ReportWire

Tag: Tom Vilsack

  • USDA ban on school lunch fees for low-income families begins in 2027

    [ad_1]

    The U.S. Department of Agriculture announced that students eligible for free or reduced-price school meals cannot be charged processing fees, also known as junk fees, beginning in 2027.

    School districts currently work with processing companies to offer cashless payment systems for families. But the companies can charge “processing fees” for each transaction. By law, students who are eligible for reduced price meals cannot be charged more than 30 cents for breakfast and 40 cents for lunch. With processing fees, however, families can end up paying 10 times that amount. Processing companies charge as much as $3.25 or 4% to 5% per transaction, according to a recent report from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

    For families with lower incomes who can’t afford to load large sums in one go, processing fees can arrive weekly or even more frequently, increasing costs disproportionately. Families that qualify for free or reduced lunch pay as much as 60 cents per dollar in fees when paying for school lunches electronically, according to the report.


    Brain-boosting nutrition tips for busy families

    04:25

    The new Agriculture Department’s policy becomes effective starting in the 2027-2028 school year. With this rule, the USDA will lower costs for families with income under 185% of federal poverty guidelines, which equals $57,720 for a family of four.

    “USDA and schools across America share the common goal of nourishing schoolchildren and giving them the fuel they need to learn, grow and thrive,” said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack in a statement Friday. “While today’s action to eliminate extra fees for lower-income households is a major step in the right direction, the most equitable path forward is to offer every child access to healthy school meals at no cost. We will continue to work with Congress to move toward that goal so all kids have the nutrition they need to reach their full potential.”

    The decision by the USDA follows a CFPB report that found online school meal payments predominantly affect low-income families. School lunch fees collectively cost families upwards of $100 million each year, according to the report.

    The U.S. Department of Agriculture has mandated that school districts inform families of their options since 2017, but even when parents are aware, having to pay by cash or check to avoid fees can be burdensome.

    “It’s just massively inconvenient,” said Joanna Roa, 43, who works at Clemson University in South Carolina as a library specialist and has two school-aged children.

    Roa said that when her son was in first grade and she saw the $3.25-per-transaction fee for lunch account transactions, she and her husband decided to send him to school with packed lunches instead.

    “A dollar here and there, I expected,” she said. “But $3.25 per transaction, especially here in rural South Carolina where the cost of living is a lot lower — as are the salaries — is a lot.”

    Roa said packing lunch for two kids every day became a burden in both time and effort for two working parents. For the past two years, thanks to surplus funds, her school district has been providing free school lunches which has changed the equation, but Roa said that could end at any point.

    In its review of the 300 largest public school districts in the U.S., the CFPB found that 87% of sampled districts contract with payment processors. Within those districts, the companies charge an average of $2.37 or 4.4% of the total transaction, each time money is added to a child’s account.

    While payment companies maintain that school districts can negotiate fees and rates before they agree to contracts, the CFPB found that complex company structures “may insulate companies from competition and make school districts less likely to negotiate.” Just three companies — MySchoolBucks, SchoolCafe, and LINQ Connect — dominate the market, according to the report.

    Without the ability to choose which company to work with, “families have fewer ways to avoid harmful practices,” the agency said, “including those that may violate federal consumer protection law.”

    ___

    “The Associated Press receives support from Charles Schwab Foundation for educational and explanatory reporting to improve financial literacy. The independent foundation is separate from Charles Schwab and Co. Inc. The AP is solely responsible for its journalism.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Republican Guvs Tell Kids: “Stay Hungry!” – Bill Tope, Humor Times

    Republican Guvs Tell Kids: “Stay Hungry!” – Bill Tope, Humor Times

    [ad_1]

    GOP guvs decry welfare and childhood obesity, tell lazy kids to “stay hungry” for success.

    Fifteen Republican governors have said no to participating in a federally funded food assistance program, telling lazy kids to “stay hungry” for success. The program was passed on a bipartisan basis by Congress in 2022 and is designed to provide money ($120 per child) for food purchases during the summer, when children are on break and unable to receive free lunches at school.

    Tom Vilsack, GOP tells kids stay hungry
    Tom Vilsack, Secretary of Agriculture. Photo: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Public Domain.

    Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said $2.5 billion was allocated in service to 21 million children. Governors gave various reasons for their states’ non-participation.

    Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt (R), reached at the governor’s mansion in Oklahoma City, where he was having dinner with his wife, Mary, and their nine children, was cutting into a T-bone steak. “Oklahoma has adequate resources,” he said around a mouthful of medium-rare steak, “and I’m completely satisfied.” He suggested that parents of “so-called hungry kids” plant “victory gardens, like they did in WWII.”

    One of the problems with food availability in the summer months is that of access. According to Prof. Mary Tupper, of Harvard University, just one in six in-need families can obtain food resources due to transportation problems. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis (R), reached on the campaign trail in Lobotomie, IA, said that he’s investigating a program whereby bicycles, with large baskets on the handlebars, will be leased to in-need Floridians for a moderate fee. “This service will NOT be available to transgenders,” the governor noted sharply.

    Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds (R), put forth by some as a likely running mate for the Florida governor, decried “Childhood obesity.” With a shudder she remarked that she’d do nothing to create “ten thousand more fat little Black children” in her state. She added that there weren’t enough “restrictions on food purchases,” and suggested that some parents used food vouchers to obtain “beer, whiskey, lottery tickets, and even cannabis.” Besides, she said, Iowa “is full of restaurants that just throw out perfectly good food every day; it’s up to the parents to be innovative in procuring food for their families.”

    Florida, Georgia, S. Carolina and Wyoming have, in addition to denying increased food assistance, opted out of the Medicaid expansion as well. Noted Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R. GA): “It’s them George Soros Jews behind all this. They’s trying to replace real Americans with fat Black and brown kids!”

    Katie Bergh, a senior policy analyst at a Washington-based research and policy institute, said that pilot programs have shown that this program makes kids healthier and less hungry. It provides more fruits and fresh vegetables for the dinner table. Snarled Rep. Greene: “Vegetables are overrated and I say we have nothing to do with fruits!”

    Nebraska Governor Jim Pillen said simply that he “doesn’t believe in welfare.” When questioned on instances of “corporate welfare” in his state as well as aid to millionaire farmers, he grinned and cackled, “Ya got me!” before calling security to order the press from the executive mansion.

    Bill TopeBill Tope
    Latest posts by Bill Tope (see all)
    ShareShare

    [ad_2]

    Bill Tope

    Source link

  • Tom Vilsack Fast Facts | CNN Politics

    Tom Vilsack Fast Facts | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]

    Here’s a look at the life of US Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack.

    Birth date: December 13, 1950

    Birth place: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

    Full name: Thomas James Vilsack

    Father: Bud Vilsack

    Mother: Dolly Vilsack

    Marriage: Christie (Bell) Vilsack (1973-present)

    Children: Jess and Doug

    Education: Hamilton College, B.A., 1972; Albany Law School J.D., 1975

    Was mentioned as a possible running mate for John Kerry during the 2004 presidential election process.

    Adopted as an infant from an orphanage by Bud and Dolly Vilsack.

    Ran for mayor of Mount Pleasant, Iowa, after his predecessor was shot and killed at a city council meeting.

    1975-1998 – Practices law.

    1987-1992Mayor of Mount Pleasant, Iowa.

    1992 – Elected to the Iowa Senate.

    1994 – Wins reelection to the Iowa Senate.

    1998 – Becomes the first Democrat elected governor of Iowa in more than 30 years.

    January 15, 1999-January 12, 2007 – Governor of Iowa.

    2004 – Chair of the Democratic Governors’ Association.

    November 9, 2006 – Vilsack files a statement of candidacy to run for the White House in 2008, becoming the first prominent Democrat to do so.

    February 23, 2007Drops out of the 2008 presidential race.

    March 26, 2007Endorses Hillary Clinton and becomes co-chairman of her national campaign.

    April 2007Joins Minneapolis-based international law firm Dorsey and Whitney as a managing partner.

    December 17, 2008 – Is nominated by President-elect Barack Obama to be agriculture secretary.

    January 21, 2009 – Is sworn in as the 30th secretary of the Department of Agriculture after a unanimous US Senate confirmation.

    July 19, 2010 – Calls for the resignation of USDA official Shirley Sherrod after an excerpted video clip of Sherrod is posted online, in which Sherrod discusses an incident involving a White farmer. Vilsack contends that he made the decision without conferring with the White House.

    July 21, 2010 – Vilsack apologizes to Sherrod after video of the full speech shows that her remarks from the clip were taken out of context. Vilsack offers Sherrod another job with the Department of Agriculture, which she later declines.

    January 15, 2016 – President Obama names Vilsack his Cabinet-level point person to address the problem of heroin and other opiate use in rural communities.

    January 13, 2017 – Vilsack steps down as agriculture secretary one week early.

    February 1, 2017 – Becomes the president and CEO of the US Dairy Export Council (USDEC).

    April 10, 2017 – Colorado State University announces that Vilsack and his wife, Christie Vilsack, will join the university as advisers.

    February 10, 2020 – Vilsack comes forward to claim the $150,000 Powerball prize he won on January 22 in the Iowa Lottery.

    February 23, 2021 The US Senate confirms Vilsack for a second stint as agriculture secretary by a vote of 92-7. Vilsack is sworn in on February 24.

    April 9, 2022 – Vilsack, who is fully vaccinated and boosted, announces he has tested positive for Covid-19 and has “mild” symptoms.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • US infrastructure splurge extends to remote New Mexico farms

    US infrastructure splurge extends to remote New Mexico farms

    [ad_1]

    ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (AP) — U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack announced a new $40 million round of grants to extend high-speed internet to extremely remote farms, homes and businesses in New Mexico, including counties where the population density is less than one person per square mile (2.5 square kilometers).

    Joe Biden and top administration officials are traveling to more than 20 states this week to buttress the president’s message on investments and economic growth before an expected reelection campaign, amid a tug-of-war on federal budget priorities with House Republicans. Biden on Monday traveled to suburban Minneapolis on Monday to tour a clean energy technology manufacturer.

    Democratic leaders in New Mexico welcomed his agriculture secretary Monday in Albuquerque for the announcement, and celebrated public spending on high-speed internet in remote New Mexico communities. Vilsack and members of the state’s congressional delegation say the funds will help farms find efficiencies through precision mapping of topography, nutrients and moisture. Vilsack, a former governor of Iowa, said fast rural internet and array federal infrastructure spending will help those growers bring commodities to market and compete.

    The grants to expand fiberoptic cable networks in New Mexico stem from the $1 billion infrastructure law signed by Biden in 2021, and the related “Reconnect” program that aims to fill in gaps where internet service is slow or nonexistent. The spending will help two rural telephone companies and a cooperative extend high-speed internet service to extremely remote ranch and farm lands, in counties such as Catron, Harding and DeBaca that have fewer than one person per square mile (2.5 square kilometers) on average.

    “When you look at the number of farms and ranches and businesses and homes that are covered, it’s not huge. And someone said, ‘Is that a wise investment of our federal dollars?’” said U.S. Rep. Teresa Leger Fernandez, who represents a sprawling rural district that traverses northern and eastern New Mexico. “And I said absolutely. Absolutely because you need the connectivity no matter what your zip code is.”

    As fiberoptic cables are extended, some households will be eligible for subsidies that can ensure high-speed access for as little as $30 a month, Leger Fernandez said.

    A $14 million grant to the Peñasco Valley Telephone Cooperative is designed to extend high-speed internet to 550 people, including 48 farms in Chaves, Eddy, Otero and Lincoln counties. The goal is to help small and medium-sized farms attain the same profitability as large food producers.

    “Those 48 farms now have the opportunity to take full advantage of this new transformational future we are building,” Vilsack said. “Those 550 people count as much as any people living in New York City or Los Angeles or Denver or any major community in this country.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • New rules would limit sugar in school meals for first time

    New rules would limit sugar in school meals for first time

    [ad_1]

    U.S. agriculture officials on Friday proposed new nutrition standards for school meals, including the first limits on added sugars, with a focus on sweetened foods such as cereals, yogurt, flavored milk and breakfast pastries.

    The plan announced by Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack also seeks to significantly decrease sodium in the meals served to the nation’s schoolkids by 2029, while making the rules for foods made with whole grains more flexible.

    The goal is to improve nutrition and align with U.S. dietary guidelines in the program that serves breakfast to more than 15 million children and lunch to nearly 30 million children every day, Vilsack said.

    “School meals happen to be the meals with the highest nutritional value of any meal that children can get outside the home,” Vilsack said in an interview.

    The first limits on added sugars would be required in the 2025-2026 school year, starting with high-sugar foods such as sweetened cereals, yogurts and flavored milks.

    Under the plan, for instance, an 8-ounce container of chocolate milk could contain no more than 10 grams of sugar. Some popular flavored milks now contain twice that amount. The plan also limits sugary grain desserts, such as muffins or doughnuts, to no more than twice a week at breakfast.

    By the fall of 2027, added sugars in school meals would be limited to less than 10% of the total calories per week for breakfasts and lunches.

    The proposal also would reduce sodium in school meals by 30% by the fall of 2029. They would gradually be reduced to align with federal guidelines, which recommend Americans aged 14 and older limit sodium to about 2,300 milligrams a day, with less for younger children.

    Levels would drop, for instance, from an average of about 1,280 milligrams of sodium allowed now per lunch for kids in grades 9 to 12 to about 935 milligrams. For comparison, a typical turkey sandwich with mustard and cheese might contain 1,500 milligrams of sodium.

    Health experts say cutting back on sugar and salt can help decrease the risk of disease in kids, including obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure and other problems that often continue into adulthood.

    The plan, detailed in a 280-page document, drew mixed reactions. Katie Wilson, executive director of the Urban School Food Alliance, said the changes are “necessary to help America’s children lead healthier lives.”

    But Diane Pratt-Heavner, spokeswoman for the School Nutrition Association, a trade group, said school meals are already healthier than they were a decade ago and that increased regulations are a burden, especially for small and rural school districts.

    “School meal programs are at a breaking point,” she said. “These programs are simply not equipped to meet additional rules.”

    Vilsack emphasized that the plan phases changes in over the next six years to allow schools and food manufacturers time to adjust to the new standards. He said in a press conference Friday that the USDA will also fund grants of up to $150,000 to help small and rural schools make the changes.

    “Our hope is that many school districts and food providers accelerate the timeline on their own,” he said.

    Courtney Gaine, president of the Sugar Association, said the proposal ignores the “many functional roles” sugar plays in food beyond sweetness and encourages the use of sugar substitutes, which have not been fully studied in children. Sugar substitutes are allowed under the new standards, Vilsack said.

    As part of the plan, agriculture officials are seeking feedback about a proposal that would continue to require that 80% of all grains offered in a week must be whole grains. But it would allow schools to serve non-whole grain foods, such as white-flour tortillas, one day a week to vary their menus.

    Another option suggests serving unflavored nonfat and lowfat milk to the youngest children and reserving chocolate and other flavored milks for high school kids.

    A 60-day public comment period on the plan opens Feb. 7.

    Shiriki Kumanyika, a community health expert at Drexel University’s Dornsife School of Public Health said if they’re done right some of the changes will be hard for kids to notice: “They’ll see things that they like to eat, but those foods will be healthier,” she said.

    ___

    This story has been corrected to fix the spelling the president of the Sugar Association. It is Courtney Gaine, not Courtney Gaines.

    ___

    AP Videojournalist Shelby Lum and AP Science Writer Maddie Burakoff contributed to this report.

    ___

    The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Feds send $930 million to curb ‘crisis’ of US West wildfires

    Feds send $930 million to curb ‘crisis’ of US West wildfires

    [ad_1]

    BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) — The U.S. is directing $930 million toward reducing wildfire dangers in 10 western states by clearing trees and underbrush from national forests, the Biden administration announced Thursday, as officials struggle to protect communities from destructive infernos being made worse by climate change.

    Under a strategy now entering its second year, the U.S. Forest Service is trying to prevent out-of-control fires that start on public lands from raging through communities. But in an interview with The Associated Press, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack acknowledged that the shortage of workers that has been plaguing other sectors of the economy is hindering the agency’s wildfire efforts.

    He warned that “draconian” budget cuts floated by some Republicans, who control the U.S. House, could also undermine the Democratic administration’s plans. Its goal is to lower wildfire risks across almost 80,000 square miles (200,000 square kilometers) of public and private lands over the next decade.

    The work is projected to cost up to $50 billion. Last year’s climate and infrastructure bills combined directed about $5 billion to the effort.

    “There’s one big ‘if,’ ” Vilsack said. “We need to have a good partner in Congress.”

    He added that fires on public lands will continue to threaten the West, after burning about 115,000 square miles (297,000 square kilometers) over the past decade — an area larger than Arizona — and destroying about 80,000 houses, businesses and other structures, according to government statistics and the nonpartisan research group Headwaters Economics.

    Almost 19,000 of those structures were torched in the 2018 Camp Fire that killed 85 people in Paradise, Calif.

    “It’s not a matter of whether or not these forests will burn,” Vilsack said. “The crisis is upon us.”

    The sites targeted for spending in 2023 cover much of Southern California, home to 25 million people; the Klamath River Basin on the Oregon-California border; San Carlos Apache Reservation lands in Arizona; and the Wasatch area of northern Utah, a tourist draw with seven ski resorts. Other sites are in Idaho, Oregon, Nevada, Washington state, Colorado, New Mexico and Montana.

    The idea is to remove many trees and other flammable material from hotspots that make up only a small portion of fire-prone areas but account for about 80% of risk to communities. Vilsack said officials will seek to restore “ old-growth forest conditions ” — meaning fewer but larger trees that can be resilient against fires.

    House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Bruce Westerman said he was glad to see the Biden administration taking “long-overdue action” and streamlining forest management rules. But Westerman questioned why more money will be spent this year even as new projects include fewer acres compared with last year, according to administration documents.

    “The Forest Service is still recklessly spending valuable taxpayer dollars with little to no accountability,” the Arkansas Republican said in a statement.

    A Vilsack aide said there were “no apples-to-apples comparisons” between costs among the landscapes, which differ in terrain, access and the state of the forest. Staffing and equipment issues also factor in, and the differences can make some areas more expensive and time-intensive, spokesperson Marissa Perry said.

    “We work to treat not only the most acreage we can, but where it makes the most difference with the resources available,” she said.

    Some said the administration remained overly focused on stopping fires — a near-impossible goal — with not enough money and resources going to communities and people at risk, including the elderly and people with medical conditions or disabilities.

    “Given the scale of how much needs to be done, we are just skimming the surface,” said Headwaters Economics researcher Kimiko Barrett. “Risks are increasing at a scale and magnitude that we haven’t seen historically. You’re seeing entire neighborhoods devastated.”

    Vilsack said the projects announced so far will help reduce wildfire risk to around 200 communities in the western U.S.

    Warming temperatures have dried out the region’s landscape and driven insect outbreaks that have killed millions of trees — ideal conditions for massive wildfires.

    The impacts stretch across North America, with smoke plumes at the height of wildfire season in the U.S. and Canada sometimes causing unhealthy pollution thousands of miles away on the East Coast.

    Last year’s work by the Forest Service included tree thinning and controlled burns across 5,000 square miles (13,000 square kilometers) of forest nationwide, Vilsack said.

    “We’re very targeted in saying, ‘Here’s where we need to go to reduce the risk,’” Forest Service Deputy Chief Chris French told the AP.

    But a key piece of the administration’s strategy — intentionally setting small fires to reduce the amount of vegetation available to burn in a major blaze — already has encountered problems: The program was suspended three months last spring after a devastating wildfire sparked by the federal government near Las Vegas, New Mexico, burned across more than 500 square miles (1,295 kilometers) in the southern reaches of the Rocky Mountains.

    It was the state’s largest fire on record, and several hundred homes were destroyed. Experts have said the environmental damage will linger generations.

    Congress has approved nearly $4 billion in assistance for the fire’s victims, including $1.5 billion in the massive spending bill passed last month.

    “If you’re a community, you’re going to have to worry about not just nature’s fires, but the government’s fires, too,” said Andy Stahl, executive director of the advocacy group Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics. “New Mexico taught us that.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Organic livestock farmers, hit by rising prices, seek help

    Organic livestock farmers, hit by rising prices, seek help

    [ad_1]

    WHITINGHAM, Vt. (AP) — Organic dairy and other livestock farmers are seeking emergency federal aid as they grapple with skyrocketing organic feed costs, steep fuel and utility expenses as well as the consequences of drought in many parts of the country.

    Two dozen U.S. senators and representatives wrote to U.S. Agriculture Department Secretary Tom Vilsack this week asking for emergency assistance for these farms. National and regional organic farming groups have also reached out to the department and the heads of the congressional committees.

    Organic dairy farmer Abbie Corse, whose more than 150-year-old family farm is located in the southern Vermont town of Whittingham, said she doesn’t know what the future of the farm will look like.

    “If a farm like ours is questioning how we’re going to keep going if something doesn’t change, I don’t know how we think there’s a future for anybody,” said Corse, 40, who farms with her mother and father.

    On top of the high feed, energy and fuel costs organic farmers are facing, labor is a pressing challenge for The Corse Farm Dairy, which has a herd of about 90 and sells its milk to Organic Valley, an international milk cooperative based in LaFarge, Wisconsin. If anyone is unable to work, the family doesn’t have backup to keep the farm running.

    “We are a medical emergency away from selling our herd,” she said.

    In May of this year, prices for organic soybeans in the U.S., used as feed on organic farms, soared to $40.52 per bushel, an increase of nearly 110% from January 2021, according to the letter the members of Congress sent to Vilsack on Monday.

    Feed costs normally average over half of organic dairy and poultry farmers’ total production costs “but dramatic increases year-over-year in organic feedstuffs are now creating unsustainable circumstances that could lead to farm closures, reduced competition and ultimately, limited consumer choice,” the letter said.

    The war in Ukraine and the Agriculture Department’s discontinuation of the National Organic Program recognition agreement with India has reduced imported grain supplies and pushed up prices, officials said.

    The drought in the West and other areas of the country has caused California, the country’s top dairy state, to have its driest three-year stretch on record and, this summer, challenged farmers in the Northeast. Western forages have been depleted and organic alfalfas, hays and sileages are in limited supply and nearly doubled in price, said Albert Straus, the founder and CEO of Straus Family Creamery in Marin County. The creamery has formed a crisis coalition of organic dairy farms, processors and brands in the West to petition for emergency drought relief.

    California has lost 10 organic dairies in the last several months and as many as 50 are projected to go out of business if no relief comes in the next couple of months, said Straus. Twelve farms had provided organic milk to the creamery until one recently went out of business, he said.

    “I’m concerned that the viability of these farms and the future of our communities is at risk,” Straus said.

    U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said he’s heard from Vermont organic dairy farmers, companies that buy their milk and the state’s agriculture secretary about “the severe financial pressure” organic dairies are facing.

    While Leahy, a Democrat, said the longer term solution must be found in more stable markets and a risk management program that works for organic dairy, he’s confident “that the federal government will find an approach to provide temporary support to our struggling organic dairy farm families.”

    A spokesperson said the Agriculture Department “is exploring avenues to address the challenges faced by organic dairy farmers, while also pursuing ongoing work to support organic and transitioning farmers through USDA programs.”

    For Kathie Arnold, who farms with her son at Twin Oaks Dairy in the central New York town of Truxton, this is likely one of the most financially difficult periods she has seen since the farm became organic in 1998. They’re going to survive, but for other younger farmers, who bought their farms in recent years and have debt to pay off monthly, “they’re not going to be able to weather this storm,” Arnold said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Organic livestock farmers, hit by rising prices, seek help

    Organic livestock farmers, hit by rising prices, seek help

    [ad_1]

    WHITINGHAM, Vt. — Organic dairy and other livestock farmers are seeking emergency federal aid as they grapple with skyrocketing organic feed costs, steep fuel and utility expenses as well as the consequences of drought in many parts of the country.

    Two dozen U.S. senators and representatives wrote to U.S. Agriculture Department Secretary Tom Vilsack this week asking for emergency assistance for these farms. National and regional organic farming groups have also reached out to the department and the heads of the congressional committees.

    Organic dairy farmer Abbie Corse, whose more than 150-year-old family farm is located in the southern Vermont town of Whittingham, said she doesn’t know what the future of the farm will look like.

    “If a farm like ours is questioning how we’re going to keep going if something doesn’t change, I don’t know how we think there’s a future for anybody,” said Corse, 40, who farms with her mother and father.

    On top of the high feed, energy and fuel costs organic farmers are facing, labor is a pressing challenge for The Corse Farm Dairy, which has a herd of about 90 and sells its milk to Organic Valley, an international milk cooperative based in LaFarge, Wisconsin. If anyone is unable to work, the family doesn’t have backup to keep the farm running.

    “We are a medical emergency away from selling our herd,” she said.

    In May of this year, prices for organic soybeans in the U.S., used as feed on organic farms, soared to $40.52 per bushel, an increase of nearly 110% from January 2021, according to the letter the members of Congress sent to Vilsack on Monday.

    Feed costs normally average over half of organic dairy and poultry farmers’ total production costs “but dramatic increases year-over-year in organic feedstuffs are now creating unsustainable circumstances that could lead to farm closures, reduced competition and ultimately, limited consumer choice,” the letter said.

    The war in Ukraine and the Agriculture Department’s discontinuation of the National Organic Program recognition agreement with India has reduced imported grain supplies and pushed up prices, officials said.

    The drought in the West and other areas of the country has caused California, the country’s top dairy state, to have its driest three-year stretch on record and, this summer, challenged farmers in the Northeast. Western forages have been depleted and organic alfalfas, hays and sileages are in limited supply and nearly doubled in price, said Albert Straus, the founder and CEO of Straus Family Creamery in Marin County. The creamery has formed a crisis coalition of organic dairy farms, processors and brands in the West to petition for emergency drought relief.

    California has lost 10 organic dairies in the last several months and as many as 50 are projected to go out of business if no relief comes in the next couple of months, said Straus. Twelve farms had provided organic milk to the creamery until one recently went out of business, he said.

    “I’m concerned that the viability of these farms and the future of our communities is at risk,” Straus said.

    U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said he’s heard from Vermont organic dairy farmers, companies that buy their milk and the state’s agriculture secretary about “the severe financial pressure” organic dairies are facing.

    While Leahy, a Democrat, said the longer term solution must be found in more stable markets and a risk management program that works for organic dairy, he’s confident “that the federal government will find an approach to provide temporary support to our struggling organic dairy farm families.”

    A spokesperson said the Agriculture Department “is exploring avenues to address the challenges faced by organic dairy farmers, while also pursuing ongoing work to support organic and transitioning farmers through USDA programs.”

    For Kathie Arnold, who farms with her son at Twin Oaks Dairy in the central New York town of Truxton, this is likely one of the most financially difficult periods she has seen since the farm became organic in 1998. They’re going to survive, but for other younger farmers, who bought their farms in recent years and have debt to pay off monthly, “they’re not going to be able to weather this storm,” Arnold said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • USDA announces $1 billion debt relief for 36,000 farmers

    USDA announces $1 billion debt relief for 36,000 farmers

    [ad_1]

    DES MOINES, Iowa — The federal government announced Tuesday a program that will provide $1.3 billion in debt relief for about 36,000 farmers who have fallen behind on loan payments or face foreclosure.

    The U.S. Department of Agriculture announced the farm loan relief program funded from $3.1 billion set aside in the Inflation Reduction Act allocated toward assisting distressed borrowers of direct or guaranteed loans administered by USDA. The law was passed by Congress and signed by President Joe Biden in August.

    The USDA provides loans to about 115,000 farmers and livestock producers who cannot obtain commercial credit. Those who have missed payments, are in foreclosure or are heading toward default will get help from the USDA. Financial difficulties for farmers may be caused by a variety of issues including drought and transportation bottlenecks.

    “Through no fault of their own, our nation’s farmers and ranchers have faced incredibly tough circumstances over the last few years,” said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. “The funding included in today’s announcement helps keep our farmers farming and provides a fresh start for producers in challenging positions.”

    About 11,000 farm borrowers delinquent on direct or guaranteed loan payments for 60 days or longer are receiving automatic electronic payments to get them current on their loans. Each farmer with a direct loan received about $52,000 and those with guaranteed loans received about $172,000. The total cost for this group is nearly $600 million. Farmers who received this help will get a letter informing them that their payments have been made and they will remain current until their next annual payment is due in 2023, Vilsack said.

    Another $200 million has been used to immediately help 2,100 farm borrowers after their loans had been foreclosed but who still owed money and had their tax refunds and other resources taken by the U.S. Treasury. The money will be used to pay the money these farmers owe to give them a fresh start, Vilsack said. The USDA said farmers in this category received an average of $101,000.

    Another $571 million will be used help several additional groups including:

    —7,000 farmers who during the COVID pandemic delayed loan payments to the end of their loans. This will cost $66 million.

    —1,600 farmers that face bankruptcy or foreclosure will get help on a case-by-case basis with individual meetings to assess their problem and find solutions at a cost of $330 million.

    —14,000 financially distressed farm borrowers facing cash flow problems who ask for help to avoid missing a loan payment will receive additional assistance. Vilsack said these issues could be brought on by drought or by low levels on the Mississippi River that is slowing barge traffic causing grain transportation issues. Up to $175 million will be available for this program.

    The money announced Tuesday is the first round of payments designed to help insure the farmers stay in business or re-enter farming.

    The remainder of the $3.1 billion will be used to help relax unnecessary loan restrictions and provide further assistance to be announced later, the USDA said.

    Farmers assisted by the program have been found by the USDA to be distressed borrowers hard hit by pandemic-induced market disruptions exacerbated by more frequent, more intense, climate-driven natural disasters, the USDA said.

    President Joe Biden and his administration continue to endure criticism for enacting a program to forgive some college loans but some of the Republican politicians who have criticized that program did not respond to questions about whether they support the farm loan help.

    The USDA also provided $31 billion to help nearly a million farmers offset lower sales, prices and other losses due to the coronavirus pandemic in 2021 and 2022, the U.S. Government Accountability Office has said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link