Agriculture
Chair: Blanche Lincoln (D-AR)
- Max Baucus (D-MT)
- Michael Bennet (D-CO)
- Sherrod Brown (D-OH)
- Bob Casey (D-PA)
- Kent Conrad (D-ND)
- Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)
- Tom Harkin (D-IA)
- Amy Klobuchar (D-MN)
- Pat Leahy (D-VT)
- Ben Nelson (D-NE)
- Debbie Stabenow (D-MI)
- Saxby Chambliss (R-GA)
- Thad Cochran (R-MS)
- John Cornyn (R-TX)
- Chuck Grassley (R-IA)
- Mike Johanns (R-NE)
- Dick Lugar (R-IN)
- Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
- Pat Roberts (R-KS)
- John R. Thune (R-SD)
Appropriations
Chair: Daniel Inouye (D-HI) Ag Sub-Committee
Chair: Herb Kohl (D-WI)
- Byron Dorgan (D-ND)
- Dick Durbin (D-IL)
- Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
- Tom Harkin (D-IA)
- Tim Johnson (D-SD)
- Ben Nelson (D-NE)
- Jack Reed (D-RI)
- Robert Bennett (R-UT)
- Christopher Bond (R-MO)
- Sam Brownback (R-KS)
- Thad Cochran (R-MS)
- Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
- Arlen Specter (R-PA)
Health, Education, Labor, & Pensions
- Chris Dodd (D-CT)
Agriculture
Chair: B Collin Peterson (D-MN)
V. Chair: B Tim Holden (D-PA)
B Joe Baca (D-CA)
- John Boccieri (D-OH)
B* Leonard Boswell (D-IA)
- Bobby Bright (D-AL)
B* Dennis Cardoza (D-CA)
- Travis Childers (D-MS)
B Jim Costa (D-CA)
- Henry Cuellar (D-TX)
- Kathy Dahlkemper (D-PA)
B Brad Ellsworth (D-IN)
- Debbie Halvorson (D-IL)
B Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-SD)
- Steve Kagen (D-WI)
- Larry Kissell (D-NC)
B Frank Kratovil (D-MD)
- Betsy Markey (D-CO)
B Jim Marshall (D-GA)
P Eric Massa (D-NY)
B Mike McIntyre (D-NC)
- Walt Minnick (D-ID)
B Earl Pomeroy (D-ND)
- Mark Schauer (D-MI)
- Kurt Schrader (D-OR)
B David Scott (D-GA)
B Zachary Space (D-OH)
- Timothy Walz (D-MN)
- Frank Lucas (R-OK)
- Bill Cassidy (R-LA)
- K. Michael Conaway (R-TX)
- Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE)
- Virginia Foxx (R-NC)
- Bob Goodlatte (R-VA)
- Sam Graves (R-MO)
- Timothy Johnson (R-IL)
- Steve King (R-IA)
- Robert Latta (R-OH)
- Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-MO)
- Cynthia Lummis (R-WY)
- Jerry Moran (R-KS)
- Randy Neugebauer (R-TX)
- Phil Roe (R-TN)
- Mike Rogers (R-AL)
- Jean Schmidt (R-OH)
- Adrian Smith (R-NE)
- Glenn Thompson (R-PA) *=House Organic Caucus member B=Blue Dog Democrat
Appropriations
Chair: Dave Obey (D-WI) Ag Sub-Committee
Chair: P Rosa DeLauro (D-CT)
- Sanford Bishop (D-GA)
* Allen Boyd (D-FL)
- Lincoln Davis (D-TN)
*P Sam Farr (D-CA)
*P Maurice D. Hinchey (D-NY)
P Jesse L. Jackson, Jr. (D-IL)
P Marcy Kaptur (D-OH)
- Jack Kingston (R-GA)
- Rodney Alexander (R-LA)
- Jo Ann Emerson (R-MO)
* Tom Latham (R-IA) *=House Organic Caucus member
P=Congressional Progressive Caucus
Education and Labor
P Chair: George Miller (D-CA)
- Jason Altmire (D-PA)
- Robert Andrews (D-NJ)
- Timothy Bishop (D-NY)
P Yvette Clarke (D-NY)
- Joe Courtney (D-CT)
- Susan Davis (D-CA)
P Marcia Fudge (D-OH)
P Raul Grijalva (D-AZ)
P Phil Hare (D-IL)
- Ruben Hinojosa (D-TX)
P Mazie Hirono (D-HI)
- Rush Holt (D-NJ)
- Dale Kildee (D-MI)
P Dennis Kucinich (D-OH)
P Dave Loebsack (D-IA)
- Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY)
P Donald Payne (D-NJ)
- Jared Polis (D-CO)
- Robert Scott (D-VA)
- Joe Sestak (D-PA)
- Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH)
P John Tierney (D-MA)
- Dina Titus (D-NV)
- Paul Tonko (D-NY)
P Lynn Woolsey (D-CA)
- David Wu (D-OR)
- Buck McKeon (R-CA)
- Judy Biggert (R-IL)
- Rob Bishop (R-UT)
- Bill Cassidy (R-LA)
- Michael Castle (R-DE)
- Vernon Ehlers (R-MI)
- Luis F Fortuno (R-PR)
- Brett Guthrie (R-KY)
- Peter Hoekstra (R-MI)
- Duncan D. Hunter (R-CA)
- John Kline (R-MN)
- Kenny Marchant (R-TX)
- Tom McClintock (R-CA)
- Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA)
- Thomas Petri (R-WI)
- Phil Roe (R-TN)
- Todd Russell Platts (R-PA)
- Tom Price (R-GA)
- Mark Souder (R-IN)
- GT Thompson (R-PA)
- Joe Wilson (R-SC) P=Congressional Progressive Caucus
Did you know that arsenic pesticides are still legal? The EPA actually tried to ban several organic arsenicals in 2006, but then caved to cotton industry lobbying and decided in 2009 to continue allowing a pesticide called monosodium methanearsonate (MSMA) on cotton. And all this went down without a peep from the sustainable ag community (as far as I'm aware). More below.
UPDATE: One more thought to add to this. The reason why cotton growers were so adamant that they need to use MSMA is because the weeds have evolved resistance to Roundup. With most cotton in the U.S. getting doused with Roundup because it's genetically engineered Roundup Ready cotton, no wonder the weeds evolved resistance. So there's the result. Arsenic. And the biotech industry markets its products by saying that GE seeds result in less pesticide use.
More than 30 years ago, Congress identified factory farms as water pollution sources to be regulated under the Clean Water Act's permit program.
But under a Bush administration regulation challenged by the environmental groups in this lawsuit, large facilities were able to escape government regulation by claiming, without government verification, that they do not discharge into waterways protected by the Clean Water Act.
Under the settlement reached May 26, the EPA will initiate a new national effort to track down factory farms operating without permits and determine if they must be regulated.
More here. What happens next will determine if the EPA actually is an agency that protects the environment or if, as The Onion suggests, it should just be renamed The Agency.
An EPA intern wrote a blog post called "Living Without Meat," recounting her experiences as a vegetarian along with several reasons why giving up meat and/or animal products is a greener way to live. (As a caveat for our blog, I'd like to add - even though the EPA blog post does not - that many of the statistics about the harm meat does to the planet are specific to factory farmed meat and if giving meat up is not an option for you, buying sustainably raised meat directly from a farmer or raising animals for meat yourself are great alternatives to the factory farmed stuff. Also, obviously, cutting down on meat is a happy medium between eating as much meat as the average American and giving it up entirely.)
The EPA blogger concludes:
Regulations can be made to help prevent the effects of meat production, but the easiest way to lessen the environmental impacts is to become a vegetarian or vegan. The vegetarian/vegan alternative can be easily accomplished in today's markets and restaurants.
Then the blog post says:
About the author: Nicole Reising is an intern at the Office of Children's Health Protection. She is a sophomore studying non-profit management at Indiana University.
Editor's note: As stated on the "About" page, "The opinions and comments expressed in Greenversations are those of the authors alone and do not reflect an Agency policy, endorsement, or action, and EPA does not verify the accuracy of the contents of the blog."
Why should this be controversial? The author, who is interning at a place called the Environmental Protection Agency, is advocating action that would protect the environment. Yet the Farm Bureau is all pissed off.
"While this is a position taken by an intern of the agency, EPA should control its blog space," said AFBP President Bob Stallman. "What is written on its blog comes across as its official position toward farmers and ranchers that it regulates and shows a terrible disregard for them and the agriculture industry."
Right. You're just pissed off that the way Big Ag makes money is inconsistent with the needs of human health and the planet and that ultimately you'll be forced to change - whether by the EPA or by Mother Nature.
Note that Stallman is someone who believes that "there is no generally agreed upon scientific assessment of the exact impact or extend of carbon emissions from human activities, their impact on past decades of warming or how they will affect future climate changes."
Below, you can see a few other quotes from a speech he gave in January. This guy's pretty disconnected from the realities of climate change, pollution, and even human health. He's not somebody who should be commanding newspaper headlines, nor should he receive credit for speaking for America's farmers.
Living near farms that use the weed killer atrazine may up the risk of a rare birth defect, according to a study presented this past Friday [February 5] at the annual meeting of the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine in Chicago.
About 1 in 5000 babies born in the U.S. each year suffers from gastroschisis, in which part of the intestines bulges through a separation in the belly, according to the March of Dimes. The rate of gastroschisis has risen 2- to 4-fold over the last three decades, according to Dr. Sarah Waller, of the University of Washington, Seattle, and colleagues. [...]
The researchers looked at more than 4,400 birth certificates from 1987-2006 - including more than 800 cases of gastroschisis -- and U.S. Geological Survey databases of agricultural spraying between 2001 and 2006.
Using Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards to define high chemical exposure levels in surface water, they found that the closer a mother lived to a site of high surface water contamination by atrazine, the more likely she was to deliver an infant with gastroschisis.
The birth defect occurred more often among infants who lived less than 25 km (about 15 miles) from one of these sites, and it occurred more often among babies conceived between March and May, when agricultural spraying is common.
President Obama just gave a fantastic gift to Chesapeake Bay this week with newly released draft reports about his executive order to restore and protect the Chesapeake. The draft reports put the EPA in charge of controlling nutrient pollution. Nutrient pollution is the polite way to refer to the problem - it's farm runoff and factory farm waste that are killing the Chesapeake. Another source of pollution is stormwater runoff from nearby cities. No doubt lawn fertilizer is playing a role in the problem. The EPA has already announced that it will fulfill its role in the executive order by expanding its regulation of CAFOs. Hooray to that!
According to the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition:
The draft reports are the first step, with preliminary recommendations. The Federal Leadership Committee will use the reports to prepare a draft coordinated strategy which will be released, with final versions of the reports, for public comment in November. The Administration intends to finalize the strategy in May 2010 but has indicated that some agencies can go forward with actions before the strategy is final.
For more information about the plight of Chesapeake Bay, I highly highly recommend reading the Oysters chapter of the book Bottomfeeder.
Sens. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) and Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) are reportedly considering (sub. req'd) offering amendments to [a major appropriations bill to] force the Environmental Protection Agency to raise the blend level [for ethanol in gasoline] above the current 10 percent maximum as an amendment to the EPA appropriation bill. The corn-state senators would like to see blend limits raised to 15 percent, and E&E reports that it looks likely that the potential amendments would block funding for the EPA if they don't move forward on raising the blend limit. [...]
But the EPA faces opposition to increasing ethanol levels in gasoline from environmentalists, livestock producers, refiners, and other groups. Concerns have been raised about whether most engines can handle higher blends, and recent studies indicate that the use of ethanol may increase global warming. The general impression among opponents of the higher blend is that it doesn't really benefit anyone other than the corn lobby.
I hope Congress will let the EPA make this determination based on all the relevant factors. I understand that senators like to protect major industries in their home states, but increasing the ethanol blend limit isn't even universally good for farmers. As Sheppard indicates, conventional livestock producers could end up paying higher prices for feed.
CLA board chairman nominates Jay Vroom to EPA advisory group
Jan 3, 2008
CropLife America Chairman Eric Wintemute has nominated CLA president and CEO Jay Vroom to the new ag advisory committee being formed by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Nominations are currently being accepted by EPA for its Farm, Ranch and Rural Communities Advisory Committee, according to Wintemute, who was acting on behalf of the CropLife board of directors.
"Jay Vroom is eminently qualified to contribute to the function and purpose of this Committee both from the perspective of his leadership of the plant science industry, but also Vroom's broader agriculture experience," he said.
The letter of nomination details Vroom's life-long association with agriculture from his being raised on the family farm in Illinois to the many agriculture issues he has championed on behalf of CropLife America and the global crop science network of CropLife International.
In his nearly 20-year service as CEO of CropLife, Mr. Vroom has served on the EPA's Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee and numerous advisory committees established to support the Food Quality Protection Act.
His family farm was one of the first participants in the soil conservation programs established by the U. S. government in the last century, and Vroom has seen to the continuation of these farming practices today as the principal owner of that Illinois farm land.
That was just the nomination. So did the President of the biotech/pesticide industry group get appointed to the EPA board? Yup.
The EPA said no to California's aerial spraying of 2 pesticides to combat the light brown apple moth. It's good news but not good enough... CA will probably find something else nasty to spray.
You know, being out of work as I am, I'm not one to suggest that the recession is good for us. But check out this headline that the recession means more money spent on gardens and less on cigarettes and alcohol. So I guess the next time I look at my bank balance and cry, I should tell myself that it's not all bad.
Dave Murphy gives us his $.02 on the new movie Food Inc. We're still in countdown mode until this film is in theatres. The date to mark on your calendar is June 12.
Here's another good one from Laskawy - his comments on Obama USDA nominee Rajiv Shah. Laskawy's a lot nicer about this than I am. He doesn't use any four-letter words.
Fooducate tells us about recession shopping trends. Like reducing impulse buys, cooking at home instead of eating out, and switching from sit-down restaurants to fast food ones or from grocery stores to superstores.
However bad your food is, just be glad you're not Russian. I'm not dissing vodka and borscht - according to this article, Russians too poor to buy regular food are instead opting for spoiled food.
Since AAF is on hiatus until September, I guess he won't mind if I pick up water issues in the meantime...
India can coordinate a nationwide election for over 700 million eligible voters, yet "the world's largest democracy" doesn't seem to be too concerned with the fact that it still can't ensure access to clean water for its rural poor -
That incredible coordination doesn't translate to the treatment of water. India still lacks sanitation facilities for about 700 million people. On top of that, 200 million don't have access to drinking water. Those that do have no guarantee it is actually safe.
Great piece from my old hometown paper, The Newark (NJ) Star-Ledger, on the federal crackdown on oceangoing cargo and cruise ships that use our oceans (because they do belong to all of us...) as their illegal waste dumping grounds.
The Center for Biological Diversity has filed suit against US EPA under the Clean Water Act for failing to recognize the impacts of ocean acidification.
A "voluntary" (uh-oh...) plan has been struck amongst six Asia-Pacific nations to protect the threatened Coral Triangle.
15 years after originally banning the granular form of carbofuran, an insecticide sold under the brand name Furadan, which was so toxic that just one grain was enough to kill a bird - USEPA on Monday finally officially banned use of the chemical in any form on food crops meant for human consumption -
FMC Corp. officials could not immediately be reached for comment. The company said on its Web site that Furadan "remains a useful product, vital to the sustainability of agriculture" and that its proper use "does not create a risk to human health, wildlife or the environment."
It's always great to see corporations attempt to pass of their deadly chemicals as a "sustainable solution", isn't it? While they're at it, maybe FMC Corporation can explain why a google search for 'FMC EPA investigation' brings up 18,500 hits, or why I spent a large percentage of my working life in environmental remediation back in New Jersey at their West Windsor chemical plant?
A friend of mine has just launched a new project, OrganicNation.tv. She'll be traveling the U.S. and documenting sustainable food and agriculture and you'll be able to see her footage on the site. (For full disclosure, I'm one of the project's advisors.)
Yesterday we had 2 big pieces of news. First, the announcement of $50 million to help farmers transition their land or livestock to organic (through the EQIP program at the USDA). Yay! The downside? Farmers have only 3 weeks to apply for the cash. So, let's call that one step forward. It's certainly not much more than that if some of the money might go un-used.
The two steps back came with the announcement of a major government push for ethanol. Step one is the creation of a new Biofuels Interagency Working Group that includes the cabinet secretaries for Energy, EPA, and USDA. Step two is the potential increase in the amount of ethanol allowed in our fuel - the "blend wall." It is currently set at 10% and may go to 15%.
Big Ag wants their cake and wants to eat it too. They want to be compensated for sequestering carbon but they don't want their emissions regulated AT ALL. And to my knowledge, the Waxman Markey bill totally exempts ag... but with the new EPA ruling that global warming & CO2 emissions harm human health, they are getting very very afraid.
Sen. Johanns (R-NE) (the former USDA secretary under Bush) is sponsoring a bill to exempt ag from the new EPA decision. That's bad. The Senate needs to hear from us LOUD AND CLEAR. One-third of greenhouse gas emissions come from ag. About 18% comes from meat production. WE DON'T WANT AG EXEMPTED. What's the point of a regulation if you exempt some of the worst offenders? The Senate must oppose Johanns' bill.
When the EPA announced Friday it had determined that greenhouse gases may endanger public health or welfare, a collective shiver went down the back of animal agriculture. The ruling now faces a 60-day public comment period. If its decision is upheld, the EPA must then act to regulate emissions. If the EPA's definition of greenhouse gases includes methane emitted by livestock, animal ag operations could be affected. - Meatingplace
When talking about food safety in the U.S. versus Europe, we often mention how Europe uses the "Precautionary Principle" - an idea that basically means "let's make sure something's safe before we use it." Seems sensible, right? In fact, you'd HOPE we're doing something rather similar to that here. But we're not. In a rather EXTREME sort of way. Check THIS out:
The Environmental Protection Agency said it would order the manufacturers of 67 pesticides to test whether their products disrupt the hormonal system of humans or animals. Congress passed a bill mandating such tests in 1996, but the agency took years to develop them and ensure their validity, officials said. The agency said that the 67 pesticides were chosen because humans and animals are widely exposed to them, not because they are necessarily the most likely disruptors of endocrinal functions. About 1,000 substances will eventually be tested, said James J. Jones, acting assistant administrator for prevention, pesticides and toxic substances. The results are due back from manufacturers around the end of next year.
Really? This stuff's never been tested? Yet we've been using it anyway? Let me tell you a little secret. The pesticide industry was born out of the chemical weapons industry. They used to test war gases on bugs to see if they would be effective on humans. After WWI, when the U.S. wanted to get rid of its Chemical Warfare Service, those who researched war gasses advertised "peaceful" uses of gas as a means of keeping themselves employed. One such peaceful use was making pesticides. In other words, if a chemical is deadly to bugs, there's a REALLY GOOD CHANCE it's not good for people. And we didn't even TEST to see if perhaps that was the case???
And now we are testing, but we're letting the manufacturers do it? I don't mind making them pay for it, but - would I be crazy to suggest that perhaps they might not be very independent and that the results might be skewed in their favors?
The outrage spawned by the hit piece on free range pork in the NYT has become a back and forth. The author James McWilliams answered his critics (which includes this blog) in The Atlantic. Paula Crossfield on Civil Eats says, "McWilliams didn't start a conversation, but instead just threw a rotten tomato."
Natasha Chart talks about biochar. And about the fact that the ag industry wants credit for sequestering carbon without being charged for their emissions. Yeah, and I want a pony.
The EPA finally decided that global warming is a problem. I'll put that in my "duh" pile along with the news that the sky is blue and chocolate is tasty.
You can't trust the supermarket companies to sell you only good, wholesome food. Yet they'll try to convince you that everything they sell is exactly that. So: skip the labels, watch what you buy, and strive for goodness, no matter where you find it.
Yay! Wolves are thriving in Oregon! I'm such a huge fan of having top predators in the food chain - sooo much good comes from it, even if we humans don't appreciate it much when the wolves kill our livestock (as in the article). Can someone please send a few wolves to Illinois? They are freaking OVERRUN with deer.
