Davis and agricultural policy

Brian Davis, the GOP endorsed candidate for Congress in the First Congressional District, and his campaign's Agricultural Advisory Group, issued an Agricultural Policy Statement today, encompasing a wide range of principles including free and fair trade, protecting and improving Minnesota's water resources, estate and capital gains tax policy. It is also seeks to contrast Davis' positions on agricultural position with those of DFL Congressman Tim Walz.

Free and Fair Trade - Access to markets for agricultural products are key for the survival of agriculture in Minnesota. The recent vote by Congressman Walz and others in Congress against the Columbian Free Trade Agreement is viewed as working in opposition to the important interests of our farmers. According to the U.S. State Department, tariffs on 77 percent of all agricultural tariff lines to Columbia - more than 52 percent of the value of current U.S. farm exports - will be eliminated immediately upon implementation of this important agreement, and the remaining tariffs will be phased out over 19 years. Brian Davis strongly supports increased access to world markets for our agricultural products.

Fuel Prices and Economic Well-Being of Agriculture - The cost of energy and oil affect all aspects of our economy, particularly the agricultural community. Markedly rising input costs have an adverse downstream effect. The full effect has not been felt yet by consumers in the grocery store or with home heating bills. In stark contrast to Congressman Walz's views on domestic oil and natural gas development, Brian Davis and the Advisory Group strongly favor increased development of these resources in the United States, including offshore and in Alaska, as part of the solution to the nation's current energy problems.

Protecting and Improving Minnesota's Water Resources - Clean water and a healthy environment are critical to agriculture and to all residents of Minnesota. Brian is a cancer physician who brings health-care expertise to this issue and he strongly supports reasonable and effective efforts in this area. However, Congressman Walz supports legislation (H.R. 2421) which could trigger the largest-ever expansion of Federal powers over all waters in our state. The current proposed legislation is viewed as an infringement on property rights and would adversely affect local control. This legislation has the potential to undermine agriculture and agriculture-related industry in our District.

Value-Added Agriculture - Minnesota is among the leaders in the development of value-added agriculture and renewable fuels. As an engineer with work experience in the energy industry, Brian understands that we must continue to develop alternative energy sources while supporting efficient and clean use of conventional sources. The energy sector of the First District related to agriculture, including ethanol, biodiesel, and wind power makes rural Minnesota an energy provider and produces a positive economic impact.

Direction of the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) - Brian supports the CRP for protecting land that is environmentally sensitive including highly erodible and marginal cropland. Acres that are scheduled to expire from the CRP in the next two years and thereafter that are not environmentally sensitive should be considered for return into agricultural production.

Estate and Capital Gains Tax Policy - The current estate tax that is scheduled to increase on January 1, 2011 will place a tremendous financial burden on families who wish to pass down a farm from one generation to the next, particularly in the current setting of increased land prices where it is difficult to start a farming operation. Likewise, expiration of the capital gains tax rates and their subsequent increase pose an excessive tax burden which will be placed on farmers choosing to sell property and assets. Brian Davis wants to promote an environment where young farmers can continue the family business. Congressman Walz's positions on these tax issues are not helping farmers transfer their assets to our next generation of farmers or to realize the equity built up from years of hard work.

Comments

[L D Nelson]

It would have been informative if Brian Davis had stated how many family farms would be affected by the estate tax. My educated guess is zero. All published statistic show that only the very wealthy, those in the top 1%-3% of the population pay any estate taxes.

Davis's claim that eliminating the estate tax will help small family farms is false. We know who it would favor and it is not the little guy.

As for his "Drill here, drill now" policy, as far as I can tell it is more slogan than policy. It is also not "part of the solution to the nation's current energy problems." Unless of course, you have a very expansive definition of current.

If the outer continental shelf were opened up, new exploration and drilling would not start until at least 2012 or 2013. Peak production would not be reached until 2030, according to the Energy Information Agency. So how will oil production 22 years from now affect current gas prices? May Davis should try to answer that question.

As for free trade for agricultural products, Mr Davis might not be aware that the Doha Round of trade negotiations recently broke up over precisely that issue. Countries, including the US, are very protective of their agriculture, sometimes for legitimate reasons, sometimes political calculations.

It should also be noted that free trade in agricultural products can also hurt American growers. Seventy percent of the migrant workers who pick crops in the US are illegal. Crack down on the employment of illegals, and those crops will move south of the border. Even now, one can go to Wal-Mart, Target or any other large grocery chain and see that an enormous amount of our food is coming from countries where labor is cheaper.

Personally, I think Mr Davis's agricultural policies are more posturing than policy.

[Ollie Ox]

First--there's no mention of the Farm Bill in this document.

Next, I'm curious what the many Ron Paul supporters helping Davis think about his support for the Colombian Free Trade Agreement (Paul voted with the Democrats on this one). Davis supports the war, the new spying bill, and now this. What are Ron Paul's supporters finding so attractive in Davis's candidacy? (Serious question--which other concerns trump the war, FISA, and the free trade agreements?)

Moreover, many of Davis's supporters--such as HFStassen on another post on this very blog--seem to believe that their endorsed candidate opposes subsidies for renewable energy. One could see how their understanding came about, based on things the candidate said in the past (most recently to MPR) but according to a recent Sunday Star Tribune questionnaire asked of all candidates, Davis supports subsidies on biofuels, winds, and other areas. Will Davis allow his supporters to continue to claim that he shares their distaste for subsidies to the biofuel, wind and other renewable energy industries--or will he or his campaign manager set them straight on the actual position that their chosen candidate supports? Do they know?

How, then, does Davis's position on value-added agriculture contrast with that of Walz? And isn't value added in ways other than energy production as well? What of livestock? Dairy?

Moreover, the press release ignores Walz's membership on the bipartisan House Energy Working group, and thus distorts Walz's position on finding a solution to energy cost issues. Here's a pdf of the draft of the legislation Walz is supporting:

http://www.bluestemprairie.com/a_bluestem_prairie/files/bipartisanfinallbilltext.pdf

Additionally, I also don't recall Walz supporting HR 2421. He isn't listed in Thomas as a co-sponsor; I don't know of news reports that say that he supports it; he isn't on the subcommittee of the transportation committee that has jurisdiction over the policy area.

Perhaps the Davis campaign will provide some documentation for the claim made in this press release about Walz's position on the legislation.

[Kathleen Castrovinci]

Brian Davis's campaign resembles that of the scorched earth method. Burn now and then deny tht the fire was started by you.

[Ollie Ox]

I was at Farmfest's congressional forum yesterday, and one of the questions asked was about HR 2421. Walz corrected Davis false claim in the session.

Here's what the West Central Tribune said:

All on the panel favored more conservation work and opposed a bill written by U.S. Rep. Jim Oberstar, D-Minn., to clean the country’s water.

“I am totally opposed to the clean-water bill and will do everything I can to stop it,” Peterson said because as written it would hurt farmers. “We certainly don’t need any more regulations.”

Peterson’s comment was noteworthy because Oberstar is chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and the dispute sets up a fight between two powerful Minnesota congressmen.

Farmers fear Oberstar’s bill would too strictly regulate what they can do with water.
****
Let's see if Davis admits the truth about Walz's position--or continues to mislead Southern Minnesotans.