June, 07 2012, 12:56pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Judith McGeary, 512-484-8821
Mark Kastel, 608-625-2042
Farmers, Ranchers and Consumers Fight USDA Animal ID Scheme
View Agribusiness-Friendly Proposal as Threat to Free Commerce
WASHINGTON
A coalition of agriculture and consumer organizations from across the nation is challenging the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) decision to push ahead with a complicated and expensive Animal ID program. The organizations sent a joint letter to the Congressional Office of Management and Budget (OMB) this week arguing that the rule should be sent back to the USDA because of the impacts it will have on family farmers, ranchers, related businesses, and other citizens who own animals.
The letter cites research from North Dakota State University which estimated the costs for cattle as more than five times greater per animal than the USDA's estimate, potentially creating costs of over a billion dollars per year.
The letter from the coalition also points out that USDA "arbitrarily assumed that only 30 million cattle" would be subject to the new regulatory requirements, even though this assumption was "contradicted by the publicly available data on the cattle industry."
By underestimating both the number of animals affected and the cost per animal, the USDA estimated the fiscal impacts at under $100 million, claiming that the rule is not "economically significant" and placing it on the fast-track to be finalized after review by the OMB, which serves as the fiscal review agency for all regulatory matters.
"The USDA has not done their due diligence investigating the true fiscal impact this will have on the livestock industry," said Mark A. Kastel, Senior Farm Policy Analyst at The Cornucopia Institute. "Our concern is that the economic burden of this rulemaking, some of which is duplicative of many effective disease control programs currently utilized, will fall unfairly on family-scale farmers and ranchers."
The coalition's critique provides additional information on the disproportionate impact on small farmers due to the on-ranch costs for equipment and labor involved in tagging and long-term recordkeeping. The coalition also notes that the agency failed to address the increased costs to livestock-related businesses, such as for certified veterinarians and sale barns.
In addition to beef and dairy cattle, the USDA's proposed rule imposes new regulatory requirements for poultry producers without any assessment of the costs. The letter states, "with respect to poultry, the agency conducted no analysis of the costs in its Regulatory Impact Analysis." This deficiency on the part of the USDA could have significant repercussions not only for farmers, but for a growing number of private citizens, in "both rural and urban settings, who own a few birds for food, show, or as pets."
For more than seven years, the USDA and Agribusinesses have been pushing various animal identification proposals. Farmers, ranchers and consumer organizations have identified many shortcomings and impractical requirements in these proposals that would be harmful for small business and independent livestock operations and allege that the primary benefits of any such widespread program will accrue to major agribusinesses focusing on expanding exports.
"The coalition urges the OMB," according to Judith McGeary, Executive Director of the Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance, "to return the rule to USDA for a thorough and complete analysis, which must acknowledge that the rule is economically significant."
The Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based nonprofit farm policy research group, is dedicated to the fight for economic justice for the family-scale farming community. Their Organic Integrity Project acts as a corporate and governmental watchdog assuring that no compromises to the credibility of organic farming methods and the food it produces are made in the pursuit of profit.
LATEST NEWS
X Suspends Journalist Ken Klippenstein Over Publication of JD Vance Dossier
"The 'free speech absolutist' has once again silenced a journalist he didn't like," said one observer.
Sep 26, 2024
X—the social media platform formerly known as Twitter—suspended Ken Klippenstein's account Thursday after the investigative journalist posted an article containing a link to a dossier on Republican U.S. vice presidential candidate JD Vance that allegedly came from an Iranian hack of former President Donald Trump's 2024 campaign.
Klippenstein, who formerly worked at The Intercept, said on his paid Substack Thursday that his X account was suspended for violating the platform's ban on posting private information.
"I know that it is general practice to delete 'private' information from leaks and classified documents, but in this case, not only is Vance an elected official and vice presidential candidate, but the information is readily available for anyone to buy," he wrote. Vance is also the junior U.S. senator from Ohio.
Klippenstein continued:
We should be honest about so-called private information contained in the dossier and "private" information in general. It is readily available to anyone who can buy it. The campaign purchased this information from commercial information brokers. Those dealers make huge profits from selling this data. And the media knows it, because they buy the data for reporting purposes, just like the campaign. They don't like to mention that though.
According to Klippenstein, the corporate media has "been sitting on" the dossier since June, "declining to publish in fear of finding itself at odds with the government's campaign against 'foreign malign influence.'"
"If the document had been hacked by some 'Anonymous'-like hacker group, the news media would be all over it," he contended. "I'm just not a believer of the news media as an arm of the government, doing its work combatting foreign influence. Nor should it be a gatekeeper of what the public should know."
Klippenstein shared a general overview of the contents of the dossier, which he described as "a 271-page research paper the Trump campaign prepared to vet" Vance, pulling out select quotes from the document:
- "Vance has been one of the chief obstructionists to U.S. efforts to providing [sic] assistance to Ukraine."
- "Vance criticized public health experts and elected officials for supporting Black Lives Matter protests while condemning anti-lockdown [Covid] protests."
- "Vance 'embraced non-interventionism."
- "In 2020, Vance criticized President Trump's airstrike killing Iranian General Qasem Soleimani, worrying it would continue to bog down America in the Middle East to the advantage of China."
- "Vance suggested that the country had been entangled in wars in the Middle East so 'financial elites' could profit from the rise of China."
"While the news media has paraphrased some of the contents of the dossier, what they haven't done is provide the American people with the underlying document, in the language in which it appeared, so they can decide for themselves what they think," Klippenstein said. "You decide for yourself."
An X spokesperson toldZeteo's Justin Baragona that "Ken Klippenstein was temporarily suspended for violating our rules on posting unredacted private personal information, specifically Sen. Vance's physical addresses and the majority of his Social Security number."
The Federal Bureau of Investigation is investigating the Trump campaign's claim of an Iranian hack. Iran's government denies any such action.
Numerous observers accused Musk—a self-described "free speech absolutist"—of hypocrisy over X's suspension of Klippenstein's account, although it is not known if the billionaire owner had any role in the decision. Other users also reported punitive action against their accounts over the dossier post.
"I'm old enough to remember when free speech zealot Elon Musk was outraged by Twitter's censorship," journalist Seth Hettena said on X.
Jacobin writer Branko Marcetic posted that "this scenario is actually a good preview of the future none of us want, but that we're heading to currently: A major story breaks, establishment press refuses to cover it, and the indy media that does is throttled by tech censors."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Helene's Catastrophic Potential Stokes Fear Amid Florida Insurance Crisis
Florida already has one of the nation's largest shares of homeowners "who don't have meaningful insurance."
Sep 26, 2024
Hurricane Helene continued barreling toward Florida on Thursday, highlighting the impacts of the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency, including difficulties securing insurance coverage in regions most affected by extreme weather.
"The Air Force Hurricane Hunters found that the maximum sustained winds have increased to near 120 mph," the National Hurricane Center said Thursday afternoon. "This makes Helene a dangerous Category 3 major hurricane. Additional strengthening is expected before Helene makes landfall in the Florida Big Bend this evening."
Federal Emergency Management Agency Director Deanne Criswell said during a White House briefing that forecasts suggest Helene will make a "dead-on hit to Tallahassee" and "this is going to be a multistate event with the potential for significant impacts from Florida all the way to Tennessee."
Although this Atlantic hurricane season hasn't yet been as intense as U.S. scientists expected, trends in extreme weather disasters have led some insurance companies to exit the Florida market in recent years. Farmers Insurance announced last year that it would stop covering property in the state, in an effort to "effectively manage risk exposure."
While the Insurance Information Institute, an industry trade group, said in May that "legislative reforms passed in 2022 and 2023 have created a pathway to a stable Florida market," reporting from this week shows that residents—who aren't ultrarich—are still struggling to get and keep coverage.
"Florida ranks sixth among states with the largest shares of homeowners who don't have meaningful insurance. About 18% of homeowners across the state—about 1 in 6—are without it," NBC Newsnoted Wednesday. "Nearly 20% of Florida homeowners pay $4,000 or more a year for homeowners insurance—the largest share in the country, according to the Census Bureau."
According toThe Palm Beach Post, the global reinsurance broker Gallagher Re said in a Wednesday analysis that "landfall in the Big Bend or Panhandle region of Florida as a major hurricane (Category 3, 4, or 5) has historically translated to insured losses in the low single-digit billions."
"But Helene is not a typical storm," the firm explained. "Given Helene's very large wind radius, this would still bring hurricane-force wind gusts and high storm surge to coastal areas in the heavily populated Tampa Bay area, tropical storm force winds across most of the Florida peninsula, Georgia, the Carolinas, Tennessee, and southern Appalachia."
Gallagher Re suggested that "Helene's private insurance market losses should be expected to land in the range" of $3 billion to $6 billion, but if the hurricane "unexpectedly" moves toward Tampa, it could be over $10 billion.
Florida isn't the only state facing insurance trouble thanks to climate chaos. Voxreported last year that "insuring property in California has been a dicey proposition," pointing to torrential rainfall that "caused as much as $1.5 billion in insured losses" and "the costliest wildfires in U.S. history, including the 2018 Camp Fire, which led to more than $10 billion in losses."
Amid the intertwined climate and insurance crises, scientists, campaigners, and homeowners have demanded policy action—and elevated criticism of right-wing attacks on crucial programs.
In a June blog post, Rachel Cleetus, policy director with the Union of Concerned Scientists' Climate and Energy program, wrote that "Congress and regulators need to ensure more transparency in the insurance market on how companies are evaluating risks as they make decisions about premiums. There also needs to be better information on what kinds of incentives companies are providing for adaptation measures that would help reduce risks."
"Alongside the necessary but ultimately bounded role of insurance in a warming world, public and private decision-makers must also shift investments away from business-as-usual maladaptive and risky choices to more resilient ones," Cleetus continued. "The nation must scale up resources for climate resilience and ensure they are reaching communities in a just and equitable way. Funding for safe, affordable, and climate-resilient housing must be expanded."
The Climate & Community Institute on Wednesday also shared recommendations in a new report—Shared Fates: A Housing Resilience Policy Vision for the Home Insurance Crisis—using case studies from California, Florida, and Minnesota.
"We propose the creation of Housing Resilience Agencies (HRAs), either by states or the federal government," the institute said. These agencies would:
- Provide public disaster insurance that offers fair and equitable protections;
- Coordinate and oversee comprehensive, community-oriented disaster risk reduction;
- Address existing market failures by providing coverage for oft-neglected sectors such as multifamily housing providers, mobile home dwellers, and heirs properties; and
- Host public risk models, climate risk advisory councils, and diverse governing boards to inform decision-making in a transparent and democratic manner.
"In order to confront the growing housing safety and affordability crisis, we need to understand our fates as shared," the institute added. "We must reimagine our home insurance system for it to reduce risk and provide equitable and fair protection."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Giuliani Permanently Disbarred in DC Over Effort to Overturn 2020 Election
"Imagine once being dubbed 'America's Mayor' and having an illustrious legal and political career, and throwing it all away for Donald Trump," said one observer.
Sep 26, 2024
Former Republican New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani can no longer practice law in the nation's capital after a federal appeals court on Thursday concurred with a disciplinary committee's recommendation for permanent disbarment over his efforts to "undermine the results of the 2020 presidential election" in service of then-President Donald Trump's "Big Lie."
In a one-page ruling, the Washington, D.C. Court of Appeals permanently revoked Giuliani's law license, finding that the former federal prosecutor and personal attorney for Trump failed to explain why he should not be subject to reciprocal punishment after the New York Supreme Court's Appellate Division disbarred him in July for lying about the 2020 election.
The New York tribunal found that Giuliani "repeatedly and intentionally made false statements, some of which were perjurious, to the federal court, state lawmakers, the public... and this court concerning the 2020 presidential election, in which he baselessly attacked and undermined the integrity of this country's electoral process."
Giuliani is also facing criminal charges related to alleged election subversion in Arizona and Georgia. He filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy last December following a $148 million defamation judgment for falsely accusing two former Georgia election workers of engaging in a nonexistent conspiracy to "steal" the 2020 election.
These blows, culminating in Thursday's D.C. disbarment, mark a stunning fall from grace for Giuliani, who, as "America's Mayor" in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, was named Time's "Person of the Year." Giuliani parlayed his popularity into a 2008 run for president in which he was an early GOP front-runner.
Giuliani spokesperson Ted Goodman slammed the D.C. court's ruling as a "miscarriage of justice."
"Members of the legal community who want to protect the integrity of our justice system should immediately speak out against this partisan, politically motivated decision," Goodman said in a statement.
Some observers linked Giuliani's disbarment to Thursday's indictment of current New York City Mayor Eric Adams, a Democrat, on corruption charges.
"Tough day for New York City mayors,"
quippedDemocracy Docket founder Marc Elias.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular