GRASSLEY: Today I'm writing to Vilsack to express concern about the timing of the applications for funding through the Rural Energy for America Program. The program has been extremely valuable in helping farmers and rural businesses invest in clean energy.
Ideally, there should be at least a 90 day window for people to submit applications. Typically, the Department of Agriculture then requires a reasonable amount of time before the end of the fiscal year to select the best projects among hundreds of applicants. As of today, the Department has not issued the notice for these grants and loan guarantees.
Given the nearly doubling of funding and the needed window of time for project application and selection, it's very important to get this program moving forward as quickly as possible so we need to get these notices of solicitation out.
On Wednesday, I'm meeting with Carol Sutley, chairman
of the Council of Environment Equality. As you can guess, I've got
plenty of topics to talk to her about.
The Obama administration has a lot of farmers worried just
exactly how they're going to handle agricultural issues through EPA.
So I'll be asking her about how they plan to implement the permits
after EPA decided not to appeal the court decision in which exempted
pesticides from the Clean Water Act would work.
Also, I'll ask about the advance notice proposed rule making on
agriculture greenhouse gases and whether this could translate into
some type of fee on livestock producers down the road like what you've
been hearing $178 on the methane that cows emit. Then I'm going to be
talk about fugitive dust as well.
Before I open up for questions, I want to remind everybody that
the Center for Disease Control says that you can't get swine flu from
eating pork. So I hope Iowans will support family farmers down the
road and have a pork chop for dinner tonight. I had a pork chop last
night.
Dan Looker?
QUESTION: Good morning, Senator. We had ham for dinner Sunday,
you'll be glad to know.
GRASSLEY: Yes. Thank you very much.
QUESTION: I just wondered if you will also be discussing the
issue of indirect land use. As you pointed out in your press release,
the California Air Resources Board has approved a standard that many
people in the ethanol industry feel discriminates against ethanol.
GRASSLEY: Yes, I will. Yes. Four issues, the pesticide one I
just referred to, indirect land use, methane and cows, and then the
fugitive dust issue.
QUESTION: And just to follow up, if -- I think we've talked
about this before, but would Congress be able to override what the
California Air Resources Board has done? And how likely do you think
that is?
GRASSLEY: Congress could override it. Will they override it?
Probably not.
QUESTION: OK. Thank you.
GRASSLEY: Tom Rider?
Tom Steever?
QUESTION: Good morning. Do you anticipate, perhaps, anything
congressionally going on to -- in response to the swine flu and North
American flu issues?
GRASSLEY: I think the thing would be whether or not there's
enough money available for anything that needs to be done. But I
don't think additional money by Congress right now is going to help
with the immediate problem.
And there will be hearings. I think there's hearings scheduled
for today.
Bob Quinn?
Dan Skelton?
QUESTION: Good morning, Senator.
GRASSLEY: Yes?
QUESTION: Apparently, Canada has filed a complaint with the WTO
regarding the COOL rule. Do you have any comment on that?
GRASSLEY: Well, if they file a complaint, we'll have to answer
it and maybe, you know, on second thought, on a couple instances,
Canada has changed their mind. But we'll have to do it.
But I can tell you this that we're confident that COOL is WTO
compliant.
Gary in Arkansas?
Philip at the Register?
QUESTION: Yes, Senator. Secretary Vilsack is coming up on his
100 -- first 100-day mark, for what that's worth. Any -- anything
about what he's done, appointments over there or anything, his actions
that have surprised you? And any other thoughts?
GRASSLEY: Well, let me -- let me give one big compliment and
then one minor caution. The compliment is very much something he
probably would have done on his own, but I also discussed it with him
because I've been involved with civil rights for black farmers for a
long period of time and involved with oversight of the civil right
division of Ag helping as much as I can the cause along, being
involved with the Pigford money and the review by the courts that's in
the Farm Bill.
So I asked him to look into it, and he issued several directives
last week, only one of which got any attention and that was to have a
complete review of the civil rights division and helping the thousands
of farmers along that weren't treated right. And I would say that he
is much more aggressive in the pursuit of it than I thought possible
and very complimentary for what he's doing in that area.
I hope that he -- the caution I would give would be to not let --
I know he wouldn't do this, but I think there's people that want him
to do it, to kind of pit production agriculture against other interest
groups in the United States. And the only one that I can really point
to at this point is between the lobby -- nutrition lobby versus
production agriculture.
GRASSLEY: But he's -- he's doing a very good job overall.
That was Philip. Did you have a follow-up?
QUESTION: Well, in -- have you seen anything? What about -- to
address the appointee appointments that have -- that he's made. Any
pattern that you see or...
GRASSLEY: I wouldn't point to a pattern except qualifications.
I think everybody's well qualified to do what they're doing, and
there's only one that I would raise a question about. And I probably
shouldn't be raising a question except some things that I've read
about where she's coming from, and I don't remember her name, but the
woman from Tufts.
QUESTION: Kathleen Merrigan.
GRASSLEY: What's her name?
QUESTION: Kathleen Merrigan.
GRASSLEY: Yes. Whoever -- whatever her name is, I've read some
things that would make some caution -- cause me to be cautious about
her, but I need to get acquainted with her because it's not fair just
to read third-party points and know exactly where she's coming from.
QUESTION: Well, I have to ask, what did she -- what have you
read that raised concerns?
GRASSLEY: I think, with -- I don't know whether I can point to a
specific thing, but it tends to me to be having an unrealistic view of
American production agriculture.
Jean, Agrinews?
OK. I've gone through the entire list. Anybody else want to
jump in?
QUESTION: Yes, Senator. This is Gene Lucht from Iowa Farmer
Today.
Just a quick question. With the -- all the new this week
regarding the swine flu, is there anyone more the government can or
should be doing to head off any possible shut-off of exports, things
like that?
GRASSLEY: Well, no. Just the opposite. You know, we've had
some countries not wanting to take our imports of pork. And since
there's no transferral of swine flu -- well, first of all, there's no
swine flu anyplace in the United States. I wouldn't want to say no
place in the world, but I haven't heard that there is any swine flu --
any pigs with flu.
So first of all, if there was, it's not transmitted through the
-- eating the meat anyway. So it's completely wrong for people not to
allow our imports in. So we -- it's not that we ought to not export,
it's that people shouldn't be putting restrictions.
So I'm very concerned about reports that these countries are
doing this and, particularly, it seems to me that since USDA and our
Center for Disease Control has been very clear that it can't be
transmitted and then we also had the World Organization of Animal
Health noting the transmission of this particular flu was person to
person. So, actually, it shouldn't be called swine flu. The word
"swine" is not legitimately connected with it.
And, obviously, you see the impact on the markets yesterday.
It's done terrible distress when all of a sudden it was effected -- I
mean, connected.
OK. Anybody else want to jump in?
OK. Thank you all very much.