We continue our NAFB Convention coverage in Kansas City, MO with the CEO of the National Pork Producers Council, Bryan Humphreys.
Q: We’ve got a number of different issues and topics to discuss. I think it’d be a good spot for us to start when it comes to Prop 12, Question 3 and how some of this ties in with the potential for a farm bill here. Could we get a national fix tied in with a farm bill? Get us up to speed on some of the latest that we’re seeing surrounding Prop 12, et cetera, right now.
A: Let’s take a step back.
2018 was Proposition 12, and before that was Massachusetts Question 3. And at the very end of the day, what both of those did was limit the sale of pork product in those states if they did not meet the arbitrary standards that were set by California and Massachusetts. Essentially, those states are trying to tell farmers in Missouri, Kansas, Iowa, Illinois and North Carolina … how to raise pigs. And we find that to be unacceptable.
But more unacceptable is the idea that we would create a patchwork of legislation across the state, across the country, that pork producers would have to comply with. There is no way for a farmer to comply with regulations in different state regulations in Massachusetts and in California and in other states around the country. You can’t have a patchwork of 50 states with different regulations.
So we’ve approached Congress and had great conversations about the need for a solution to Prop 12, or fix Prop 12. And so far, the reception in D.C. has been tremendous. It was included in the House version that passed bipartisan out of the Ag Committee.
And we continue to have conversations to push Congress to get a farm bill done. Yet this year, (we’ve had) a little bit of a challenge as we head in. But the American agriculture and the American pork producers need a solution to Prop 12. We also need the stability of a farm bill done yet this year.
Q: And to what you mentioned there, obviously we don’t have very many days in the lame duck session to get something across the finish line. And to that respect, I hope we can get something done here. I know the chances are slim if we have to kick this the next year.
That raises the question for me. Okay, we have new members of Congress that are going to come in, Republicans will hold the majorities. We’ll have a Republican White House, a president who has said on other issues that he would prefer to leave it up to the states. Not necessarily ag issues, but other issues.
So one has to wonder, could the dynamics change if this gets pushed into next year, could that mean something different happens with some of this Prop 12 legislation tied into the farm bill?
A: Valid question. Our push continues to be to get it done this year. We have a version out of the House; it’s passed out of committee. There’s an obvious opportunity there to move forward with that.
Senator Bozeman has put out a draft version of some bullet points as well, and it’s included in there. At this point, the push should be to get it done and to clear the slate for the new administration to work on policy issues as they come in next year. Our focus remains on getting a farm bill done this year.
Do dynamics change? Perhaps? But at the end of the day, it’s pretty universally accepted that Proposition 12 has had an impact on food prices in California. Pork loins in the state of California have gone up 41% since the inception. This issue isn’t getting better. And so the need for a solution is now and kicking the can down the road.
From an American pork producer standpoint, and honestly, an American agriculture standpoint, it’s a real struggle. We need to see a farm bill action quick.
Q: Another issue is ag labor. And with a new incoming administration, there’s been a lot of talk about immigration, et cetera. I know we need reform to the H2A program.
What’s your thoughts from NPPC’s perspective in terms of labor issues we have right now?
A: I think you nailed it right there when we talked about H2A and reform. American agriculture needs year-round H2A availability in some of the areas where we have hog farms and where agriculture is predominant. We’re looking at an unemployment rate less than 3% in some of these areas and the availability to hire local folks is simply not there.
And so year-round H2A, the benefit of the TN program for those technical workers that come in at a higher level is there. But we really need to take a long hard look at some of those programs and again separate out legal immigration for agriculture and food affordability and availability from the rest of the immigration discussion. And we’ve seen bipartisan bills on that before and look forward to continuing those conversations under not only a new administration but under a new Congress.
Q: I should ask as well, and we should reemphasize, I know we have seen H5N1 now in swine. We saw the cases in a backyard farm in Oregon.
But you know, reiterating to folks that the pork supply is safe. And as we’re seeing this evolution, I know the pork industry is continuing to watch this closely and react in real time, right?NP
A: And so just again, as you said, this was an isolated incident on a backyard farm in Oregon where they were mixing with other birds and not necessarily a situation we would see in a commercial operation or in an operation that is regularly going into the food supply.
But for your listeners and for everybody out there, we have to remember the importance of biosecurity. We have to remember as we go into this migratory bird season of the need to continue to take biosecurity seriously. This isn’t about enhancing your biosecurity. It’s about making sure that you’re following your biosecurity protocols not only for H5N1, but for the employees and for the pigs as well, to ensure that we continue to keep everyone safe as we go through this.
But again, for everybody out there, pork continues to be safe to eat. It never entered the food supply. I had pork chops the last two nights. I had bacon and sausage for breakfast this morning. Absolutely no concerns there.
Q: Bryan, anything else you would want to add from NPPC here today?
A: I think just a recognition that this election that we just went through, in addition to some changes in administration and Congress, there were a couple of ballot measures – one in Sonoma County, California and one in Denver, Colorado – that agriculture should be really proud of.
Agriculture banded together under the threat for some activism groups. Activist groups out there trying to not only get rid of livestock agriculture in California but banned harvest facilities in Denver. And we banded together, and we worked together, and we collaborated. And at the end, in Sonoma County, 85% of the folks that voted in California said “no” to banning CAFOs. They stood with American agriculture.
And in Denver, 65% of the folks that voted there said “no” to getting rid of harvest facilities. And I think we should take a moment and be proud that the American consumer and the constituents in those areas recognize the value of agriculture and that these activist groups have simply gone too far. And we should be proud of that and take a moment to celebrate the fact that the consumers and the constituents have stood with agriculture this time around.
