Milk
price increase seems to please no one [Stockton Record]
California
Agriculture Secretary Karen Ross approved a milk price increase aimed at
supporting the state's dairy industry but granted only half of what cheese
makers had supported and less than a quarter of what dairy farmers had sought.
That decision was widely anticipated by San Joaquin County dairy farmers, whose
milk is the most valuable farm commodity, worth an estimated $453 million in
2011. Dairy operators have struggled with historically high corn and feed
prices. The California Department of Food and Agriculture reports 105 dairies
went out of business, including seven in San Joaquin County, from 2011 to 2012,
leaving 1,563 in the state. Ross admitted her order, released late Friday, is
little more than a temporary patch that does nothing to address the failings of
the state's underlying milk pricing system. "California dairies and
processors must operate within national and international markets that require
the manufacture of milk products to be competitive with those produced
elsewhere in terms of variety, price and quality. Our system of regulated milk
pricing is an antiquated one that impairs the ability of the dairy industry to
rise to this challenge," she wrote in a letter released along with the
price order.
Senate
lines up solid majority for immigration bill [Los Angeles Times]
WASHINGTON
— A sweeping immigration bill gained the lopsided Senate majority that
supporters hope will pressure reluctant House Republicans, clearing a key test
vote Monday and moving along an all-but-certain path to passage in the Senate
this week. The 67-27 tally, with 15 Republicans joining all the Democrats who
voted, largely validated the strategy set by Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.),
one of the bill's chief architects, who had sought to reach out to Republicans
at the cost of sidetracking some liberal priorities. But the vote also showed
how divided Republicans remain on the issue, with opponents sharply criticizing
those in their party who have sided with the immigration overhaul effort. Many
Republicans in Congress have hesitated to support a bill that critics in their
party deride as amnesty for the 11 million immigrants living in the U.S.
without legal status. Others think the party must back immigration changes to
fix a dysfunctional system and to avoid alienating the country's fast-growing
Latino population.
Commentary: Imperfect
immigration bill deserves to pass [Associated Press]
Does
$30 billion sound like a fair price for an immigration bill? That's the cost of
a super-size border security package designed to win conservative votes and
push through the sweeping measure to settle the fate of 11 million people
living outside the law….The bill remains far from perfect. An envisioned
13-year wait for citizenship for undocumented residents and a refusal to give
same-sex couples equal treatment for legal status are among the troublesome
provisions. Still, with all its flaws, the bill remains a generational chance
to bring millions into a mainstream American society. The Senate and House
should approve this immigration bill.
Reid
pressures House to pass farm bill [Associated Press]
WASHINGTON
-- Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says his chamber won't pass an extension
of farm policy this year and is pressuring the House to figure out how to pass
a farm bill. The House rejected its version of a five-year,
half-trillion-dollar farm bill last week, with 62 Republicans voting no after
Speaker John Boehner urged support. The Senate passed its farm bill earlier
this month with support from two-thirds of the chamber. Reid on Monday urged
Boehner take up the Senate farm bill before current policy expires Sept. 30.
"Doing nothing means no reform, no deficit reduction and no certainty for
America's 16 million farm-industry workers," Reid said. Both bills expand
farm subsidies while saving money overall and making cuts to the almost $80
billion-a-year food stamp program, which has doubled in cost in the last five
years. The Senate bill cuts $400 million a year from food stamps, or half a
percent, while the House bill cuts $2 billion annually, or about three percent.
Big
legal price tag for Salinas River diversion permit [Monterey Herald]
It
will cost up to $350,000 in legal representation and expert consultant work
just to get ready to defend Monterey County's threatened Salinas River
diversion permit, a sum that came as a shocker to county water board members
and others. On Monday, the county Water Resources Agency board of directors
approved an additional $250,000 for outside legal counsel Downey Brand for its
work through the July 10 deadline for submitting the county's case to the state
Water Resources Control Board. In August the board will conduct a hearing to
decide whether to revoke the river diversion permit. The board also directed
staff to ask the Board of Supervisors to consider paying the legal costs,
noting the supervisors agreed in February to defend the permit and spend up to
$1 million a year for the next three years on related efforts….Monterey County
Farm Bureau executive director Norm Groot said he had "serious
concerns" about the legal costs, noting that the agency's regional
advisory committee had been meeting for several months to help develop a
community-based approach to handling the permit issue and had never heard any
discussion of legal matters. Groot noted that the committee, made up of board
members and Salinas Valley groundwater basin users, still had "no clear
idea" about the permit defense effort. He questioned why the committee had
even been set up if it wouldn't have a major say in how to move forward.
Ag
Today is distributed to county Farm Bureaus, CFBF directors and CFBF staff, for
information purposes, by the CFBF Communications/News Division, 916-561-5550; news@cfbf.com.
Some story links may require site registration. To be removed
from this mailing list, reply to this message and please provide your
name and e-mail address.
No comments:
Post a Comment