• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

NCBA sees quick Congressional action on M-COOL

HAY MAKER

Well-known member
NCBA sees quick Congressional action on M-COOL
Thursday, December 7, 2006, 1:49 PM

National Cattlemen's Beef Association (NCBA) legislative affairs director Colin Woodall covered the waterfront of cattle industry issues in remarks Thursday morning to the Iowa Cattlemen's Association annual convention in Des Moines. But he focused on the expected changes a Congress controlled by Democrats will mean to NCBA's legislative agenda.

Perhaps most significantly, Woodall predicted Democratic control of Congress would limit NCBA's ability to get things done in Washington D.C. "Here, the past several years, NCBA's been able to go at a shotgun approach - pull the trigger and go after every single hole we can find and try to plug it, because we had a lot of friends, a lot of people who were on our side and would help us," Woodall said. "That's not so much the case anymore."

Woodall said that would make gaining permanent repeal of the estate tax, also known as the death tax, a long-time legislative goal of NCBA, much more difficult. While NCBA hasn't been successful in that effort, the group has played an important role in gaining a multi-year delay in implementation of mandatory country-of-origin labeling (M-COOL) for meat. But Woodall predicted a Democrat-controlled Congress would move implementation of M-COOL forward from its currently scheduled date of September 30th, 2008.

"I fully expect that we will see efforts here within the first couple of weeks of this new Congress to get mandatory country-of-origin labeling bumped up," Woodall said. He said Congressional supporters of M-COOL would likely try to move the implementation date forward to September 30th of 2007.

Moreover, Woodall said he believed a ban on packer ownership of livestock would get renewed attention by the 110th Congress. "[Incoming Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman] Senator Harkin is a big proponent of a ban on packer ownership, [incoming House Agriculture Committee Chairman] Mr. Peterson has been in the past as well, so we're going to see how that plays out," Woodall said. "That's going to be a hot topic."

Woodall pointed out NCBA's policy on packer ownership of livestock, which currently opposes a ban, is up for renewal at this year's NCBA annual convention, which gets underway at the end of January in Nashville, Tennessee. And he said NCBA would likely discuss adoption of a policy on ethanol at that meeting as well, especially since Nebraska Cattlemen adopted an ethanol policy at that group's annual meeting last week that opposes any further ethanol mandates and a gradual phase-out of tax benefits for ethanol production.

In the meantime, Woodall said the potential for reduced influence on Congress by NCBA heightened the need for the involvement of individual livestock producers in the legislative process. He said that's especially true since Congressional districts have become decreasingly rural, and given the legislative successes of extremist animal rights groups like the Humane Society of the U.S.

"We are being attacked - animal agriculture, agriculture as a whole, is under attack," Woodall asserted. "We're not getting the funding we used to - we have fewer true rural districts in Congress and we've got an animal rights group that is coming after us left and right," he added. "So we need your help to be involved, to stay informed on what's going on in Washington D.C., to write letters, to call your Congressman and to get your voice across, because they do listen to you."
 

Jason

Well-known member
Now econ is against producers?


from article posted
"We are being attacked - animal agriculture, agriculture as a whole, is under attack,"

from econ
They shouldn't just be attacked, they should be tarred and feathered

Nice support for producers who are the very essence of animal agriculture.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Jason said:
Now econ is against producers?


from article posted
"We are being attacked - animal agriculture, agriculture as a whole, is under attack,"

from econ
They shouldn't just be attacked, they should be tarred and feathered

Nice support for producers who are the very essence of animal agriculture.

The "they" I was referring to was the NCBA and their packer backing over producer backed policies.

Who is the "they" you were talking about, Jason?

I bet nobody ever accused you of being the sharpest pencil.
 

Jason

Well-known member
Your the idiot that replied right after the article said that animal agriculture is under attack that they should be tarred and feathered.

Your own words convict you of being a dullard.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Jason said:
Your the idiot that replied right after the article said that animal agriculture is under attack that they should be tarred and feathered.

Your own words convict you of being a dullard.

You really are funny, Jason. It has been proven time and again on this forum that you don't know what you are talking about. The recent discussion on distiller's grain, for instance. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
No Lying King, it's only been stated that Jason doesn't know what he's talking about by those who can't tell the truth if their life depended on it.

Proving it is another matter.

Talk is cheap and no cheaper than it is from you.


~SH~
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Maybe Mr. Woodall should explore and address the fact that maybe his little group is the one that is out of step...I think they may be in the same mindset as the current whitehouse administration and some of the folks on the hill that are still in denial-- but folks want a change, be they cattle producers or blue collar workers...

They are tired of a GIPSA that is told to do nothing against corruption in Big Business- just shuffle papers to make it look good :roll: -- they are tired of government agencies that are growing in power every day, like USDA which feels it is unanswerable to the public and has tried to take away more constitutional rights by imposing the greatest mandate ever put on livestock owners in history...They are tired of allowing one or two corporate bought out Congressman to refuse to enact or enforce passed legislation-- but if you look across the nation, the M-COOL law was not only supported by a majority of consumers but also a big majority of cattle producers...They are tired of a corporation bought administration/Congress which has done more to take away states rights than anyone since FDR...

And the number one thing is that unlike the Corporate bought politicians in D.C. and the NCBA, they see that the past 10-15 years of this global trade and free trade has done nothing for and in fact hurt the cattle producer or working man-- while stuffing the pockets of the multinational Corporations...... :( :mad:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
CN_Today 12/20/2006 4:12:00 PM


SD Stockgrowers Pleased – Thune on Ag Committee



Rapid City ~ The South Dakota Stockgrowers Association (SDSGA) is enthusiastic about Senator Thune’s (R-SD) recent appointment to the Senate Agricultural Committee.



According to SDSGA Past President Ken Knuppe, Buffalo Gap, S.D., the SDSGA enjoys a good working relationship with Senator Thune and his staff. “The Stockgrowers appreciate Senator Thune’s understanding of the wide variety of cattle industry issues that we bring to the table. We are fortunate to be able to sit down with Senator Thune and visit about property rights, animal health, country of origin labeling, captive supply reform and international trade – and he recognizes the importance of each of those issues, plus many more.”

According to Knuppe, Thune has shown outstanding leadership on the prairie dog issue – maintaining communication between the Stockgrowers and federal land agencies in a continued effort to control the prairie dog infestation.



But Thune realizes that cattle market issues are equally important, says Knuppe, and he has been an outspoken advocate for mandatory country of origin labeling and other competition issues needed to improve profitability for cattle ranchers.



Knuppe says that Senator Thune, along with Senator Johnson (D-SD) and Congresswoman Herseth, (D-SD) who serves on the House Ag Committee make a powerful team representing South Dakota’s cattle industry. This unity will be especially important, Knuppe says, as the Stockgrowers work to implement improved ag policy through the 2007 Farm Bill.
 

William Kanitz

Well-known member
The coming COOL law requires firms or individuals that supply covered
commodities to retailers to provide information indicating the
product's country of origin. This information must address the
production steps included in the origin claim (i.e., born, raised, and
slaughtered or produced). Self-certification documents or affidavits
may play a role in assuring that auditable records are available
throughout the chain of custody, but the auditable records must
themselves also be available to ensure credibility of country of origin
labeling claims.

To convey the country of origin information, the law states that
retailers may use a label, stamp, mark, placard, or other clear and
visible sign on the covered commodity or on the package, display,
holding unit, or bin containing the commodity at the final point of
sale to consumers.

The law requires any person engaged in the business of supplying a
covered commodity to a retailer to provide the retailer with the
product's country of origin information. In addition, the law states
the Secretary of Agriculture (Secretary) may require that any person
that prepares, stores, handles, or distributes a covered commodity for
retail sale maintain a verifiable recordkeeping audit trail.
 

mrj

Well-known member
OT, you really need to face facts and realize that NCBA currently has more than 27,000 members, more than 60% being cow/calf/stocker operators, and more than 30% being cattle feeders, really not a "little group" at all.

It is also a fact that agriculture producers are a very small minority in this country and the vast majority of our population cares nothing about agriculture, believing their food supply will always be available. Voters do not want to spend money to secure a viable agriculture in the USA.

That fact requires that we in agriculture do all we can to show our Congressmen what we need in order to fulfill the food needs of our country. You can call it all the dirty little names you choose, but if we don't work and provide funds to elect people who understand or are willing to learn about agriculture, you may as well get used to paying ever higher higher taxes for the 'privilege' of raising your horses and cattle and forget about making a living doing it.

MRJ
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Well Maxine-- Your little group represents probably less than 5% of all cattle producers (cow/calf) in the nation- being the fact that the majority don't belong to either NCBA or R-CALF...

And I watched your little group and their tactics and the politics they played over the years--the promises and the flipflops-- and a lot of it smelled bad...I also listened to the year after year of the same promises from NCBA of the great future and prices to come from the global trading and selling their souls to the packers-- as I watched neighbors sell out- and more and more of the youth of the rural areas moving away... 20 years of NCBA has done nothing...Time to give R-CALF and some of their folks the next 20 years to see if they can do any of all the things NCBA didn't/couldn't......
 

PORKER

Well-known member
Yes ,we are tired of allowing one or two corporate bought out Congressman to refuse to enact or enforce passed legislation-- but if you look across the nation, the M-COOL law was not only supported by a majority of consumers but also a big majority of cattle producers... assuring that auditable records are available
throughout the chain of custody, but the auditable records must
themselves also be available to ensure credibility of country of origin
labeling claims.

To convey the country of origin information, COOL ,the law states that
retailers may use a label, stamp, mark, placard, or other clear and
visible sign on the covered commodity or on the package, display,
holding unit, or bin containing the commodity at the final point of
sale to consumers.

The law requires any person engaged in the business of supplying a
covered commodity to a retailer to provide the retailer with the
product's country of origin,COOL, information. In addition, the law states
the Secretary of Agriculture (Secretary) may require that any person (Maxine)included,
that prepares, stores, handles, or distributes a covered commodity for
retail sale maintain a verifiable recordkeeping audit trail. That's pasture to plate,MRJ ,That you.
 
Top