Farm Bureau Policies 2022 responsible for the food supply of our nation to provide factual information on the safety of our food supply so that it neither divulges farming trade secrets nor aids in furnishing sensitive financial or annual production information to third parties in such a way that would facilitate opportunities for price discrimi- nation or price fixing to the producer; (9) Open communicationwithwilling consumer groups;
No. 206 Cooperatives
programs of “assignedmarketing rights”; and/or (3) exempt com- mercial production quantities from the regulations of the volume control program. Special self-help programs developed outside theCaliforniaMarketingAct of 1937, suchas commissions, should conformwith the general organization and approval standards of the act. These programs should provide for audits which shall be made a part of an annual report to producers under the program, bepaid for andcontrolledby those served, andprovide for periodic review through referenda. Any assessments levied for the functions of a marketing order, commission, or council shouldnot be commingledwith state gen- eral funds andused for purposes other than theuses authorizedby the programparticipants. (Rev. 2004) No. 202 Producer-Financed Programs Even though current lawallows the state to transfer funds tem- porarily fromthe Food andAgriculture Fund to theGeneral Fund, the function of all programs operating under this special fund should never be impeded by such a loan. Prior to any transfer of funds, a repayment date shouldbe specified. Interest earned from the Food andAgriculture Fund should not be utilized for General Fund purposes unless it is paid back with interest. No industry funded program should be required to undergo an evaluation or budget deduction for efficiency purposes enforced by the state government. (1993) No. 203 Brand Advertising The California and Federal Marketing Acts of 1937 should be amended to authorize an allowance to a handler of credit for ad- vertising or promotion of a private brand or trade name for any agricultural commodity. Theacts shouldalsobeamended toallowfor advertisingdollars collected under an order regulating producers and/or handlers to be spent on brand advertising on a matching fund basis with handlers and processors. These enabling provisions should be implemented by those affected. Full opportunity should be given to allow approval or disapproval, and the results should truly reflect the wishes of the producers or handlers affected by an order. Such advertising or promotionshouldbe inaccordwithaplanadoptedby theadvisory board administering the marketing order. Safeguards should be provided to assure that generic advertising and promotion pro- grams are not degraded. No. 204 Producer’s Rights In the changing marketing patterns of many California- grown commodities, it is imperative that individual producers be guaranteed the right to develop and select specific mar- keting programs designed to meet the specific needs of their individual commodities. One of the basic objectives of Farm Bureau is to serve as a vehicle for organized action by indi- vidual farmers. In this most important role, it is incumbent upon Farm Bureau to provide sufficient factual information to enable farmers to make intelligent decisions on issues con- cerning their farming operations. Producershave the right toproposeenabling legislationmodify- ing the provisions of both state and federal marketing acts. Farmproducers should have ameans of recourse when buyers reject delivery, or alter terms of sale, claiming the product fails to meet agreed-to specifications. A system should be established allowing USDA to reinspect the product at the point of delivery to settle differences. (Rev. 2010) No. 205 Producer’s Liens Processors should be prohibited from attaching addenda to contracts whichwaive the producer’s lien against case goods held by the processor. The producer’s lien law should be amended to assure that the lien survives inbankruptcyproceedings andproducers are treated as secured creditors. Tomeet this objective, a central filing system should be established so the lien is on record to provide notice to bona fide purchasers. Market Enforcement TheFarmProduct Trust Fundwithin theCaliforniaDepartment of Food and Agriculture’s Market Enforcement Branch (MEB) should be abolished. The trust fund fees should be redirected to the MEB to increase the enforcement and investigation abilities. Fines shouldbedeveloped for disobeyingmarket enforcement law that canbeenforcedswiftlyandeffectively. Fees shall becharged to licensees andproducers foruseof additionalMEB servicesbeyond initial renewal licensing. (Rev. 1997)
We support the principles of cooperatives enabling farmers to join together inagricultural cooperatives inorder tocompete fairly and effectively in themarket place. (Rev. 2009) No. 207 International Trade We believe that trade must be based on principles of fairness. We believe all international trade agreements shouldbe equitable andwork toopennewmarkets andexpandcurrentmarkets forU.S. agricultural products. We support regulatoryparity,monetary integrity andmonetary stability as essential components for fair trade. Domestic and importedproducts shall beproducedunder sub- stantially similar standards. U.S. producers endure strict environ- mental and labor standards that create anunlevel playing field.We believe these inequities must be weighed when additional trade preferences to foreign countries are considered. As a matter of U.S. national security, our government should givepriority to foodsafetyandsecurityprotection. TheU.S. govern- mentmust be cognizant of policy and/or actions that weakenU.S. agriculture’s viability and sustainability toprovide for anadequate food, fiber and timber supply. Tariffs U.S. should not further reduce agriculture tariff levels until im- porting countries lower tariffs to align with the United States. At such time, future tariff reductions should only be done in concert with the nation interested in lowering such tariffs. Import sensitivecommodities shouldreceivea longerphase-out period for tariffs. Trade agreements should include deadlines for countries to comply with tariff reductions. If deadlines are not met or other barriers are raised, U.S. tariffs should be adjusted to harmonize with the non-complying country’s tariffs. We urge a significant allocation of existing tariffs imposed on imported seafood and fishery products to be used for promotion and research benefitting U.S. farm-raised aquaculture. Agricultural Imports All importedagricultural products shouldbe inspectedat point- of-entry. They shouldalsobe subject to the same inspection, sani- tary, andphytosanitary quality, labeling, and residue standards of domestic products. To better protect against the risk of pest and/ or disease introduction from imports, we support an increase in funds for inspection services and facilities. Investigation/Dispute Resolution We support an expedited dispute settlement process that gives special consideration for perishable commodities. Producers of specialty and perishable commodities who can show prima facie evidenceof injury shouldbeprovided financial assistance for legal and research expenses. The U.S. must diligently pursue and enforce dispute resolu- tion laws and decisions that address unfair practices by com- peting nations. Sanctions TheU.S.governmentshouldnot includeU.S.agriculturalproducts. Agricultural Trade Negotiations Wesupport the inclusionof all agricultural productsandpolicies during negotiations. All impacted producers should be compensated for any losses resulting fromsanctions and/or tariffs. Trade agreements should not provide financial compensation to foreign producers in lieu of market access. Congress and U.S. trade negotiators should increase efforts to eliminate false technical trade barriers, export subsidies, imbal- anced domestic subsidies and the unregulated dumping of agri- cultural products.Weurge special considerationbe given to issues impacting import sensitive products. Our government should insist upon strict implementation and enforcement of trade agreements.We encourageCongress to con- tinuallyevaluate tradeagreementsanalyzing impacts toagriculture with an emphasis on fair trade. Agricultural products should not be allowed into the U.S. as a trade-off for military and political reasons or as a trade-off for manufactured or nonagricultural products to the detriment of American farmers and farmproducts. FarmBureausupports apermanentU.S. deputy ambassador for agriculture within the U.S. trade representative’s office. Intellectual and Proprietary Technology In this free and fiercely competitive global market, U.S. gov- ernment entities should be cognizant of the potentially nega- tive implication of sharing intellectual property and research information with global trading partners that could result in amplified foreign competition to the financial disadvantage of American agriculture. U.S. government entities, including theuniversity systemshould
(10) Measures to improve and streamline food inspection by havingUSDA serve as the sole federal agency responsible for food inspection and safety; (11) Provisions to allow the transport and storage of fresh eggs basedoncurrentUSDAstandards of 45degrees Fahrenheit or less, but oppose themandatory pasteurization of fresh eggs; (12) State efforts to ensure the quality and integrity of unpas- teurized fruit juices.We oppose FDA regulationof these products; (13) Promoting science-based, voluntary commodity quality assurance products; (14) USDA and FDA removing E. coli as an adulterant; and (15) The FDA to allow the extra-label use of cephalosporin an- timicrobial drugs in animals whenwarranted. We believe that equivalent and consistent standards should be set for beef, pork and poultry for school lunch programs. We encourage the education of all food handlers on the proper preparation, cooking and serving of all foodproducts andon sani- tary practices as part of state licensing procedures. (Rev. 2020) No. 136 Industrial Hemp With the further development of state and federal regulations related to industrial hemp, it is important that FarmBureauengage in this issue to protect agriculture as a whole. Recognizing industrial hemp is anagricultural cropunder state and federal law, wemay advocate on issues related to the produc- tion, processingand saleof industrial hempand the effect onother agricultural crops or producers. As there is extreme variation from county to county in how in- dustrial hemp is regulated, county FarmBureaus shall retain lo- cal discretion to address the development of policies regarding industrial hemp. We encourage: (1) CFBF staff to engage in process related to industrial hemp in amanner consistent with the principles of CFBF policies; and (2) Parity be achievedbetweenState and federal laws and regu- lations regarding industrial hemp. (19/Rev 2020)
Marketing and Bargaining
No. 201 Marketing Orders and Commissions
Marketing orders and commissions can be successful self-help tools for California producers. We recognize the right of produc- ers to promote increased research, sales and consumption of the commodities theyproduce.We further recognize the right toassess both domestically produced and imported product for market promotion purposes. Marketing orders and commissions should: (1) Bemarket oriented; (2) Adhere to competitive principles; (3) Utilize the least amount of government regulation to assure uniformcompliance; and (4) Be implemented on a timely basis once approved by grower referendum. We support producer control over checkoff programs. Areferen- dumshall beheldasprovided for ineachcommodityprogram, but at intervals not to exceed ten years or upon petition of 10 percent of qualified producers. In marketing order and commission referendum, the mem- bers of a nonprofit agricultural cooperativemarketing association should be informed of the intended position of the cooperative before a bloc vote is exercised. Boards of directors of agricultural cooperatives shouldbeallowedtovote for theirmembers regarding marketing order and/or commission issues, provided eachmem- ber is given the right tocast hisorher ownballot inany referendum. Financial disclosure shouldnot be requiredof commissionand marketing boardmembers. Federal Programs Basic concepts and provisions of the Federal Marketing Act should conformwith the CaliforniaMarketing Act of 1937. State Programs We oppose any interpretation of the California Marketing Act of 1937 which recognizes the propriety of volume control pro- grams which (1) utilize “historical bases” for assigning growers the volume of a commodity they can plant or market; (2) lead to
18 Ag Alert January 26, 2022
Powered by FlippingBook