March 22, 2024
Yesterday, Rep. Dan Newhouse (WA-04) participated in a hearing held by the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture to hear Department of Agriculture Secretary Thomas Vilisack testify on the fiscal year 2025 agency budget request.
Watch Rep. Newhouse’s remarks HERE or read remarks as prepared below:
“Thank you, Chairman Harris, and Ranking Member Bishop. Secretary Vilsack and Director Rapp, great to see you and thank you for being here to discuss the Administration’s Budget proposal for Fiscal Year 2025.
Every farmer and agriculture stakeholder I meet brings up the same first and most pressing topic: farm labor. In your written testimony, you say ‘at the end of the day, a strong farm economy inarguably contributes to a strong rural economy and makes rural communities a more attractive place to live – and we are doing everything within out control to focus our efforts on enhancing economic resiliency.’
That is well intentioned, and I would agree, but our rural communities are struggling and family farms are disappearing because it is no longer economically viable for them to survive. One of the most significant costs is labor and in Washington, the Adverse Effect Wage Rate—which really should be called the Adverse Employer Wage Rate—is $19.25 per hour.
While this wage is not determined by your agency, it does influence it because data collected through USDAs Farm Labor Survey is used to calculate the AEWR. The Department of Labor either does not understand or care about the agricultural industry and the importance of healthy foods grown in the United States.
What are you doing to rein in the cost of labor? Do you have the right tools in your toolbox to address this issue? The right tool makes a big difference so if not, what specifically do you need from Congress to support the long-term sustainability of our domestic agricultural industry?
The fiscal year 2024 agricultural appropriations bill recently signed into law included my language to ensure that you have a seat on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States to review certain covered transactions involving agricultural land, agriculture biotechnology, or the agriculture industry. It also included language aimed at improving the reporting under the Agricultural Foreign Investment Disclosure Act (AFIDA).
This language was critical after a recent GAO report confirmed one of our worst fears: that not only is the USDA unable to answer the question of who owns what land and where, but that there is no plan by the department to reverse this dangerous flaw that affects our supply chain and economy. Ownership of U.S. agricultural land by foreign adversaries is a very important topic and I was surprised it was not mentioned in your written testimony.
How is your Department planning on executing the authorities and actions signed into law to address foreign ownership of U.S. agricultural lands?
Later today, the National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will publish a final Environmental Impact Statement that recommends relocating grizzly bears into the North Cascades in my district.
As a farmer, I worry not only about the grizzlies destroying my crops, but for the safety and well-being farmers, families, farm employees, and communities. This sentiment has been overwhelmingly amplified by constituents with many citing the cougar and wolf introductions that—to no surprise—have resulted in dead livestock and residents threatened.
It is clear that officials the Park Service and Fish and Wildlife know grizzlies can and probably will move out of the zone in which they plan to drop them in, yet rather than letting common sense prevail, they continue to push forward with this dangerous plan and my constituent’s voices have been shut out in favor of a pre-determined outcome.
Are you aware if the National Park Service or the US Fish and Wildlife Service consulted with USDA as they finalized the EIS? Do you know if either of these agencies, as a result of their disregard for public safety and the residents who would have to live with these executive actions, have a plan for dealing with crop loss and livestock depredation that is inevitable from these predators?
As a third-generation farmer, I am proud to represent one of the most fruitful regions in the country. The EIS released today is not the final decision so as Secretary of USDA, I would ask for your assistance in conveying to the Park Service and US Fish and Wildlife Service that introducing grizzly bears into the North Cascades would threaten farmland, livestock, and most importantly, human lives.
A consequence that we have seen across the country as a result of the recent record inflation is ‘shrinkflation,’ with products on our grocers shelves smaller than they were a couple years ago. I recently learned that in my home state, milk that comes in a 59 oz size is not allowed under the WIC program whereas the 64 oz size is.
To your knowledge, does the WIC food package developed by USDA FNS provide flexibility that would allow a 59 oz container of cow’s milk to be covered?”
Rep. Newhouse is a member of the House Appropriations Committee and serves on the Agriculture, Energy and Water, and Homeland Security subcommittees.
To learn more and watch the full hearing, click here.