Health Tax Would HIT
Small Business Employees
The Health Insurance Tax (HIT) will hurt small business employees the hardest, according to congressional testimony offered today, May 9, by New York Farm Bureau President and dairy owner Dean Norton. Testifying before the House Small Business Subcommittee on Health and Technology, Norton, also a board member of the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF), encouraged members to cosponsor H.R. 763, which would repeal the HIT.
The HIT, which was passed as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, will be levied on a health insurance company’s net premiums.
“Because of escalating health insurance premiums, we’ve had to significantly change the cost structure from covering about 90% of the insurance cost to approximately 50% through a high-deductible plan,” Norton said. “Unfortunately, the people who are really hurt by this change are the employees. They now have to contribute a larger portion of the expense when they seek medical attention.”
Most farmers and other small businesses do not self-insure because they do not have a large enough pool of employees, said Norton. Instead, small employers purchase health insurance on the fully insured market. Because the smallest employers almost never self-insure, they will end up bearing the brunt of the HIT.
According to the Kaiser Family Foundation’s 2012 Survey of Employer Health Benefits, only 15% of the smallest employers self-insure. Further, health insurance costs for small businesses have increased 103% since 2000. According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, the HIT will further increase family premiums by $400, or 2.5%, in the year 2016, making it even harder for farmers to purchase coverage for themselves, their families and their employees.
H.R. 763, introduced by Reps. Charles Boustany (R-La.) and Jim Matheson (D-Utah), would repeal the annual fee on health insurance providers, preventing premium increases for individuals and small businesses in the fully insured health insurance marketplace.
Georgia Bull Evaluation Program 2013-2014 Tests Announced
The entry deadline for the 44th Calhoun Bull Evaluation, featuring bulls born Sept. 1-Nov. 30, 2012, is June 3. Bulls will be accepted at the station July 1-2 and maintained for a warm-up period until they are weighed on test July 22-23. Interim weights will be collected Aug. 20, Sept. 17 and Oct. 15, with off-test weights taken as an average of weights Nov. 11 and 12. The bulls will be scanned by ultrasound in October and will undergo breeding soundness exams in November.
The Calhoun Beef Cattle Seminar will be Dec. 5, the evening prior to the sale. The 44th Annual Calhoun Bull Evaluation Sale is scheduled to begin at 12:30 p.m. Dec. 6.
The entry deadline for the 56th Tifton Bull Evaluation, featuring bulls born Dec. 1, 2012-Feb. 28, 2013, is Sept. 2. The bulls will be accepted at the station Sept. 30-Oct. 1 and maintained for a warm-up period until they are weighed on test Oct. 21-22. Interim weights will be collected Nov. 19, Dec. 17 and Jan. 14, 2014, with off-test weights taken as an average of weights Feb. 10 and 11. The bulls will be scanned by ultrasound in January and will undergo breeding soundness exams in February.
The Tifton Beef Cattle Short Course will be March 4, the day prior to the 56th Annual Tifton Bull Evaluation Sale, which is scheduled to begin at 12:30 p.m. March 5.
Bulls must be registered, free of any known genetic defects and structurally sound. They must have a weight per day of age of 2.5 lb. upon arrival, must have an official 205-day weight and a birth weight. The bulls will be fed a ration adequate to foster good growth and development.
For more information, contact Ronnie Silcox, extension animal scientist at the University of Georgia, at 706-542-9102 or rsilcox@uga.edu or Patsie Cannon at 229-386-3683 or ptcannon@uga.edu. Information is available on the test website at www.caes.uga.edu/commodities/animals/beef/stations/index.html.
For additional information on current bull tests, visit the listing of Central Bull Test Programs in the Angus Journal Virtual Library, available here.
Georgia Angus Association Planning Fall Event
The Georgia Angus Association Membership & Recruitment Committee is putting together a fall seminar scheluded to be Sept. 14, 2013 in Tifton, Ga. The one-day seminar will target beef producers in Georgia with an emphasis on attracting commercial producers in the southern region of the state.
The tentative schedule includes keynote speaker Gary Fike, beef cattle specialist for Certified Angus Beef LLC (CAB), and Rodney Schoenbine of Zoetis to discuss genomic-enhanced expected progeny differences (GE-EPDs) powered by HD 50K and the impact on Angus Production. Lunch will be provided.
CSU-Led Study Assesses Impact of
Pending U.S. Supreme Court Case on Gene Patents
As the U.S. Supreme Court moves closer to a decision this summer in the landmark gene patent case against Myriad Genetics, a study, led by Colorado State University (CSU), is shedding light on what may be at stake.
Gregory Graff, associate professor of agricultural and resource economics at CSU, and a team of researchers at University of Minnesota and Pennsylvania State University analyzed U.S. patents to find that the case may not have the dramatic impact that some in the biotechnology industry fear it will. However, they caution, the Supreme Court’s decision may have unanticipated impacts on patents that claim sequences from species other than just humans.
Graff’s paper,“Not Quite a Myriad of Gene Patents: Assessing the potential impact of the U.S. Supreme Court on the changing landscape of U.S. patents that claim nucleic acids,” will be published in Nature Biotechnology this month.
The plaintiffs in the Myriad Genetics case are seeking resolution as to whether an isolated DNA molecule with a natural genetic sequence from the human genome should be considered eligible to be patented. According to recent commentary, there is good reason to expect the Supreme Court may decide to ban gene patents.
As the case was winding its way up through the courts, Graff and his team of collaborators began a comprehensive, in-depth review of how many and what sorts of U.S. patents make the kind of claims to DNA that were being challenged in the Myriad Genetics case.
The study analyzes the different types of claims that constitute a “gene patent” and then determines the number and nature of U.S. patents that could be invalidated by a Supreme Court ban.
“Our intention was to give some sort of measure to the potential legal and commercial implications of what is squaring up to become a landmark patent case, one of the most significant Supreme Court cases in the biological sciences for decades,” said Graff.
This is the first study of several to draw upon a new and massive worldwide compilation of patents related to genetics and genomics, put together by Graff and collaborators at the International Science and Technology Practice and Policy (InSTePP) Center at the University of Minnesota over the past three years with funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
What distinguishes the study from previous research is the way in which patents were counted and “read” by computer algorithms. Graff worked with other collaborators at Penn State to train computer programs to pick out just those patents with precisely the same kind of legal language being challenged in the case. The research also goes beyond just considering human genes to analyze genes patented from all types of organisms, leading the study to raise questions about the full implications of the case.
The results of the study show that there are fewer U.S. “gene” patents — particularly the kinds that are being challenged in the Myriad case — than prior analyses have suggested.
The study also shows that, despite the focus on the patenting of human genes for use in medical diagnostics, the majority of gene patents actually claim genes from other organisms, ranging from mice to corn to microbes.
“This finding poses a serious question that the U.S. Supreme Court will need to resolve because the Myriad case is, supposedly, only looking at whether human genes are patentable,” said Graff. “According to our results, there appears to be no simple way, given the logic of genetics or of patent law, to make a clean distinction between the small number of patents that claim human sequences and the larger number of patents that claim sequences from other species.”
The third key finding is that for the past decade, applicants appear to have been moving away from making the kinds of patent claims that are at greatest legal risk in the Myriad case. The researchers suggest that other policy measures and lower-court decisions in other cases may have already been effective in nudging patent practice away from those types of gene patents that the plaintiffs in the Myriad case and the American public find most objectionable.
To read the full paper, visit http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v31/n5/full/nbt.2568.html.
Worldwatch Institute Study Shows Increased
Energy Efficiency in Ag Sector, But Researchers
Say Ag and Livestock Remain Major Sources
of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Global greenhouse gas emissions from the ag sector totaled 4.69 billion tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalent in 2010 (the most recent year for which data are available), an increase of 13% over 1990 emissions. By comparison, global CO2 emissions from transport totaled 6.76 billion tons, and emissions from electricity and heat production reached 12.48 billion tons, according to Worldwatch Institute’s Vital Signs Online service (www.worldwatch.org).
Growth in ag production between 1990 and 2010 outpaced growth in emissions by a factor of 1.6, demonstrating increased energy efficiency in the ag sector.
The three most common gases emitted in agriculture are nitrous oxide, CO2 and methane. The World Watch Institute says methane accounts for around 50% of total ag emissions; nitrous oxide, a byproduct generated by the microbial breakdown of nitrogen in soils and manures, 36%; and CO2 released during aerobic decomposition of organic matter, 14%.
Emissions from enteric fermentation (digestion of organic materials by livestock) rose by 7.6% worldwide between 1990 and 2010, but regional variation was high. At 51.4% and 28.1%, respectively, Africa and Asia saw their emissions increase, while emissions in Europe and Oceania fell by 48.1% and 16.1%. Europe’s significant reduction in emissions parallels the decline in its beef production between 1990 and 2010, but it may also reflect increased use of grains and oils in cattle feed instead of grasses.
“Adding oils or oilseeds to feed can help with digestion and reduce methane emissions. But a shift from a grass-based to a grain- and oilseeds-based diet often accompanies a shift from pastures to concentrated feedlots, which has a range of negative consequences such as water pollution and high fossil fuel consumption,” said Laura Reynolds, Worldwatch Food and Agriculture researcher and the study’s author. “Aside from reducing livestock populations, there is no other clear pathway to climate-friendly meat production from livestock.”
According to the Institute, the data indicate the huge share of global emissions that is attributable to livestock production. While reducing livestock populations is one way to reduce global emissions from agriculture, farmers and landowners have numerous other opportunities for mitigation, many of which offer environmental and even economic co-benefits. For instance, growing trees and woody perennials on land can sequester carbon while simultaneously helping to restore soils, reduce water contamination, and provide beneficial wildlife habitat. Reducing soil tillage can rebuild soils while lowering greenhouse gas emissions. Some practices can even result in increased income for farmers, such as “cap-and-trade” programs that allow farmers to monetize certain sequestration practices and sell them, while government programs like the Conservation Reserve Program pay farmers to set aside some of their land for long-term restoration.
Editor’s Note: The articles used within this site represent a mixture of copyrights. If you would like to reprint or repost an article, you must first request permission of Angus Productions Inc. (API) by contacting the editor at 816-383-5200; 3201 Frederick Ave., Saint Joseph, MO 64506. API claims copyright to this web site as presented. We welcome educational venues and cattlemen to link to this site as a service to their audience.