Beth Bechdol is the Director of Agribusiness Strategies at Ice Miller LLP and is responsible for assisting and coordinating the Firm's Agricultural Law Initiative.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) made two announcements in recent days from Copenhagen, Denmark as the United States and delegates from 191 other countries meet at the United Nations Climate Summit. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack released a USDA report outlining the agency's calculated impact of climate change on U.S. ecosystems. "The Effects of Climate Change on U.S. Ecosystems" report concludes that climate change affects U.S. agriculture, land resources, water resources and biodiversity and describes in some detail more specific projected impacts on grain and oilseed crops, horticultural crops, and livestock, among others. Vilsack referenced carbon offset markets as a means to help the country become energy independent, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to create income generating opportunities for rural America. USDA's analysis of the climate change legislation passed by the U.S. House of Representatives shows it provides a net gain for farmers and ranchers, with revenue from a carbon offset market offsetting increased farm expenses.

A complete copy of the report is available at the following link: http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/!ut/p/_s.7_0_A/7_0_1OB?contentidonly=true&contentid=2009/12/0611.xml.

Over the last several months, many of the leading agriculture commodity organizations have challenged this specific analysis by USDA, arguing the costs to farmers and ranchers far outweigh the calculated revenue from carbon markets. Today, though, USDA announced a unique partnership with U.S. dairy producers who have agreed to accelerate their adoption of waste to energy technology projects. The Memorandum of Understanding, signed by Dairy Management Inc.'s Innovation Center for U.S. Dairy and USDA, committed the industry to reach a 25 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020. The partners will increase the number of anaerobic digesters (which convert manure into electricity) supported by USDA programs and also encourage research and development of new technologies.

U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack made a tour through Indiana on June 3, primarily to tout the Obama administration’s plans to rebuild and revitalize rural America.   He made three stops in Indiana: Terre Haute, Indianapolis and Danville.  The most interactive of the stops for Indiana residents was in Danville, where the secretary held a forum (part of USDA's Rural Tour) to collect ideas and comments from local residents on how best to revitalize the rural economy.

Vilsack outlined the goals of the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act – providing  assistance to struggling families; investing in the nation’s transportation system; and building “green collar” jobs.  He acknowledged that families are struggling because of the economic crisis.  In rural areas, Vilsack pointed to a few specific areas of relief provided by the stimulus funds, including infrastructure in watershed areas to reduce flooding and promotion of renewable energy production to revitalize local economies.

Rural community residents, ag organization and business leaders in attendance asked the secretary questions on a variety of topics… the struggle to feed a growing world population, the regulatory environment and wind energy issues were just a few.  Another topic though dominated the conversation and also provide the insight into the administration's priorities in agriculture – structural changes in U.S. agriculture and USDA's plans for assisting small farmers.

This has been a recurring theme for Vilsack following the release of the 2007 Census of Agriculture.  Referencing three different segments of producers ("large" farms that produce 75 percent of the nation's output; mid-sized farms and small farms), the secretary outlined priorities primarily for the latter two groups.

Mid-sized farms, he noted, are decreasing in number because they are either being purchased by larger farming operations or are dissolved because they are no longer able to compete in the industry.  USDA and other federal programs will promote job creation in local areas to provide alternative job opportunities for those farmers.

Small farms, on the other hand, are a growing segment and one that USDA will attempt to help more because of the "job opportunities they create in rural America."  How will USDA help these smaller operators?

1. Expansion  of the beginning farmer program
2. Connecting local consumers and local producers to establish more market opportunities for farm products. 
3. Expanded conservation programs will help farmers more efficiently use their land.
4. Increased focus on biofuels,  expanded trade, and climate friendly programs will also create more opportunities for small farmers.

These comments provide much needed reassurance and promises of support to rural communities hard hit  by the current economic downturn.  At the same time, they also foretell a significant shift in USDA focus and programming away from the largest, most productive farms to smaller farms seeking more localized expansion opportunities.  It is still early in this administration's term and so difficult to predict precise directives or outcomes, but it is clear that Vilsack has yet to waver from this theme and these new priorities.

Getting work done by independent contractors is very common, especially for those in the agricultural industry.  Whether one is contracting for a small job like painting a barn, or a larger job like building a tool shed or grain storage bin, it is important to understand the liability risks involved with those very common contractual relationships.

In a recent case, the Indiana Court of Appeals highlighted the risk that individuals face in their professional and private lives when contracting for jobs valued at more than $1,000.  The Court of Appeals found that the Indiana Worker's Compensation Act places liability on the person who lets such a contract (the "statutory employer") under certain circumstances.

The Act states that when the statutory employer - a farmer, for example - hires someone to do a job valued at more than $1,000 the statutory employer will have to pay the worker's compensation benefits if (1) there is an injury to the contractor's employee; (2) the contractor does not have worker's compensation insurance; and (3) the person contracting for work to be done has not obtained a certificate on the contractor from the Indiana Workers' Compensation Board.  This is commonly called the "statutory employer's liability."

In the case, a farmer hired a contractor to paint a house and barn.  Although the legislation exempts work done on one's personal residence only, this job involved the house and barn, so the exemption does not apply.  The farmer did not obtain a certificate from the Indiana Worker's Compensation Board showing that the contractor had worker's compensation insurance.  An employee of the contractor was injured on the job and the contractor did not have worker's compensation insurance.  The employee demanded worker's compensation benefits from the farmer.  The farmer sought coverage under his personal liability policy, but that policy excluded benefits that are required to be paid under worker's compensation law.  The insurance company successfully argued that the exclusion, a common exclusion in liability policies including most homeowner's and business liability policies, precluded any coverage to the farmer for the injured person's worker's compensation benefits.  Therefore, the court held the liability insurance policy did not provide coverage for the farmer for any amount he had to pay to the injured worker.

Therefore, to avoid personal and business risk, one must obtain a certificate from the Worker's Compensation Board showing that the contractor has worker's compensation insurance.  A certificate signed by an insurance agent will not be sufficient to mitigate liability in the event that an injury occurs and the contractor does not have worker's compensation insurance.  Also, if you have worker's compensation insurance for your operation, you should check whether that policy may provide coverage for this situation.  Finally, see if you can get contingent worker's compensation coverage on your farm's liability policy.

Modern agriculture is affected by more than just traditional farm policy - in other words, the statutes and programs that offer financial supports and incentives for production agriculture.  Today, new and changing policies and regulations require different strategic and business planning considerations.  Agriculture policy now is inextricably linked to rural, energy, trade, climate change, nutrition, transportation and infrastructure policies not to mention food safety, financial services and environmental regulations. 
 
This increasingly important set of policy priorities coupled with a new political administration in Washington, D.C. with a strong will to act suggest that the agriculture industry be prepared for something other than the status quo.  In just the last few weeks, several announcements and actions that connect the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Congress, the court system and the agriculture industry support this view. 
 
Consider the following:
 
1.  EPA's greenhouse gas endangerment finding  After a thorough scientific review ordered in 2007 by the U.S. Supreme Court, the EPA issued last week a proposed finding that greenhouse gases contribute to air pollution that may endanger public health or welfare. The gases in question are: carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydro fluorocarbons, per fluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride. 
 
As the proposed endangerment finding states, "in both magnitude and probability, climate change is an enormous problem. The greenhouse gases that are responsible for it endanger public health and welfare within the meaning of the Clean Air Act."  The report continues, "the science clearly shows that concentrations of these gases are at unprecedented levels as a result of human emissions, and these high levels are very likely the cause of the increase in average temperatures and other changes in our climate." 

Many industries send out warning signals at the first sign of "over-regulation" and agriculture is no exception.  This specific finding is a slippery slope for agriculture - especially the livestock industry that could be subject to new permit requirements for structure construction or modification and ultimately naturally occurring methane emission fees per animal to the tune of $175 per dairy cow, $87.50 per beef cow and $21.87 per hog (according to the American Farm Bureau Federation).  

In response, Nebraska Senator and former Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns has co-sponsored legislation that would protect animal agriculture from any greenhouse gas regulations promulgated by EPA.  Citing the significant economic value his state reaps from commercial red meat production, Johanns suggests this "cow tax" could cost Nebraska's farmers and ranchers tens of thousands of dollars per farm per year.
 
Before the finding takes effect, EPA is required to hold it open for public comment for 60 days and then issue proposed regulations which again would be subject to a public comment period. So EPA’s “deliberative process” could take another two years or more. Meanwhile, last week's announcement will increase pressure on Congress to move ahead on climate change legislation.

2.  Comprehensive climate change legislation  Climate change is near the top of the legislative agenda. In the Senate, Energy and Public Works Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer (D-CA) says she’ll do her best to work with anyone who seeks to move legislation quickly.  The House Energy and Commerce Committee is holding hearings now on a draft released by Chairman Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) that proposes a mandatory cap-and-trade system to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The House Agriculture Committee wants a seat at the table on climate change, too. Committee staffers are currently reviewing stakeholder responses to a 29-question survey regarding the role of agriculture and forestry in a carbon reduction program. The input will be used in “crafting principles that could be part of any subsequent legislation,” explained Ag Committee Chairman Collin Peterson, who says the panel will launch its own hearings on the issue in the next few weeks.

3.  EPA does not appeal court decision on pesticide applications  The U.S. Justice Department recently announced it will not appeal a federal court decision that could eventually require farmers to seek permits from the EPA for all pesticide applications and open the door to citizen lawsuits.  The U.S. Court of Appeals 6th Circuit issued the decision on the case, National Cotton Council vs. EPA, in January, nullifying an earlier EPA ruling that allowed chemical applications to be regulated under existing federal pesticide regulations. Instead, the pesticides applied in or near waterways will now be classified under the Clean Water Act. The change, if allowed to stand, carries significant implications for agriculture as a user of pesticides unable to completely control runoff caused by rainfall. 

A wide range of other beneficial pest control activities could be subjected to lawsuits from activists claiming that the use of pesticides is prohibited under the Clean Water Act unless authorized by permit.  This is of great concern to mosquito control officials and pest managers for forests, recreational waterways, irrigation canals and parks. 

In a March 6, 2009 letter, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack asked EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson to seek a rehearing and request reversal of the 6th Circuit's decision. Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Tom Harkin, (D-IA) and Ranking Member Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) weighed in with a similar letter.  But those requests were rebuffed, and the EPA has indicated they would be requesting a two-year implementation plan for the ruling. 

4.  EPA seeks public comment on raising the ethanol blend level to E15  EPA's broad reach into agriculture also is evident in its renewable fuel mandate authorities.  EPA is currently seeking public comment on a waiver application submitted by representatives of the ethanol industry to authorize up to 15 percent ethanol blends with gasoline.  The 30-day comment period will run through at least May 20, 2009. By law, the EPA is required to grant or deny the request no later than December 1, 2009.  Since 1978, the limit has been a 10 percent volume ethanol blend (E10) for conventional (non flex-fuel) vehicles.

According to the EPA release, the applicants contend that increasing the blend rate is needed to bring greater investment to next generation biofuels technologies and commercialization.  And the higher blend rate is arguably critical to fulfilling the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act's renewable fuel mandates.  Opponents (typically environmental and consumer groups and small engine and car manufacturers) counter that the increased blend rate might damage pollution control equipment, reduce air quality, and undermine vehicle and equipment performance and warranties.

5.  New environmental and climate position at USDA   Agriculture Secretary Vilsack announced last week the creation of a new environmental and climate position in his inner office.  Robert Bonnie will serve as Senior Advisor to the USDA Secretary for Environment and Climate.   Referencing that two out of the three key goals of President Obama for USDA are tied to the environment, Vilsack will rely on Bonnie to help guide broad natural resource and climate policy and program decisions.  Bonnie has worked for the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) for over 14 years with extensive experience in carbon credit programs and conservation initiatives for endangered species.

Independently, each of the above should be important to agriculture, but taken collectively they are evidence of an intensifying regulatory landscape for the industry.  Every part of agriculture - from crop and livestock production, food processing and manufacturing to alternative energy production - is affected by these developments.  Increasingly, EPA will be shaping environmental and climate policy that directly affects agriculture.  Climate change legislation and related programs will be developed and implemented - it's not a matter of if, but when and what form.  Agriculture must communicate with the new political and policy leaders, engage in the policy formation and influence more beneficial rather than harmful outcomes for the industry.
 

This week, Ice Miller hosted an industry gathering in honor of two great friends to and leaders of Indiana Agriculture.... Anne Hazlett, the director of the Indiana State Department of Agriculture (ISDA), and Jay Akridge, the Glenn W. Sample dean of agriculture at Purdue University.  Lt. Governor Becky Skillman joined the group and wielded high praise for both Anne and Jay.  In doing so, she also reminded all of us how fortunate our state is to have such strong agricultural leadership.

Anne brings significant experience to her position at ISDA following two "tours of duty" in Washington, D.C. on both the Senate and House Agriculture Committees where she was involved in both the 2002 and 2008 Farm Bills.  Most of us in Indiana, however, know Anne well from her time served as Lt. Governor Skillman's chief of staff in the administration's first term.

Anne relayed to us that the current economic climate is a "time of great opportunity and great challenge" for agribusiness.  We are fortunate to have such a diverse agriculture that continues to see strong demand...some in part to previous trade mission efforts.  In order to remain competitive, however, she challenged us to better articulate to consumers the economic development impact of agriculture on our state.

As  dean of agriculture, Jay is responsible for administering academic programs in the College of Agriculture, the Indiana Agricultural Experiment Station, the Purdue Cooperative Extension Service and a number of state regulatory services.  Jay's leadership in the Department of Agricultural Economics well prepared him for his current role as he directed the MS-MBA dual degree program between Purdue and Indiana University and also managed the Center for Food and Agricultural Business.  He is also an acclaimed teacher, receiving Purdue's highest teaching award just a few years ago.

Jay shared with us the efforts underway in the College of Agriculture to complete their strategic vision and roadmap for the next five years.  More importantly, he encouraged us to continue to seek new and critical partnerships.... partnerships among Purdue, the state and the business community.

Indiana agriculture, like so many other industries, is working to adjust to the challenges presented by this severe economic downturn.  In many areas, new leaders are working to navigate these difficult times and bring innovative ideas to these significant challenges.  In Indiana, we have these kinds of leaders...espeically in agriculture.  Anne Hazlett and Jay Akridge, while not "new" faces, are proven leaders and will continue to contribute to our industry's success.

Indiana State Senator Beverly Gard, chair of the Energy and Environmental Affairs Committee, has focused much of her time and leadership in recent Indiana General Assembly sessions on livestock and confined animal feeding operation legislation.  Senator Gard has authored Senate Bill 221 this session.  It overwhelmingly passed the Senate and is moving to the House.  The bill establishes "good character" provisions and allows for a livestock operator's past management record to be considered when applying for a new or expanded livestock permit.  Most agriculture and livestock groups in the state consider SB 221 a "consensus piece of legislation."

The recent passage of Proposition #2 in California along with other states' actions to restrict and modify traditional livestock production practices has intensified efforts to make similar changes in other states.  The Humane Society, for example, is actively pursuing moratorium and strong animal welfare bills in Ohio and Illinois.  In Indiana, aside from SB 221, other bills surfaced this session that included distance set-backs and even production moratoriums.

Ice Miller closely monitors these proposals and their industry and political dynamics for clients.  Last week, Mark Shublak, a partner in the firm's Public Affairs Practice Group, provided an overview of Statehouse activities.  This week, Ice Miller talked with Senator Gard and asked for her personal and political perspectives on SB 221 and other pending livestock related bills.  Hear more of Senator Gard's first-hand commentary from the Indiana Statehouse.

Today's General Assembly session in Indiana, like in other states, is clouded with uncertainty.  Despite being a budget surplus state, Indiana still faces tremendous budget planning challenges due to the economic recession.

Ice Miller closely monitors these dynamics and key legislative matters for clients.  Mark Shublak, a veteran observer of the Indiana legislature and a partner in the firm's Public Affairs Practice  Group and the Agribusiness Initiative, offers his observations on the happenings and atmosphere in the General Assembly.

Mark also provides an overview on some of the key agriculture and rural proposals under consideration by the  legislature, including a variety of livestock related bills, and property tax developments, among others.  Hear more of Mark's first-hand commentary from the Indiana Statehouse.

In the coming days, Ice Miller will also provide more specific views on the pending livestock and confined animal feeding operation legislation from the author of Senate Bill 221 and Chair of the Energy and Environmental Affairs Committee, Senator Beverly Gard.

Commentary from Beth Bechdol, Director of Agribusiness Strategies, Attending USDA's 85th Annual Agricultural Outlook Forum

The attitudes of attendees at this year's agricultural outlook conference are concerned, cautiously optimistic, curious, hopeful and even discouraged.  In other words....extremely mixed!
 
The annual event which provides industry leaders with market and commodity outlooks, but also insight to emerging policy developments, was a must-attend this year because new leaders stepped out further onto the public stage...  Director of the National Economic Council and Assistant to the President for Economic Policy Lawrence Summers and Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack.
 
Summers opened the conference with a description of the Obama  administration's two economic policy thrusts - a direct strengthening of the economy through job creation and the stimulus package and ensuring renewed financial stability in the credit, housing and banking systems.  He described today's recession as one of those "vicious cycles" that occurs just a few times in a hundred year period when the market's self-equilibrating fuction breaks down.  It is the  president's view, Summers noted, that the "profoundly important investments" being made in the stimulus package will help "restore the US economy's potential to produce and earn."
 
Secretary Tom Vilsack was next with a message obviously more tailored to agriculture.  Without prepared remarks, he eloquently outlined priorities for the Department and also key strategies he intends to pursue.   He told us that President Obama personally directed the Secretary to focus on three areas:  1.  ensure that children have more access to nutritious foods; 2.  expand alternative energy opportunites; and 3.  support research that allows agriculture to transition away from its own fossil fuel dependence.
 
Then, recent events added two more priorities for the Secretary...the salmonella find in peanut butter elevated food safety and the economic recession and stimulus package provisions will require USDA to quickly deliver $28 billion in nutrition and rural development programs especially.
 
The recently released 2007 Ag Census also clearly had an impact on the Secretary's thinking and strategic focus for agriculture.  He highlighted several findings from the "snapshot" of U.S. agriculture including the dramatic increase in small income farms (108,000 new small farms in the last five years); an increase in the very large farms such that today the 125,000 largest farms produce 75 percent of all our food; and finally the decline by 80,000 farms in the mid-size range.
 
It was no surprise, then, that the strategies defined by the Secretary were specifically referenced as "helping small to mid-sized farms."  They included: 

1. Helping small farms (many of which are specialty crop producers) become mid-sized farms by encouraging more consumption of fruits, vegetables, and nuts
2. Improve the safety and security of the food system
3. Rebuild and revitalize rural communities
4. Develop more renewable and alternative energy opportunities for agriculture
5. Enhance conservation stewardship programs

Large farms were not completely excluded from the plan, however.  Vilsack referenced the benefits that would accrue to this segment from science and research investments, trade promotion and also climate change profit opportunities.
 
He closed by noting that this "complicated agenda" was "complicated further by the financial situation," and that the "ag budget has to be a part of making hard choices" to attack the federal budget debt.   At the same he was delivering these comments, across town at another press event, the Obama budget proposal was released.  It should have been no surprise to industry observers who have listened closely to President Obama that the budget proposes a phase out of direct payments to large farms - payments that have for decades been a part of the farm "safety net".  In fact, it was just days ago in his address to Congress that the  president said he would look for wasteful items in the budget to cut including "large payments to agribusinesses."

Agricultural policy has long been viewed as a massive ship which required much strength and time to even begin steering on a new course.  We should all watch closely the new captains at the decision-making helm - the new direction may come more quickly than many in agriculture had planned or hoped for.

President-elect Barack Obama announced that former Iowa governor Tom Vilsack will be the next Secretary of Agriculture.  Vilsack, known as a proponent of renewable energy, will inherit a "bully pulpit" to steer farmers toward adding wind turbines and solar farms and methane digesters to their land.  Vilsack will likely provide balanced support for crop and livestock agriculture.

Vilsack will be the third governor in a row in the top agriculture spot.  The two before him were governors from Nebraska and North Dakota.

While no crystal balls were used and no firm predictions made, the group of distinguished speakers brought together by Ice Miller last week all agreed that the potential for some significant change and uncertainty was ahead for the agriculture industry.

Sen. Richard Lugar self-titled his remarks “VeraSun, GMOs and CO2” and referred to many of the challenges and opportunities ahead for the industry.  Despite the concerns over ethanol producer VeraSun’s financial situation, Lugar is “still excited about the prospects” for alternative energy and continues to “argue strenuously for ethanol.”  He remains concerned about the world trading system and some countries’ apprehension to address food crises and ultimately use technologies like GMO crops to feed those who are hungry.

Finally, he discussed the importance of carbon sequestration in the future but encouraged thoughtful consideration of it by each farm, household and factory.  Listen to his remarks.

In the end, Lugar frankly commented that the uncertainties are great and that some luck was going to be needed in the coming year.  Listen to his remarks.   He closed suggesting the need for “the right language and statesmanship” on all of these issues was critical and told industry leaders to “be prepared.”  “This will be not just a year of marketing, but also one of advocacy and community meetings,” he advised.

Roger Bernard of ProFarmer and Farm Journal magazine described the Nov. 4 election results and the still uncertain outcome of key Senate races.  Listen to his remarks.  Bernard also highlighted several areas of agriculture that could be impacted by the election results. Below is a slide from his presentation that touches on some of those key issues.  View his entire presentation.



Dave Lyons of Louis Dreyfus expressed concern from the perspective of a leading multinational grain shipping and processing company about future trade prospects for agriculture.   The future regulatory oversight of the financial and commodity markets also will have an impact on Dreyfus and many other agribusiness firms.  Lyons voiced concern about early hints at a combined Commodity Futures Trading Commission and Securities Exchange Commission and hopes agriculture can keep its own regulator.  Listen to his remarks.

Jeff Simmons of Elanco provided strong direction to the audience to fight strenuously for continued use of key agricultural technologies.  Referring to a question asked of him about Proposition 2 that passed in Calif. and will prohibit some very traditional livestock production methods, Simmons shared some of his direct experience working with Elanco in the United Kingdom – a country that turned away from agricultural productivity advancements following food safety crises and pressure from strong activist groups.  Listen to his remarks.

Renewable energy was a significant issue during the recent election campaigns.  Dr. Wally Tyner of Purdue University explained the current market dynamics for biofuels vs. petroleum and addressed some likely policy debates that will unfold in 2009 for current renewable energy programs and supports.  Listen to his remarks.

What Sen. Lugar described as being a “tough year” for the industry may at least gain some clarity as the new personalities and leadership in agriculture soon will be in place.  Roger Bernard posited this about President-Elect Obama…."Which Obama will take the White House – the pragmatist or the politician?"   The question holds true for every new political leader that touches agriculture – we now must wait to see who those new leaders will be.

Melissa Proffitt Reese, partner and chair of the agribusiness initiative at Ice Miller LLP, authored this blog.

On Thursday, Nov. 13, Ice Miller was proud to host Sen. Lugar for one of the first post election analyses on the state of agribusiness.  The event was a private briefing for our clients and an opportunity to hear first-hand about the outlook for the 111th Congress and the Obama Administration.

Sen. Lugar began his remarks with a discussion on ethanol and the extraordinary promise for the renewable energy source.  Lugar commented that by focusing on the production of ethanol, we can over time minimize our dependence on foreign sources of energy.

Lugar also focused on global trade issues, particularly the use of genetically modified organisms and climate change issues.  With respect to the economic outlook, Lugar professed that the recovery will not come soon.  Listen to some of Sen. Lugar's comments.

Sen. Lugar's remarks were followed by a panel discussion with experts from critical areas of agricultural policy and business including: Roger Bernard, Policy and Washington Editor, Farm Journal Magazine; Dave Lyons, Vice President Government Relations, Louis Dreyfus; Jeff Simmons, President, Elanco Animal Health; and Dr. Wally Tyner, Professor of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.


Simmons commented that the, "best way out of uncertainty is to anchor to certainty."  Capitalizing on his global experience, Simmons pointed to access to technology and innovation as two essential ingredients needed to retain a competitive advantage in the global marketplace.  Listen to Simmons talking about production and technology.

A common theme throughout the discussion was the critical importance of international trade for agricultural goods and services produced in the United States.  We have far more capacity than needed to meet our own mature market’s food requirements.  More importantly, our competitive and highly efficient food and agriculture system is challenged to feed the world’s population.

Joy Fischer, of Ice Miller LLP, attended the Lt. Governor's debate and authored this blog.

On August 13, Ice Miller LLP, CountryMark and the AgriInstitute presented the Lieutenant Governor's debate on agriculture at the Indiana State Fair.  There was no better backdrop than the fair to host the debate given the tremendous impact the food, agricultural and, of course, hardwood industries have on our state.  The debate was moderated by Gerry Dick from Inside INdiana Business.

Indiana State Representative Dennie Oxley opened the debate talking about the need to re-build and reinvigorate Indiana's economy.  He emphasized his rural roots growing up in English, Ind., a small rural community in Crawford County.  Oxley emphasized a collaborative approach to governing – that every stakeholder should have a place at the table and a voice in the discussion, especially as we face economic challenges.  Oxley noted that Indiana is 44th in the nation in personal growth and one of the leading states in home foreclosures. 

Lt. Governor Becky Skillman countered referencing the Governor's 2004 roadmap to an economic recovery which brought real change to Indiana.  She noted the $600 million budget deficit Gov. Daniels inherited and emphasized the administration balanced the budget in the first year.  She spoke of the work of the Indiana Economic Development Corporation (IEDC) which has closed on 590 business deals attracting $17 billion in private capital investments to the state.  Skillman particularly noted the impact agriculture has on our state, contributing an estimated $25 billion a year to the state's economy. 

The candidate's opening remarks were followed by a series of questions from the panelists.  One of the questions asked the panelists to share their top five rural economic priorities.  Oxley focused on the need to expand healthcare, re-invest in schools and adapt a green jobs initiative.  Lt. Governor Skillman referenced the administration's work in creating the Office of Community and Rural Affairs which has distributed $100 million to local communities for infrastructure and capital projects.  She also emphasized the importance of community leadership training programs and the hometown competitiveness program.

Another question focused on the expansion of dairy operations and asked the candidates how they plan to manage the growth and, at the same time, safeguard the environment.  Lt. Governor Skillman referenced the work of the ag regulatory task force and that the Daniels administration will continue to be an advocate for livestock groups.  At the same time, she recognized that growth must be managed responsibly.  Oxley acknowledged that he supports the growth of livestock as well but wants all production to increase in a responsible manner. 

One of the panelists asked the candidates to offer their opinions on the biggest opportunities and challenges facing our state.  Lt. Governor Skillman focused on the opportunities for livestock production and hardwoods.  She referenced the growing gap between the public's perception of agriculture and reality as one of the biggest challenges.  Oxley stated that one of the greatest opportunities for Indiana is to use agriculture to improve the economy.  As a state legislator, he supported the formation of the Indiana Department of Agriculture and emphasized we need an administration that will attract as many jobs as possible. 

One of the final questions asked the panelists to comment on soil erosion and the June 7 flood.  Oxley highlighted the challenges rural Indiana faces and emphasized the need to re-invest in rural areas.  Particularly, he highlighted his support of the Clean Water Indiana program.  Lt. Governor Skillman pointed out that in 2005, the administration re-distributed the cigarette tax to provide funding for soil conservation efforts. 

Oxley's closing statements, once again, focused on his rural heritage.  He spoke about the role agriculture can play in developing Indiana's economy and the need to bring everyone to the table.  Lt. Governor Skillman spoke of the need to develop a strategic plan.  Specifically, she referenced the growth of biofuels, livestock production and the hardwood industry.  She spoke of her commitment in seeing the agricultural sector grow and thrive.  She concluded by pointing to the administration's 3 1/2 years of action-oriented policymaking which has made Indiana cleaner, leaner and more tax payer friendly. 

Agriculture long has been an important part of the political dialogue.  I think we can all agree that in the current dynamic and even volatile period we find agriculture, we need an administration with a strong strategic vision to help us compete in the global marketplace. 

I know like many of you, I am looking forward to continuing to hear from the candidates on this important issue.