By KEVIN WALKER
Michigan Correspondent

CHESTERFIELD, Mo. — The National Corn Growers Assoc. (NCGA) sat a telephone conference last week to state its position on the federal climate change bill, and inform listeners of a study it recently sponsored (see above article).

Participating in the teleconference were Darren Ihnen, president of the NCGA and a farmer in South Dakota; Rick Tolman, CEO of the group; Paul Bertels, director of agricultural economic analysis and environmental impacts at the NCGA; and John Doggett, vice president for public policy.

“We as a board have passed a resolution to oppose HR 2454,” Ihnen said. “It will definitely increase our costs of production. In volatile and unstable times, we think that’s a detriment to agriculture, in particular, corn growers … Most areas of the country would be a net loser just because we can’t adopt a continuous no-till.”

According to Bertels, continuous no-till would be the primary way growers would realize “offset opportunities” under HR 2454’s cap-and-trade system. Ihnen expressed concern about the diversion of crops from food crops to forests and other “carbon crops” such as prairie grasses.

“To divert acres into a forestation or some other crop would be a detriment to energy security,” he said.

Ihnen also speculated the system would create problems with food security because some livestock farming could go overseas. At one point, a reporter asked what would make the bill better.

“Obviously, continuous no-till does not work for me,” Ihnen stated. “We have to develop a system where you can get credit for doing minimum tillage or for doing more to protect our land in sensitive areas. The biggest thing is keeping our costs down.”

Doggett discussed HR 2454 from a political and legal vantage point. He said that Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) sent a resolution to the Senate last week that could prevent the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from regulating greenhouse gases.

“It’s going to be interesting to see how Senator Murkowski’s resolution will do in the Senate,” Doggett said. “Whether it can prevail in the Senate, I’m not sure.”

He went on to say that such a resolution would not pass the House of Representatives, in all likelihood, and the current administration wouldn’t sign such a piece of legislation. He also explained that in 2007 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the EPA “must” regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.

“This has been a significant driver in the Congress to pass legislation to reduce greenhouse gases,” Doggett said. “A number of members of Congress want to avoid a regulatory regime under the Clean Air Act …”

Doggett was asked whether he thought last week’s election results in the Massachusetts Senate race to replace the late Edward Kennedy would have any effect on the current situation.

“It doesn’t mitigate or stop the regulatory threat that is out there,” he said. “All bets are off for cap-and-trade legislation likely this year, but at some point members of Congress will need to evaluate whether a regulatory regime or a legislative effort is going to do more good out in the countryside.”