Capitol Prepares for May Revise

Next Thursday the Governor will release his May revisions to his proposed budget.  All indications are that revenues have exceeded proposed expenditures by approximately $4 billion.  The May revision is expected to include proposals on how to spend those funds.  The Governor is planning on identifying "one time" expenditures so as to not create an ongoing burden on the state's general program by adding personnel and programs. 

 

Some rumored proposals include adding $2 billion to education funding for technology, broadband implementation, professional development and other one-time items to both implement the Common Core Standards as well as bring schools up to basic technology standards.  Another possible proposal is to increase funding to the higher education system through one time augmentations for technology and capital outlay  For agriculture, the May revise is rumored to contain $3 million for border stations to prevent the introduction and spread of plant and animal diseases and pests. 

 

Governor and Legislature Near Deal on Rainy Day Fund

As part of the May revision the Governor is expected to announce an agreement with the  legislature on a stronger, more permanent "rainy day fund."  The agreement Brown and lawmakers are negotiating would fund a rainy-day account in years that capital gains revenue exceeds 8 percent of total general fund revenue, a higher threshold than Brown had proposed. But it would also require contributions of 1.5 percent of all general fund revenue, a concession to Republicans, sources said.

 

The proposal would replace a budget reserve measure already on the November ballot. That measure had been criticized by public employee unions, allies of Brown and Democratic lawmakers. The original measure, ACA 4, was part of a 2010 budget deal among Democrats, Republicans and then.  Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and originally scheduled to go before voters in 2012, but lawmakers postponed it to 2014.

 

Bills Head to Appropriations Committee, then Floor

Last week marked the deadline for bills with a fiscal impact to the state to be passed out of policy committee.  The Appropriations Committee in each house has been busy analyzing these bills and identifying the fiscal impact on the state.  Bills that meet the threshold are sent to "Suspense."  The Committees are expected to vote successful bills that will move forward off the Suspense calendar on May 23.  Bills will then move to the floor of the house of origin and will need to be voted out-of-house of origin by May 30. 

 

One controversial bill opposed by agriculture, food companies, business groups and pharmaceutical companies is SB 1381 (Evans).  This measure will mandate a costly labeling system for foods containing GMO ingredients.  The bill will be heard on Monday, May 12th in the Senate Appropriations Committee.  

 

 

The governor of Vermont this week signed state legislation that will require food sold in the state as of July, 2016, that is the product of genetic modification (GM) or contains GM ingredients to be labeled. 

The new law does not extend the labeling requirement to animal feeds and pet foods.  

 

The food industry is gearing up for a major legal battle, challenging the new law, but with the New York State Assembly moving quickly to pass its labeling legislation - Massachusetts and Maine have passed labeling bills with enactment limits, and currently 29 state legislatures are considering 89 related bills - the ability of the industry to financially sustain legal challenges is in question.

 

Vermont created a "food fight fund" to defend against the legal challenges that are coming, and is taking online contributions to help build the fund.  The Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO) says the average Vermont household's food bill could increase by as much as $400 a year because of the labeling mandate.  

 

In Washington, DC, 35 ag, processing, food and retail associations formed a coalition to get Congress to preempt state GM labeling laws.  Rep. Mike Pompeo (R, KS) and five bipartisan colleagues introduced legislation last month to give FDA supreme labeling authority, set standards on voluntary labeling for the absence or presence of GM ingredients, and create a federal definition of "natural" and related claims on food labels.

 

However, Congress is reluctant to preempt state laws, and so far the reception on Capitol Hill to the notion of nullifying laws like Vermont's, is chilly at best.  Lawmakers fear, in part, inserting Congress in this issue opens the door for other federal versus state issues.  

 

Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack floated the notion of modifying food product bar codes to list GM ingredients, and the idea is starting to get attention as an alternative to label listings. While not simple because it would require just about the entire food chain to participate, it would also face stiff opposition from labeling advocates.

 

The White House this week released its third National Climate Assessment as part of President Obama's climate action plan, and the news for agriculture isn't good.  U.S. and North American climate change in the form of drought, storms, cold and other weather anomalies is already affecting every region of the U.S., the report says.

 

"On the whole, the report finds summers are longer and hotter, with longer periods of extended heat.  Wildfires start earlier in the spring and continue later into the fall.  Rains come down in heavier downpours.  People are experiencing changes in the length and severity of season allergies.  And climate disruptions to water resources and agriculture have been increasing," according to a White House statement accompanying the report.  

 

The report was produced by over 300 experts and overseen by the National Climate Assessment & Advisory Committee, then reviewed by the National Academies of Science (NAS).  Over 4,000 public comments were reviewed in preparing the report, the White House says.

 

Ranking member Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA) and former committee chair Rep. John Dingell (D, MI) lead a group of 20 of their colleagues in immediately sending a letter to House Energy & Commerce Committee Chair Fred Upton (R, MI) urging him to hold hearings on the assessment so that "differing views" on policies and programs necessary to respond to climate change can be vetted.   

 

Several members of both parties on Capitol Hill are urging the President to "go slow" or scale back what they expect to be regulatory actions to come as a result of the assessment. Coal and its use as a fuel continues to be a major political hurdle, and an overall fear the White House will try and pick energy "winners and losers" also signals a major battle.  EPA action to limit coal-fired power plants and recent action on methane reduction/recapture also have lawmakers nervous.

 

Also controversial is an announced Administration plan to take into account "climate change influences" on environmental reviews required by law.  A group of Republican Senators last week told the White House to back off a stalled proposal to change the manner in which National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reviews are evaluated.  

 

Ag and forestry, the report says, will continue to be hit with adverse climate changes and extreme weather events, but this sector can also contribute to solutions that will moderate climate impact, including renewable fuels, carbon sequestration and land management and cropping practices that reduce greenhouse gases.

 

There were six key messages for agriculture in the report, as follow:

• The climate changes that have increased over the last 40 years will continue for at least the next 25 years, with major impacts on crops and livestock expected "mid-century;"
•  Several regions will see productivity in livestock and crop production decline based on "increased stress" from weeds, diseases, insect pests and other "climate-induced stresses."
• Innovative conservation methods are needed to mitigate the impact of soil loss and degradation due to increasing precipitation for both rainfed and irrigated agriculture;
• "Critical thresholds" are already being exceeded when it comes to crop and livestock production and will be exacerbated by continuing weather extremes;
• While ag has been able over recent years to adapt to climate swings, increased innovation will be critical to ensure the rate of adaptation and "the associated socioeconomic system" can keep up with climate change over the next 25 years, and  
• Climate change impacts on agriculture will affect food security both here and overseas, because crop yields will change and food prices and the impacts on food processing, storage, transportation and retailing will increase.

 

A listing of specific state reports is found by going to http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2014/05/06/what-climate-change-means-regions-across-america. The 25-page chapter on agriculture and land use can be found here: http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/report/sectors/agriculture.

 

 

 

 

Moving to protect European swine herds from an outbreak of porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDv), the European Union (EU) this week approved new rules that put tough restrictions on the import of pork byproducts, including plasma, from the U.S., Canada, Mexico and Japan. The rules are reportedly effective May 10.

 

The U.S. is concerned the restrictions may extend to swine byproducts exported to Europe but not intended for livestock feeding - based on the possibility the products could be diverted to animal feed - as well as how the EU will certify compliance.  Exporters have been advised to confirm which shipments will be allowed to enter the EU prior to shipment. There is also the U.S. concern other nations may try to copy the EU restrictions with their own programs and interpretations.

 

The EU says all pig products imported from the four nations must be treated with heat at 80 degrees Celsius (176 degrees Fahrenheit) and stored for six weeks at room temperature to kill the virus.  The EU did not ban swine blood products; U.S. plasma exports total about 2.2 million metric tons each year.

 

Still unknown is what France will do.  It had earlier announced it was considering a full ban on swine and swine byproducts from the four countries, but would hold its decision until after the EU ruled.  However, it also said, "If there is no agreement to ban imports at the meeting, our national authorities will go ahead with their decision." However, it's not yet known if the EU decision is enough to make France happy or if it will take a unilateral approach to banning swine product imports.

 

While official details won't be released until next week, word from the conferees on the federal waterways reauthorization is that a final conference report is in hand, clearing the way for final action in the next couple of weeks. The final sticking point was how many projects - and which ones - Congress will write into the law as direction to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on how to spend their money and where.

 

Insiders say the conference report will require a bigger share of harbor maintenance fees to be spent on actual port upgrades, and that "inland waterways resources" will be retargeted to allow lock/dam projects to begin earlier.  The key now is what appropriators will do as far as overall funding for waterways/ports projects.

 

No word on whether the package carries a long-requested increase in the fuel user fee barge operators pay to help fund waterways projects.  The industry wants the increase, but House and Senate authorizers said only the tax-writing committees can authorize an increase in the fee.  

 

Last week, 82 ag shipper and ag producer groups sent a letter to Sen. Ron Wyden (D, OR), chair of the Senate Finance Committee, and ranking minority member Sen. Orrin Hatch (R, UT) urging them to back a 6-9-cent increase in the current 20-cent-per-gallon barge fuel tax.  A similar push is planned for the House, where House Ways & Means Committee Chair Dave Camp (R, MI) has introduced a bill to raise the federal user on ag shippers to 26 cents.

 

What causes dehydration?
What are the symptoms?
The following are the most common symptoms of dehydration, although each individual may experience symptoms differently. Symptoms may include:
* Thirst
* Less frequent urination
* Fatigue
* Light headedness
* Dizziness
* Confusion
* Dry mouth and mucous membranes
* Increased heart rate and breathing

How can dehydration be prevented?
* Drink plenty of fluids, especially when working or playing in the sun
* Make sure you are taking in more fluids that you are losing
* Drink appropriate sports drinks to help maintain electrolyte balance.

 

Mike Taylor, CPCU

Vice President 

InterWest Insurance Services, Inc.

100 Pringle Avenue, North Tower, Suite 550

Walnut Creek, CA 94596

(925) 977-4104 Office

(800) 464-0077 Toll Free

(925) 977-4150 Fax

(510) 206-5505 Mobile

CA Lic #0B01094

www.iwins.com

mtaylor@iwins.com