Tag Archives: farm bill

House Ag Chair and new Ranking Member share bipartisan priorities at Farm Show listening session

Posted on by
Reply

Whole milk, new farm bill top their bipartisan to-do list

By Sherry Bunting, Farmshine, Jan. 17, 2025

HARRISBURG, Pa. – Bipartisan priorities were evident — especially on getting whole milk back in schools and completing a new farm bill — during Rep. Glenn ‘GT’ Thompson’s annual listening session on opening day of the Pennsylvania Farm Show Jan. 4th in Harrisburg.

With a thin Republican House majority, Thompson, who represents the largely rural 15th district of north central Pennsylvania, will continue as Chairman of the Ag Committee. 

He introduced the more than 100 attendees to the Ag Committee’s new top Democrat, Ranking Member Angie Craig, who represents the mostly rural 2nd district of southeast Minnesota.

They were joined by Ag Committee and Ag Appropriations Committee member, Rep. Chellie Pingree, representing the 1st district of Maine, and by Pennsylvania Secretary of Agriculture Russell Redding.

Whole milk

“We got really close to getting this done,” said Thompson about his Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act after Berks County dairy farmer Nelson Troutman with the Grassroots Pennsylvania Dairy Advisory Committee asked: What’s next for the bill in the new 2025-26 Congress?

“We have to start over, but there is a lot more support this time,” Thompson replied. He doesn’t see any obstacles on the House side after overwhelming bipartisan support in the 2023 floor vote.

He expects the bill to move quickly through the Education and Workforce Committee under its new Chairman Tim Walberg (R-Mich.), a whole milk bill cosponsor. Then Thompson will work with House leadership to get it on the calendar for a 2025 vote.

He said the Senate side also looks “very promising” as Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark), a supporter of the bill, replaces former Ag Committee Chair Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) who had blocked it.

Craig gave further assurance. She and the new Ag Committee Ranking Member on the Senate side, Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), are working together on this. “We do not see what we saw last time on the Democratic side to get this done for GT,” said Craig.

Both are Democrats from Minnesota who previously cosponsored the bill – Craig on the House side, Klobuchar on the Senate side.

Thompson credited the education and leadership of the Grassroots Pennsylvania Dairy Advisory Committee and 97 Milk in raising awareness and support. “The grassroots effort also helped improve the bill by suggesting language that makes sure the calories don’t count toward the fat in the school meal,” he said.

Pingree is also a big supporter of whole milk in schools. She was “amazed” to see all the Drink Whole Milk signs, banners, and painted bales while visiting her brother-in-law in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. 

“I don’t know too many states where you see something this interesting while you’re driving down the road. It’s pretty impressive. It has spread far and wide,” she noted.

Congresswoman Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) was “impressed” by the Drink Whole Milk signs along roadsides when she spent time in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. That was music to the ears of Berks County dairy farmer Nelson Troutman with the Grassroots Pennsylvania Dairy Advisory Committee. His original painted round bales in December 2018 motivated the launch of the 97 Milk education movement in February 2019. It is run by volunteers and donations at 97milk.com

ESL milk

Troutman asked if the bill could address extended shelf life (ESL) milk in schools. He is concerned about taste and acceptance by students, saying “schools should only be allowed to serve ESL milk if that’s the only option available to them.”

His concern arises from the volume of new plant capacity coming online across the country for ESL and aseptic shelf-stable milk packaging, along with new Federal Milk Marketing Order formulas that will price Class I milk differently based on shelf life. This creates potential competitive issues, especially in Pennsylvania, for bottlers of conventionally pasteurized milk that tends to be more local vying for school contracts with ESL milk coming from potentially more distant locations.

Farm-to-School

State lawmakers and young people in attendance voiced further concerns about the quality of school meals and the practice of schools shipping-in prepackaged meals prepared out-of-state, leaving Pennsylvania agriculture out of the loop. 

They requested incentives for local farm-to-school food programs. Frank Stoltzfus, a 9th generation farmer from Lancaster County pointed to the PA Beef to PA Schools program as a successful example.

These discussions come under the jurisdiction of the House Education and Workforce Committee and its “long overdue overhaul,” said Thompson: “The Childhood Nutrition Reauthorization is where we reform and refine to update school meals. I’ll be encouraging Chairman Walberg that we do that reauthorization, and this (ESL question) is something we can certainly take a look at.”

Pingree noted “some farm bill funding also goes to school meals, and we can put more into resupplying kitchens for on-site meal prep and local procurement.”

Nutrition overhaul

The last time Congress did a Childhood Nutrition Reauthorization was in 2010, when it tied school meals more strictly to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGAs).

“When it comes to nutrition, if kids won’t eat it, then it’s not nutritional, and we are seeing a lot of waste today,” Thompson observed.

On that score, he pointed to “good reforms” to the Dietary Guidelines process that will again be part of the markup of the farm bill to “take some of the food politics out of the process coming from the so-called ‘experts.’ We want science-based not agenda-based guidelines.”

Farm bill

Asked about a timeline for the new farm bill, Thompson was optimistic. New committees are still being populated, and new members will need some farm bill education.

“But I would love to see this farm bill go to committee markup in the first quarter of this year — that is my goal – and then see it move quickly to the floor,” he said in a Farmshine interview after the event. “We will continue to do listening sessions, but I want to move ahead. We’ve had great input from all across the country, but I do think it’s important that we keep listening and touching base.”

Both he and Craig shared concerns about nosediving grain prices and net farm income. They differed on what constitutes cuts vs. cost-control on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) that makes up the bulk of the now over $1 trillion farm bill. They both want the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) funds pulled into the conservation title and baseline, but they differ on removing the IRA’s climate mandates for these funds.

Thompson warned about competition from conservatives who are interested in using these funds as ‘pay-fors’ on tax policy, which he said Ag Committee Republicans would oppose. “I want these IRA funds in this farm bill,” he said.

Craig said the IRA funds best practices like carbon sequestration, and Pingree said she likes the focus on resilience for healthy soils. They pointed to carbon markets that see the value and lauded Sec. Vilsack’s use of $3 billion in CCC funds for pilot projects that will “help give us better metrics.”

While there is general agreement that most practices on farms improve the planet, the question is – how do the things farmers already do get monetized?

“They are not getting enough credit for their ecosystem services — carbon sequestration, air quality, water quality, filtration of rain. Farmers improve our environment just by farming,” said former State Senator Mike Brubaker. “Is there some way for them to get paid?”

SUSTAINS Act

Thompson said the farm bill does not address this specifically, but legislation passed in 2022 includes the SUSTAINS Act, which he described as “providing a framework for private industry to be involved.”

Corporations and foundations can donate funds to USDA for conservation purposes, like improving technical assistance for more farmers to have access to popular programs like EQIP. He cited a “great return on investment” from Chesapeake Bay Foundation initiatives as an example.

But he pushed back on the Ag Secretary’s use of CCC funds for such purposes because administrations come and go, with their own changing priorities.

“Having certainty going forward is incredibly important,” he said. “Sec. Vilsack wanted to do things by regulation and his interpretation of how CCC funds could be used. He should have come to us (Congress), instead.”

Likewise, concerns were voiced about emerging land use policies at local, county, state and federal levels.

Renewable energy

Asked for their views on traditional and alternative energy, a bipartisan preference emerged for balancing affordable and renewable sources with science, technology and innovation as “pathways for solutions.”

“We need ‘all of the above’ because energy will be a mix for a very long time,” said Pingree. “But we have to stay in this (renewable) dialog.”

Thompson said the ultimate destination of the Farm Show butter sculpture — a digester on a Pennsylvania dairy farm — is a good example of renewable energy produced from cow manure and food waste.

Craig said biofuels through E15 standards are vital for corn and soybean farmers in her district of Minnesota, with new biobased aviation fuel standards an exciting opportunity that U.S. farmers should benefit from, not imported corn from Brazil.

“Our farmers have to be at the forefront of it, we have to get this right,” said Craig. “As Ranking Member, I’ve got to manage my caucus just like GT does as Chairman, to work together for the right solutions, which are probably somewhere in the middle.”

Food security

Questions were also raised about invasive species, animal health, and safeguarding the food supply — especially in regard to inspection of border crossings for invasive pests that threaten all types of agriculture and novel cross-species migration of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI H5N1) in poultry and now dairy operations.

“We have to make sure we keep investing in our laboratories, inspections, and research,” said Thompson.

According to Redding, the Pennsylvania Diagnostic Laboratories System (PADLS) was born out of the poultry industry’s first difficult encounter with avian influenza back in the early 1980s. Today PADLS is instrumental as the state is one of the first to enter the mandatory national bulk milk testing strategy, and has established some protocols credited to the poultry industry.

He stressed the importance of cross-species engagement between Pennsylvania’s top two ag sectors of poultry and dairy, where biosecurity is essential.

“We’re at about 100% of milk representing our nearly 5000 dairy farms, and we’ve not found (H5N1) on the third cycle of testing now,” Redding reported. “The difficulty with a national strategy is finding a model that fits the diversity of all the states.”

Craig said HPAI is a big concern for her home state of Minnesota, which is No. 1 in turkey production and No. 7 in dairy.

They look forward to working with the new U.S. Secretary of Agriculture on what the national strategy looks like going forward “without overburdening the farmers.”

-30-

Ag hearing: ‘Perfect storm’ could ignite farm financial crisis, House Ag Chair GT expresses frustration over Senate playing politics with farm bill

Posted on by
1

By Sherry Bunting for Farmshine, Aug. 2, 2024

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The extended 2018 farm law will expire Sept. 30 in the throes of a tumultuous election year while farm liquidity and cash flow decline in the face of an eroded farm bill safety net. 

Witnesses before the House Ag Committee July 23rd were (l-r) Dr. Dana Allen-Tully for Minnesota Corn Growers, David Dunlow for American Cotton Growers, Tony Hotchkiss for Ag and Rural Bankers, Joey Caldwell for the Ag Retailers Association, and University of Arkansas ag economist Dr. Ron Rainey. Hearing livestream screen capture 

Witnesses in a July 23 House Ag Committee hearing expressed support for the House bill and made it clear that another extension is a non-starter, with one witness describing the current law as facing a category-five hurricane with no protection.

“Unprecedented challenges are facing the entire agricultural sector, threatening to ignite another farm financial crisis,” said House Ag Chairman Glenn ‘GT’ Thompson (R-Pa.) as he opened the hearing on financial conditions in farm country.

USDA estimates net farm income will see the steepest drop of $43 billion this year – down 27% from 2023 and down 40% from 2022. In its report, USDA notes that livestock farms will also see net cash farm income drop for 2024 across all specializations. Within the livestock sector, dairy farms are forecast to see the largest decrease in average net cash farm income in 2024.

“The impact won’t be fully understood until early next year when farmers are unable to secure operating loans because they can’t cash flow,” said Dr. Dana Allen-Tully, member of a diversified crop and dairy farming family near Eyota, testifying for Minnesota Corn Growers.

In addition to flooding in her region and drought elsewhere, crop producers face income losses of $150 to $233 per acre, she said, citing plummeting prices, high costs of production, doubling interest rates, natural disasters, and tightening credit.

Thompson said these factors create “a perfect storm that will compromise the foundation of our agricultural economy.”

He observed U.S. agriculture is in the largest two-year decline in farm income, and by the end of 2024, total farm sector debt will be the highest since 1970.

“Unfortunately, the farm safety net has not seen significant investment since 2002. The lack of support for those that feed the world is unacceptable,” the Chairman said, pointing to the many farm bill listening sessions across the country. 

According to Thompson, the bipartisan House Committee-passed Farm, Food and National Security Act of 2024 represents the largest permanent farm bill investment in over two decades for the farm safety net, conservation, trade promotion, specialty crops, research, and livestock biosecurity. 

“It will give renewed strength… just when producers need it most,” he declared, taking aim at “pundits spreading misinformation about this bill in order to sow division.”

Thompson said Democrats in Congress have “unilaterally added billions to climate and conservation programs, and the current Administration added one-quarter of one trillion dollars to nutrition programs — all while ignoring the farm safety net.”

“I will not apologize for advancing a bill that seeks to put the farm back in the farm bill. I am tired of the politics and gamesmanship, and I know folks out in the countryside are too,” he said.

Thompson stated further that this work has been “saddled with a meddling Senate Democrat and others who do not seem to appreciate the dire circumstances in farm country.” 

The “meddling Senate Democrat” is Ag Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), who is retiring at the end of 2024 and is also responsible for holding hostage the Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act.

As recently as last week, some Ag Committee Democrats have expressed a preference to see a farm bill fail before engaging in the process, Thompson reported, adding that his door remains open “to renegotiation from any partner willing to come to the table with a serious proposal — not more red lines.”

He stressed the difficulty in reconciling a bipartisan 900-page House bill with a partisan 90-page Senate summary.

“For negotiation to be viable, Chairwoman Stabenow needs to unveil her bill text,” he challenged.

During the hearing, witnesses cited meaningful improvements to the safety net via updates to reference prices, crop insurance, and the conservation title.

Both the current 2018 law and the incomplete Senate summary do not meet the needs of farmers, witnesses indicated. Even the stronger safety net in the House bill is not enough, they said, but would help farmers weather the storm.

While pundits say the House bill cuts nutrition programs, Thompson has repeatedly demonstrated no program cuts in the bill, even though the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) score showed $30 billion in savings on the 10-year baseline compared with earlier scores. 

Nutrition Title spending accounts for nearly 80% of the estimated $1.5 trillion total farm bill. Nutrition spending also increases by 73% ($484 billion) since the 2018 farm bill enactment.

“Quite frankly, we are not going to have nutrition, if we do not have farmers, so our investment here is in the farm safety net,” Thompson stated. 

The House farm bill seeks a stronger farm safety net within a shrinking piece of the total farm bill pie. Senate Ag Committee minority graphic

Ranking member David Scott (D-Ga.) emphasized in his remarks the Democrat position that CCC authority remains “exclusively in the hands of the Secretary of Agriculture,” without the congressional oversight proposed in the House bill.

The witnesses didn’t bite when asked about this. Several indicated it is more desirable to have a stronger safety net so the CCC does not have to be dipped into in the first place.

At the same time, witnesses indicated the need, now, for supplemental intervention under the current price squeeze.

To that point, Rep. Mark Alford (R-Mo.) asked: “Did you know we are losing 1000 farms every month in America right now? It’s a staggering number when we consider our food security and our national security.”

“Working capital is fast depleting,” Dr. Allen-Tully testified. She called John Deere’s layoffs “a canary in the coal mine” and warned against another farm bill extension because “it won’t stop the hemorrhaging. Even a new farm bill with a strong safety net may not be timely or sufficient, though I pray Congress will pass a new farm bill this year because it will help in the long run.

“We put everything on the line for a thin and often negative margin. Young people aren’t going into farming, and that’s why the average age of farmers is nearing 60… no parent wants their kids to go through life facing constant worry. We need our full-time farm and ranch families,” she said.

North Carolina farmer, David Dunlow testified for American Cotton Growers. He noted the size of operating loans farmers in all commodities take on every spring, and the lines of credit with input companies.

“That has to be paid back – every year — before we can go and get another operating loan,” he said. “The margins are very thin … under normal conditions, and with the economy now, nothing cash flows. It’s very difficult to get those loans paid and to move on to the next year.”

Testifying for the Ag and Rural Bankers, Tony Hotchkiss said lenders are seeing changes. Farmers are working through liquidity faster than anticipated and are now beginning to leverage equity through refinancing debt. This is further challenged by the cash flow needed for the refinancing payment.

“This has made ag bankers feel as though they are looking over the cliff,” Hotchkiss stated, stressing the need for ag policy changes, many of which are included in the 2024 House farm bill.

Joey Caldwell of GreenPoint Ag Holdings in the Southeast U.S., testified for the Ag Retailers Association. He said a strong farm bill safety net is critical to Rural America: “If the farmer is not successful, the supply chain is not successful, and this impacts the very fabric of our communities.” 

University of Arkansas ag economist Dr. Ron Rainey also testified that farm debt levels are increasing as divergence between input costs over ag prices is widening, even if the overall price indices are higher.

He said more farmers need to be involved in using risk management, whether that is through better subsidy levels or technical assistance to enhance understanding and use of it.

“If they don’t have crop insurance, and if they are outside of the safety net, then they’re financing their risk on their balance sheets. The more we can move from ad hoc disaster assistance, the better off the farmers are,” said Dr. Rainey. 

“But where we are now… that’s going to require some intervention. That’s just the bottom line,” he added.

Rep. Eric Sorenson (D-Ill.) brought up sustainable aviation fuel and the inequity in how current Energy Department tax credits are given for ethanol from Brazil and used cooking oil from China, while American farmers, who can serve this need, are getting nothing.

“Sustainable aviation fuel is one of the most exciting things coming as a corn farmer,” Dr. Allen-Tully replied. “But the way the Treasury Department has their guidance written excludes us. It is almost insulting to believe that we would bring in sugarcane ethanol in place of ethanol we can grow here.”

Rep. Mary Miller (R-Ill.) asked witnesses how the climate policies of the current administration are affecting farmers, and she gave her own opinion as a farmer:  “It’s painful.”

Caldwell responded, pointing to energy and fertilizer as the largest costs, and they are much higher under these policies.

“Farmers need a strong farm bill,” said Caldwell. “When a farmer plants a crop, they put more than their job at risk. It is their home, their livelihood – a pillar of their community. For many, it is also their family legacy, passed down through generations that they hope to pass on to their kids… they risk losing it all.”

-30-

Thompson pushes effective, transformational farm bill. Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act included!

Posted on by
1
Representative GT Thompson of Pennsylvania once told a group of farmers gathered for a 97 Milk meeting that he has gone by a lot of titles and been called a lot of things over the years, and while it’s an honor to be the Chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, his favorite title is ‘Representative’ because, he said “that’s what we do. We are representing The People.” True to form, GT led the House 2023-24 farm bill process with representation in mind by making the bipartisan endeavor ‘tripartisan’ — going to great lengths to bring grassroots farmers into the process. One thing he heard repeatedly at the 85 listening sessions in 40 states was ‘bring whole milk choice back to schools,’ even though school meal rules fall under the childhood nutrition reauthorization led by the Education Committee, not the farm bill. But now he’s done that too. Bolstered by the overwhelmingly bipartisan 330 to 99 passage of H.R. 1147 on Dec. 13, 2023, he found a way to make Whole Milk for Healthy Kids part of his proposed farm bill that heads to House Ag Committee markup next week. He says he is intent on getting the whole milk legislation through the Senate blockade and “over the finish line.” File photo by Sherry Bunting

By Sherry Bunting, Farmshine, May 17, 2024

WASHINGTON – House Ag Committee Chairman Glenn ‘GT’ Thompson (R-Pa.) says the bipartisan farm bill has reached a milestone and holds the potential for being transformational.

The chairman’s mark, released ahead of committee markup set for May 23, demonstrates the listening that went on in his busy schedule traveling to 40 states and one territory for 85 listening sessions over the past two years.

“We are hopeful that the House Ag Committee markup of this chairman’s mark legislation helps feed the momentum to get this farm bill done,” said Chairman Thompson in a May 14 Farmshine phone interview.

There are important highlights here, including reforms to the Dietary Guidelines process for greater transparency and accountability with new checks and balances, as well as language to expand the reach, funding and impact of the dairy incentive and school meal programs by including full fat fluid milk, flavored and unflavored, as seen in H.R. 5099 and H.R. 1147 (Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act).

“I was able to work with Dr. Virginia Foxx (chair of the House Education and Workforce Committee), and they will be providing a waiver after we mark this bill up, so we will be able to include Whole Milk for Healthy Kids in the farm bill,” Thompson shared.

He has previously stressed that, “This is about our kids and the outdated and harmful demonization of milkfat.”

“When we get to conference (with the Senate), it could be an issue, but Whole Milk for Healthy Kids passed the House by a 330 vote. I am intent on getting this provision over the finish line. 

“It may be the most important thing we do out of many things in this farm bill for dairy farmers,” he said.

Other dairy subtitle provisions

The dairy subtitle includes language to return the Class I ‘mover’ price to the ‘higher of’ calculation instead of the ‘average plus 74 cents’ that was implemented in May 2019.

“We obviously recognize that USDA has now gone through an extensive hearing process, and will honor what USDA comes up with, which will supersede what we’re doing,” Thompson reported. “But it was the Ag Committees in the Congress through the 2018 farm bill that eliminated the ‘higher of’ language, which has been followed by significant unanticipated losses.”

Language has also been included to mandate biennial cost of processing surveys. This also appears in the Senate farm bill.

Processors making products used in Federal Milk Marketing Order (FMMO) formulas would participate in processing cost surveys every two years. In addition to reporting costs for those products, the Dairy Pricing Opportunities Act language that is rolled into the farm bill proposal states that the cost and yield information for all products processed in the same facility be included. (Note: This would ensure accurate allocation of plant costs that apply just to the products that are actually used in the FMMO pricing formulas so that the costs to process other value-added products that are not included in FMMO pricing, but are made in the same plant, do not influence future ‘make allowance’ hearings.)

These cost surveys would be published for the purposes of informing the regulatory or administrative (hearing) process for the establishment of pricing rules (such as determining how to use that published information to set ‘make allowance’ levels that are embedded in FMMO pricing formulas).

The dairy subtitle also expands the Dairy Margin Coverage (DMC) tier one cap on annual milk production history from 5 million pounds to 6 million pounds, similar to the Senate bill.

It also includes language for updating DMC production history and provides a 25% discount in premium costs for any producer signing up for all five years of DMC coverage.

“That’s quite a savings,” Thompson observed.

IRA funds included without ‘climate sideboards’

In the Conservation Title, the chairman’s mark brings Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) conservation funds into the farm bill baseline without the ‘climate sideboards’ and arbitrary measures that ride along in the Senate version.

“All conservation programs, as long as they are locally-led and voluntary, contribute to climate and carbon sequestration. What the IRA legislation did is make it overly prescriptive with a lot of practices we know are successful not being eligible for these conservation dollars.

“We believe that the principles of locally-led and voluntary are a huge part of what has made conservation programs so successful. Agriculture sequesters 6.1 gigatons of carbon annually, over 10% more than we emit,” said Thompson.

Timelines matter

There are a couple reasons timelines matter in getting this farm bill done. The IRA funding is one of them.

“Number one is the American farmer is struggling right now. The chairman’s mark, as we prepared it in the House Committee, will be of great service to them as producers of food, and to struggling families as consumers of food, quite frankly,” said Thompson.

“The other reason timelines matter is these IRA dollars. As the Secretary of Agriculture continues to push those dollars forward, the original $19 billion – between what he already spent and what the CBO projects he will not be able to spend – that number is now down to $14 billion,” Thompson explained. “That’s opportunity lost for the future, unless and until we pass and reauthorize the farm bill and roll those dollars into its baseline.”

Thompson continued, explaining that, “Every dollar in IRA conservation funds spent between now and the passage of the farm bill is a dollar lost to the baseline for the future. One of the flaws of the IRA is these conservation dollars expire in 2031. Whatever we bring into the farm bill – into the baseline – is there for perpetuity. It will be there for the 2050 and 2055 farm bills. That’s smart, and it’s good for agriculture and great for conservation.”

The Senate proposal also brings IRA conservation funds into the farm bill baseline, but puts climate requirements on these funds, especially in regard to methane.

Tripartisan effort produces nutrition cost-savings, not cuts

“My chairman’s mark is built on solid tripartisan input from Republicans and Democrats and the hardworking people of American agriculture,” Thompson affirmed. “The Senate proposal is a partisan proposal. They did not bring Senate Republicans to the table.”

In his May 10 open letter, Chairman Thompson stated that his door is always open.

“There exists a few, loud armchair critics that want to divide the Committee and break the process. A farm bill has long been an example of consensus, where both sides must take a step off the soapbox and have tough conversations,” he wrote. “The 2024 farm bill was written for these precarious times and is reflective of the diverse constituency and narrow margins of the 118th Congress. Each title takes into consideration the varying opinions of all who produce as much as those who consume. It is not one-sided, it does not favor a fringe agenda, and it certainly does no harm to the programs and policies that feed, fuel, and clothe our nation.”

Case in point, the CBO has scored the House farm bill chairman’s mark to save $28 to $29 billion in the Nutrition Title.

“Some would have you believe we are cutting $28 to $29 billion from feeding struggling families, but we are not,” Thompson declared. “There are no cuts to individual SNAP benefits in this bill. My Democratic colleagues say we are cutting by that much, but the CBO score on my proposal reflects cost savings from increased efficiencies, reduced fraud, and things that better meet the needs of families struggling in poverty.”

Justifiably proud of the intense work he and his committee have done on the nutrition programs lightning rod that makes up more than 80% of the farm bill baseline, Thompson said his proposal actually “creates a fire wall so that a future right-leaning administration would not be able to arbitrarily cut benefits either. It exercises our Article I prerogative on how we do market basket analysis, keeps the variables and the cost of living. These things are significant factors.”

His proposal also expands access to a couple populations not eligible for SNAP in the past, including families with adult children in school up to age 21 (not 18). In the past, their part-time jobs affected family eligibility.

Putting the farm back in the farm bill

The Commodities and Crop Insurance Titles also engaged input from farmers, farm groups and industry. On reference prices, Thompson said the Senate bill picks three crops and puts in a 5% increase for base acreage.

“In our proposal, we’ve worked with the stakeholders. We’ve done the math, the financial and risk analysis on what is needed.”

This includes a more commodity-specific update to reference prices and granting the Secretary of Agriculture authority to expand base acres.

“We have been committed to putting the farmer back into the farm bill commodities title,” he said.

This scratches the surface of what is included in the farm bill chairman’s mark. An overview and title by title summary are available at https://agriculture.house.gov/farmbill/

When asked about what other dairy topics could come up during markup, Thompson said he wouldn’t be surprised to see other amendments in committee.

“There are some labeling issues that are not in our purview or jurisdiction but come under the Energy and Commerce Committee. We could get the ball rolling, but we would need them to get on board for that to go forward,” he said.

Reflecting on the milestone this week, Thompson answered our question about what he’s most proud of to this point.

“The fact that this farm bill was built using the input of American farmers, ranchers, and foresters, and it reflects what their priorities are and what their needs are, and the fact that as I look at the chairman’s mark and all 12 titles according to the goal placed early on, two years ago as I started my leadership of this process: 

“This will be not only a highly effective farm bill for our producers, processors and all of us who consume food, it will be transformational,” he said.

-30-

My testimony at the Chairman’s Farm Bill listening session in January

Posted on by
1

Good afternoon honorable Chairman, members of Congress, farmers, colleagues and friends. Thank you for this opportunity to make comments on the importance of the federal farm bill.

My name is Sherry Bunting. For 40 years, I have served as an ag journalist. Before that I milked cows. I am a volunteer resource person with the Grassroots PA Dairy Advisory Committee, which I am representing today. The grassroots committee works with the separate volunteer 97 Milk education effort that began when Berks County dairy farmer Nelson Troutman painted a round bale ‘Drink Whole Milk 97% Fat Free.’

Our main effort is to educate policymakers about the importance of children having the simple choice of whole milk in schools. We thank Congressman GT Thompson and the cosponsors of The Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act in the last legislative session and hope to see it become reality in the next session.

We understand this does not fall within the farm bill; however, there are some intersections.

Bottomline:

We believe children should be able to choose nutrient dense whole milk that they will enjoy and therefore actually consume in school meals and other USDA-funded nutrition programs.

We believe farmers should be free to offer children the quality product they actually produce and be free to use their own mandatory promotion checkoff funds to promote what they produce: That would be the nutrient dense whole milk that is naturally 3.25 to 4.5% fat, mostly standardized at 3.25% fat – or virtually 97% fat free.

Under the Nutrition Education part of the Nutrition Title, we support language to exempt nutrient dense foods, like whole milk, from the arbitrary and outdated fat-limits imposed by the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA).

We support a farm bill provision to untie the hands of the dairy checkoff program to come out from under these arbitrary fat-limits so farmers can promote the nutrient dense whole milk they produce.

The cafeteria where Pennsylvania state lawmakers and staff have lunch offers the choice of whole milk, whereas our children are federally prohibited from choosing whole or 2% milk at school where they have two meals a day, five days a week for three-quarters of the year.

Nutrition title

The nutrition title of the farm bill sends mixed messages. Are we nutritionally supporting families in need when the arbitrary fat-limits unfairly keep nutrient dense foods like whole and 2% milk out of schools and other programs like WIC for children over age 2?

Worse, USDA has proposed a new rule to reduce the amount of milk a mom can buy under WIC.

The administration’s new Hunger, Health and Nutrition Strategy goes even farther, using FDA authority to – as President Biden and Secretary Vilsack put it — “tell us what we should eat”. This is a chilling thought.

Under the proposed FDA Healthy Labeling rule, whole milk will qualify as nutrient dense but may not qualify for a healthy label because of these outdated fat-limits.

Meanwhile, we see the SNAP program puts few if any limits on sugary snacks and sodas with zero nutrients. We hear from our own school nurse committee member that it’s normal to see donuts with sugary sprinkles and fat-free flavored milk for school breakfast while nutrient dense whole milk is forbidden. How does this make sense?

Dairy policy

After more than 10 years of allowing only fat-free and 1% milk at schools, a generation of milk drinkers has been lost and milk consumption declined more rapidly.

The Class I pricing change in the 2018 farm bill was supposed to help fluid milk innovation while being farmer-neutral, but it made these trends worse. Over the past 4 years, we have seen the following:

1)    More price risk put onto dairy farmers with a net loss of $941 million in Class I value over 4 years comparing the new Class I pricing formula to the old one, including $264 million in losses for 2022 losses, alone; (Backgrounder submitted)

2)    Disruption in how risk management tools work so farmers have less confidence in using them;

3)    More processors de-pooling milk, so just 60% of U.S. milk production participated in federal milk marketing orders in 2021,

4)    Rapid increases in the number of competing highly processed ‘fake-milks’, and

5)    A large number of fluid milk plant closures and rapid consolidation of the industry toward cow islands and milk deserts. (Some analysis from 2021 and 2022 can be found at these two links: 

https://wp.me/p329u72Cq and 

https://agmoos.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/dairy_situation_analysis_bunting_july_2021_final-1.pdf

6) Industry consensus for reverting to ‘higher of’ (AFBF stakeholder meeting in Kansas City in October 2022 – coverage at these two links: 

https://wp.me/p329u7-2Ee and https://wp.me/p329u7-2Ez

The Class I ‘mover’ formula should revert back to the ‘higher of’ at least until national hearings can explore the future of the milk pricing system and figure out what to do about farmer payment protections if more processors stop participating in federal orders. Only Class I fluid milk processors are required to be regulated under federal orders.

Dairy farmers appreciate and rely on farm bill programs like Dairy Margin Coverage, Dairy Revenue Protection and Livestock Gross Margin. However, these programs don’t make up for, nor do they function properly, if we don’t have transparent pricing and competitive markets.

Also, these margin programs do not consider rising fuel costs. Farmers pay transportation to bring inputs on the farm and to ship milk off the farm.

Sustainability

Moving ahead, we see sustainability targets as the next big consolidator. We have concerns about how methane is calculated and see an anti-cow bias that started with the anti-fat Dietary Guidelines, now moving into the way climate targets are discussed and measured. We encourage you to look at the work of Dr. Frank Mitloehner on how Global Warming Potential is incorrectly calculated for cattle.

We believe the farm bill should remain focused on conservation and innovation research and assistance. It should be voluntary and not tie needed farm programs to climate goals.

We believe farmers should get credit for what they are already doing, such as here in Pennsylvania, where farmers have long used cover cropping and conservation tillage practices.

Thank you for your work on developing a farm bill that recognizes our farmers as the environmental and economic backbone of America and to support farm vitality that will ensure our nation’s food security and freedom.

Respectfully submitted,

Sherry A. Bunting for Grassroots PA Dairy Advisory Committee / 97 Milk

Lifelong resident of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania; freelance writer and columnist, Farmshine; former school board director, Eastern Lancaster County School District; member North American Ag Journalists

717.587.3706 mobile

agrite2011@gmail.com

Address: 1918 Barnett St., East Earl, PA 17519

On-time farm bill is Chairman Thompson’s top priority, areas of USDA oversight also rank high

Posted on by
3

By Sherry Bunting, (Nov. 25 interview has been updated since Thompson’s official caucus election to Ag Committee chairmanship)

WASHINGTON – With Republicans securing a slim majority in the U.S. House after the midterm elections, Congressman Glenn ‘G.T.’ Thompson (R-Pa.) is preparing to move from ranking member to chairman of the House Agriculture Committee when the 118th U.S. Congress is sworn in for the next legislative session on January 3, 2023.

The House Republican Steering Committee made it official December 7, selecting Thompson incoming Ag Committee Chair, the first from Pennsylvania since 1859.

Outgoing Chairman David Scott (D-Ga.) expressed his appreciation to fellow committee members, sharing in a statement: “As I prepare to hand the gavel over to Mr. Thompson… I am encouraged by the bipartisan work we have accomplished together, particularly around our shared interest in broadband and access to USDA programs for our new and small producers. Heading into the 2023 Farm Bill, I am hopeful and prayerful that the collegial spirit will continue and that the Agriculture Committee will be able to deliver a farm bill with strong Republican and Democratic bipartisan support.” 

A first order of business for incoming Chairman Thompson is to host his first official 2023 farm bill field hearing on the first Saturday of the Pennsylvania Farm Show, January 7 in Harrisburg.

Thompson has had a long history of holding listening sessions during the Farm Show and bringing with him some committee members from other states. This time, he’ll be looking at a larger venue at the complex, and he’s inviting all Democrat and Republican members of the House Ag Committee as well as prospects.

“The committees won’t be fully populated by then, but the chairmanship will be confirmed,” said Thompson in a recent Farmshine phone interview.

“The most important priority is the on-time completion of the 2023 farm bill as the current farm bill expires at the end of September 2023,” says Thompson. “Certainly, beyond that, we have oversight functions that are really important too.”

One of those areas of oversight, he explains, is the House and Senate Republican request already sent to USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack asking for an audit on “all the pots of money” in USDA that have come through executive actions and the spending in bills passed by the Democrat majority.

“We are asking for this audit because we believe it will be helpful going into the farm bill process to see those funds outside of the baseline,” Thompson explains. “We’ll be following up and looking forward to getting that information.”

In addition to bringing USDA in for oversight within and outside of the farm bill process, Thompson mentioned the leadership will want EPA Secretary Michael Regan to explain the things EPA has been advancing that are creating uncertainty and problems for America’s farmers and ranchers.

Outside of the funding for USDA conservation programs, Thompson says he is “absolutely opposed to making (the farm bill) a climate bill.”

It’s going to be busy in Washington D.C. after January 3, but he says he remains committed to bringing the Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act forward again with potential legislative improvements.

“We’ll jump on whole milk right away, but it’s not in the farm bill, and it’s not in the Ag Committee, it’s in the Education and Workforce Committee,” Thompson explains, noting that he will be a senior member of that committee also, and will work with the chairman.

He reports that the Republicans had teed up a version of the childhood nutrition reauthorization last summer in that committee, but their bill and their amendments to allow whole milk and 2% milk in schools and in the WIC program did not make it into the version passed by the House on party lines.

The good news is the House Democrats’ version of the childhood nutrition reauthorization, without the whole milk provisions, also did not advance through the Senate, so it will be a do-over next session.

“Let’s hope the third time is the charm,” says Thompson. “I remain hopeful we can do it through that. My goal is to work hard to get it in as part of that base bill and go from there. We’ll need bipartisan support in the Senate, where the childhood nutrition reauthorization requires 60 votes.”

The Senate remains split down the middle with an edge to the Democrats in terms of committee leadership in the next Congress.

Back to the farm bill priorities, Thompson said protecting crop insurance as well as other crop and livestock protection products like Livestock Gross Margin (LGM) and LGM-Dairy as well as Dairy Margin Coverage (DMC) and support for DRP are front-burner. Enhancing them — where possible — ranks high on his list.

Along with that, he says the committee is learning from the disaster payments that have been made outside of the farm bill baseline to be looking at how to incorporate more of that relief in a way that provides certainty for farmers and ranchers and for the lenders providing them with access to capital.

Another priority will be to look at the Title I reference prices for commodities.

“With record high inflation, the challenge is not what is paid, but the margin left at the end of the day,” says Thompson.

“There’s really no part of the farm bill that’s ‘unimportant.’ The nutrition help is important to give a hand-up to those in need, and to be using this to provide access to career and technology education so people can rise above their financial struggles,” he explains.

When asked about milk pricing reforms in the farm bill, and the change made to the Class I mover in the previous farm bill, Thompson said: “It’s all on the table. No conclusions have been drawn yet. As we do these listening sessions and hearings, this is where we’ll decide what the tweaks will be to areas of the farm bill.”

Asked what he thinks about the talk coming out of the COP27 in Egypt this week, of the U.S. pledging to pay $1 billion in reparations to other countries for climate impacts – noting that China is being exempted from paying such reparations because of still being defined as a ‘developing’ nation — Congressman Thompson was blunt in his response.

“It is absolutely ridiculous. We should not be paying for that. The United States of America leads the way in the reduction of greenhouse gases, and a big part of that is because of our farmers and ranchers. They are our climate heroes, and they’re not getting enough credit for that, for what they are already doing,” he said.

In a follow up question about the ESG scoring and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) proposed rule to track scope 3 emissions back to the farm level, Thompson observes: “Those are political-science driven policies with no place in American agriculture or American finance for that matter.”

When asked about the $11.4 billion in annual funding the President pledged at COP27 for climate transitions in other countries, Thompson added: “We would be funding some of the dirtiest economies in the world. It’s not our role to do that.”

The House controls the ‘purse strings’ so to speak, so this could be a show-down.

Given how CBO scoring of baselines is sometimes a hair-splitting mechanism in a farm bill negotiation, what was implied, without being specifically said by the incoming Chairman, is that some of these climate funds going elsewhere with no accountability might best go to making sure America’s farmers and ranchers have the certainty and backing they need to continue as American food producers. That, in itself, is good for climate and the environment.

Stay tuned.

-30-

From DMC to FMMOs, from price ‘movers’ to ‘make allowances’: House Ag hearing reviews farm bill dairy provisions

Posted on by
1

By Sherry Bunting, June 24, 2022

WASHINGTON — It was a lot to wade through, but after two panels and nearly four hours, many cards were on the table, even if the full deck was not counted. 

The U.S. House Agriculture Committee hearing Wednesday, June 22 was a 2022 review of the current farm bill’s dairy provisions. Chairman David Scott (D-Ga.) set the stage with his opening remarks, noting a significant part of the hearing would be devoted to the dairy safety net, namely the Dairy Margin Coverage (DMC), but also to talk about the Federal Milk Marketing Orders (FMMO) to learn if this system is “the best fit for today’s world.

“We want to continue to listen to farmers and navigate the issue for the best approaches to any changes,” he said, setting the next stage for listening sessions.

Those testifying talked about building consensus for FMMO changes, a charge handed down from Ag Secretary Tom Vilsack last December, and again more recently, when he said a consensus agreement by stakeholders on one plan was needed before a national hearing on milk pricing could be held.

On the Class I ‘mover’ change in the last farm bill, USDA AMS Deputy Administrator Dana Coale noted that the change was authorized by Congress after an agreement was reached between NMPF and IDFA to change the ‘higher of’ to a simple average plus 74 cents. This was designed to be revenue neutral, she said, but the pandemic showed how an unforeseen market shock can create price inversions that significantly change this neutrality. (testimony)

Coale noted that “market abnormalities” brought on a situation where Class I was below Class III, which doesn’t typically happen, and this created losses.

“In the 2018 farm bill Congress authorized a change to the Class I price mover. We implemented that in the department in May 2019. This change was a consensus agreement reached between NMPF and IDFA to benefit the entire industry. Implementation in the farm bill was designed to be revenue neutral. However, nobody foresaw a pandemic occurring, and no one could have projected the implications that pandemic would have on (prices), particularly within the dairy sector. What we saw occur from mid-2020 through mid-2021 was a significant change in that revenue neutrality. As you look at the Class I mover before the pandemic and moving out of the pandemic, it is maintaining pretty much a revenue neutral position compared to the prior mover. However, due to the (class) price inversions that occurred, we had some major losses incurred by the dairy sector.”

Dana Coale, Deputy Administrator, USDA AMS Dairy Programs

On the primary dairy safety net, Farm Service Agency Deputy Administrator Scott Marlow went over the Dairy Margin Coverage (DMC) and explained the beneficial changes that have been implemented since the 2018 farm bill. (testimony)

He noted that supplemental DMC would have to be made permanent in the next farm bill in order for that additional production history between the 2011-13 figure and the 5 million pound cap to be covered in future years.

“In 2021, DMC payments were triggered for 11 months totaling $1.2 billion paid to producers who enrolled for that year, with an average payment of $60,275 per operation. At 15 cents per cwt at the $9.50 level of coverage, DMC is a very cost-effective risk management tool for dairy producers. Ahead of the 2022 DMC signup, FSA made several improvements. The program was expanded to allow producers to enroll supplemental production (up to the 5 million pound cap). In addition FSA updated the feed cost formula to better reflect the actual cost dairy farmers pay for alfalfa hay. FSA now calculates payments using 100% premium alfalfa hay, rather than 50% of the premium alfalfa hay price and 50% of the conventional alfalfa hay price. This change is retroactive to January 2020 and provided additional payments of $42.8 million for 2020 and 2021. We are very concerned about the margins. It is very important the way DMC focuses on the margin. Farmers are facing inflation of costs beyond the feed that is part of this calculation. This margin based coverage has proven to a model and is something we need to look at for other costs and commodities.”

Scott Marlow, Deputy administrator usda fsa farm programs

Dr. Marin Bozic, Assistant Professor Applied Economics at the University of Minnesota gave some long range trends and observed the factors that are decreasing participation in Federal Milk Marketing Orders. (testimony)

He mentioned that a consideration not to be ignored is the status of vibrancy and competition as seen in transparency and price discovery. When asked about proposals to improve this, Bozic said the proposals need to come forward from the industry, the stakeholders, and that the role of academia is to provide numbers, trends, and analysis of proposals, not to decide and determine these marketing structures.

“Farm gate milk price discovery is challenged by this lack of competition,” he said. “If a corn producer wishes to know how different local elevators would pay for corn, all he needs to do is go online or tune in to his local radio station. Dairy producers used to be able to ‘shop around’ and ask various processors what they would pay for their milk.”

Bozic was quick to point out that, “We should not rush to generalize from such anecdotal evidence, but in my opinion, it would also be prudent not to ignore it.”

“FMMOs start from a set of farmer-friendly ideas… They have somewhat lost luster due to declining sales of beverage milk. In regions other than Northeast and Southeast, fluid milk sales no longer provide strong enough incentives for manufacturers to choose to stay consistently regulated under FMMOs. My estimates are that the share of U.S. milk production in beverage milk products is likely to fall from 18.3% in 2022 to 14.5% by 2032. Do Federal Orders suffice to deliver fair market prices to dairy producers? The critical missing ingredient is vibrant competition for farm milk. Whereas just six or seven years ago, many producers had a choice where to ship their milk, today it is difficult. When some dairy producers have asked for milk price benchmarking information from their educators or consultants, those service providers have in multiple instances faced tacit disapproval or even aggressive legal threats from some dairy processors. Further research and an honest debate on competition in dairy is merited.”

Marin bozic, ph.d., department of applied economics, university of minnesota

Where FMMO changes are concerned, Bozic noted some of the broader issues to come out of the Class I pricing change that was made legislatively in the last farm bill. For example in future reforms, when there is lack of wide public debate on proposals, he said: “It increases odds of a fragile or flawed policy design, and lack of grassroots support for the mechanism in changing markets. FMMOs have a comprehensive protocol for instituting changes through an industry hearing process. The Class I milk price formula can be modified through a hearing process.”

From Bernville, Pennsylvania, representing National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) and DFA, Lolly Lesher of Way-Har Farms shared the benefits of the Dairy Margin Coverage (DMC) program through FSA and other risk management tools through RMA. She said they purchase the coverage at the highest level each year as a safety net for their 240-cow dairy farm. (testimony)

DMC is intended for smaller farms producing up to 5 million pounds of milk annually, but other farms can layer it in with other available tools at the tier one level on the first 5 million pounds or choose to pay the tier two premium to cover more of their milk through that program, but other tools like DRP are also available, Marlow explained.

Turning to the Class I pricing change in the last farm bill, Lesher said the change was an effort to “accommodate a request for improved price risk management for processors, while maintaining revenue neutrality for farmers… but the (pandemic) dramatically undercut the revenue neutrality that formed its foundation.”

“As valuable as the (DMC) program has been, many farmers have not been able to fully benefit because the underlying production history calculation is outdated. It is critical that the (supplemental DMC) production history adjustment be carried over into the 2023 farm bill… The events of the last two years have shined a spotlight on the need for an overall update to the FMMO system. Class I skim milk prices averaged $3.56/cwt lower than they would have under the previous ‘mover’. This undermined orderly marketing and represented net loss to producers of more than $750 million, including over $141 million in the Northeast Order. The current Class I mover saddles dairy farmers with asymmetric risk because it includes an upper limit on how much more Class I skim revenue it can generate… but no lower limit on how much less… those losses become effectively permanent.”

lolly lesher, way-har farm, bernville, pennsylvania, representing nmpf and dfa

According to Lesher’s testimony: “The dairy industry through the National Milk Producers Federation is treating this matter with urgency and is seeking consensus on not only the Class I mover, but also a range of improvements to the FMMO system that we can take to USDA for consideration via a national order hearing.”

Lesher serves on DFA’s policy resolutions committee and she noted that DFA, as a member of NMPF “is actively participating in its process (for FMMO improvements), which involves careful examination of key issues to the dairy sector nationwide… We look forward to working with the broader dairy industry and members of this committee as our efforts advance.”

Representing International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA), Mike Durkin, President and CEO of Leprino Foods Company stressed the “extreme urgency” of updating the “make allowances” in the FMMO pricing formulas. These are processor credits deducted from the wholesale value of the four base commodities (cheddar, butter, nonfat dry milk and dry whey) used in FMMO class and component pricing as well as within the advance pricing for fluid milk. (Leprino is the largest maker of mozzarella cheese in the U.S. and the world. Mozzarella cheese is not reported on the USDA AMS price survey used in the FMMO class and component pricing.) (testimony)

Durkin also noted the importance of making the Dairy Forward Pricing Program that expires September 2023 a permanent fixture in the next farm bill for milk. This program allows forward pricing of milk used to make products in Classes II, III and IV so that longer-duration contracts can be used by this milk when also pooled under FMMO regulation without fear of the authority expiring in terms of the FMMO minimum pricing. (Milk that is used to make products in Classes II, III and IV is already not obligated to participate in or be regulated by FMMOs.)

“The costs in the (make allowance) formula dramatically understate today’s cost of manufacturing and have resulted in distortions to the dairy manufacturing sector, which have constrained capacity to process producer milk. Congress can improve the current situation by directing USDA to conduct regular cost of processing studies to enable regular make allowance updates. The need to address this lag is now extremely urgent. While our proposal to authorize USDA to conduct regular cost surveys will eventually provide data to address this in the longer term, steps must be taken now to ensure adequate processing capacity remains. Updating make allowances to reflect current costs will enable producer milk to have a home. Making the (Dairy Forward Pricing Program for Class II, III and IV) permanent could also facilitate additional industry use of this risk management tool for longer durations without concern about the program expiring.”

Mike Durkin, president and ceo, leprino foods, representing idfa

Lesher also thanked House Ag Ranking Member G.T. Thompson for his Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act, seeking to bring the choice of whole and 2% milk back to schools. The bill currently has 94 additional cosponsors from 32 states, including the House Ag Chair David Scott and other members of the Agriculture Committee. The bill was referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor.

Other key dairy provisions were reported and questions answered, including a witness representing organic dairy farmers. There’s more to report, so stay tuned for additional rumination in Farmshine and here at Agmoos.com

Recorded hearing proceedings available at this link

Written testimony is available at this link


-30-

A life lived in earnest

Posted on by
8

Tuesday was a day of significance with many shades to it. The much-debated 5-year Farm Bill got its final Congressional approval in Washington; the day was designated by American Cancer Society as World Cancer Awareness Day and Chevy developed its Purple Roads ad and “purple your profile” campaign to raise funds on facebook. Tuesday, Feb. 4, 2014 is also the day the world lost a good and courageous dairy farmer I was glad to call friend. Here are the thoughts I penned for this week’s Farmshine.

Zach Meck pictured here at Meck Brothers Dairy in Berks County, Pennsylvania in August of 2012

Zach Meck pictured here at Meck Brothers Dairy in Berks County, Pennsylvania in August of 2012

Zach Meck fought the fight, kept the faith

Zachary L. Meck, 33, of Womelsdorf, Pa., passed away Tuesday, Feb. 4 after a five-month battle with cancer. In the words of his wife Suzanne (Perdue) Meck, formerly of Whitehall, Md., “Zach saw a full healing as he was peacefully called to his heavenly home.” Over the past few months, she said, the couple felt the prayers and well wishes from around the world, and they were comforted to know so many people care.

In Zach, the world lost a good and courageous young dairyman. 2 Timothy 4:7 is the verse that comes to mind for a life gone too soon, loved by many and lived in earnest. Zach made a lasting impact on not just his family and friends, but also upon the future of the dairy industry he so loved and the solidarity he had with fellow dairymen, as well as the passion he had for the cow herd he and his brother Jeremy built up into a business through sheer determination.

It is not without notice that the next five year Farm Bill passed its final hurdle in the Senate on this same day. Zach had poured time and energy into being part of an effort to shape the future for young dairy farmers within the context of the Farm Bill’s dairy title.

Our paths crossed in 2009 when the dairy industry faced the most devastating milk prices ever endured. Zach and his brother Jeremy had built their Meck Brothers Dairy from scratch. They had started with the 4-H animals their late father Ronald bought them as youngsters growing up on their parents’ poultry farm in Lancaster County, Pa. They grew the herd in a rented barn — working all kinds of other jobs – then purchased and renovated a Berks County, Pa. farm they moved into during 2009.

Zach was not one to sit still. Sometimes it seemed he was going in multiple directions all at once. But his efforts were effective. In 2009, he was part of a group of dairymen meeting in two counties, which later became the grassroots beginnings of the Dairy Policy Action Coalition that spread beyond the borders of Pennsylvania as dairymen from various regions talked together about the future of their industry.

He also served as a Land O’Lakes delegate and ran a close race as runner up for a seat on the Land O’Lakes board in early 2013. Zach was a member of the Berks County Farm Bureau, Marion Grange, and Berks County Holstein Club. He graduated from Cocalico High School, where he was a member of FFA and was active in 4-H.

“We’ve been through a lot over the years,” wrote friend and mentor Nelson Troutman in a calendar-of-hope created for Zach in December. “Then came Suzanne, and when you made up your mind, I could tell. It was good. But with these health issues, try not to make sense of it all, it never will. Remember to always look forward and that you are not alone. Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding (Proverbs 3:5).” Wise words he heeded in his short time with his beloved Suzanne.

Having the privilege of writing a story about Meck Brothers Dairy in August of 2012, I could see the respect he and his brother Jeremy had for one another and their passion for what they worked to accomplish – with that edge of always pushing forward to do more to make the cows more comfortable, do more to tell the dairy story to the greater Berks community, do more to get the voice of the young farmer heard, do more to light a fire – even if only to send a smoke signal – that policies need to be changed to consider the context of the young farmer. Zach was impetuous, yet intuitive.

“It’s time to get the younger generation involved in the leadership of their cooperative,” Zach said during a summer of 2012 interview. “Our futures are at stake in the outcome of the decisions that are made. The mechanics of the market should be our focus. We should be looking out for our fellow dairy farmers around us. Large or small, we’re all important. We have to focus on creating opportunities and getting the mechanics of the market right.”

So we come back full circle to that verse, 2 Timothy 4:7: “I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith.” Yes, Zach, you surely have.

Born in Denver, Pa., Zach was the son of the late Ronald K. and Joyce (Stoltzfus) Meck. In addition to his wife Suzanne, Zach is survived by his mother Joyce, two brothers Matthew K., husband of Susan (St. Clair) Meck of Denver; Jeremy R. Meck of Womelsdorf; two nephews Jackson K. and Levi C. Meck of Denver; and his paternal grandmother Norma (Zimmerman) Meck of Lititz.

A visitation will be held on Friday, February 7 from 6:00 to 9:00 p.m. and on Saturday, February 8 from 9:00 to 11:00 a.m. at the Tulpehocken UCC Church, where services will be held at 11:00 Saturday.

Memorial contributions in Zach’s memory may be made to the American Cancer Society, P.O. Box 1274, Lebanon, PA 17042 or Vickie’s Angel Foundation, 511 Bridge St., New Cumberland, PA 17070.

###