# Obama outlines views on agriculture.



## alleyyooper (Apr 22, 2005)

The Republican and Democratic presidential candidates both supported lowering farm payment limits and limiting such assistance to family farmers.

Payment limits were a focal point of debates in Congress on the 2008 Farm Bill, passed in June over President Bushâs veto. President-Elect Barak Obama voted for the 2008 Farm Bill, saying it had more good provisions such as support for hunger and conservation programs, than bad provisions. His opponent Senator John McCain opposed the bill.

Now that Obama has been elected, hereâs a look at his views on agriculture as stated during the presidential campaign.

Obama wants to make a disaster assistance program permanent so farmers would not have to wait for Congress to decide whether aid is needed in the wake of individual natural disasters.
The Democrat supports country-of-origin labeling, which requires meat and perishable farm products to indicate from where they came. The Farm Bill expanded the list of products covered by the law effective Sept. 30.
Obama would increase funding for a cost-sharing program for organic certification to help farmers afford the costs of complying with national standards for organic food, a fast-growing sector of the American food market. 

There are not enough young people entering farming, according to Obama, so he would help the public university system and farm extension service work with youth groups to identify and prepare future farmers. He also favors tax breaks for landowners selling to beginning family farmers and for people going into farming.

Obama wants to work to break down trade and investment barriers to maintain American farmersâ competitiveness around the world. He would broaden export promotion programs with training and through new electronic transaction systems to help producers develop global marketing networks. He also would work to ensure all trade agreements contain strong and enforceable labor, environmental and safety standards.

The Illinois senator says he supports efforts to improve food safety by boosting Americaâs ability to identify, contain and prevent outbreaks and to inform the public when an outbreak happens. He says he wants the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug Administration to have more authority to issue and enforce recalls of contaminated food.

Obama would encourage the use of technologies to produce power from animal wastes, and farming practices that reduce energy use and maintain soil health. He also pledges to expand federal energy efficiency and conservation projects and support for industries that produce new value-added agricultural products.

The Democrat wants to use some of the revenue from carbon dioxide emissions permits for investments in clean-energy development and deployment. This would create jobs and stimulate economic growth, especially in rural America, he says.

Incorporating more biofuels, including cellulosic ethanol, into the national supply is another Obama goal - 7.57 billion litres (2 billion gallons) of cellulosic ethanol in the system by 2013 and a requirement of at least 227 billion litres (60 billion gallons) of biofuels, including cellulosic ethanol and biodiesel, by 2030.

Obama would create incentives for communities to invest in biofuel refineries and also would provide a subsidy for ethanol produced from new facilities.

Obama also wants incentives for forest owners, farmers and ranchers to plant trees, restore grasslands, and use farming practices that capture carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, or engage in no-till practices that retain carbon dioxide currently stored in the soil.

America.gov is a function of the U.S. State Departmentâs Bureau of International Information Programs.


----------



## KSALguy (Feb 14, 2006)

i wonder how his HSUS and PETA friends feel about all this,


----------



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

I really want less government on my farm, not more. I don't ask for subsidies, grants, crop insurance, or anything else. I just want them out of the way.


----------



## Katgowen (Nov 3, 2008)

What gets me is they always talk about what they are going to do and then do the exact opposite. I do think that farmers should get a little extra break for farming, but I don't think that you should be able to own say 100 acres of land that is classified as farmland and then not farm it and get the break. I have heard of this happening and I just think that is wrong; you have to be able to prove that your actively farming the land.


----------



## OkieDavid (Jan 15, 2007)

Remember- He can BE for anything but he can only affirm/sign into law or veto what CONGRESS sends him.......That is where the real stroke is.


----------



## KSALguy (Feb 14, 2006)

exactly right OkieDavid, and if we look at his lobiest groups and the house majority the way it is, what do you think will happen? he will talk pretty while they do the exact opposit,


----------



## Dahc (Feb 14, 2006)

alleyyooper said:


> The Illinois senator says he supports efforts to improve food safety by boosting Americaâs ability to identify, contain and prevent outbreaks and to inform the public when an outbreak happens. He says he wants the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug Administration to have more authority to issue and enforce recalls of contaminated food.


This equals NAIS. Something small flock owners overwhelmingly oppose. I know it wont affect hive owners but others should know it's coming.


----------



## Ernie (Jul 22, 2007)

Katgowen said:


> What gets me is they always talk about what they are going to do and then do the exact opposite. I do think that farmers should get a little extra break for farming, but I don't think that you should be able to own say 100 acres of land that is classified as farmland and then not farm it and get the break. I have heard of this happening and I just think that is wrong; you have to be able to prove that your actively farming the land.


What I find most often happens is that the people convince the government to get behind something, say for example promoting dairy in Wisconsin. Then the government says, "We don't know anything about dairy so let's go ask the dairy farmers what they want done." Then they go to the top three dairy producers in the state and ask what they need in order to continue operating. Those top three dairy producers then say, "We need tighter regulations on the little guy so they don't poison people and destroy our market for milk. We need more hoops and hurdles in the path of the little guy so they aren't ever capable of actually impacting our business. Oh, and could you please tax them and give us their money as incentives?" And then government complies.


----------



## the kid (Jul 9, 2006)

AL 
you sure know how to light it up around here
and get it going
dont look at me I didnt vote for him


----------



## Bouncenhumble (Jan 12, 2004)

Dahc said:


> This equals NAIS. Something small flock owners overwhelmingly oppose. I know it wont affect hive owners .


 It wont affect you..... YET. They have a little, and they want more. It is just a matter of time.

I feel like yelling GET YOUR HANDS OUT OF MY PANTS!!! AND STOP LOOKING OVER MY SHOULDER!!!

I am just glad I live on a small farm, 2 days ago I woke up to a guy saying that with in the next 4 years we will have food riots here in the stats. I dont' think he is too far off. Here comes socialism, get prepared now.


----------



## alleyyooper (Apr 22, 2005)

Ya I know every one wanted Mit Rommeny. I grew up with his father being the govener of Michigan. Didn't impress me then, and his son still doesn't impress me.

Personally I think the word is depresstion, we are long pass resession here in Michigan. 

 Al


----------



## countrymouse (Nov 9, 2004)

Ernie said:


> What I find most often happens is that the people convince the government to get behind something, say for example promoting dairy in Wisconsin. Then the government says, "We don't know anything about dairy so let's go ask the dairy farmers what they want done." Then they go to the top three dairy producers in the state and ask what they need in order to continue operating. Those top three dairy producers then say, "We need tighter regulations on the little guy so they don't poison people and destroy our market for milk. We need more hoops and hurdles in the path of the little guy so they aren't ever capable of actually impacting our business. Oh, and could you please tax them and give us their money as incentives?" And then government complies.


Policy wonks call it "The Iron Triangle." Not much of a chance of breaking it without overwhelming public support for the little guys ("we want... :rock: higher prices! :rock:"--don't hold your breath for that!) BO's right about us needing more small farms, but US ag is too industrialized at this point. You'd just get trained, get a "good deal" on your land, and then proceed to royally lose your shirt to the big growers.

It's better to have health insurance and work a 9-5; at least, that's what most of my former FFA/4H buddies are doing. Starting a small farm today is like opening a hardware store next to HomeDepot. 

If there's one thing that's evident on this board, it's that we've got willing and trained (or at least interested) farmers everywhere, they're just hanging drywall or selling cars.


----------

