Issue Position: Agriculture

Issue Position

South Dakota's number one industry is agriculture, which is why I have chosen to serve our farmers and ranchers as a member of the Senate Agriculture Committee. In both the House and Senate, I have fought hard to promote South Dakota's agriculture economy and to protect the way of life for South Dakota's farming families by actively engaging in creating sound agriculture policies. As a member of the House Agriculture Committee, I helped draft the 2002 Farm Bill and as a member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, I helped craft the 2008 Farm Bill. In 2012, I worked across party lines with my colleagues on the Committee to draft S. 3240, the Senate-passed version of a new five-year Farm Bill, which would have saved taxpayers more than $23 billion while still providing a robust safety net for agriculture producers. Unfortunately, the U.S. House of Representatives did not pass a 2012 Farm Bill before January 1, 2013, so an extension through September 30, 2013, of most provisions of the 2008 Farm Bill was included as part of the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012.

After passing a reform minded Farm Bill last year, the Senate missed an important opportunity this year to improve federal agriculture policy by passing a Farm Bill which includes an outdated counter-cyclical program which most farmers told Congress they do not want and which was eliminated in last year's Senate-passed Farm Bill. The 2013 Senate Farm Bill also fails to adequately rein in redundancy and waste in food assistance programs. Many of my colleagues and I offered amendments on the Senate Floor to the bill in an attempt to make meaningful reform to the food stamp program and return the Commodity Title to last year's level of reform. More than 200 amendments were filed, including two I offered that would have saved taxpayers more than $5 billion. However, only 14 Farm Bill amendments were considered and voted on prior to final passage on June 10, 2013. For these reasons, I was unable to support the final bill.

I offered and cosponsored several reform-minded Commodity and Food and Nutrition Title amendments to the Farm Bill during the Senate Agriculture Committee's markup of the bill. Two of my amendments were accepted into the Chairman's Mark and approved by voice vote. My amendment to require that native sod and longstanding grassland acres, converted to cropland, be tracked by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) was incorporated into the sodsaver provision of the bill. The bill also includes my improvements to the Forestry Title that will assist fighting pine beetles in the Black Hills. Additionally, I cosponsored an amendment that eliminated outdated fixed target prices for certain commodity crops and could save $276 million, which was also accepted into the bill.

I am pleased that key conservation and crop insurance provisions, which I supported in previous Senate-passed Farm Bills remained strong.

The House's version of the Farm Bill did not pass when it was brought to vote on the House floor on June 20, 2013 by a vote of 195-234. However, on July 11, 2013 the House, by a vote of 216-208, passed a Farm Bill which included all titles of the House Agriculture Committee passed Farm Bill except the Food, and Nutrition Title.
Separating the Food and Nutrition Title of the House Farm Bill from the rest of the bill complicates the road forward to getting a Farm Bill to final passage. On July 18, 2013 the Senate voted by unanimous consent to send the Senate Farm Bill, with all titles, including the Food and Nutrition Title, to the House to begin Conference Committee action; however, the House has not yet scheduled necessary steps it must take to begin the Conference Committee process. As the Farm Bill continues to work its way to final passage, I will continue fighting to make needed changes to ensure the final legislation meets the needs of modern-day agriculture, and that redundancy and waste are reduced in the Food and Nutrition Title.

In October 2012, I spearheaded a letter signed by a bipartisan group of Senators to Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack requesting an investigation of the recent unusually high differences between the prices sheep producers are receiving and over-the-counter prices consumers are paying for lamb. This letter was prompted by a drastic price drop of more than 50 percent in live lamb prices compared to 2011 prices and also because a (USDA) risk protection insurance program is not providing the price protection intended for insured sheep producers. The letter also encourages the USDA Secretary to explore export opportunities for meat and meat products outside traditional North American trade areas. My request came after speaking with sheep producers and leaders in the sheep production industry, and learning of the devastating impacts of price drops in the lamb market coupled with extreme drought conditions over the past year. The USDA has informed me that it is close to releasing the results of the investigation I requested.

A major victory for South Dakota's farm families came in the reform of the estate tax provisions that were included in the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012. The so-called death tax would have increased to 55 percent from 35 percent and dropped the exemption from federal taxes from $5.12 million to $1 million, impacting over half of South Dakota's farms. Instead, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 reinstates the exemption at $5.12 million and indexes this amount for inflation going forward. Estates above the exemption amount are taxed at a rate of 40 percent. This still leaves a tax burden on 15-20 percent of farm families in South Dakota. In June, I led a bipartisan, bicameral group of legislators in introducing legislation that would permanently repeal the Estate Tax. I am hopeful that estate tax repeal will be included in comprehensive tax reform.

In April of 2013, in an unprecedented breach of privacy, the EPA released personal information of more than 500 farmers and ranchers from South Dakota and as many as 80,000 from other states to environmental activist groups. It is clear that this release was an inappropriate use of federal information, jeopardizes our national food security, and only reinforces Americans' mistrust of the current administration. This information in the hands of environmental groups, who continuously engage in legal battles with family farms across the nation, could put these producers at risk of litigation and intimidation. I have been vocal in my criticism of the dangerous precedent set by releasing this private information and am working to ensure that we will not see this incident repeated.

Source