Trump Still Mum on Pick for Ag Secretary
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Jan. 4, 2017 Volume 13, Number 1 Trump still mum on pick for Ag Secretary Donald Trump takes office in just over two weeks and we still don’t know who his agriculture secretary is going to be. Last week, it appeared that Trump planned to select a Hispanic for the post, either former Texas Rep. Henry Bonilla or former Texas A&M University President Elsa Murano. Trump interviewed and had his photo taken with both. But on Monday, reports confirmed by Agri-Pulse had a new leader for the position, former Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue, whom Trump interviewed in November. Then on Tuesday, the search process took another twist: CNN reported that still another leader had emerged, former California Lt. Gov. Abel Maldanado, who also interviewed last week with Trump. The CNN report couldn’t be confirmed by Agri-Pulse. The delay would appear to mean that USDA is likely to be without a Senate-confirmed secretary when Trump takes office Jan. 20. But who knows how this process really works? Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack was sworn in Jan. 21, 2009, after being announced the previous Dec. 17, more than a month earlier. The Senate Agriculture Committee held Vilsack’s confirmation hearing on Jan. 14, 2009. Sonny Perdue Perdue, 70, served two terms as Georgia governor, from 2003 to 2011. Although he has a doctorate in veterinary medicine, Perdue spent most of his career in business, including agribusiness and transportation in rural Houston County. The president of the American Farm Bureau Federation, Zippy Duvall, was president of the Georgia Farm Bureau when Perdue was governor and tells Agri-Pulse that he “understands agriculture and its importance to our country and its citizens.” Duvall, who traveled on several trade missions with Perdue, said he “always had an open door to farmers.” The shift in focus toward Perdue took some observers in agriculture by surprise since it appeared that Trump had decided to use the USDA post to diversify his cabinet by picking a Hispanic. The cabinet so far is dominated by older white men, and Veterans Affairs is the only other seat yet to be filled other than agriculture. www.Agri-Pulse.com 1 Lighthizer nomination confirms trade enforcement focus Trump filled the last major trade position in his administration on Tuesday by announcing that trade lawyer Robert Lighthizer would become U.S. Trade Representative. Lighthizer, who served in USTR during the Reagan administration, is known for pursuing trade actions against China on behalf of U.S. companies and has served on Trump’s USTR transition team. The nomination fits with Trump’s promise to get tough with China on trade. Bill Brock, who was U.S. trade representative from 1981 to 1985, says Lighthizer’s philosophy is in line with Trump’s. Lighthizer became deputy USTR shortly before Brock left. “Most of his work in the trade field has been more on the industrial side and more on the protectionist side. In that sense, he clearly would have been chosen to reflect the president-elect’s philosophy and his campaign commitments,” said Brock. On the other hand, Brock says the nomination of someone with Lighthizer’s credentials suggests that Trump may not be downgrading USTR to the extent it has appeared he might be doing. The transition team has said that Trump’s nominee for the Commerce Department, Wilbur Ross, would take the lead on trade policy, and Trump is also forming a National Trade Council in the White House run by China hawk Peter Navarro. “Knowing Lighthizer, and knowing the respect the Trump team obviously has for him, I would hope that they are going to go to the more traditional pattern” Robert Lighthizer where USTR is the lead agency on trade policy, Brock said. Some trade critics are pleased with the choice of Lighthizer. Lori Wallach, director of Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch, said he has “quite a different perspective” on trade policy than GOP congressional leaders. He “is very knowledgeable about both technical trade policy and the ways of Washington, but what sets him aside among high-level Republican trade experts is that for decades his views have been shaped by the pragmatic outcomes of trade agreements and policies rather than fealty to any particular ideology or theory,” she said. The National Milk Producers Federation and U.S. Dairy Export Council said in a joint statement that Lighthizer’s experience in trade enforcement would “serve him well in forging a path forward on trade policy that will benefit this country.” The statement went on, “A focus on preserving and growing what is working well, while cracking down further on what is not, will help to expand global markets for U.S. dairy farmers and the companies that turn their milk into nutritious dairy products shipped all over the world.” According to Lighthizer’s bio, while at USTR he negotiated about two dozen bilateral agreements on products ranging from steel to grain. WOTUS, Clean Power Plan on chopping block for EPA The top priorities for the man expected to head the Environmental Protection Agency in the new administration will include getting rid of the “waters of the U.S.” rule (aka WOTUS) and the Clean Power Plan (CPP). But neither can be accomplished by the snapping of Scott Pruitt’s fingers, or the stroke of Donald Trump’s presidential pen. www.Agri-Pulse.com 2 The goals of Pruitt, Trump’s choice for EPA chief, are not difficult to predict. As attorney general of Oklahoma, he has filed lawsuits challenging WOTUS and the CPP. WOTUS has been a target for farmers, ranchers, energy companies and developers since it was announced in 2015. They argue that EPA, which developed the rule with the Army Corps of Engineers but also ignored critical comments by the Corps late in the rulemaking process, vastly overstepped its legal authority. Pruitt says that WOTUS tries to exercise jurisdiction over non- navigable streams and dry creek beds with no connection to navigable waters, as required by the Clean Water Act. Environmental groups argue otherwise. They note that the Clean Water Act itself defines navigable waters as “waters of the U.S.,” and contend EPA has reasonably defined “waters” to include small streams and tributaries with a “significant nexus” to navigable waters. Before Pruitt gets a chance to tackle the definition of “waters” in the law, however, he will have to work with the Justice Department to determine a legal strategy. That’s because the rule is the subject of litigation, with more Scott Pruitt than half the states – and numerous trade associations, such as the American Farm Bureau Federation – challenging the agency. The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati has stayed implementation of the rule. Parties may submit briefs through March, with oral arguments to follow. But the new administration can put a halt to that. Tim Bishop, a lawyer with Mayer Brown in Chicago who is representing AFBF and a host of other farm groups, says it’s likely that EPA and the Corps will ask the court to hold the matter “in abeyance” while the Trump administration decides what course to take. “Then, once the agency people are in place, they can make a decision to reconsider the rule,” Bishop said in an email. “Reconsideration, the next step, could result in withdrawal of the rule, or withdrawal and replacement with another rule, either of which require notice-and-comment rulemaking.” He noted that “the abeyance/announce reconsideration sequence is just what the Obama administration did” with the ozone rule approved by the EPA during the George W. Bush administration. There’s another piece of the puzzle, Bishop noted: The Supreme Court is considering a petition filed by the National Association of Manufacturers – which he represents – questioning the appeals court’s jurisdiction over the matter. The proper place to litigate the matter is in federal district court, not the appellate court, NAM argues. The Supreme Court is scheduled to consider the petition at a Jan. 6 conference. If it decides to review the matter, “then that would surely trigger a stay of the (6th Circuit) litigation separate from any issue of abeyance,” Bishop said. Jon Devine, senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council’s water program, said that the new administration will encounter “rough sledding” if it wants to repeal WOTUS, “because the rule’s protections are popular, rely on an extensive scientific record, and easily fit within the Clean Water Act.” www.Agri-Pulse.com 3 “Second, though we’re not going to speculate about what the new administration might try to do in court, we’d note that NRDC (the Natural Resources Defense Council) and many of our partners are full parties to the litigation, and can fight for these public health and environmental safeguards even if the government seeks to retreat from a full defense of the rule,” Devine told Agri-Pulse in an email. WOTUS, of course, isn’t likely to be the only big issue targeted by Pruitt. The Clean Power Plan also will be on the chopping block. Similar to the WOTUS rule, the CPP has been stayed by the courts, in its case by the Supreme Court. But a major difference is that the CPP, which is designed to reduce carbon pollution from power plants, has been partially implemented. (A report from the Carbon Tax Center says that the electricity sector is already four-fifths of the way toward reaching the plan’s 2030 carbon reduction goal.) In addition, arguments have been held on the CPP before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, which could decide to uphold the rule.