Talent-Emerson Bill Betrays NAIS Opposition
The National Animal Identification System (NAIS) cannot be found in the U.S. Code. Should the Talent – Emerson bill [S3862, HR6042] become law, NAIS will be inserted into the U.S. Code for the first time, giving the USDA the authority to create and develop a national animal identification program without ever defining the most important word in its creation. “Voluntary” is at the crux of the matter, and small-scale producers, family farms, homesteaders, pet owners and the person who owns even one chicken for breakfast eggs have as much reason to fear a coercive “voluntary” system as a mandatory program.
The Talent – Emerson bill attempts to achieve two main political functions. First, it is designed to politically take the edge off this contentious issue. Since first announcing its intention to create the NAIS, the USDA has heard from a very vocal and active grassroots movement that opposes this government identification and tracking program. After over a year of opposition and ridicule, the USDA announced that the program would remain “voluntary.” But their words and their actions do not match. Indiana and Wisconsin have both implemented mandatory premises identification -- with USDA funding -- and many other states are considering mandatory premises identification, which is the first step in the USDA’s three step implementation plan of premises registration, followed by tagging every animal, then tracking every animal. Still the USDA insists the program is “voluntary” and now there is a bill introduced in Congress that attempts to splinter the grassroots opposition by offering a compromise to one small portion of the coalition who never really understood the danger of or opposed the creation of a coercive “voluntary” NAIS.
Second, one should never underestimate the politics behind the introduction of this bill. While the Virginia Independent Consumers and Farmers Association (VICFA) has not taken a position on the coming election we do understand that politicians face an increasingly angry electorate over NAIS and that they are looking for ways to take the emotion out of this issue before November. We won’t make a determination about the motives behind the introduction of this bill, but we need to ask what do we have to gain by a supporting a bill that creates a new government program that currently does not exist in law, and that will negatively affect the livelihood of thousands of family farmers? The introduction of this new piece of legislation is a prime example of how government continues to grow while the politicians take credit for limiting the growth of government programs. Several years ago, a national animal identification plan was just the dream of a few industry folks who saw dwindling breed registries and an opportunity to make a buck using the power of the U.S. government. Now, instead of just saying no to this new expensive and unnecessary government program, the Talent--Emerson bill actually would create a new government boondoggle in federal law. Only in Washington, DC would the creation of a new government program be considered limiting government growth. Sure, it might be a little less than the USDA and their partners in industry want, but they will get ninety percent of what they want, and under a coercive “voluntary” program farmers will be left holding the bill.
The Talent –Emerson bill is flawed in other respects. Section 2 of the bill grants the USDA a blanket exception from public disclosure laws that would allow the USDA to run this program under a cloak of secrecy while at the same time allowing producer information to be widely disseminated. It appears that this poorly worded bill was a feeble attempt to protect participant animal owners from having their personal information released. However, the bill grants the USDA the right to disclose livestock owners’ information to law enforcement, Homeland Security, Health and Human Services, by court order, and even to a foreign government if the USDA determines an animal poses a “disease or pest threat” or a “danger to human health.” The exceptions swallow the rule. One can hardly think of a reason why the USDA would not routinely hand out your information to untold numbers of administrative agency bureaucrats and individuals. This is not the protection of personal information that livestock owners are demanding under a “voluntary” program.
Finally, VICFA cannot support this bill because of its conspicuous silence on the definition of “voluntary.” As we have mentioned, the USDA has made no secret of its desire to have full participation in the NAIS. The Talent -- Emerson bill creates NAIS, and then says “livestock owners” cannot be mandated to participate. However, this leaves a universe of market entry points that can and will be regulated under a new congressionally created program. Imagine the difficulty of a producer who chooses not to participate when his children are excluded from 4-H competitions, processors refuse to accept his animals, and he cannot transport animals to buy and sell because a veterinarian cannot issue a health certificate without a premises registration or animal identification.
Call your Representatives and Senators today and tell them that the Talent – Emerson bill does not pass muster.