The Department of Agriculture has withdrawn a proposed rule to revisit biotech regulations and says it will “re-engage” with stakeholders. USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service said Monday it wants more information from stakeholders to “determine the most effective, science-based approach for regulating the products of modern biotechnology, while protecting plant health.” Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue says USDA needs to “take a fresh look, explore policy alternatives, and continue the dialogue,” regarding biotech regulations. APHIS oversees the importation, interstate movement and environmental release of genetically engineered organisms to ensure they do not pose a plant pest risk. Perdue says the U.S. needs regulations and policies that are “are flexible and adaptable” to the ongoing biotechnology innovations in the industry today.

The National Corn Growers Association issued this statement today, in response to the Administration’s announcement that it will withdraw the Part 340 proposed rule in favor of taking a closer look at reforming biotechnology regulatory processes.

“The National Corn Growers Association is encouraged by today’s announcement and applauds USDA’s reconsideration of the proposed rule,” said NCGA President and North Dakota Farmer Kevin Skunes.

“The proposed rule had desirable elements, but the deficiencies found in key areas would have rendered the overall product unworkable for innovation and America’s farm families.

On behalf of America’s corn farmers, I commend Secretary Perdue for the serious nature with which he has approached this important and sizable task. The intent he has expressed in regard to working with stakeholders is heartening. We look forward to collaborating with him to ensure that our nation’s system for regulating agricultural biotechnology facilitates both the current and future needs of innovations important to families on and off the farm.”

(NAFB) The House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology announced that it may soon hold a hearing on the International Agency for Cancer Research’s 2015 assessment that glyphosate is a carcinogen. The Committee has been looking into the IARC, which receives American taxpayer funding, and it sent a letter to the agency’s director citing concerns over the “scientific integrity” of the group. The letter also sheds light on the allegations of data manipulation in the IARC review of glyphosate. It also questions the involvement of Christopher Portier, a statistician with no previous experience regarding glyphosate, who testified during a high-profile European hearing that he was in favor of banning the herbicide. At the same time Portier chaired the IARC Working Group that proposed the assessment on glyphosate, he was also a private litigation consultant for two law firms, directly benefitting from the classification of glyphosate as a “probable” carcinogen. The House Committee may soon be asking IARC officials to appear before them to give testimony about the methodology they used to come up with their findings.

The National Pork Producers Council wants Congress to renew its commitment to funding ag research. That was the message during testimony on Thursday before a subcommittee of the House Space, Science, and Technology Committee. NPPC Chief Veterinarian Dr. Liz Wagner told the Subcommittee on Research and Technology that the U.S. is the most technologically innovative food producer in the world. America also has the safest and most affordable food supply in the world. All of that is because of a commitment to agricultural research. As an example, Wagner said research helped the pork industry deal with the Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Virus, as well as the H1N1 virus. Wagner says a virus that the pork industry is particularly concerned about is Foot-and-Mouth Disease. The U.S. doesn’t have enough FMD vaccine on hand to deal with a potential outbreak. An unchecked outbreak of FMD would cost the pork, corn, and soybean sectors over $200 billion dollars through the next ten years. Wagner said the federal commitment to research has dropped off in recent decades. Between 1970 and 2008, half of the USDA budget went to research. By 2013, that number had dropped to 30 percent.

President Trump often cited withdrawing from the North American Free Trade Agreement as a way to reduce America’s trade deficit with Mexico. However, a Forbes Dot Com article says that isn’t the way it works. If the U.S. should no longer be involved in NAFTA, all three countries revert to Most Favored Nation trade status under the World Trade Organization. In order to join the WTO, each country had to agree to limit its tariffs to a certain level. The average U.S. tariff on imports from non-FTA countries is 2.8 percent. The World Bank says Mexico’s average tariff is 4.5 percent. If freed from NAFTA, the president could increase tariffs on Mexican imports to help reduce the imbalance. However, WTO rules require the U.S. to also raise tariffs by an equal amount to all of its other partners that don’t have a free trade agreement with America. Most economists say there is no scenario under which withdrawing from NAFTA will be a good thing for America. Should the U.S. follow through on the withdrawal threat, Mexico and Canada would look elsewhere for free trade agreements. Canada has a new free trade agreement with the European Union, while Mexico and the EU are currently negotiating a free trade agreement of their own.

(NAFB)

The House Ways and Means Committee tax overhaul plan released Thursday provides a blueprint for tax reform. The plan is essentially a set of promotional documents, with many details unaccounted for.

The documents say the estate tax would be repealed, and that the legislation will lower individual and corporate tax rates. Agriculture groups are reviewing the first draft of the legislation.

The American Farm Bureau Federation applauded the introduction, but acknowledged that AFBF staff will be studying the proposal to ensure the plan “reduces the tax burden” on farmers and ranchers.

The National Farmers Union opposes the tax plan, while supporting efforts to simplify the tax code. Farmers Union President Roger Johnson says the tax plan would “shift the nation’s tax burden from the top earners in our country to the backs of American family farmers, ranchers and the middle class.”

The National Biodiesel Board expressed disappointment because the plan does not include an extension of the biodiesel tax incentives. And, the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives also expressed opposition to the tax plan, as the organization says eliminating Section 199 “would raise taxes on millions of farmers.”

The National Pork Producers Council in testimony delivered today urged Congress to renew its commitment to funding agricultural research to help America’s farmers feed a growing world population, improve public health and strengthen U.S. national security by ensuring America’s food security.

NPPC chief veterinarian Dr. Liz Wagstrom told the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology Subcommittee on Research and Technology that the United States is the “lowest-cost and most technologically innovative producer of food in the world… and has the safest food on the planet” because of the country’s historical commitment to research.

She pointed out that research helped the U.S. pork industry deal with diseases such as Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome and the H1N1 influenza virus. But, she added, U.S. agriculture remains vulnerable to emerging and foreign animal diseases.

A disease the pork industry and other livestock sectors are particularly concerned about, Wagstrom testified, is Foot-and-Mouth Disease (FMD).

The United States doesn’t have enough vaccine to address an FMD outbreak, which, if unchecked, would cost the pork, beef, corn and soybean sectors, alone, $200 billion over 10 years. NPPC is urging Congress to establish and fund through the next Farm Bill a manufacturer-managed FMD vaccine bank and is requesting funds for animal disease diagnostics and research that “can help address the alarming gap in the government’s preparedness for an FMD outbreak.”