Latest news with #SenateAgriculturalCommittee
Yahoo
03-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
One Georgia lawmaker says President Trump's tariffs don't go far enough
As the impacts of President Trump's tariff continue to play out, lawmakers here in Georgia are worried they could hit Georgia farmers. However, one grower told Channel 2's Richard Elliot that he thinks the tariffs don't go far enough. State Sen. Russ Goodman is one of a number of farmers and growers here in the Georgia legislature. He told Elliot on Thursday that he not only supports the new tariffs but wishes they went even further. 'I think there could be some short-term pain with that,' Goodman said. Goodman is the chair of the Senate Agricultural Committee, but he got that job because he's also a grower. On his farm between Valdosta and Waycross, he grows blueberries- the crop, he says, is spotty this year. Goodman said he fully supports President Donald Trump's new tariffs on goods from other countries, but he thinks they didn't go far enough - particularly on Mexico. RELATED STORIES: Georgians who make their living with the car industry concerned over tariffs Georgia lawmakers have mixed emotions over new Trump tariffs announced Wednesday Dow drops nearly 1,680 in biggest wipeout since 2020 as fears of fallout from tariffs shake markets 'As a produce farmer in Georgia, if what I'm hearing is correct, I'm disappointed we're not going to have any tariffs on Mexican produce,' Goodman said. Trump announced wide-ranging reciprocal tariffs in addition to a 25% tariff on cars coming into the US. Since the Port of Brunswick is the busiest roll-on/roll-off automobile port in the US, there are worries that any slowdown could affect jobs there. Elliot asked Gov. Brian Kemp about any concerns he may have about the tariffs' impact on the Georgia economy. He said he needs to see more details. 'I still want to see kind of what the devil is in the details and see how this shakes out. I still think there's a lot of unknowns, and we're down to the last two days of the legislative season, so that's been my focus,' Kemp said. Elliot also spoke with Georgia's Democratic US Sen. Jon Ossoff who said the tariffs are nothing short of reckless. 'I think this has been quite recklessly done, and I'm seriously concerned about the potential economic impact on Georgia,' Ossoff said. Ossoff also expressed worries about the impact on the auto industry and auto import industry. 'I'm hearing from Georgia farmers, Georgia manufacturers and think what's lacking is any clear sense from the administration of what exactly they are trying to achieve,' Ossoff said.
Yahoo
24-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Cattle committee bill gets robust hearing in Senate Agricultural Committee
A cow is pictured on the Jordan Ranch in Livingston, Montana. (USDA/FPAC photo by Preston Keres) A fight over a beef promotion program saw boisterous debate in a Senate Agricultural Committee meeting last week. House Bill 119, brought by House Speaker Rep. Brandon Ler, would create the Montana Cattle Committee, which would run what's called a 'checkoff program,' or promotion program for a specific product, in this case Montana beef. Perhaps the most famous checkoff program was the U.S. Department of Agriculture's 'Got Milk?' campaign. In this case, it would be a state — not federal — program promoting in-state beef producers. However, the bill, if passed, would ask for a vote by cattle producers to create the [committee or program?]. The vote would also create a fee, $1 per head, on about 1.75 million beef cows in Montana to fund marketing or other promotional work. 'I just want to state that this bill is not imposing the tax,' said Ler, R-Savage. 'The state itself is not imposing the tax. That would be left up to a referendum of the producers.' He added he wants to see the bill passed to 'promote Montana beef.' The bill states the committee 'is uniquely situated' to provide benefits including 'advertising, promotion, food safety production research, nutrition, marketing research, the collection and dissemination of production and related statistics, and public education.' Essentially the bill seeks to create a 'favorable environment' for Montana cattle producers to market their product both domestically and internationally. At the heart of the debate was an additional tax on beef cows which opponents said would add up for producers, and they didn't want to be paying to help market their competitor's' products. Proponents of the bill have said the program will benefit cattle producers across the state. 'We're just asking for the opportunity to ask the producers of the state of Montana if they would like to tax themselves and see if we can improve the atmosphere for the livestock producers, improve the profitability, basically,' said Gene Curry, who is the chairman of the Board of Livestock, but was speaking for himself as a livestock producer. 'We're not asking for you to levy a tax on us or anybody. We're just asking you to give us the ability to ask the producers if they would like to tax themselves.' The cattle committee would be housed in the Department of Agriculture. It would be made up of seven members appointed by the governor. Originally the bill also dictated what groups can forward names for consideration to the governor, though it's since been amended to open up the nomination process further. The groups originally named in the bill as organizations that would pick the members were the Montana Stockgrowers Association, the Montana Cattlemen's Association, the Montana Association of Livestock Auction Markets, Montana Cattlewomen, the Montana Beef Council, the Montana Farm Bureau Federation, and the Montana Farmers Union. Representatives of two of those groups — the Montana Farmers Union and the Montana Cattlemen's Association — spoke against the bill during its Senate hearing. 'Ultimately, it pits neighbor against neighbor. That's a problem in my mind. As a business owner, I wouldn't pay for my competitor's advertising no matter how small the bill is, it just doesn't make sense,' said John Ferrat, a rancher and board member for the Montana Farmers Union. 'House Bill 119 is nothing more than taxation without representation, and if I recall, in 1773 there was some tea dumped into a harbor over just such a thing.' Blackfeet and Chippewa Cree representatives also spoke against the bill, as there is no direct tribal representation on the board. 'We do have Montana brands that were forced upon us to sell our cattle,' said Craig Iron Pipe, representing the Blackfeet tribal agriculture department and is a producer himself. 'We would like a voice at the table.' The bill was first introduced on Jan. 6. It had its first hearing two days later and some who provided testimony said they had little notice the bill was coming. Last week, the committee did not take immediate action on the bill. It passed the House on 52-47 vote to send it to the Senate. A fiscal note for the bill said the cattle committee would cost $1.5 million per year, but would be paid for by private donations and the head fee on livestock. Ler did not sign a third, most recent fiscal note, but signed the previous two.
