Agriculture has slipped from D.C.'s radar screen

Trying to sell Ram trucks, Chrysler made a splash in the Super Bowl this month with a two-minute television spot celebrating the American farmer — a montage of handsome still photos and a vintage Paul Harvey speech all ending with the pitch: “For the farmer in all of us.”

Nine days later, the picture was very different as President Barack Obama skipped over farmers entirely in his State of the Union address, never mentioning the yearlong farm bill stalemate in Congress nor even including “agriculture” among the thousands of words spoken that night.

“It’s obviously not on their radar screen,” said Minnesota Rep. Collin Peterson, the ranking Democrat on the House Agriculture Committee. “The president and his people I don’t think even get it.”

The White House declined to speak on the record, referring questions to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. A spokesperson for the secretary told POLITICO that he remains convinced Obama truly wants a farm bill notwithstanding his silence. Ag trade groups smoothed over the slight by focusing on the president’s remarks regarding potential markets in Europe.

But the juxtaposition of the Super Bowl ad and State of the Union silence reflects a real disconnect in American politics over farm policy. And one that goes well beyond the president.

Chrysler’s marketers made a business decision to invest millions of dollars to identify with farmers, just as the automaker also aired a second two-minute spot for Jeep — this time celebrating U.S. troops coming home from wars overseas.

“We have used the largest television viewing audience to highlight the pride, the resilience and the determination that form an integral part of the American character,” said Sergio Marchionne, CEO for both Chrysler Group LLC and its principal owner, Fiat S.p.A. An accompanying news release speaks of the troops and farmers as “two groups whose work ethic, dedication and service have sustained the very fabric of this nation.”

Contrast that with Washington where in the middle of the worst drought in a generation, no farm bill was even brought to the floor of the House — an unprecedented delay for which Republicans paid little at the ballot box. Indeed, the year ended with Obama washing his hands of the whole matter and allowing Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to pen a nine-month extension that infuriated many dairy farmers and left the two Ag committees out in the cold.

What is it that Chrysler sees that Washington doesn’t? Are these just modern Mad Men selling pickups to suburban men with farm fantasies?

Or is something bigger happening here in power politics? And is there a lesson that farmers themselves must learn from if they are to better market their importance to American consumers — and voters?

“It was a prideful moment out here in Ag country,” said Keith Alverson, a 32-year-old farmer in Lake County, S.D. “But we’re a small percentage of the population, and it’s clear we’re not connecting the way we used to. We have to find new ways.”

“No one is thinking about the promotion of agriculture in a big and bold way,” said one Republican aide who tracks farm issues. “There are numerous newsletters, coalitions, websites but they’re all serving the same audience. They’re essentially all singing to the choir, but no one is bringing any new folks to the church service.”

Politics is certainly part of it.

When Iowa was in play in the presidential election, Obama talked a good game on the farm bill last summer. But more than past administrations, this White House has taken a remarkably hands-off approach to farm issues — the chief exception being the first lady’s vegetable garden.

Original Article Here

Agriculture college to boost Arunachal's education scenario

One of the lesser developed states of India, Arunachal Pradesh is all set to have a state-of-art education hub, where students can pursue specialisation courses in agriculture. 

Centre has approved a proposal for the establishment of an agriculture college in Arunachal Pradesh.

The college, first of its kind in the state, would be set up in Pasighat, the headquarter of East Siang district, official sources said here on Friday, Sept 7.

The news was communicated by Union Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar to Chief Minister Nabam Tuki when the latter called on him at New Delhi on Thursday. The state has also been made eligible to accrue benefits under Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojna (RKVY) a centrally sponsored programme, sources added.

"With Centre making Arunachal eligible for RKVY, our farmers will be immensely benefited from the programme," Tuki said. Apart from approving theproposal for the college, Pawar also gave the consent to strengthen and upgrade the existing ICAR-NEH, Arunachal Pradesh centre at Basar in West Siang district.

Besides pledging that due importance would be provided to Bamboo Mission, Pawar nodded for upgradation and strengthening of Pig Rearing Centre at Karsingsa near here apart from modernising the veterinary hospitals and dispensaries across the state. In response to another plea from Tuki, Pawar assured to send a central team to assess the feasibility of setting up of Mithun rearing centers in the state at the earliest possible.

Original Article Here

Government to Increase E. Coli Tests in Raw Beef

By STEPHANIE STROM

In a ruling that appeared to side with consumers, the Agriculture Department announced that it would expand testing for E. coli in raw beef trimmings beginning next week.

The announcement came on the heels of a decision on Wednesday by the Food and Drug Administration to deny a petition by the Corn Refiners Association to change the name of the sweetener high-fructose corn syrup to corn sugar on nutrition labels.

“We think they both got it correct, although to varying degrees,” said Dr. Michael Hansen, a senior staff scientist at the Consumers Union.

Dr. Hansen said the F.D.A.’s ruling on corn syrup was particularly important, since some consumers have adverse reactions to high-fructose corn syrup and might have been misled by a change in the name. “The only sweetener they really can eat is dextrose, and there is dextrose called corn sugar, so this could really have had an impact on them,” he said.

He was less impressed with the Agriculture Department’s decision to begin testing some raw beef products for six additional strains of E. coli that produce the so-called Shiga toxin — O26, O45, O103, O111, O121 and O145 — which, like their better-known cousin, E. coli O157:H7, can cause severe illness and death. “They need to be looking at all raw beef products, not just some of them,” Dr. Hansen said.

The department first proposed testing for the additional strains late last year, after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that the number of confirmed cases of illness caused by these strains had exceeded the number caused by E. coli O157:H7.

The testing was to start in March but was delayed after members of the industry protested. The new tests will be done on raw beef trimmings, which are used in ground beef.

“These strains of E. coli are an emerging threat to human health and the steps we are taking today are entirely focused on preventing Americans from suffering food-borne illnesses,” Tom Vilsack, the secretary of agriculture, said in a statement. “We cannot ignore the evidence that these pathogens are a threat in our nation’s food supply.”

In a statement, Todd Allen, the vice chairman for the beef industry’s beef safety committee and past president of the Kansas Livestock Association, said the industry welcomed the additional testing because it would help ensure that the safeguards the industry has put in place are working.

“As an industry, we will continue doing all we can to raise healthy cattle and provide consumers with safe, wholesome beef,” Mr. Allen said.

The Corn Refiners Association, which represents companies like Archer Daniels Midland, National Starch L.L.C. and Cargill, said the F.D.A. had denied its request on “narrow, technical grounds.”

The F.D.A. ruled that under its definition, sugars were crystalline in form and thus high-fructose corn syrup as a syrup could not be called a sugar. “They would have had to change two regulatory definitions — that of a sugar and that of a syrup — in order to accommodate what is essentially a marketing ploy by the Corn Refiners, who are upset that high-fructose corn syrup has a bit of a bad reputation,” said Marion Nestle, the author of “Food Politics” and a blog of the same name and a professor at New York University.

In a statement released late Wednesday, Audrae Erickson, the president of the Corn Refiners Association, said consumers are confused about what high-fructose corn syrup is. “Consumers have the right to know what is in their foods and beverages in simple, clear language that enables them to make well-informed dietary decisions,” she said.

Original Article Here