July 19, 2010
Statement from National Sorghum Producers
The ethanol industry plays an important role in economic activity of the Sorghum Belt and the future of the sorghum industry. National Sorghum Producers (NSP) believes the ethanol tax incentives have been valuable polices in growing America’s ethanol industry. NSP encourages policy makers to also evaluate Growth Energy’s Freedom Fueling Plan, which outlines the process of redirecting a portion of these incentives to build out a critically needed renewable fuels infrastructure. NSP does not believe an extension of the tax incentives and the Fueling Freedom Plan are mutually exclusive ideas. We encourage Congress and the ethanol industry to develop a plan that provides stable policies, yet looks at the long term needs of the industry.
NSP represents U.S. sorghum producers. The organization serves as the voice of the sorghum industry coast to coast through legislative representation, regulatory representation and education. To learn more about NSP, visit www.sorghumgrowers.com.
June 25, 2009
NSP Position on Climate Change
Leadership of the National Sorghum Producers met today to discuss and review Agriculture Chairman Collin Peterson's hard-fought amendment to the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009. The bill, which was approved in the House Energy and Commerce Committee last month and heard by the House Committee on Agriculture two weeks ago, included language that caused significant concern to the National Sorghum Producers and its producer members. House Agriculture Chairman Collin Peterson negotiated an agreement with bill sponsors late yesterday that significantly improved the prospects for agriculture.
Following today's meeting, NSP Chairman Toby Bostwick, a sorghum producer from Melrose, New Mexico issued the following statement:
"The National Sorghum Producers recognizes, wholeheartedly appreciates, and supports the efforts of Chairman Collin Peterson to fight for agriculture's protection in negotiations on the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009. His efforts on behalf of agriculture are to be highly commended. The amendment brokered by the Chairman is certainly a step in the right direction toward protecting and benefitting farmers in any future climate change legislation.
"This piece of legislation has far reaching impacts that have the potential to affect every American citizen. Given the potential negative effects of this bill on cost of production and world competitiveness of agriculture producers, NSP cannot in the best interests of our producer members and agriculture in general, support the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009. The legislative process is an extensive one, but at this point, the bill leaves too many unanswered questions for our industry. NSP will remain involved in the legislative process as long as climate change legislation is under discussion.
"NSP strongly encourages members of Congress to vote 'yes' on Chairman Peterson's amendment to the bill and to vote 'no' on final passage of H.R. 2454."
June 18, 2009
Members Request Pause in Push for Climate Change Bill
Republican members of Congress including Moran (R-KS) and Lucas (R-OK) this week spearheaded a letter to Speaker Pelosi asking “that appropriate time be allowed for the legislative process to be completed.” The letter, which was co-signed by 18 other members, is below:
June 16, 2009
The Honorable Nancy Pelosi,
Speaker
U.S. House of Representatives
H-232, The Capitol
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Madam Speaker,
We write to express our concern over the artificial timeline that dictates the consideration of H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009. We respectfully request that appropriate time be allowed for the legislative process to be completed.
As a result of your stated deadline of June 19 for consideration, the Chairman of the House Committee on Agriculture has told us that there is insufficient time to completely hear from all of our constituents, analyze this complex proposal, and act. With the magnitude of this bill, it is critically important that the House Agriculture Committee has sufficient time to work its will.
On Thursday June 11, our Committee held a hearing to review the impact of H.R. 2454 on rural America. The Committee took testimony from eight witnesses, covering a wide variety of rural interests. All witnesses said they could not support the bill. Beyond these witnesses, 99 agriculture organizations have already publicly expressed opposition to the bill and more are added to the list each day. This is indicative of the growing concerns we are hearing throughout the agriculture community.
Madam Speaker, please extend your June 19 deadline. Both supporters and opponents agree this legislation will have far-reaching effects on generations to come. This matter deserves thoughtful consideration and a careful legislative process.
Sincerely,
Rep. Frank D. Lucas (R-OK)
Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA)
Rep. Jerry Moran (R-KS)
Rep. Timothy V. Johnson, (R-IL)
Rep. Sam Graves (R-MO)
Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL)
Rep. Steve King (R-IA)
Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R-TX)
Rep. K. Michael Conaway (R-TX)
Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE)
Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-OH)
Rep. Adrian Smith (R-NE)
Rep. Bob Latta (R-OH)
Rep. Phil Roe (R-TN)
Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-MO)
Rep. Glenn W. Thompson (R-PA)
Rep. Bill Cassidy (R-LA)
Rep. Cynthia Lummis (R-WY)