Indiana Farm Bureau - Public Policy Dispatch

Friday, February 27, 2009

Volume 09, Issue 7

The following county Farm Bureaus are scheduled to visit the Statehouse next week.

Tuesday, March 3: Gibson

Wednesday, March 4: Fayette

Thursday, March 5: Adams, Dubois & Hendricks

LEGISLATURE REACHES HALFWAY POINT The 2009 session of the Indiana General Assembly reached the halfway point this week as Wednesday marked the deadline for bills to pass the house in which they were introduced. The bills that remain alive now cross the Statehouse Rotunda for consideration by the other house. The second house has until April 15 to complete its action on the bills that have been forwarded to it. The two houses then have until April 29 to reconcile the differences between the two versions of a bill and send it to the Governor.

FB MEMBER CONTACT NEEDED ON IMPORTANT BILLS There are three areas of major concern to many Farm Bureau members where contacts with legislators could influence the course of action eventually taken by the General Assembly. These three areas are: amending the Constitution to legitimize the 1-2-3 property tax caps; imposing unwarranted new restrictions on responsible animal agriculture; and legislative over-reaction to behavior of a few irresponsible dog breeders. They are each discussed in greater detail below. The best contacts with legislators are those made in person. Face-to-face is best but a personal phone call is also effective. Even if you don’t get through, the fact that you made the effort and left a message will be recorded and noted by your legislator. It is also important to always remember that you are the one who is in the best position to know how a particular proposal will affect you. Approach your legislator knowing that you are the expert on your farm and your operation. Finally, don’t take any legislator for granted. Even if those that understand and agree with your position on an issue still need to be reassured of that. Legislators are also better advocates within their house and their caucus if they can honestly say that your position is one for which they have received a lot of constituent support. If you are able to contact your legislator personally, it is appropriate to address all of these issues and any others that may be of personal concern to you in your conversation. If you are leaving a message, or communicating by e-mail or letter, it is advisable to limit each communication to a single subject.

CONSTITUTIONAL CAPS AWAIT HOUSE ACTION The resolution that would place on the ballot in 2010 the question of amending the Indiana Constitution to legitimize the 1-2-3 property tax caps has been assigned to the House Ways & Means Committee. Farm Bureau opposes this resolution, SJR 1, because it would remove any constitutional cloud from the caps tied to assessed value (AV). These caps favor homeowners at the expense of other taxpayers including farmers, whose property taxes on land will be capped at 2% of AV and equipment at 3% of AV. More details about the discriminatory caps and action which you can take to prevent them from becoming permanent and irreversible can be found in the “Action Alert” on the home page of Indiana Farm Bureau’s website at www.infarmbureau.org.

ANIMAL AGRICULTURE SUBJECT OF THREE BILLS THAT REMAIN ALIVE Three bills that deal with animal agriculture remain alive after the break. Two of these, SB 221 and HB 1074, establish some “good character” requirements for applicants. Farm Bureau prefers SB 221 because it recognizes and anticipates changes that are occurring nationally in the area of regulated livestock facilities. We have worked closely with the bill’s author, Sen. Beverly Gard (R-Greenfield), IDEM and several of the state’s livestock groups to craft workable regulatory requirements that address her concerns. The third bill is HB 1075, which establishes a two-mile setback from state parks and DNR reservoirs for the application of manure or the construction of a new confined feeding operation. Please contact your senator and ask him/her to oppose HB 1074 because the same issue is addressed more satisfactorily in SB 221 and to oppose HB 1075 because there is no scientific reason to establish a statewide two-mile setback from DNR properties. HB 1075 violates the principle of local control, which assumes that people in the community know what is best for their community but retains exemptions including “accepted farm management practices,” veterinary medicine practices, state or federally inspected slaughterhouses, pest control and situations where it is necessary to destroy an animal that is endangering livestock, another domestic animal or property. The bill now moves to the Senate where its author and other proponents have pledged they will try to work out a number of the concerns that have been voiced regarding the bill. The Farm Bureau staff was told by a number of representatives who voted for the bill that they would change their vote if these problems were not resolved.

ANIMAL CRUELTY BILL ASSIGNED TO SENATE COMMITTEE HB 1468, the so-called “puppy mill” and animal cruelty bill has been assigned to the Senate Corrections, Criminal & Civil Matters Committee. Committee Chair Brent Steele (R-Bedford) has not yet indicated when the bill will be given a hearing. Among other things, the bill attempts to address issues in the dog breeding business that have attracted considerable media attention and public criticism over the past year or so. However, the bill would penalize responsible dog breeders in the state and jeopardize their ability to make a living. Most pet breeders seek to satisfy the public demand for companion animals in a responsible and humane fashion and recognize that in their business, like any other, there are “bad actors.” Limiting the number of dogs in a particular facility or legislatively second-guessing the advice of veterinary professionals is not the way to get abuses in the dog breeding business under control. Moreover, the bill is a legislative priority of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), which is the country’s largest, richest and most media-savvy opponent of modern animal agriculture practices. All production agriculture in Indiana should be wary of any initiative that will give HSUS greater credibility in our state. Legislators, especially senators, should be asked to oppose HB 1468. If they are reluctant to commit to opposing the bill outright, they should be asked to recommend the issue be referred to a summer study committee so both sides of the issue can be given a full and fair hearing. Pet breeding is an emerging industry in rural Indiana.

Another animal bill that Farm Bureau does support is SB 222. This bill would make it a crime to kill a domestic animal without the owner’s permission. The definition of domestic animal for the purposes of this bill includes livestock. The bill does recognize that at times it may be necessary to kill an animal to protect your own property. House members should be asked to support this bill in the form it was received from the Senate and not allow it to be significantly amended to include the objectionable provisions of HB 1468.

SENATE COMMITTEE READY TO TAKE UP BUDGET The Senate Appropriations Committee will soon begin its work to revise the one-year budget forwarded to it by the House. Committee Chair Luke Kenley (R-Noblesville) has said that he expects to return the budget adopted by the House in HB 1001 to a true biennial budget that covers the period from July 1, 2009, through June 30, 2011. He has acknowledged that the House was working in the dark with respect to the ramifications the federal stimulus package might have on state obligations and programs when they put the budget together. However, he feels that with more details of the stimulus now available the state should proceed with the traditional two-year budget. The Appropriations Committee is scheduled to begin hearing presentations from state agencies regarding their budgets on March 5 with a presentation by the Department of Education. The House enacted the fiscal year 2010 school budget and school distribution formula in a separate bill, HB 1723.

HOUSE FAILS TO ADDRESS UNEMPLOYMENT FUND CRISIS A game of political brinksmanship in the House ended when Rep. David Niezgodski (D-South Bend) withdrew HB 1721 from consideration. The bill, which would have increased taxes on employers to help replenish the state’s exhausted unemployment compensation fund, was withdrawn in the face of Republican opposition. House Speaker Pat Bauer (D-South Bend) indicated that he would not allow the House to pass a tax increase with no GOP support. Senate President pro tem David Long criticized the House for failing to address a critical issue facing the state and indicated that the Senate would put together a bill but emphasized that it would take bi-partisan support to enact it. The state’s unemployment fund is out of money. The state has already borrowed nearly $400 million from the federal government for unemployment benefits.

GOVERNOR WON’T USE STIMULUS FOR CONTINUING PROJECTS Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels has indicated that he does not intend to use funds from the federal stimulus package to fund programs that will require continued funding from the state after the stimulus money dries up. On CBS’s Face the Nation last Sunday, Daniels indicated that Indiana was in better shape than most other states and that he expected to use the stimulus money for infrastructure and teacher education programs. These, he said will prepare Indiana for the future but not require additional tax revenues to sustain in the future. Indiana is slated to get about $4.2 billion of the $787 billion stimulus package. Additionally, there is a significant amount of money available through grant programs which Indiana can compete for.