OVERVIEW

Since our nation's inception, the American farmer has been key in maintaining our national prosperity and defense and has made possible one of the highest standards of living in the world.  The United States is the only nation in the history of the world to be able to abundantly feed not only our citizens, but also much the world, with nutritious, low-cost and abundant quantities of food.  However, beginning in the mid-1980’s unrealistic and failing farm policy resulting in financial pressure and lack of profitability has dramatically decreased the number of people directly involved in agriculture.  Still, due to   the economic sacrifice and productive ability of the remaining American farmers, our food supply has actually increased.  Additionally, other industrial uses of agricultural commodities have been developed during this time, with bio-based renewable energy now developing into a major use for agricultural production domestically and globally

In fact, we believe that all of our national energy needs now imported could be met with domestic renewable energy from all sources, coupled with attainable national energy efficiency standards.

To serve the exploding demand for renewable energy while continuing to provide food and fiber, American farmers must operate at a profit.  They must receive a fair price for their products and they must have greater input into the decisions, which affect their destiny. This must be done with a domestic farm policy that recognizes the importance of American farmers as providers of an adequate and safe food supply, as producers of renewable energy, as a resource for a myriad of industrial uses, and as creators of jobs throughout our economy. They must also have fair conditions in the international marketplace.

To achieve less threatens the national security of America by robbing this country of one of our most precious national resources, the productive and economy transforming capacity of the American Farmer.  The American Corn Growers Association was formed in 1987 to not only serve its constituents and to represent their best interests, but to persuade America that what is good for the American Farmer is good for our great nation.

The American Corn Growers Association (further referred to as the ACGA) strongly supports all members of the growing coalition of  forward looking groups from across the economic and political spectrum that will work to support  agricultural producers' (e.g. the Farmer) interests, and concurrently America’s interests.  Our goal is to remember and change the failed agriculture policies of the past, while always looking forward. 

We recognize that there are many complicated and ever-changing issues that face policy makers that support our goals, or are simply interested in agriculture The following policy statement, which we debate and update annually, is offered so that the position of the American Corn Growers Association and its members may be better understood and may contribute to enlightened policy development for America.

MISSION STATEMENT

The American Corn Growers Association (ACGA) is an organization of corn producers representing the mainstream of American production agriculture and broad producer interests.  Our constituency is the American Farmer.  We develop and conduct programs on behalf of corn and other agricultural commodity producers including market development, research development, and representation in policy making at the local, state and federal levels. 

ACGA works to develop an environment in which commodity producers have the opportunity to operate profitably through market prices attuned to the rest of the economy for basic farm commodities.  Our members are skilled professionals who, through their knowledge and investment of time, labor and capital, provide the country with sources of renewable raw materials for food, energy, fiber and animal feeds while committing themselves to the protection of our environment.  While we believe that American production agriculture and consumers are   served by agribusiness, we believe that farmers are the original source for all commercial activity regarding agriculture in this country.  We also understand that there are very fundamental differences of interest between commodity producers and agribusiness.  These would include the issues of price, supply, trade, and producer friendly farm policy.   We will work to encourage fair government and trade policies that first benefit our sole constituents.  However, we believe that it is in the best interests of all society to preserve family farm agriculture in this country, and indeed globally.  We assert that American production agriculture is the foundation for a national economic development program, which can build jobs for millions of our fellow Americans. We believe that our national policy should always reflect the economic and job development potential represented by production agriculture.

Following our mission statement is an expanded articulation of the need for, and importance of, such continuous national policy.

THE NEED FOR ADEQUATE FARM POLICY FOR FARMERS AND CONSUMERS

A continuous national farm policy is necessary to promote long-term prosperity to farmers.   Long-term losses must not only be avoided, but future profits must be foreseen, in order to continuously attract    entrants to production agriculture.

Farmers must have the ability to receive profitable prices in times of adequate supply, not just years of supply shortage. Profitability is required by all businesses.

Farm policy that requires extremely tight supplies to achieve profitable farm prices will provide very rare profits to farmers.  At the same time, without commodity reserves, consumers are constantly at risk of food and/or energy shortage.

Farming is a fundamentally unique business worldwide that does not and cannot follow the typical supply and demand economics applicable to most businesses.

The farm marketing system is the reverse of most businesses.  Hundreds of thousands of farmers (manufacturers) sell to a very few “consumers” (large food and industrial use companies).  This is exactly opposite the usual marketing system, wherein an individual manufacturer or retailer sells to a large number of consumers. The system is best defined in Webster’s Dictionary by the words “monopsony” and “oligopsony”.  Food industry consolidation worsens this system. But the uniqueness of the farm marketing system is ingrained in agriculture, and will still exist if the number of farmers is reduced. 

Individual farmers cannot predict or control their final annual output due to weather, and cannot individually impact total supply.  Potential final selling prices (final crop sales may occur 18 months after planting) are unknown at the single annual time a farmer must plant.  Therefore, in the absence of policy incentives, an individual farmer will attempt to maximize total output regardless of current prices.

Total farm output will therefore not drop due to low farm prices in times of burdensome supply, unless very large geographic areas go completely out of production. Severe social and economic disruption in all farming regions will be required to force such areas out of production. If such areas go out of production due to low prices, they will not be available if short-term food or renewable energy shortages occur due to drought, or unforeseen problems.

Any farm policy that does not recognize these market realities is fundamentally flawed, will incur high government costs,  will constantly risk severe market disruption, and will be largely ineffective.

A national farm policy and international trade policy is required that recognizes the market realities of the business of farming.  Without such policy, the nation will:       

Lose the family farm system of decentralized production, which has proven to be the most successful of agricultural systems, and is preferred by the vast majority of the general public.

Continue to force farmers and rural residents into a form of second-class citizenship in an otherwise healthy economy, and lose economic activity that may be needed in any general downturn.

Through agribusiness concentration, increasingly put domestic and export consumers at risk of food shortages, increasingly raise their concerns about food safety, and increasingly limit their food choice.

FOOD SYSTEM

The ACGA as well as consumers, laborers, and environmentalists, are increasingly concerned about the future of our food production and marketing system as a whole and demand change.  Consumers of this nation are standing up and asking hard questions about the safety, reliability and healthfulness of our food supply.  Laborers involved in our food production system in many cases have not been treated fairly as well.  The unrealistic and special interest driven agricultural and food policies of our recent era, have forced a bitter harvest on family farmers and rural communities while leaving consumers with questions about the food they buy for their families.

These same failing policies have also threatened our environment in many ways. Sportsmen and environmentalists are increasingly concerned about the loss of wildlife and fisheries habitat in our food producing regions due to fencerow-to-fencerow production, degraded waterways, and unregulated de-forestation that may be contributing to global warming. 

We believe that it is quite possible to have fairly priced commodities from family farmers and safe, reasonably priced food in our supermarkets.  We need to encourage food that promotes healthy families, and reduces demand on our healthcare system as well.

Labeling

ACGA supports the labeling of genetically modified livestock for human consumption and labeling of cloned meats, eggs or milk from cloned livestock as well.  The use of carbon monoxide on meat products should be labeled.   The purpose is to inform the public for their continued informed choice in food purchases.

In addition, we must balance a healthy food system with the increasing demand for agriculture to contribute to renewable energy.  ACGA will cooperate with all stakeholders in our food system to advance positive change.

FEDERAL FARM POLICY

Congress has a vital role to play in the development of national farm policy.  The decisions it makes on budgeting, international relations and appointees of various departments have a direct influence upon the future of American agriculture.

The major goal of any commodity organization should be to improve prices received for the crops its members produce.  Some groups have adopted a philosophy that the ACGA believes is contrary to this objective by only promoting increased production and yield.   As a result, the American farmer has often suffered from prices that are lower than the cost of production.  Although the ACGA encourages improved efficiencies in the production of corn, we also understand that if overproduction is not addressed in times of surplus, market prices drop dramatically.

We support passage and enactment of a farm program that decreases government budget exposure and allows farmers an opportunity to operate at a profit.  The previous farm bills for the last two decades have cost hundreds of billions dollars and forced more than one million farmers off the land. 

Goals

The ACGA supports a farm program that achieves these primary goals, followed by specific objectives to achieve these goals;

Higher farm prices and lower farm program costs.

Economic incentives to continue environmental gains made by producers.

Maximum planting flexibility including fruits and vegetables to respond to market signals and environmental considerations

A farm program that effectively matches supply with demand by supporting policies that increase consumption of agricultural based products including renewable fuels,  but which restrains over-production in times of burdensome surpluses

A farm program that provides for emergency reserves of basic commodities to protect against unanticipated extreme shortages, in conjunction with tools allowing farmers to manage free stocks in times of burdensome supply.

A farm program that strongly encourages participation.

Objectives

Budget agreement: We urge Congress to recognize the importance of American agriculture to our domestic well-being and security through its budget agreement.  Any budget agreement that removes the funding for necessary agricultural programs should be defeated. 

CCC Loans: The ACGA supports the implementation of up to a two-year non-recourse loan program for corn.  The two-year loan would give producers maximum marketing flexibility, allowing for more marketing options than the current nine-month loan program.  We support a farm program with a national average full cost of production loan rate.   This loan rate must include land and management cost, and be indexed for inflation.  The cost of production should be computed by the land grant university system.

The ACGA supports the institution of a revolving loan fund within CCC.  This fund would be used for the loan program, and allow for funds to be recaptured following the repayment of the loan and reissued the following year.

Decoupling:  We call for a continued effort to defeat any further attempts to 'decouple' price supports from crop production.  We oppose any attempt to include decoupling through treaties or through the rules of the World Trade Organization.

Farmer Owned Grain Reserves: The ACGA supports passage, enactment and proper implementation of a Farmer Owned Reserve with adequate loan rates and components for both food, feed and international relief uses, and renewable energy industry uses.  These reserves shall be used in years of short crops to stabilize the supply of our products for consumers.  These reserves shall be held off the market until such time market signals encourage release of stocks to fill market channels.  At no time shall this reserve be used to depress market prices.  Strategic reserves should be isolated from the market.

Agricultural abundance can be a valuable resource if a portion of it is dedicated to expanding industrial uses of agriculture products.  A dedicated grain reserve should be established that would provide a portion of the investment resources for companies expanding or building new facilities used to produce agriculture products for industrial non-food markets.

Farm Service Agency (FSA): Congress should adopt a long-term agricultural policy that places greater discretion and power at the local FSA level.  FSA, utilizing county and area elected committees and FSA employees, delivers to farmers’ farm programs, farm credit, and disaster and conservation programs.  Local control is imperative to assure workable farm programs that are fair for farmers.  The ACGA opposes any proposal to close county FSA offices and eliminate employees and believes that Congress should provide necessary funding to keep the needed field structure to deliver all vital farm programs.  We also oppose any effort to reduce the authority of elected committees in the operation and decision-making in these local offices.  We will solicit and organize the agriculture community to achieve these goals.

At times USDA’s FSA loan program has run out of funds.  Therefore we support continuous congressional authority to fund and authorize adequate appropriation to replenish FSA loan programs.  Furthermore, additional funds must be included for FSA salaries and expenses to provide support for any additional employees needed to timely deliver programs to producers.

Global Agricultural Policy: The ACGA believes that US farm policy has a great effect on farmers worldwide, and although US farmers need to be competitive in world markets, we understand the need for each country of the world to have a strong agricultural base.   We feel it is in our best interests to keep the economies of the world strong through profitable agricultural prices globally. Therefore, we should not develop policies that destroy the productive capabilities in other countries, or they will not have the capability to buy the products that we produce.

New Uses for Corn: Agriculture represents a wealth of renewable resources beyond food, feed, and fiber.  We support national farm policy that encourages new and expanded uses for corn to tap this potential.

Direct energy intiatives are achieving success operating Combined Heat and Power facilities which efficiently utilize biomass resources hertofor considered waste. Such faciclities provide heat and power with less greenhouse gas emission than fossil fuel sources.  Furthermore such facilites hold promise in the profitable use of agricultural products and byproducts including corn stover.  ACGA encourages the implementation of public policy of all levels which facilitate establishmet of CHP facilities and infrastructure.in certain parts.

ACGA has long felt that that America needs a renewed approach to energy policy that achieves multiple national and international goals by recognizing rural America as a diverse energy producer.  The following factors have led us to this belief: 

The rapidly increasing productive capacity of corn;

The need for a diverse, domestic, decentralized and renewable supply of energy for this nation has never been greater;

That since the single most abundant source of energy on this planet is solar and that corn is one of the most efficient converters of solar energy;

 That the Btu cost for corn is competitive with most fossil fuels,

That rural America offers the landmass, productive capacity, and human resources to capture this energy,

The ACGA also recognizes corn and corn stover as a new potential solid fuel source. Corn and corn stover is both renewable and clean it should be promoted as such and mainstreamed into the available energy supply stream.  Corn, with a significant Btu content, has the flexibility to be used in many applications -- from home heating to industrial power generation.  Corn can be used to heat, cool and to provide for electrical power generation.

Supply Management: The ACGA supports the concept of “Resource Management".  We propose the Secretary of Agriculture manage ending stocks at a predetermined level of usage.  This level would be maintained throughout the year with the Secretary having no more than six months to bring ending stocks down to these levels within this time frame.  The Secretary would be required to use appropriate discretion to reach this level utilizing expanded renewable energy consumption, expanded farmer owned commodity reserves, or acreage reductions In the case of acreage reductions, farmers will be required to participate in the set-aside in order to be eligible for price supports and other farm program benefits.

When policies used to create sufficient industrial and export demand for agriculture products fail and increasing grain stocks depress prices, the Secretary of Agriculture shall have the authority to implement a short term CRP.

Transportation:  Railroad mergers have created captive shippers, causing delays of grain shipments in the U.S. and particularly in the upper Midwest, creating severe hardship for corn producers and grain shippers alike.  Therefore, the ACGA calls for a thorough investigation by the Department of Transportation of these problems and that all further railroad mergers be denied until such investigation is complete.  The ACGA and all concerned organizations shall be allowed participation in such investigations.

NATIONAL ENERGY POLICY

Renewable energy is a vital part of our future national energy security and an important alternative in our national clean air strategy.  We believe that all of our national energy needs now imported could be met with renewable energy from all sources, coupled with attainable national energy efficiency standards.

A new and expanded National Renewable Fuels Standard should therefore be established that requires expanded use of domestically produced renewable energy beyond current requirements.  Such a requirement should ensure that a significant part of our national energy usage shall be based on renewable energy, including diverse sources such as cellulosic, biofuels, wind and solar energy.   Credits trading will be utilized to allow flexibility within such a standard.

Ethanol and other developing bio-based blended fuels offer an opportunity for America to end our dependence upon imported petroleum by discarding the bankrupt oil-driven foreign policy of the past and to improve the quality of our nation's air and environment. 

Some specific examples of the program for which we urge immediate adoption follow.  The Clean Air Act of 1990 offered an example of how farm commodities such as corn, which is the primary raw material for ethanol, can have a beneficial impact upon the issues of a national energy policy and an improved environment.

American Coalition of Ethanol (ACE):  The ACGA supports the role of ACE as the group that supports the interest of the farmer owned ethanol interest in the growing ethanol industry.

Alliance for Rural America:  The ACGA will take a leadership role with other farm-support groups to form a coalition of support for like-legislation.  This leadership role will take the form of the ACGA President, CEO, and/or Board of Directors to inform, facilitate with, and collaborate with other farm-support groups such as members of the Alliance for Rural America to provide a single voice support as needed in legislative forums with CFDC to promote this type of legislation.  The ACGA President, CEO, and/or Board members are encouraged to develop this support.

ETBE:  We support the rapid and full commercialization of ethanol into ethyl tertiary butylether (ETBE). We also support research into other molecular structures for renewable liquid fuels that are attuned to market needs.  As much as possible, production of ETBE and newly developed fuels should be incentivised in a manner to direct production benefits to farmers and rural America, rather than the solely to the oil industry.

Ethanol:  We support a new national energy policy that ends our dependence on imported oil by mandating the use of ethanol blended and other biofuels.  We call for increased construction of ethanol production facilities with greater farmer input, as to site location.  We support governmental and private sector incentives for the production of new, farmer owned ethanol facilities.  We support the extension and expansion of ethanol tax incentives at both the state and federal levels.  We call for adoption of fair market practices to eliminate "no ethanol" advertising by petroleum companies.

Multiple Ethanol Blends : ACGA supports supports multiple ethanol fuel blends as a domestic, renewable form of alternative transportation fuel and recognizes the need for expanded infrastructure development and incentives for fuel utilization.  We also support incentives or requirements for the auto industry that will result in vehicles better able to utilize multiple ethanol fuel blends and other renewable fuels. ACGA also supports the National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition in its efforts to secure continued federal support for an expanded E-85 infrastructure including Blender Pumps for all blends of ethanol nationwide and income tax credit incentives to encourage infrastructure development and for the availability and utilization of multiple ethanol fuel blends for the national vehicle fleet. 

E 20 Initiative:  ACGA supports the state of Minnesota’s initiative to enact a mandatory twenty-percent blended ethanol (E 20) program and encourages other states to enact programs similar to the Minnesota model for renewable energy.

Bio-Diesel: ACGA supports the advance and promotion of bio-diesel and other bio-based fuels.

Corn as a Solid Fuel Source:  ACGA believes that corn, designated as a fuel source, should be considered in a closed loop energy system.

Energy Costs: Energy costs impact input costs to farmers and consolidation in the energy industry could lead to increased costs to farmers.  Therefore, the ACGA shall monitor the energy industry to assure that consolidation of energy companies does not unfairly raise energy costs to farmers.

Electric Restructuring: ACGA opposes federally required electricity restructuring, and urge the states to proceed with caution and careful deliberation.  ACGA supports provisions that ensure low-income assistance programs.

Fuel for Aviation: The aviation sector has the potential to open up new market demand for ethanol and ETBE, with the possibility of over 500 million gallons being consumed per year.  Therefore the ACGA strongly supports the use of ethanol and ETBE in the Aviation fuels market and will work to expand the ethanol market through its “Clean Wings Over America” program.

Tax Incentives: The ACGA supports a long-term tax incentive for all domestically produced renewable fuels. 

Production Tax Credit for (PTC) Renewable Energy: ACGA supports a long-term extension of the PTC. , and supports amending Section 45 of the U.S. Tax Code pertaining to the federal production tax credit (PTC) for renewable energy, such as wind, to allow farmers and other individuals to utilize full value of the PTC and not be subject to the passive investment rules or the alternative minimum tax (AMT).

Wind Energy: 

The ACGA supports a permanent extension of the Federal Wind Energy Production Tax Credit (PTC).

The ACGA supports Federal and State policies that prioritize and incentivize farmer and locally-owned wind farm projects, such as the Minnesota Community Based Energy (CBED) Model.

ACGA supports state or federal policies that:

1. Require wind lease options and wind leases to expire at the end of 5 years if wind project development has not begun unless farmers or landowners wish to extend leases or lease options.
2. That wind leases be limited to a maximum of 50 years.
3. That wind rights remain with the land.

EXPORT POLICY

The ACGA recognizes corn exports are very important to the American corn producer.  We recognize that as the leading exporter of corn in the world we have huge potential to command a fair price for our product.  We strongly support an aggressive export policy directed at promoting direct-from-the-farm sales to overseas buyers.

The policies of lowering CCC support prices for feed grains and soybeans to meet world market competition are a cruel hoax that has been forced on US farmers since the mid-1980’s.  We cannot make American Agriculture prosperous by exporting our surplus commodities at less than the cost of production.

Export Enhancement Programs: The Export Enhancement Program must also be reconsidered.  It encourages the displacement of corn with wheat while encouraging the sale and export of American grown corn at a level less than its cost of production.  It also requires tax dollars and only benefits a few international grain-trading companies.  We believe it must be stricken in its entirety.

Genetically Altered Crops: The ACGA believes that any importing country or company has the right to choose between buying genetically altered commodities or traditional production.  We further believe that it is the duty of the grain trading and exporting companies to offer their customers the option of buying either of these products, altered or unaltered.  Many consumers around the world are clearly indicating opposition to food products produced from GMOs and are refusing to purchase many US commodities for fear that they may contain such organisms.  Therefore we request that USDA assist producers wishing to export commodities that are non-genetically modified.

Market share agreements:  Major corn producing (exporting) countries must begin dialogue with the objective of international production and inventory control to balance the price of corn with the non-agricultural economy and encourage profitability, while also providing adequate global corn reserves.

TRADE POLICY

The ACGA recognizes that trade policy is an integral part of domestic farm programs, and that no effective and fair domestic agricultural policy can be pursued without addressing international trade policy.

The emphasis that ACGA places on trade policy is reflected in our comprehensive trade policy statements which follow.

The ACGA is committed to joining with all like-minded stakeholders in trade policy that will work together for effective trade agreements and policy that not only serves family farm agriculture, but the needs of America as a whole.

Trade Negotiations:

We believe all international trade agreements should be based on principles of fair trade.  It is crucial to fair trade negotiations that imported products be produced under standards substantially similar to those found in the U.S. with respect to worker safety, environmental protection, consumer safety and public liability.

ACGA believes that the US should not belong to the WTO until fair trade is maintained in all trade agreements including NAFTA and CAFTA.  We believe in fair trade not free trade.

The current rules of agricultural trade embodied in the North American Free Trade Agreement and World Trade Organization have been harmful to family farm agriculture.  Family farmers continue to suffer from the manipulation of world trade through export dumping by trading companies, through tariff escalating and restrictive business practices such as price fixing, market dominance, currency manipulation, and transfer pricing.

Therefore the ACGA calls on the US government to hold public hearings across rural America to get first hand information on the problem with current trade rules.  Based on these comments, the ACGA shall urge the US government to renegotiate all trade agreements.  Furthermore, no new agriculture negotiations should be undertaken until:

Current obligations have been evaluated for their impacts on farmers and overall food security, 

 All commitments made in writing to various agriculture sectors to influence the direction of trade policy have been fulfilled.

  Any trade rules prohibiting export dumping are vigilantly enforced for agriculture products. 

In all trade negotiations, provisions to prevent social dumping, especially due to child labor, should be explicitly stated.  All potential barriers or impediments to farmers’ rights to grow, segregate, supply and label should be eliminated.  Furthermore all trade rules that could be used by trading partners to cripple producer-financed marketing initiatives such as special labels and promotion programs must be changed.  In particular, trade rules relating to sanitary and phytosanitary standards, which prohibit marketing on the basis of production procuring methods (PPMS), should be eliminated.  The US government should explore mechanisms to reduce market volatility, which have significant negative impact on US farmers.

Current Trade Agreements:

The ACGA recognizes that current and proposed free trade agreements enhance the multinational corporations’ ability to exploit natural resources and production labor around the world at the expense of workers and traditional industry in the U.S., including family farmers.

We recognize that beef, dairy, livestock and other agricultural sectors will meet the same fate that the U.S. textile industry has met if proposed free trade agreements follow the model of current trade agreements, and the continuing attrition among American vegetable and fruit producers caused by already existing free trade agreements will only accelerate.

We also recognize that one of the major concessions the U.S. government wants other countries to make in return for greater access to U.S. farm product markets is that they impose U.S.-like Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) protection. We see the government’s hypocrisy in promoting free trade on one hand and promoting more restricted trade on items covered by IPRs on the other hand.

Just as ACGA opposed the North American Free Tread Agreement (NAFTA) and the Central American Free-Trade Area (CAFTA), we will oppose other trade agreements such as the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas (FTAA), or any other trade agreements which advance other sectors of the U.S. economy at the expense of U.S. farm families.

ACGA also calls for the government to take measures to bring the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, the most liberal and abused in the world, under control. We also call for a review of the powers that Intellectual Property Rights grant, being the broadest and most liberally interpreted in the world, in order to enhance competition and provide Americans with more competitively priced pharmaceuticals.

World Trade Organization:

The ACGA believes that the WTO has not fulfilled the needs of agriculture as a whole.  Since the inception of the WTO, ACGA has believed that this international institution has circumvented the rights of countries to develop and implement their own farm and food policy measures to the best interests of their society in general.  Since that time ACGA has watched the WTO manage and dictate trade issues internationally that have been consistently detrimental to family farmers, consumers and the environment, not only in the U.S., but globally as well.  These policies have in many cases reduced prices paid for farm commodities by disallowing price support and supply management policies and reducing the right of the U.S. to protect itself from price depressing agricultural imports.  This resulting reduction in the economic wellbeing of Rural America has had a depressing effect on the rest of the economy as well.

Given this fact, ACGA supports the position that the United States shall withdraw from the WTO and redirect its trade agenda course to one that reflects the best interests of the population base.  This redirection should be one that encourages the best interests of not only U.S. society but one that encourages a harmonious and viable family agriculture food production system around the world, with sustainability and fairness for all involved.

ACGA encourages all commodity groups and farm groups to call upon Congress and demand the United States withdraw from the WTO.

Country of Origin Labeling: 

We believe consumers should have the information to make informed decisions about the origins of their food.  Therefore, we support country of origin labeling for all food products.  We must allow consumers to make informed food choices through adequate product labeling.  “Product of the U.S.” shall only be labeled on those products that are produced, born, raised and processed 100% in the United States.  We must ensure that all products coming into the U.S. are not being minimally processed and or blended inside the U.S. thus making them eligible to obtain a “USDA Inspected” label and to be marketed as a U.S. product.

Country of Origin Labeling for Renewable Fuels

Acga supports country of Origin Labeling for all renewable fuels

BSE and Canadian Beef Imports:

 The cattle industry is a vital component of corn demand in the U.S.  It is evident that there is a continued risk of BSE (bovine spongiform encephalopathy) introduction into the U.S. cattle herd and food supply from Canadian live cattle and beef imports.  ACGA opposes the planned opening of the U.S. border to Canadian imports.  ACGA also opposes any importation of beef from cattle over 30 months of age.

Currency Fluctuations:

Currency fluctuations have not been a consideration in past trade negotiations.  ACGA recommends equitable safeguards to avoid the problems of currency fluctuations be a part of all future trade negotiations.

Trade Promotion Authority (TPA aka Fast Track):

We oppose extension of TPA until all unfair trade practices have been addressed. 

State Trading Enterprises (STE’s):

 The United States of American supports and promotes democracy for not only Americans but for citizens of all sovereign countries,

ACGA urges Congress and the US Administration to amend the US international trade position to respect the democratic and sovereign right of family farmers of other countries to establish and maintain democratically controlled marketing institutions including so-called State trading enterprises (STE’s) with single desk selling, price pooling and supply management mechanisms.  The ACGA believes that the destruction of marketing organizations that provide better livelihoods for family farmers of other countries will not benefit American family farmers but rather will further increase multinational corporate control of world commodities which in the long run will be harmful to American family farmers and ranchers.

Import Standards:

We believe all consumer items imported into the U.S. should be required to meet the same standards as domestically produced products, and that consumers of such imported products be made aware of such quality differences when purchasing said products.  

Section 22 Authority:

The ACGA supports the reinstatement of Section 22 authority, since it protected our farm programs from unfair trading practices.

US Sovereignty:

 Since the WTO has ruled against the U.S. in the several disputes, clearly challenging U.S. sovereignty, we demand action be taken to modify any and all trade agreements that are a threat to U.S. sovereignty.

Patents:  While the ACGA does not support NAFTA or the WTO rules regarding trade, we support fair trade but resent the hypocrisy of multinationals that want free trade while these same companies protect their monopolies in the US by abusing patent rules and regulations that raise the crop input costs for US farmers.

BIOTECHNOLOGY

Biotechnology is on the forefront of agricultural research and development of new strains and types of genetics.  Diversity within this field is imperative to improve genetics and have reasonable pricing of such products which allow for a competitive advantage to corn producers.  Therefore the ACGA strongly opposes the further consolidation of the genetic marketing and research industry.

ACGA believes that USDA/APHIS agricultural biotechnology regulatory programs and processes should be promulgated, implemented and administrated to ensure that farmers economic interests are protected.

Genetically Altered Crops:  The ACGA believes that any importing country or company has the right to choose between buying genetically altered commodities or traditional production.  We further believe that it is the duty of the grain trading and exporting companies to offer their customers the option of buying either of these products, altered or unaltered.  Many consumers around the world are clearly indicating opposition to food products produced from GMOs and are refusing to purchase many US commodities for fear that they may contain such organisms.  Therefore we request that USDA assist producers wishing to export commodities that are non-genetically modified. 

The ACGA encourages USDA to continue its performance evaluation and certification program regarding GMO test kits as a means to facilitate the exportation of identity-preserved and value–added commodities that meet the specifications of foreign customers in order to help the U.S. grain industry compete in world markets.  In order to further enhance integrity of the U.S. grain production and marketing system, and to facilitate the competitive marketing of U.S. corn and other commodities, ACGA calls on federal and state seed certifying agencies to require that all seed companies state the actual seed purity percentage, including the actual percent of GMO contamination in conventional, non-GMO seed varieties and that this percentage be shown on every lot, bag or other container in which seed is marketed.

We support legislation requiring a court order prior to any evidence being obtained from a farmer’s property that can be used in a criminal or civil suit. Biotech companies should be liable for all damages to all producers due to market disruption caused by genetically altered crops.

CHECKOFFS FOR CORN

The ACGA supports educational and promotional efforts on behalf of new uses and a variety of products made from corn.  We know that such efforts require large amounts of funding, and the “checkoff” has been devised to assist market development for products.  However, we support increased farmer input into decisions regarding disbursement of funds from these checkoffs for corn, which at this time are still approved on a state-by-state basis.  We believe that efforts by any organization to seek a Congressional requirement for a national checkoff would circumvent this local control.  That is why we believe if a Congressional required national checkoff should occur and as with any state checkoff, it must contain the following provisions for the protection of farmers:

It must be grower controlled.

There must be a provision for refunds to growers.

Refunds must be divided between the respective state checkoffs and the national checkoff.

Any board of directors for a national checkoff must have seats for agricultural organizations with differing political and market philosophies.

There should be a provision for cooperative funding.

When more than one corn organizations exists in a state, each should be funded.

CONSERVATION

Farmers are the best stewards of our environment and natural resources.  Their ability to earn a living depends directly upon the preservation of the land that provides their bounty.  We support the following policies:

Conservation Reserve Program: The CRP is clearly successful in its objectives to improve the environment, enhance wildlife habitat, control erosion on highly erodable soils and improve water quality.  Therefore the ACGA supports legislation and /or USDA action to offer producers voluntary continuation of current CRP contracts beyond expiration dates.  We also support provisions that allow substantial expansion of CRP sign-up authority and that rental rates should be raised to encourage producers to enter more acreage into the CRP. 

Short-term CRP: If the national supply and demand balance supports expansion of the current CRP program, the ACGA supports the enactment of a new three-year CRP using short-term cover crops such as legumes.  This will be in addition to the primary CRP.  Entry into the new program shall not be limited by the current arbitrary and restrictive EBI scoring system.

Cost sharing: The USDA should participate in cost sharing to establish cover crops, which would encourage soil regeneration, erosion control and wildlife habitat.

EQIP Funds: The ACGA supports targeting of EQIP funds to small and moderate scale livestock waste facilities.

Global Warming and Carbon Sequestration:  Global warming has become a major concern in the U.S. and throughout the world.  Growing crops and forests offer the best solution to address this global problem by using carbon from the atmosphere and storing it in soils.  The ACGA requests the USDA to establish minimum values for carbon sequestration, based on scientific university studies.  Such studies must include crop variances and production practices.  Carbon credits should be treated as a new agriculture commodity with minimum floor pricing loans.  USDA should be given sole authority for monitoring farming practices as they apply.

Soil Restoration: The ACGA supports the adoption of a Soil Restoration Program (SRP) to protect the productivity of cropland.  This SRP would be used as a part of the annual set aside plan and could be required for participation in the price support programs.  The SRP would be based on the tillable acreage base of each farming unit.

Waterways and Filter strips: Many producers have voluntary established waterways and filter strips, thereby reducing soil erosion.  These producers should be allowed to enter said areas in the CRP program at rates comparable to newly established areas.

CROP INSURANCE

The ACGA supports a modified Federal Crop Insurance Program.  We support a national corn reserve pool, which producers would draw bushels of corn as payment on crop losses.  This program would be a low cost program for the government.

We support a Federal Crop Insurance system that allows producers the opportunity to purchase crop insurance at county FSA offices.

Crop insurance coverage should be made available on crops at up to 100% of production costs, with a portion of the premium being subsidized by the Federal government.  Such a program would attract most producers and would be more cost effective for insurance companies and Federal subsidies.

FUTURES & TRADING REGULATIONS

Commodity futures trading plays an important role in agriculture, providing some means of price discovery for basic commodities.  This system, while not perfect, provides producers opportunities for risk management and pricing of their production.  It is therefore of the utmost importance that there be adequate oversight, regulation and protections put into place that guard against abuse of this system by anyone or entity.  We therefore strongly encourage that the Chicago Futures and Trading Commission and other appropriate regulators adopt regulations and policy that reflect our positions regarding these issues to help encourage true price discovery.

Crop Forecasting: The ACGA believes that any company who makes it their business to forecast crop size or yield shall not engage in the buying or selling of futures contracts.  This would include its owners, board members or employees or any other affiliated parties.

Dual Trading: We believe dual-trading practices should be made illegal for any floor trader of the CBOT.  The practice of a floor trader trading his own contracts while he is in the business of trading other parties’ contracts provides for the possibility of manipulation of the market and undermines the price discovery mechanism system, which it represents.

Fund Trading: Reversals of large volumes of long futures corn contracts held by a few commodity funds could cause a drastic and sudden drop in corn prices.  We urge the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to closely monitor and regulate the methods used by such funds in disposing of said contracts.

Short Selling:  Excessive short selling of contracts by speculators with no ability to produce or originate the commodity can cause unwarranted price drops and market distortions.  We urge the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to limit short selling by speculators. 

No Basis Established Contracts: No Basis Established Contracts (formally known as hedge to arrive contracts) involve the use of futures contracts under the jurisdiction of the Commodities Futures Trading Commission.  These contracts are not regulated at this time and there is no standard contract that discloses all the risks associated with such contracts.  The ACGA believes that the CFTC should develop stricter guidelines concerning No Basis Established Contracts, and that these contracts should be treated the same as any other futures or options contract.

Oversight of the Chicago Board of Trade:  The ACGA recommends that the CFTC be merged with the Securities and Exchange Commission to provide better regulation and oversight of the futures markets.

Trading Volume Limits: The ACGA believes trading volume limits have been expanded too far concerning corn contracts.  We believe this further increases volatility of the market, while only serving to increase profits of the CBOT.  Therefore, we support limiting the daily allowable trading limit to 10 cents per bushel with no expanded limits.

Section 8: ACGA supports efforts to promote transparency and fair action in the grain and livestock markets by causing legislation to amend Section 8 of the Commodity Exchange Act, whereby the Commodity Futures Trading Commission would disclose the position of large traders, as defined by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission in futures markets.

COMPETITIVE MARKETS

Family farmers ultimately derive their income from the agricultural marketplace.  Family farmers have always been in a position of weakness in selling their product to large processors and in buying their inputs from large suppliers.  Today, the position of the family farmer has become far weaker as consolidation in agribusiness has reached all time highs.  Farmers have fewer buyers and suppliers than ever before.  The result is an increasing loss of family farms and the smallest farm share of the consumer dollar in history.

One hundred years ago, this nation reacted appropriately to citizen concerns about large, powerful companies by establishing rules constraining such businesses when they achieved a level of market power that harmed, or risked harming  the public interest, trade and commerce.  The United State Congress enacted the first competition laws in the world to make commerce more free and fair.  These competition laws include the Sherman Act, Clayton Act, Federal Trade Commission Act and Packers & Stockyards Act.  Since that time, many countries in the world have followed this U.S. example to constrain undue market power in their domestic economies.

Unfortunately, competition policy has been severely weakened in this country, especially in agriculture, due to federal case law, under funded enforcement, and unfounded reliance on efficiency claims.  The result has been a significant degradation of the domestic agricultural market infrastructure.  The current situation reflects a tremendous misallocation of resources across the food chain.  Congress must strengthen competition policy within the farm sector to reclaim a properly operating marketplace.

We urge Congress to strengthen competition policy by enacting legislation that considers family farmers in its enforcement, by funding enforcement agencies more fully, and by supporting the creation of new farmer-owned businesses to add competitors to the marketplace.  We urge Congress to create a Competition Policy title in the farm bill.

Antitrust Regulation and Enforcement in Agriculture:

We urge that the following specific initiatives be pursued in order to promote competitive markets in agriculture:

The antitrust laws should be altered to focus on supplier harm in addition to consumer harm.

New legislation should prohibit mergers or acquisitions that allow a firm to gain more than a fifteen percent market share nationally in any agricultural business including the retail supermarket trade.

Congress should craft competition rules specific to agriculture within the new farm bill.

Jurisdiction over enforcement of antitrust laws should reside with the Department of Justice in a newly created Office of Agricultural Competition.

Congress should amend the Clayton Antitrust Act to make it clear that a person who suffers indirect as well as direct harm can recover damages resulting from anti-competitive conduct.

Congress should enact legislation easing the ability of farmers to achieve class status in litigation involving anti-competitive practices by agricultural businesses, including the retail supermarket trade.

Congress should significantly increase funding for enforcement of antitrust laws.    

Competition in the Livestock Sector   regarding all meat and poultry processors who possess a five percent or greater market share:

We urge that Congress:

Enact a two-year suspension on mergers and acquisitions between firms in the red meat and poultry processing sectors.

Transfer jurisdiction over competition issues in the livestock sector from the United States Department of Agriculture to a newly created Office of Agricultural Competition in the Department of Justice.

Prohibit red meat processors from owning livestock or livestock production operations.

Require all contracts between processors of red meat and poultry to include a fixed base price negotiated at the time of the agreement and the bidding and/or offering of such contracts are conducted in an open, public manner.

Prohibit non-price benefits between processors and producers of livestock as anti-competitive or discriminatory practices unless such benefits are offered in an open, public manner.  Such non-price benefits include, but are not limited to, delivery terms, processor financing, processor leasing/ownership of facilities or land, etc.

Improve price reporting by processors as to live animals and the meat trade.  The USDA should not eliminate information from public reports under the guise of “proprietary information" unless such information is proven by a processor to be economically valuable, not readily ascertainable in other nonpublic ways, and that disclosure would cause provable economic harm.

Fairness in Contracting: To the extent that contracting is allowed between agricultural producers and processors, we urge that Congress enact the following fairness requirements:

Require contracts to be in plain language and to disclose material risks.

Provide contract producers with a three-day right to review contracts.

Prohibit confidentiality clauses in contracts.

Provide producers with a first-priority lien for payments due under a contract.

Protect producers from having contracts terminated capriciously or as a form of retribution.

Prohibit processors from retaliating, or discriminating against producers who exercise rights including the right to join producer organizations.

Bailment Contracts: Many large agribusiness companies are producing both grain and livestock through the use of Bailment contracts.  These contracts often put the contract growers in the position of unsecured creditors.  Therefore ACGA recommends that all states in which bailment contracts are offered pass legislation that gives first lien priority to contract growers.  Farmers should seriously consider whether a bailment contract is in their economic, financial or social best interests. 

The trend toward bailment type production contracts is accelerating.  Therefore USDA shall establish a review board of farmers and legal representatives to review all such contracts relating to agriculturally produced products and minimum requirements protecting producers be established.

Creating New Competition: The establishment of new competitors in the agriculture sector is the key to diffusing the power of the dominant firms and providing profitable opportunities for family farmers. Federal and state governments provide tremendous amounts of money to dominant firms in the form of grants, loans, tax breaks, research and development subsidies. 

We urge the Congress to redirect much of these funds to spur the development of new start-ups that will provide new opportunities for family farmers to market their products, using these guidelines:

All food and agriculture related grant and loan programs should target small to mid-sized farms and farmer-owned businesses.  This should not be limited to entities structured as cooperatives.

Research performed within USDA or funded by USDA should focus on small to mid-sized farms and farmer-owned businesses.

The federal Food Stamp program and Women, Infants and Children program should allow food purchases directly from farmers. Technology constraints with electronic funds transfer cards should be overcome.

Government procurement for food should give a 10% preference to bids from farmer-owned operations.  More numerous, but smaller volume, contracts and/or requests for proposal for food procurement as opposed to the large volumes currently included in such contracts.  Further, a study should be done to identify barriers to buying from farm-based or farmer-owned food suppliers in an effort to find and implement solutions to such barriers.

Current USDA efforts in the areas of direct marketing should be continued and strengthened.

OTHER RELATED POLICIES

Community Improvement:  The ACGA is committed to prosperous rural communities and businesses, including non-farmers.  We support the involvement of farmers at all levels of community improvement, including maximum involvement in our local schools.

Economic Justice for all farmers: The ACGA supports policies that provide economic justice for Mexican and all other international corn producers.

Soybean Producers of America: ACGA applauds the creation of the Soybean Producers of American as a necessary alternative to the current soybean grower representation.  The American Corn Growers Association calls for coordination between our two organizations on issues of common ground.

Health Care: The ACGA supports legislation to allow self-employed individuals, including farmers, to deduct one hundred percent of the cost of health insurance premiums.

We support pharmaceuticals re-importation legislation on behalf of America’s consumers.

New Farmer Initiatives: American agriculture faces a potential farmer shortage in the 21^st century.  Therefore 100,000 more farmers must be placed on the land through a coordinated federal, state, community and private program to assure America’s food security in the 21^st century.

Current IRA 1031 exchange rules for realestate have sharply increased competition for farmland from non-farm investors who ar shielding income from capital gains taxes.

This non agriculturally based competition has made farmland increasingly out of reach for young farmers.

In order to reduce the current 1031 generated unfair competition, ACGA proposes that the gain from the sale of a ll realestate currently be limited to that gain over and above the inflation adjusted increased value of such realestate.  This would reduce the incentive for investors to see overpriced farmland purchases as their best alternative for tax savings.

We support preferential tax treatment for landlords that offer share rental agreements in leiu of cash rent relationships.

Pesticides:  The ACGA understands that until reasonable alternatives are presented, the use of many chemicals is necessary.  Therefore, when there are no safe and effective alternatives to Methyl Bromide in the control of many pests, and since the use of Methyl Bromide is imperative and usually required in the treatment of many agricultural commodities before they are exported, we oppose the EPA's proposed ban of the use of Methyl Bromide until such time as a safe and effective alternative is available.

Patents:  While the ACGA does not support NAFTA or the WTO rules regarding trade, we support fair trade but resent the hypocrisy of multinationals that want free trade while these same companies protect their monopolies in the US by abusing patent rules and regulations that raise the crop input costs for US farmers.

We support legislation to encourage prompt and effective generic competition in off-patent crop protection products by allowing potential generic competitors to freely use on-patent products for the purpose of developing regulatory agency registration prior to the expiration of their patents and by facilitating easier and more economical access to the original registrants’ data when generic competitors choose not to develop their own.  We also support the importation of crop protection products when they are the same as ones approved for use in the U.S. and sold by the same companies.

Checkoff Litigation:  ACGA opposes the use of government funds to appeal court rulings on the beef checkoff, the pork checkoff, or any other checkoff program found to be unconstitutional.

Right to Save Seed by Farmers:  The ACGA supports efforts to persuade Congress to amend the patent law, so that patents on seed cannot be used to override or escape the clause in the Plant Variety Protection Act, which allows farmers to save seed for their own use.  Moreover, the ACGA believes it was never the intent of Congress, nor of the founding fathers upon providing for patents in the Constitution, that farmers ever lose their age-old right to save seed for their own use.

The ACGA supports the internationally accepted concept of Farmers’ Rights.  In addition to ensuring farmers’ fundamental right to save and exchange seed, Farmers’ Rights also recognizes that farmers should be rewarded for their efforts in improving crops and livestock, that farming communities have the right to refuse access to their germplasm and knowledge, and that farmers have rights to land and secure tenure.

The ACGA supports increased funding for public food and farmer research, with the aim of increasing the amount of research done free of corporate involvement, in particular so that public institutions can continue to provide economically viable seeds which farmers can save for their own use.

Sugar Act: The ACGA supports the Sugar Act.  We oppose attempts to eliminate one of the most successful programs in US agriculture.  We support a minimum loan level of twenty-five cents per pound for raw sugar products.

Value added equity fund: Many farmers are trying to improve their financial positions by building value added processing facilities for their raw agricultural commodities.  The ACGA proposes legislation to create a Value Added Equity Fund.  Said fund shall be a tax-exempt entity patterned after the Low Housing Tax Credit.  Said fund should be controlled by a board of producers and could be administered through the ACGA foundation.  The fund would be limited to investments in closed cooperatives.

Vertical Integration: Since vertical integration of agribusiness provides no future for family farm agricultural producers, these integratations should be declared illegal, with the exception of farmer owned closed cooperatives.

* * * *