Organic rule quashed
A hotly contested rule that was proposed in the Barack Obama administration has finally met its match in the Donald Trump administration.
I’ve written a couple columns about the Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices rule, which would have mandated specific production practices for organic farmers and ranchers. Well, the final blow was cast by the U.S. Department of Agriculture—the same agency that proposed this rule—on March 12. USDA withdrew the rule with an effective date of May 13.
USDA Marketing and Regulatory Program Undersecretary Greg Ibach said, “The existing robust organic livestock and poultry regulations are effective. The organic industry’s continued growth domestically and globally shows that consumers trust the current approach that balances consumer expectations and the needs of organic producers and handlers.”
Dating back to the rule’s inception in 2016, the opposition to this rule has been bipartisan—and even bicameral. Both Senate and House Agriculture Committee chairmen have been vocal opponents of the rule. All four principals—Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Pat Roberts and Ranking Member Debbie Stabenow, and House Agriculture Committee Chairman Michael Conaway and Ranking Member Collin Peterson—publicly expressed concerns with the rule and requested an extension of the public comment period. Farmers were speaking up that they had not been heard while the Obama administration’s USDA proposed the rule.
Organic producers’ major complaint about the rule was the mandated space increase for organic hens—at least 2 square feet of outdoor space. Before, organic hens could be housed “outdoors” but contained in porches. Had this rule become effective, producers would have been forced to purchase more land and demolish barns to build new ones.
Well, there must’ve been some animal health or safety benefits to the rule, right? Nope and many opponents argue that animal health and safety would have gone down.
According to USDA, “Significant policy and legal issues were identified after the rule published in January 2017. After careful review and two rounds of public comment, USDA has determined that the rule exceeds the department’s statutory authority and that the changes to the existing organic regulations could have a negative effect on voluntary participation in the National Organic Program, including real costs for producers and consumers.”
This is exactly what should have happened the first time. When you listen to the folks you’re casting regulations on and they have negative effects—withdraw them. Or, at least work with the affected folks to make them workable.
Though the Trump administration isn’t always on agriculture’s side (ahem, trade), the president’s promise of rolling back burdensome regulations continues to become a reality.
According to Agri-Pulse, “USDA said the Agricultural Marketing Service received approximately 72,000 comments on the proposed withdrawal. Of those comments, over 63,000 opposed withdrawing the final rule, but USDA said 56,000 of those comments were submitted as form letters. About 50 comments supported withdrawal (with five comments as form letters) and about 7,800 did not state a specific viewpoint on proposed withdrawal.”
Editor’s note: Seymour Klierly writes Washington Whispers for the Journal from inside the Beltway.
