. Farm bill supports most of what they list.
— Jeannine Otto (@AgNews_Otto) February 7, 2019

I feel like I need more details. But I’m excited we’re having this conversation and as a rancher I’d like to be part of making things better instead of worse.
— MegRaeB.bsky.social (@MegRaeB) February 8, 2019

Lots of wiggle room, kind of like now. Define ‘feasible’..🤷🏽‍♂️
— Doug Doughty (@_dpdoughty) February 7, 2019

Research and Statistics Shows Improvement on “Farting Cows”

While much of what is suggested for agriculture is already being handled through programs funded in the farm bill, the mention of “farting cows” shows a divide between rural and urban America.

According to data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), direct greenhouse gas emissions that come from cattle and their manure represents 2% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, or less than 0.4% of global emissions.

Research by Virginia Tech and USDA-ARS determined that if all livestock were eliminated from production agriculture it would only reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 2.6% or 0.36% globally. However, the shift would cause changes in dietary needs as people would not be able to receive enough of several different essential dietary nutrients without animal proteins. There would be deficiencies in calcium, vitamins A and B12 and some important fatty acids. Ultimately, resulting in higher caloric diets .

“A take-home message from the study was that we need to expand the way we think about food production to account for the complex consequences of changing any individual piece within the wider food system,” says Robin R. White, a professor of Animal and Poultry Science at Virginia Tech.

The announcement of the Green New Deal is something that Sara Place, NCBA’s senior director of sustainable beef production research, hopes will serve as starting off point for a conversation between the politicians supporting it and livestock producers.

“I think it highlights the large divide between people that are interacting with the environment and growing food every day, and those that are concerned about environmental issues, but ignorant,” Place says.

The U.S. has become one of the most efficient producers of both beef and dairy in the world during the past few decades, helping curtail the amount of emissions.

Since 1977, the U.S. beef cattle herd has decreased by 33% and the same amount of beef is being produced. A Journal of Animal Science study by Dr. Jude Capper showed that comparing 1977 versus 2007 to produce 1 kg of beef it took 69.9% of the animals, 81.4% of feedstuffs, 87.9% of the water, and only 67.0% of the land required. Modern beef systems produce 81.9% of the manure, 82.3% CH4, and 88.0% N2O per billion kilograms of beef compared with production systems in 1977.

Dairy has seen wide improvements as well. A study published in the Journal of Animal Science ( Capper et al., 2009 ) showed that modern dairy production has become much more efficient. Comparing 1944 versus 2007 it takes 21% fewer cows, 35% less water and 10% less land produce 1 billion kg of milk. All while emitting 37% less of a carbon footprint. Other greenhouse gas impacts included a reduction of 24% for manure, 43% for CH4, and 56% for N2O per billion kg of milk compared with equivalent milk from historical dairying.

Even with these gains in recent history to curtail greenhouse gas emissions in beef and dairy production there still appears to be a need to share that information with political leaders.