Farm Bureau Press - 2014 Election Supplement

Oct. 17, 2014 www.arfb.com

2014 election supplement Arkansas Farm Bureau sent questionnaires — concerning issues important to Farm Bureau members — to major party candidates for U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives (Dist. 1, 2, 4). It is our hope that you, the Farm Bureau leaders, will be able to use this information to educate yourselves on those who are seeking to serve us in government.

U.S. Senate

MARK PRYOR

D, Little Rock

IMMIGRATION REFORM What do you think are key elements of any immigration reform bill? What timeline do you support for passage of an immigration reform bill?

Critically important to the health of our agricultural economy is ensuring we have the labor force required to produce the most efficient, safe and secure food supply in the world. I hear over and over from farmers who say it’s time to streamline the temporary work visa system (H2A), which would greatly reduce the time, cost and stress that so many of our farmers face as they seek to acquire adequate labor. It’s not lost on anyone that the barriers currently in place create an unfortunate incentive to hire undocumented immigrants. We need to change that.

For that reason, and others, I supported the comprehensive immigration reform bill passed by the Senate last year. Our bill contained the strongest border security measures ever considered, and it required undocumented immigrants to pass a background check, pay back taxes, learn English and go to the back of the line. The bill was tough but fair, and it was supported by the Arkansas Farm Bureau, the Arkansas Chamber of Commerce and faith leaders across our state and nation. It’s past time to enact these commonsense reforms that would be a boost to our economy.

What do you consider essential in a guest worker program?

The Senate-passed bill reformed the unwieldy H2A program by replacing it with a streamlined “W-Visa” system for lower-skilled foreign workers to be temporarily employed on U.S. farms. Rather than imposing an arbitrary and inflexible cap on the number of available visas, as we currently have, 1

W-Visas would help to avoid unnecessary worker shortages by growing and contracting availability along with the demand for labor. Passing this measure would benefit the farming community almost immediately, especially since it includes a program that would allow current undocumented farm workers who have a substantial existing commitment to agricultural work here in the United States to obtain legal status through an Agricultural Card Program. Of course we cannot open the door to visa overstays, which is why our bill combines these needed labor reforms with the strong biometric visa entrance-exit systems to crack down on those who would abuse their temporary status.

ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT What kind of reforms would you consider in regards to the Endangered Species Act? (Farm Bureau supports H.R.4315, H.R. 4316, H.R. 4317, H.R. 4318, H.R. 4284, H.R. 4319 and S. 2084) Arkansas farmers and ranchers know better than anybody that Washington’s one-size-fits-all regulations can hurt their bottom line, often as badly as not having a proper work force. I’ve heard real concerns about how the Endangered Species Act impacts private property rights and the ability to make a living.

I was very disappointed when the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service abandoned its promise to fully analyze the impact of critical habitat designations in favor of only considering the costs to agencies implementing the regulations. To fix this, I wrote and introduced S. 2084, the Community Protection Act of 2014.

Endorsed by the Farm Bureau, my bill would require the Obama administration to reverse its decision and take into account the economic impact of endangered species designations on Arkansas farmers.

We know in Arkansas that too often, certain habitat designations threaten the economic viability of our private lands, lowering property values and hindering the ability of landowners to obtain loans. My legislation requires those in Washington charged with implementing these regulations

to consider any effects on land use and property values, employment, and state and local revenues.

I’m convinced current policy needs a more balanced approach, and I’m working right now on another bill with Sen. John Boozman to protect Arkansas’s private landowners from endangered species designations that I hope to unveil in the coming weeks.

Would you support repeal or significant reforms of laws that allow groups to “sue and settle” with the federal government?

At the same time, I am increasingly concerned by the “sue and settle” practice that allows groups to circumvent private property rights and exploit endangered species laws with the help of the federal government. In practice, this means parties to lawsuits are unfairly able to present their case before the government without hearing from community stakeholders. These cases often result in policy decisions that have a real economic impact on thousands of Arkansans, even though their voices were never heard by the appropriate agencies. I will look for legislative opportunities to curb this troubling practice and ensure all stakeholders are heard by federal agencies when decisions are made that affect so many of our rural families.

Keeping my focus always on Arkansas’s priorities, earlier this year I asked the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to reopen its public comment period on a wildlife designation that could hurt our economy, the proposed critical habitat of the Neosho Mucket and Rabbitsfoot mussels. I also invited the agency director to Arkansas and see firsthand how its designation could negatively impact economic development in Arkansas. I will always fight to ensure burdensome and unnecessary regulations, including wrongheaded habitat designations, do not impede our way of life.

Clean Water Act EPA and the U.S. Corp of Engineers recently released a new proposed rule (Docket ID No: EPA-HQ-OW-2011-0880) that Farm Bureau feels will greatly expand their regulatory authority. What water resources do you feel should be regulated by these agencies? And how can they be restricted to those resources?

1

I share Arkansas Farm Bureau’s serious concerns about the EPA’s expanded authority over our waterways. The agency’s new regulatory reach under the proposed “Waters Of The U.S.” rule could grant the EPA authority over areas it was never supposed to cover. Congress was clear on this: the Clean Water Act should apply only to navigable waterways and does not include ditches, flood plains, ponds, and other water features under the thumb of the EPA. This unnecessary rule could cause increased costs for farmers and private landowners through new permit application expenses, environmental analysis and mitigation requirements. All this mess regarding the exemption from permitting under the Clean Water Act could be easily clarified by simply excluding active farm land. The bottom line is, EPA should withdraw this burdensome rule. And if they won’t, I’ve supported and voted for legislation to prohibit the EPA from finalizing this rule.

Biotech Labeling Do you support the labeling of genetically modified foods or products containing genetically modified organisms? Would you support efforts to streamline the process of approving biotech products provided that they have been properly vetted?

Arkansas has always been at the forefront of advances in farming technology and efficiency.

Genetically modified crops are the latest of these innovations, which stretch back centuries. As we continue to ensure our crops are safe to grow and consume, I believe we should use science-based determinations for labeling food. Science has shown genetically modified crops are just as safe as nonmodified crops. In fact, genetically modified crops allow us to be better stewards of the land. GMOs allow farmers to use less fertilizer and pesticide and improve our yields. The significant gains we have made in yields allow us to produce more food with less land, less fertilizer, less pesticides. GMOs are a win for our environment, the global population and our nation’s farmers and ranchers. Under current law, genetically modified products have the voluntary option to be labeled as such and I continue to support voluntary labeling of these products. As Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies, I will continue to monitor the use of genetically modified foods to ensure our food supply is safe and secure.

Farm Bill If re-elected to the U.S. Senate, it is possible you will be in office when the next farm bill is written. What do you think is critical in terms of support for U.S. farmers and ranchers? What reforms would you like to see in the farm bill?

For much of this past year, I worked hard to 2

pass a bipartisan and comprehensive Farm Bill, legislation supported by the Arkansas Farm Bureau and advocates for the farm industry. Arkansas farmers hadn’t always gotten a fair shake in previous Farm Bill negotiations, and that’s why most of Arkansas’s congressional delegation worked together and pass a comprehensive reauthorization that finally delivered for our state’s economy.

We wanted to see a five-year Farm Bill signed into law last summer because we hoped to give our farmers and ranchers the certainty they needed to plan for the coming year. When the Senate passed our bill, Sen. Boozman and I recognized it wasn’t perfect, but at the end of the day it was good for Arkansas. We knew it would give our producers the long-term tools and safety net needed to grow crops and raise livestock that are the envy of the world. We passed our Farm Bill by a wide bipartisan margin, and all we needed -- all Arkansas’s farmers and ranchers needed -- was for the House to act in the best interest of rural America.

You all know what happened next: a small minority in the House decided to play politics with the Farm Bill, stonewalling its passage for months at the urging of Washington special interest groups that care nothing about the needs of Arkansas’s rural families. These irresponsible members of congress were more interested in Washington’s broken my-way-or-the-highway politics than doing right by the people they represent.

When I’m home in Arkansas every weekend, the thing I hear most from folks at the gas station or in line at the grocery store is that they’re sick of the drama in Washington. I am too.

In the end, there was only one member of Arkansas’s congressional delegation who recklessly opposed the Farm Bill, a bill that was bipartisan and comprehensive, cut billions in spending and made real reforms to the food stamp program, and gave our farm families the certainty they deserve: Congressman Tom Cotton.

As an Arkansan, I was disappointed by Congressman Cotton’s disinterest in putting Arkansas first, and that first vote against the Farm Bill came even before he launched his Senate campaign not long after being sworn into office. First he argued it was too generous to farmers and voted to cut $13 billion from farm safety net programs. Later he changed his tune to say the bill didn’t do enough.

If Congressman Cotton actually stopped to listen to Arkansans, he would know this kind of thinking leaves farmers without needed risk management tools, which ultimately hurts our state’s economy.

Farm Bureau members remember all too well the generational drought that hit Arkansas in 2012.

Many of our ranchers had to sell livestock because they didn’t have grass or hay. By opposing the 2014 Farm Bill, Congressman Cotton voted against disaster assistance provisions going back to 2011, almost $80 million of which went to Arkansas, provisions

that ensure our producers can manage their biggest risk factor -- the weather.

I think Farm Bureau members know I’ll always be a senator who listens to Arkansans, and I will never back down from a chance to fight for our state’s farmers and ranchers. You’ll find I work with Republicans and Democrats to ensure this new Farm Bill, and all future legislative proposals, is smart and fiscally responsible policy that benefits Arkansas families.

Last thing on this: I know your members already understand the Farm Bill is much more than just commodities. I’ve said all along this legislation should actually be called the “Rural America Bill” because its programs boost our nation’s rural economy as a whole. This bill helps to ensure businesses in rural Arkansas have access to the capital they need to grow and create jobs. It supports the expansion of broadband internet service to ensure that we’re able to compete in the global economy.

The Farm Bill also supports the Market Access Program (MAP), which helps to connect the crops and produce we grow in Arkansas with new markets around the world. I have long been a champion of MAP and other programs that bring Arkansas rice, soybeans and cotton to foreign buyers.

Unfortunately, my opponent has a different view.

He supported eliminating the Market Access Program, the Emerging Markets Program and the Foreign Market Development Program when he voted for an irresponsible budget proposal that also raised the age to 70 for Medicare and Social Security, slashed Pell Grants and eliminated the Essential Air Service that gives many rural communities in Arkansas a lifeline and access to air travel. No other member of congress from Arkansas supported this plan, and unfortunately it’s just another example of Congressman Cotton siding with the Washington special interests now spending millions to feed his ambition for a higher political office, even when it comes at the expense of rural Arkansans and our state’s economy.

TOM COTTON

R, Dardanelle

IMMIGRATION REFORM What do you think are key elements of any immigration reform bill?

We are a nation of immigrants, but we’re also a nation of laws, and we must respect both traditions. Immigration reform thus must begin with securing our borders; only then will Arkansas trust Washington to proceed with other critical elements of immigration reform, which include a workable visa-tracking system; an employment-verification system that is proven,

user-friendly, and cost-effective for the biggest businesses to the smallest ranchers and farmers; and a legal-immigration system focused on our country’s economic needs.

What timeline do you support for passage of an immigration reform bill?

Our immigration system badly needs reform, thus we should move quickly to secure our borders and enforce current law. These steps will give Arkansans the confidence needed to move forward with other elements of immigration reform. Meanwhile, the Obama administration must stop its unlawful, unilateral actions, which only undermine that confidence.

What do you consider essential in a guest worker program?

We must reform our legal-immigration system to focus on our country’s economic needs, whether an improved guest-worker program or high-skilled immigration. And these programs, whether in farming or any other industry, should be driven by the forces of free enterprise, not by Washington bureaucrats. Likewise, they should not hurt wages or employment for current American citizens and lawful permanent residents.

ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT What kind of reforms would you consider in regards to the Endangered Species Act? (Farm Bureau supports H.R.4315, H.R. 4316, H.R. 4317, H.R. 4318, H.R. 4284, H.R. 4319 and S. 2084) I have sponsored the majority of these bills.

Congress must reform the process by which species and critical habitats can be designated. The Obama administration has made it significantly easier to make these designations, which hurts farmers, ranchers, and property-owners. While we all want to protect endangered species, we must not do so in a way that irrevocably harms local economic interests.

Would you support repeal or significant reforms of laws that allow groups to “sue and settle” with the federal government?

Yes. I have already sponsored legislation to stop “sue and settle” abuses. The Obama administration is populated by radical, left-wing environmentalists, many of whom used to work with the groups who file these lawsuits, which exclude local stakeholders from expressing their views. I will work tirelessly to stop this kind of abuse.

CLEAN WATER ACT EPA and the U.S. Corp of Engineers recently released a new proposed rule (Docket ID No: EPA-HQ-OW-2011-0880) that Farm Bureau feels will greatly expand their regulatory authority. What water resources do you feel should be regulated by these agencies? And how can they be restricted to 3

those resources?

Congress failed in its responsibility to define just what “navigable waters” are, thus leaving the door open to federal regulators to seize undue power for themselves. The federal government’s responsibility should stop at the permanent water’s edge, not extend to a temporary alluvial or ditch on a farm.

Congress must pass legislation which clearly defines these boundaries and reign in the regulators.

BIOTECH LABELLING Do you support the labeling of genetically modified foods or products containing genetically modified organisms?

I support consumer-driven efforts to know what’s in the food Arkansans feed their families.

But I do not support additional federal mandates on producers, which needlessly drive up costs for consumers.

Would you support efforts to streamline the process of approving biotech products provided that they have been properly vetted?

Yes. FARM BILL If elected to the U.S. Senate, it is possible you will be in office when the next farm bill is written. What do you think is critical in terms of support for U.S. farmers and ranchers?

The government should not make dramatic, abrupt changes to a program, such as our farm programs, on which major industries have built settled expectations over time. Congress must carefully evaluate these programs to ensure they truly provide a safety net for farmers and use taxpayer dollars prudently.

What reforms would you like to see in the farm bill?

I believe we must separate the food-stamp program, which now accounts for 80% of “farm bill” spending, from farm programs. I know some farmers disagree and fear that farm programs cannot pass without the food-stamp program, but I believe the House of Representatives proved otherwise in 2013. We passed a farm-only bill and a food-stamp reform bill, with work requirements, drug testing, and other needed reforms. While this approach did not become law, the House is the chamber that should be less supportive of rural interests. After all, many House districts contain no farms, while all Senators represent rural areas. Thus, we can pass a similar package of bills through the Senate if we change our senators, which will benefit farmers and taxpayers.

Considering the broad changes in the farm safety net in the 2013 farm bill, will Congress continue to offer farm bills in the future? Should they?

Yes. The new farm bill will expire in 2018, necessitating future legislation. As explained in questions #1-2, I believe we can reform the current approach in a way that benefits farmers and taxpayers, while also helping those in need of food-stamp assistance

U.S. Congressional District 1

RICK CRAWFORD

R, Jonesboro

IMMIGRATION REFORM What do you think are key elements of any immigration reform bill?

I believe the most important aspect of our immigration system that needs to be addressed is our border security. We simply cannot allow our border to go unsecured and for a continued flow of individuals who have a desire to do harm to others in our country. I believe we must also ensure that before additional reforms are enacted, we have a clear understanding of our current laws and determine if a need exists to change those laws, including any sort of amnesty measure. I do not believe we should enact any changes to our immigration system that provides blanket amnesty to those looking to enter our country. Lastly, we need to ensure that any legislation mirrors the needs of those who are involved in this every day along our border and that would be our Customs agents, border patrol agents, and local law enforcement. Our national security is something that we cannot afford to politicize. This situation, I believe, requires lawmakers to fully examine this issue and prioritize our national security over any political ideology.

What timeline do you support for passage of an immigration reform bill?

I believe that comprehensive immigration reform is a very complex issue that shouldn’t be rushed through Congress. New legislation should be worked through slowly, allowing lawmakers and the public enough time to discuss potential changes to our current immigration laws. We should work quickly to secure our southern border and once that occurs we should deliberately work through changes to our immigration system to allow time for the American people to have input and understand the trade-off’s that would occur with any potential change to our immigration system.

What do you consider essential in a guest worker program?

I believe our guest worker program should be simplified and that it should reflect the needs of agproducers who benefit the most from the guest worker program. Under our current administration, 3

the system has been convoluted and bogged down by red tape. To address this problem, I introduced H.R. 707, the STRAW Act, to simplify the current guest worker program and to allow farmers to secure the reliable stream of labor they so critically need.

ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT What kind of reforms would you consider in regards to the Endangered Species Act? (Farm Bureau supports H.R.4315, H.R. 4316, H.R. 4317, H.R. 4318, H.R. 4284, H.R. 4319 and S. 2084) The endangered species act has shifted dangerously in favor of large groups who have every incentive to sue the federal government, and away from a practical application of the law that values actually protecting at-risk species instead of just settling lawsuits in order to preserve budgets. I believe the four ESA Reform bills we will hopefully be considering later this month will go far to bring more transparency and fairness to the process. These include HR 4315, which would require data used by federal agencies for ESA listing decisions to be made publicly available and accessible through the Internet; HR 4316, which would require the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to track, report to Congress, and make available online: (1) funds expended to respond to ESA lawsuits, (2) the number of employees dedicated to litigation, and (3) attorney’s fees awarded in the course of ESA litigation and settlement agreements; HR 4317, which would require the federal government to disclose to affected states all data used prior to any ESA listing decisions and require that the “best available scientific and commercial data” used by the federal government include data provided by affected states, tribes, and local governments; and HR 4318, which would prioritize resources towards species protection by placing reasonable caps on attorney’s fees and making the ESA consistent with another federal law. In addition, I authored a bill, the Common Sense in Species Protection Act, that I believe addresses two glaring problems in the process - HR 4319 - CSISPA would first require (instead of giving the option) the Secretary of the Interior to consider economic impact when including specific areas in a critical habitat designation. Second, CSISPA would require agencies to use the cumulative rather than incremental method for determining economic damage caused by critical habitat designations, for a true and accurate account of the cost of species protection to lives and livelihoods of those impacted.

Would you support repeal or significant reforms of laws that allow groups to “sue and settle” with the federal government?

Yes - HR 4318 is a great step forward and I fully support it.

CLEAN WATER ACT EPA and the U.S. Corp of Engineers recently released a new proposed rule 4

(Docket ID No: EPA-HQ-OW-2011-0880) that Farm Bureau feels will greatly expand their regulatory authority. What water resources do you feel should be regulated by these agencies? And how can they be restricted to those resources?

I believe the only water resources that should be regulated by the EPA and Corps of Engineers is what was contained in the original Clean Water Act legislation. Any further expansion of that regulatory authority should be done by act of Congress so that any ambiguities in terminology or regulatory authority be settled by lawmakers and the legislative process and not by unelected bureaucrats forcing their own version of change through the rule making process. I believe the best way to restrict the EPA and Corps of Engineers to specific resources is to require the enactment of legislation that would explicitly state what resources they are be allowed to regulate.

Absent legislative action, unelected bureaucrats are left to define the parameters as they see fit and in ways that significantly impact ag-producers and the general public as a whole.

BIOTECH LABELLING Do you support the labeling of genetically modified foods or products containing genetically modified organisms?

No. Would you support efforts to streamline the process of approving biotech products provided they have been properly vetted?

Yes. FARM BILL If elected to the U.S. Congress, it is possible you will be in office when the next farm bill is written. What do you think is critical in terms of support for U.S. farmers and ranchers?

The Farm Bill must be reflective of our producers’ risks, whatever those risks might be, and wherever those producers are. Too often Farm Bill legislation attempts a one-size-fits-all approach, but the truth of the matter is that our producers operate in widely varying regions and have different needs. A strong Farm Bill would take in to account the differences found in the types of production agriculture. MidSouth agriculture differs from that of the Midwest to other regions of the country. A strong Farm Bill will continue to have an adequate safety net while protecting producers from excessive market risk. Having an adequate safety net for our ag-producers is critical in every Farm Bill that lawmakers consider enacting.

Without an adequate safety net, we jeopardize our food security thus jeopardizing our national security.

What reforms would you like to see in the farm bill?

I believe we have to have greater producer information protection. I think too often we forget how vulnerable our food supply is to outside attacks.

By keeping producer information as private as possible, we prevent exposure to outside organizations who may want to disrupt our food supply and also from domestic groups who want to inflict as much damage as possible on producers and their way of life that they disagree with. I would also like to see stronger reform measures put in place that relieve producers from the regulatory burdens being imposed on them by the EPA and other federal bureaucracies. Ag-producers have always been the best stewards of our land and of our natural resources. It is in their best interests to take care of what we have and they don’t need any more excessive regulations to ensure that happens.

Considering the broad changes in the farm safety net in the 2013 farm bill, will Congress continue to offer farm bills in the future? Should they?

Yes they should. Farm Bills are critical to ensure we have an adequate safety net for our ag-producers for our domestic food supply as well as the international markets they supply. By having a Farm Bill, we are placing a priority on our ag-producers and ensuring they have the resources necessary to produce the most stable and abundant food supply than anywhere else in the world. While changes to what is included in the Farm Bill will be an ongoing debate, we should always work to enact legislation such as the Farm Bill so that our producers, and those across the globe who have come to rely on our ag products, will have the peace of mind knowing that we place a priority on what they do every day for their fellow Americans and their fellow human beings.

JACKIE MCPHERSON

D, HEBER SPRINGS

IMMIGRATION REFORM What do you think are key elements of any immigration reform bill?

Any immigration bill must ensure our border security and deter illegal immigration while guaranteeing adequate visas for American industries that rely on immigrant labor and protecting employers hiring immigrants in good faith.

What timeline do you support for passage of an immigration reform bill?

Immigration reform is one of our most pressing problems and should be addressed immediately, our representatives fail us every day they refuse to act.

What do you consider essential in a guest worker program?

The most important features of any guest worker program is that it provides the flexibility for farmers to meet constantly changing conditions beyond their control, allows qualified workers to stay in the

country as needed, requires them to return to their home country immediately on the expiration of the visa, and ensures that they can be hired for a fair, competitive wage.

ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT What kind of reforms would you consider in regards to the Endangered Species Act? (Farm Bureau supports H.R.4315, H.R. 4316, H.R. 4317, H.R. 4318, H.R. 4284, H.R. 4319 and S. 2084) Arkansas’s farmers have a unique relationship with and respect for the land they cultivate. The ESA should provide incentives for private land owners and public land users to protect threatened and endangered species instead of imposing arbitrary and burdensome regulations on land owners. The ESA must be amended with a greater respect for private property ownership and the needs of agriculture, development, and recreational land use.

All ESA actions must consider private economic costs, be based on sound science, and be as limited in scope as possible, The burden of proof for all actions should rest with the determining agency, not the land owner.

Would you support repeal or significant reforms of laws that allow groups to “sue and settle” with the federal government?

Yes, FWS must act within the legislative and regulatory process. These “sue and settle” agreements are merely an attempt to circumvent the traditional ESA process and fast-track protections without due consideration for economic harm and private ownership interests.

CLEAN WATER ACT EPA and the U.S. Corp of Engineers recently released a new proposed rule (Docket ID No: EPA-HQ-OW-2011-0880) that Farm Bureau feels will greatly expand their regulatory authority. What water resources do you feel should be regulated by these agencies? And how can they be restricted to those resources?

I would not support the proposed new rule. I would support defining “waters of the United States” as permanent geographic features such as streams, oceans, rivers, and lakes as decided in the 2006 Rapanos v. U.S. Supreme Court decision. Farmers, ranchers, and other land owners need a degree of certainty about which bodies of water fall under these regulations that they do not currently have. Expanding the definition to include non-permanent waters, or small bodies of water unconnected to downstream waters creates unnecessary confusion for land owners.

BIOTECH LABELLING Do you support the labeling of genetically modified foods or products containing genetically modified organisms?

Food safety is of the utmost importance. I fully support our current approach to encourage voluntary labeling of products that may appeal to certain consumers, such as the “organic” certification.

5

However, mandatory labeling of GMOs could create the false impression that certain items are inferior or unsafe so I would not support mandatory labeling for production practices that do not affect the safety or nutrition of a product.

Would you support efforts to streamline the process of approving biotech products provided that they have been properly vetted?

We’ve made tremendous advances in productivity, heartiness, and marketability of our food items through biotechnology. We have to maintain the highest standards for food safety, but also allow safe, high-quality products into the market without undue delays and bureaucratic red-tape.

FARM BILL If elected to the U.S. Senate, it is possible you will be in office when the next farm bill is written. What do you think is critical in terms of support for U.S. farmers and ranchers?

Conditions in farming and ranching change very quickly, especially with advances in technology. My first priority in Congress would be to listen to the needs of Arkansas’s farmers and fight for their priorities.

What reforms would you like to see in the farm bill?

First and foremost, Washington needs to recognize that southern farming and ranching has different needs than other regions of the country.

The most recent farm bill includes some new provisions on crop insurance. I’d like to see how those are implemented and how they’re working for people in real life, not just on paper, before talking about specific changes. But if these crop insurance programs are going to be how we protect our nation’s food supply, we need to make sure that they’re working effectively and affordable to Arkansas’s farmers.

Considering the broad changes in the farm safety net in the 2013 farm bill, will Congress continue to offer farm bills in the future? Should they?

Farmers are the backbone of the first district, and I’ll fight for them in Washington. We absolutely need stability and certainty for our farmers and that means having a farm bill in place

U.S. Congressional District 2

PATRICK HENRY HAYS

D, North Little Rock IMMIGRATION REFORM What do you think are key elements of any immigration reform bill?

We must secure the border, and address our immigration problem in a

comprehensive way.

This is a multifaceted issue, and that’s why I think a comprehensive approach will be needed to address it.

The Senate’s bill (S. 744) is the kind of bill that I would like to see the House pass. The key elements of any reform bill should be securing the border, overhauling the guest worker program so farmers have access to a stable and legal workforce, creating a workable employment verification system, and creating a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.

What timeline do you support for passage of an immigration reform bill?

I believe immigration reform should be one of Congress’ top priorities. If this Congress will not address the issue, I will do everything I can to get the next Congress to do so if I am sent to Washington.

What do you consider essential in a guest worker program?

First and foremost, we have to ensure that our agriculture industry has the labor it needs to function and grow. The H-2A program is not meeting the needs of farmers and agribusiness. I would support an uncapped Agricultural Worker Visa Program (AWP), with the options of “At-Will” Visas or Contract Visas. This framework was set out in S. 744, which passed in the Senate. I would also support an adjustment of status for experienced but unauthorized agricultural workers currently inside the U.S, given that they meet work obligations.

ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT What kind of reforms would you consider in regards to the Endangered Species Act? (Farm Bureau supports H.R.4315, H.R. 4316, H.R. 4317, H.R. 4318, H.R. 4284, H.R. 4319 and S. 2084) I support increased transparency, greater flexibility to the states, restraint in litigation, and more economic analysis before policy is made that may hamper agriculture, development, and business. I also believe that litigation related to these issues simply takes too long in too many cases. I’d support streamlining the process, and finding a faster way to move these cases through court. The time spent waiting on litigation has a negative impact on our economy. I’ve reviewed the legislation the Farm Bureau supports, and would be supportive of it in Congress.

Would you support repeal or significant reforms of laws that allow groups to “sue and settle” with the federal government?

I’m very concerned about this issue, because the use of “sue and settle” has resulted in hundreds of new regulations, with high compliance costs, and really amounts to closed door rulemaking. I would support significant reform. “Sue and settle” has become too prevalent. This doesn’t just effect EPA, but also the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the Department of Agriculture. EPA should be able to provide Congress with information 5

about the notices of intent to sue received by the agency, as well as the petitions for rulemaking served on EPA by private parties. Congress has to reassert its oversight authority, and its authority over the rulemaking process.

CLEAN WATER ACT EPA and the U.S. Corp of Engineers recently released a new proposed rule (Docket ID No: EPA-HQ-OW-2011-0880) that Farm Bureau feels will greatly expand their regulatory authority. What water resources do you feel should be regulated by these agencies? And how can they be restricted to those resources?

I support limiting federal Clean Water Act authority to navigable streams and waterways that have continuous flow. Congress has final authority on rulemaking, and can, through legislation, limit or define policy issues. The EPA proposed rule broadly expands the interpretation of the “waters of the United States.” While the decision to lengthen the time for comment and consideration of the new rule is positive, Congress will likely have to intervene to limit and define the “waters of the United States” referenced in the Clean Water Act. BIOTECH LABELLING Do you support the labeling of genetically modified foods or products containing genetically modified organisms?

I support current FDA labeling policies, and oppose any special labeling for genetically modified organisms.

Would you support efforts to streamline the process of approving biotech products provided that they have been properly vetted?

Yes. Where products have been properly vetted, improving and streamlining the approval process makes sense.

FARM BILL If elected to the U.S. Congress, it is possible you will be in office when the next farm bill is written. What do you think is critical in terms of support for U.S. farmers and ranchers?

I would work for a unified farm bill, that has a meaningful nutrition title, and which addresses the needs of farmers across the country. I believe a robust, and affordable, crop insurance program is critical. Flexibility should also be a priority, and producers should be given a choice of program options and greater flexibility to plant in response to changing markets. Conservation programs should be streamlined and the farm bill should promote innovative rural development. I strongly support continued funding for export market promotion. Individual programs, from the dairy insurance program, to the sugar program, to the livestock program, should meet the changing needs of farmers, and I would consult regularly with the Farm Bureau, at the national, state, 6

and local levels, other agricultural organizations, and with farmers in the Second District for guidance and counsel on how changes could be made in future farm bills to strengthen and grow American agriculture.

What reforms would you like to see in the farm bill?

I do not like the idea of means-testing for farmers, and reducing crop insurance for those with higher-incomes. I’d like to find a more workable solution that helps with the issue of affordability. I have concerns about the conservation compliance policy, and would like to see a roll-back or reform of those provisions that is more workable for farmers.

Considering the broad changes in the farm safety net in the 2013 farm bill, will Congress continue to offer farm bills in the future? Should they?

We have a permanent framework that is solid, and should remain, but I believe Congress should offer farms bills in the future, and I think that they will. Agriculture has a huge impact on our economy and our communities, especially in Arkansas. New technology, including biotechnology, and changing markets will necessitate the need for policies that meet the needs of farmers and agribusiness. The new farm bill does more to promote the future of farming, by offering assistance to beginning farmers and to retiring farmers who pass down their farms. Those kinds of needs will change over time, and will also need to be addressed by future farm bills.

FRENCH HILL

R, Little Rock

IMMIGRATION REFORM What do you think are the key elements of any immigration reform bill?

Our current immigration system is broken. First, we must secure our borders. Long stretches of unprotected borders allow drug cartels and human traffickers to operate unchecked. The American people lack faith in the federal government’s commitment to a secure border.

At the same time, there are common sense reforms and improvements we can make. We must modernize our immigration system so that it makes sense in our modern, globalized world. We need to embrace reforms that prioritize our economic needs, not simply family reunification, when it comes to our allocation of visas.

What timeline do you support for passage of an immigration reform bill?

Any broader discussion about immigration or immigration reform requires a secure border.

What do you consider essential in a guest worker program?

Having helped farmers finance crops for years,

I understand the need for wellcrafted H-2A, H-2B, and other guest worker programs. We need a workable system that meets the needs of our economy and the market. However, we need verification, enforcement, accountability, and oversight, particularly regarding visa overstays. We cannot have any guest worker programs crafted in a way that facilitate illegal immigration.

ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT What kind of reforms would you consider in regards to the Endangered Species Act? (Farm Bureau supports H.R.4315, H.R. 4316, H.R. 4317, H.R. 4318, H.R. 4284, H.R. 4319 and S. 2084) We must take steps to advance ESA transparency and openness in government. The public has a right to fully understand land classification and determination decisions. I need to examine these bills in greater detail. However, there is much room for commonsense improvement.

Would you support repeal or significant reforms of laws that allow groups to “sue and settle” with the federal government?

I have concerns with “sue and settle” techniques used by special interest groups at the expense of the public good. The Endangered Species Act provides clear and fair procedures to determine endangered species or habitats. We must take steps to rein-in ESA abuses.

CLEAN WATER ACT EPA and the U.S. Corp of Engineers recently released a new proposed rule (Docket ID No: EPA-HQ-OW-2011-0880) that Farm Bureau feels will greatly expand their regulatory authority. What water resources do you feel should be regulated by these agencies? And how can they be restricted to those resources?

The proposed rule in question seeks to redefine the water resources the federal government can regulate. Specifically, it removes the word “navigable” from current regulations. This would allow the government to regulate any body of water, no matter how isolated or small. In my view, this is an unprecedented, unacceptable expansion of current federal authority. Instead of burdening our farmers and landowners, the EPA and the U.S. Corp of Engineers should work with local stakeholders to promote safe, clean navigable waterways. We cannot afford to have common sense removed from the federal rule making body. Such a change would produce endless lawsuits bogging down currently appropriate land uses. If implemented, I would support legislative efforts to overturn this rule.

BIOTECH LABELLING Do you support the labeling of genetically modified foods or products containing

genetically modified organisms?

Currently, federal law requires food and product labeling information for safety, nutrition, and proper food handling. The American Medical Association has said there is no scientific evidence to support GMO labeling for health concerns. At the same time, the FDA has developed guidelines for companies to provide additional information about their products, and several have chosen to do so. Customers currently have the option to buy “non-GMO” labeled products.

Would you support efforts to streamline the process of approving biotech products provided that they have been properly vetted?

I oppose unnecessary regulations and bureaucracy, which restrict new products from coming to market. We must streamline our biotech approval process in way that ensures safety, while facilitates innovation.

FARM BILL If elected to the U.S. Congress, it is possible you will be in office when the next farm bill is written. What do you think is critical in terms of support for U.S. farmers and ranchers?

All American businesses and citizens deserve certainty when it comes to federal policy. Our farmers and ranchers are no different. Nearly 25% of Arkansas economy is tied to the agriculture industry.

We need a workable, fair, common sense farm bill that balances the needs of our farmers, ranchers, consumers, and taxpayers.

What reforms would you like to see in the farm bill?

I would like to see a more transparent farm bill.

I would also support separating the food assistance titles from the broader agricultural-related components of the bill. Congress should discuss and debate each issue more thoroughly.

Considering the broad changes in the farm safety net in the 2013 farm bill, will Congress continue to offer farm bills in the future? Should they?

I believe Congress will continue to offer farm bills in the future. The United States is a leading innovator in the agricultural sector. Our agricultural productivity and continued leadership is essential to a hungry world.

Naturally, Congress also has the obligation of balancing the desire of a farm with the need for fiscal restraint.

U.S. Congressional District 4

BRUCE WESTERMAN

R, Hot Springs

IMMIGRATION REFORM What do you think are the key elements of any immigration reform bill?

Establishing and maintaining operational control of 7

our borders is essential, and the first step to any effort to reform the nation’s immigration law. Only until operational control of the border is established and maintained for a sufficient period should any reform effort be undertaken.

What timeline do you support for passage of an immigration reform bill?

Subsequent to establishing and maintaining operational control of the border, Congress should look at any reforms through a careful, step-by-step, process that establishes benchmarks to be met before the next step is taken, encourages lawful immigration, prevents illegal immigration, and does not include amnesty. This method will address the wide variety of immigration issues better than trying to pass a quick, one-size-fits-all piece of legislation.

What do you consider essential in a guest worker program?

Any guest worker program should be marketdriven, truly temporary and protective of hardworking taxpayers. If markets require the use of temporary labor, we should allow businesses to use temporary labor during busy seasons. Any guest worker program should require temporary workers to return to their home countries once their visas expire.

ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT What kind of reforms would you consider in regards to the Endangered Species Act? (Farm Bureau supports H.R.4315, H.R. 4316, H.R. 4317, H.R. 4318, H.R. 4284, H.R. 4319 and S. 2084) I support H.R. 4315, H.R. 4316, and H.R. 4317 due to the increases in public transparency in, and increased congressional oversight of, the Department of the Interior. I support the awarding of litigation costs to prevailing parties called for in H.R. 4318. I support H.R. 4284 for requiring the Secretary of the Interior to notify and work with states regarding designations made under ESA. I proudly support H.R. 4319 authored by Rep. Crawford and joined by the rest of the Arkansas delegation as original co-sponsors.

I support the goals of S. 2084 and, should it not advance out of the Senate by the end of the current Congress, would consider offering similar legislation during the 114th Congress.

Would you support repeal or significant reforms of laws that allow groups to “sue and settle” with the federal government?

I believe the “sue and settle” process to be nothing more than a way for the executive branch agencies to abrogate their responsibilities and negate Congress’ powers of oversight and the purse. By engaging in the “sue and settle” process, executive branch agencies act contrary to the Administrative Procedure Act and allow private groups and friendly executive branch agencies to set national policy. I support consideration and eventual passage of legislation such as H.R. 1493, the Sunshine for Regulatory Decrees and Settlements Act of 2013.

CLEAN WATER ACT EPA and the U.S. Corp of Engineers recently released a new proposed rule (Docket ID No: EPA-HQ-OW-2011-0880) that Farm Bureau feels will greatly expand their regulatory authority. What water resources do you feel should be regulated by these agencies? And how can they be restricted to those resources?

I have serious objections to this proposed rule, as it could let the EPA regulate practically anything that connects to downstream waters. This includes ditches, farm ponds, and potentially low-lying farm property where a puddle could form during a rain. I also have serious objections to how this rule potentially impacts normal farm tasks like planting, plowing, and even building a fence—impacting the profitability of farming operations. This rule could also have negative impacts to many forest management activities that are vital to Arkansas’s economy. Navigable waters (i.e. interstate rivers should be the limit of federal jurisdiction, with smaller waters the jurisdiction of state and local government. I believe Congress should work to clarify the Clean Water Act definition of “navigable waters” in light of the Supreme Court’s Rapanos (2006) and SWANCC (2001) rulings.

BIOTECH LABELING Do you support the labeling of genetically modified foods or products containing genetically modified organisms?

Yes, in a way that removes confusion and uncertainty for the consumer and does not increase production costs by complying with multiple standards.

Would you support efforts to streamline the process of approving biotech products provided that they have been properly vetted?

Farming has long been on the cutting edge of science. I support efforts to streamline the approval process of properly vetted products.

FARM BILL If elected to the U.S. Congress, it is possible you will be in office when the next farm bill is written. What do you think is critical in terms of support for U.S. farmers and ranchers?

What reforms would you like to see in the farm bill?

Unprecedented growth of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) raises several questions and concerns: • Has the U.S. economy performed so poorly under the Obama administration that expansion of SNAP is justified or has the administration used the program to further its agenda of government expansion?

• Is the SNAP program functioning properly as a temporary “supplemental assistance” program or has it become a more permanent “dependence” program 7

that creates an incentive not to work and provide for one’s self and family?

My goal as a U.S. Congressman would be to increase the number of gainfully employed Americans to reduce the need for SNAP and other entitlement programs. It is necessary to make sure SNAP is functioning properly for its intended purpose and that it is not being abused. One way to do this would be to separate SNAP from the Farm Bill and debate the issues separately. Both bills are important enough that they ought to stand on their own merits.

The goal is to reform the SNAP program. If this can be done more effectively with SNAP remaining a component of the Farm Bill, then I am supportive of keeping the two issues together and working to make changes to SNAP. Elimination of non-WTO-compliant Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) requirements in order to protect American meat producers and growers from retaliatory tariffs.

Considering the broad changes in the farm safety net in the 2013 farm bill, will Congress continue to offer farm bills in the future? Should they?

Congress should continue to have a role in this policy and should work more efficiently to pass authorizations in a timely manner so as to ensure certainty with Arkansas’s farmers and ranchers.

JAMES LEE WITT

D, Dardanelle

IMMIGRATION REFORM What do you think are the key elements of any immigration reform bill?

Illegal immigration is a growing problem in Arkansas and across our country. Our current system is broken, and it is time for Congress to act. I support a path to citizenship as long as we protect our borders and encourage lawful behavior.

Undocumented workers must be held accountable, pay taxes and penalties, learn English, and pass a background check.

What timeline do you support for passage of an immigration reform bill?

It is past time for Congress to act on this issue. We must get our priorities straight and put people before politics. I want to go to D.C. to be a problem solver not an obstructionist.

What do you consider essential in a guest worker program?

Any type of guest worker program must be streamlined in order to be effective and efficient. The seasonal needs of agriculture make the timeliness of the workforce extremely critical. Our farmers and ranchers need access to a legal and stable workforce.

Any type of revisions to the current guest worker pro8

gram must provide certainty that they will have access to the workforce they need at a competitive cost.

ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT What kind of reforms would you consider in regards to the Endangered Species Act? (Farm Bureau supports H.R.4315, H.R. 4316, H.R. 4317, H.R. 4318, H.R. 4284, H.R. 4319 and S. 2084) Any type of reform to the Endangered Species Act must start with how the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) performs their economic impact analysis when determining the critical habitat designation for these species. Currently, the USFWS does not perform a comprehensive economic impact analysis. The USFWS must take into account the impact these designations will have on our farms, small businesses, and industries. It is important for us to protect our environment, but I believe agriculture and the environment must coexist. We can do this by using common sense and sound scientific principles.

Would you support repeal or significant reforms of laws that allow groups to “sue and settle” with the federal government?

I would closely review and carefully examine proposed reforms on a case by case basis.

CLEAN WATER ACT EPA and the U.S. Corp of Engineers recently released a new proposed rule (Docket ID No: EPA-HQ-OW-2011-0880) that Farm Bureau feels will greatly expand their regulatory authority. What water resources do you feel should be regulated by these agencies? And how can they be restricted to those resources?

Once again, I believe we must be good stewards of our environment but I am a cattle farmer. I grew up on a farm. I cannot imagine the EPA trying to regulate the ponds and creeks on my farms. We have state agencies in place that have a much greater understanding of the agricultural practices used in our state and these types of regulations need to be left up to them.

BIOTECH LABELLING Do you support the labeling of genetically modified foods or products containing genetically modified organisms?

I believe we have a right to know what is in the food we are eating, but we must ensure requirements are not cost prohibitive for companies or consumers. Any type of labeling must be done with uniform standards.

Would you support efforts to streamline the process of approving biotech products provided that they have been properly vetted?

I support streamlining efforts to process biotech products. We must ensure these products are safe for consumption, but I believe we can do this much more quickly and efficiently. While I served as Director of FEMA, we were very successful at cutting red tape in

order to provide a better service for those affected by disasters. Not only did this speed up the process for providing relief but it also saved taxpayers money.

FARM BILL If elected to the U.S. Congress, it is possible you will be in office when the next farm bill is written. What do you think is critical in terms of support for U.S. farmers and ranchers?

It market changes. This is an issue of “food safety.”

If we do not put measures in place to protect our farmers and ranchers, we will be forced to import our food.

What reforms would you like to see in the farm bill?

With the implementation of the latest farm bill still underway, I believe it is difficult to talk about specific reforms until we see how some of these new programs are going to work. I do believe there are two critical points that each farm bill must have.

First, the farm bill must recognize the differences in regional agriculture. In Arkansas, we raise our chickens, our cows, and our crops differently than other parts of the country. Any future farm bill must take these regional differences into consideration when drafting the legislation.

Second, the farm bill must ensure that crop insurance is effective and affordable. With the ability to irrigate our crops, southern agriculture has not used crop insurance as a viable option for protecting their investments in the past. Changes in the 2013 farm bill are forcing southern farmers to use crop insurance. If this is going to be there preferred method of safeguarding our nation’s food supply, we must ensure it provides adequate protections to all regions of the country.

Considering the broad changes in the farm safety net in the 2013 farm bill, will Congress continue to offer farm bills in the future? Should they?

It is vital Congress continue to offer farm bills in the future and I promise to fight for this issue if elected. Agriculture is our state’s largest industry and we must do everything in our power to contiue providing support to our farmers and ranchers.