WASHINGTON - Regulation carries costs for U.S. agriculture, the most serious of which might be "lost opportunity," Mark Scholl said.
"The big one I think we really need to think about when we're looking at regulatory (issues) is lost opportunity," or advancements that otherwise would be made, said Scholl, an Illinois grain farmer and president of the Farm Foundation.
Scholl spoke May 24 in a Washington, D.C., Farm Foundation forum on the future of food and agriculture regulation. Also on the panel were Rebeckah Adcock, senior advisor to U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue and regulatory reform officer of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and Mike Strain, commissioner of the Louisiana Department of Agriculture and Forestry, and president of the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture,
The forum, open to journalists and others online, was organized by the Farm Foundation, a nonprofit group that provides nonpartisan policy and forums related to agriculture.
Reducing regulation, in agriculture and elsewhere, has been a priority for the Trump administration. President Trump signed an executive order April 24 directing the USDA to identify and eliminate potentially unnecessary regulations that "hurt farmers and rural communities."
ADVERTISEMENT
USDA employees realize "there's better ways to do what we're doing, in what we're delivering even in non-ideal budget times," Adock said.
In assessing a regulation, the USDA will ask, "Is it worth it? Do the costs outweigh the benefits," she said. "What are the real costs? What are the real benefits?"
The USDA also will ask, "Is there a better way" of doing something and "Is this the role for the federal government?," she said.
"Those are all questions that, quite frankly, we don't ask all that often, very publicly, very loudly, in Washington," which is something that people outside the nation's capital often express frustration with, she said.
State role
State agriculture agencies play a huge regulatory role, Strain said.
State ag agency officials also are asking, "What can we do better?," he said. "We'll be reexamining the process. What works, what doesn't?"
There's been talk in the Trump administration of making greater use of "cooperative federalism" in which federal, state and local government share responsibility in governance. Strain mentioned cooperative federalism and said it should encourage "robust conversations" on regulation.
ADVERTISEMENT
"This is a great opportunity to move the economy forward, and also to take a hard look at everything we're doing and do it in a better way," he said.
Regulation's cost
Scholl, who has an extensive agribusiness background, said regulation has affected ag in many ways, including pushing up the cost and development time of genetics in ag chemicals.
In 2000, developing and releasing a chemical with "an active ingredient" took an average of $184 million and about nine years. Today, doing so takes $284 million and about 11 years, he said.
"The majority of that (increases) requires from regulatory and environmental constraints that have been put on. I'm not saying they've been wrong, I'm just those are things that added to the cost," Scholl said.
Regulation has reduced innovation and investment in agriculture, too, he said.
"Under stewardship, good thought and communication, let's try to unfetter this thing," he said.
