|
LOBBYING REPORT |
Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (Section 5) - All Filers Are Required to Complete This Page
2. Address
Address1 | 7373 West Saginaw Highway |
Address2 | P.O. Box 30960 |
City | Lansing |
State | MI |
Zip Code | 48909 |
Country | USA |
3. Principal place of business (if different than line 2)
City |
|
State |
|
Zip Code |
|
Country |
|
|
5. Senate ID# 40017133-48
|
||||||||
|
6. House ID# 398870000
|
TYPE OF REPORT | 8. Year | 2017 |
Q1 (1/1 - 3/31) | Q2 (4/1 - 6/30) | Q3 (7/1 - 9/30) | Q4 (10/1 - 12/31) |
9. Check if this filing amends a previously filed version of this report
10. Check if this is a Termination Report | Termination Date |
|
11. No Lobbying Issue Activity |
INCOME OR EXPENSES - YOU MUST complete either Line 12 or Line 13 | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
12. Lobbying | 13. Organizations | ||||||||
INCOME relating to lobbying activities for this reporting period was: | EXPENSE relating to lobbying activities for this reporting period were: | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
Provide a good faith estimate, rounded to the nearest $10,000, of all lobbying related income for the client (including all payments to the registrant by any other entity for lobbying activities on behalf of the client). | 14. REPORTING Check box to indicate expense accounting method. See instructions for description of options. | ||||||||
Method A.
Reporting amounts using LDA definitions only
Method B. Reporting amounts under section 6033(b)(8) of the Internal Revenue Code Method C. Reporting amounts under section 162(e) of the Internal Revenue Code |
Signature | Digitally Signed By: John Kran |
Date | 1/22/2018 3:42:17 PM |
LOBBYING ACTIVITY. Select as many codes as necessary to reflect the general issue areas in which the registrant engaged in lobbying on behalf of the client during the reporting period. Using a separate page for each code, provide information as requested. Add additional page(s) as needed.
15. General issue area code IMM
16. Specific lobbying issues
Michigan Farm Bureau (MFB) advocated for legislation that addresses agriculture's long and short-term labor needs. Immigration reform would include an adjustment of status for those currently undocumented that are working in agriculture, allowing them to work in agriculture, and secondly creases a usable guest worker program run by the USDA that allows for at-will or contract workers for agriculture. MFB opposes E-Verify legislation unless it moves in tandem with legislation addressing agriculture's labor needs. MFB also advocated for changes in the H-2A guest worker visa program that would make the system more efficient and streamlined and guaranteed workers arrived on time to perform job duties like planting or harvesting crops. MFB is encouraged by The Agricultural Guestworker (AG) Act, introduced by Rep. Bob Goodlatte but has not taken a position. The bill would create a new H-2C guest worker visa for agriculture.
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None
U.S. SENATE, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Agriculture - Dept of (USDA)
18. Name of each individual who acted as a lobbyist in this issue area
First Name | Last Name | Suffix | Covered Official Position (if applicable) | New |
John |
Kran |
|
|
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above Check if None
LOBBYING ACTIVITY. Select as many codes as necessary to reflect the general issue areas in which the registrant engaged in lobbying on behalf of the client during the reporting period. Using a separate page for each code, provide information as requested. Add additional page(s) as needed.
15. General issue area code TRD
16. Specific lobbying issues
Michigan Farm Bureau supports the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Our position is that overall, NAFTA has been very good for Michigan agriculture and we should work to protect the positive gains made in this agreement. If there is an opportunity to modernize or improve some areas for agriculture, we also support that - including Sanitary/Phytosanitary requirements, biotechnology, and additional protections for fruit and vegetable growers. MFB also supports the further opening of trade opportunities with Cuba.
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None
U.S. SENATE, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, U.S. Trade Representative (USTR)
18. Name of each individual who acted as a lobbyist in this issue area
First Name | Last Name | Suffix | Covered Official Position (if applicable) | New |
John |
Kran |
|
|
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above Check if None
LOBBYING ACTIVITY. Select as many codes as necessary to reflect the general issue areas in which the registrant engaged in lobbying on behalf of the client during the reporting period. Using a separate page for each code, provide information as requested. Add additional page(s) as needed.
15. General issue area code TAX
16. Specific lobbying issues
Michigan Farm Bureau has communicated with the U.S. House and Senate on the the following principles in regards to tax reform discussion: 1.) Lower effective tax rates; 2.) Repeal estate taxes and keep stepped-up basis; 3.) Reduce capital gains taxes; 4.) Provide immediate expensing of business inputs; 5.) Keep the deduction for interest expenses; 6.) Continue cash method of accounting; 7.) Continue like-kind exchanges. MFB would like to see these items included in future tax policy and supports these items. MFB supported passage of H.R. 1 the Tax Cuts and Jobs act that passed in both the House and Senate. MFB also advocated for extending expired tax provisions including the biodiesel tax credit and the Health Insurance Tax.
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None
U.S. SENATE, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
18. Name of each individual who acted as a lobbyist in this issue area
First Name | Last Name | Suffix | Covered Official Position (if applicable) | New |
John |
Kran |
|
|
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above Check if None
LOBBYING ACTIVITY. Select as many codes as necessary to reflect the general issue areas in which the registrant engaged in lobbying on behalf of the client during the reporting period. Using a separate page for each code, provide information as requested. Add additional page(s) as needed.
15. General issue area code HOU
16. Specific lobbying issues
Michigan Farm Bureau is working with members of the House and Senate on seeking a legislative change that would allow H-2A via guest workers to have the option of staying in on farm housing financed under Section 514 federal housing program administered by USDA. Currently these ag works are not eligible. MFB believes farmers have exhausted options to employ domestic workers that would utilize the housing and would like to use the empty houses to be made available to H-2A workers.
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None
U.S. SENATE, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Agriculture - Dept of (USDA)
18. Name of each individual who acted as a lobbyist in this issue area
First Name | Last Name | Suffix | Covered Official Position (if applicable) | New |
John |
Kran |
|
|
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above Check if None
LOBBYING ACTIVITY. Select as many codes as necessary to reflect the general issue areas in which the registrant engaged in lobbying on behalf of the client during the reporting period. Using a separate page for each code, provide information as requested. Add additional page(s) as needed.
15. General issue area code AGR
16. Specific lobbying issues
Michigan Farm Bureau communicated to both the U.S. House and Senate on the need to complete a 2018 Farm Bill before the current bill expires in October 2018. We support the following principles as a guide in writing the next Farm Bill: 1.) Protecting current Farm Bill program spending; 2.) Maintaining a unified farm bill which includes nutrition programs and farm programs together; 3.) Risk management tools which include both federal crop insurance and commodity programs as top funding priorities; 4.) Continuation of Price Loss Coverage (PLC) and Agricultural Risk Coverage (ARC) with changes to ARC-County to make it more effective and fairer to all farmers; 5.) Developing farm savings accounts as a risk management option for all producers; 6.) Changes to the Dairy Margin Protection Program (MPP) to provide producers more flexibility and better coverage; 7.) Maintaining funding for federal conservation programs which maintain environmental benefits; 8.) Maintain adequate funding for the specialty crop industry with emphasis on fundamental research, marketing and promotions, and pest management programs.
Michigan Farm Bureau has been working with USDA and House and Senate members on addressing an ongoing concern with farmers enrolled in Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) in Lenawee County, Michigan. Audit/reviews were done by the Farm Service Agency (FSA) of existing contracts and there have been considerable delays in payments for 2016 and 2017 to farmers. Farm Bureau is advocating for payments to contract holders, improved communication by USDA, and an end to the uncertainty. MFB also supports H.R. 3518, the Great Lakes Agricultural Stewardship Act. The bill would require the Department of Agriculture (USDA) to establish a Great Lakes basin initiative for agricultural nonpoint source pollution prevention. The bill would provide incentives for voluntary conservation initiatives on farms.
MFB also supported S. 1966, the Regional Conservation Partnership Program Improvement Act. The bill would help streamline the program, reduce unnecessary red tape and ensure the maximum amount of resources go to on the ground conservation practices on farms. We support broader partnerships to help farmers implement conservation in accordance with NRCS practice standards as well as new approaches guided by sound science. RCPP has done a lot of great work in Michigan to support both soil and water quality and a strong agricultural industry.
MFB also worked closely with members of the House and Senate and USDA on improving delivery of conservation services in Michigan after a USDA audit of the Conservation Reserve Program. MFB continues to advocate for increased customer service, the inclusion of ditches and drains as an allowed filter strip practice - something allowed in Michigan for decades but recently called into question.
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None
U.S. SENATE, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Agriculture - Dept of (USDA)
18. Name of each individual who acted as a lobbyist in this issue area
First Name | Last Name | Suffix | Covered Official Position (if applicable) | New |
John |
Kran |
|
|
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above Check if None
LOBBYING ACTIVITY. Select as many codes as necessary to reflect the general issue areas in which the registrant engaged in lobbying on behalf of the client during the reporting period. Using a separate page for each code, provide information as requested. Add additional page(s) as needed.
15. General issue area code CAW
16. Specific lobbying issues
Michigan Farm Bureau communicated with the U.S. House on support of H. R. 26 Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act, H.R. 5 the Regulatory Accountability Act, and H.R. 1004, the Regulatory Integrity Act. MFB has also communicated with the U.S. Senate on the need to take up these bills and concepts in 2017. Specifically, we are supportive of S. 951, the Regulatory Accountability Act, introduced by Sens. Rob Portman and Heidi Heitkamp. Farm Bureau members support these efforts because of EPAs recent rulemaking actions, such as the Waters of the US Rule, Clean Air Rule, Worker Protection Standards and others have highlighted the problems not just with the Agency, but with the regulatory process itself. Everything from how scientific review is incorporated, to the requirements for cost-benefit analysis, to the deference given to agencies in federal courts and beyond, need to be examined to ensure that the regulatory process is fair, transparent, and aligns with Congressional intent based on the laws they pass.
Michigan Farm Bureau has continued to advocate for the repeal of the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule or Clean Water Rule and commented on this when recently proposed by EPA and Army Corps of Engineers of the intention to withdraw and replace the rule. MFB policy strongly supports repealing the rule.
Farm Bureau also supported an amendment to FY 2018 Interior-EPA Appropriations in the House (H.R. 3354) offered by Reps. Billy Long (R-MO) and Jim Costa (D-CA), would reaffirm congressional intent that two laws enacted to manage the after-effects of industrial toxic waste spills were not intended to govern routine, low-level emissions from livestock on farms. Specifically, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) was enacted to provide for cleanup of major industrial toxic waste dumps and spills, like oil spills and chemical tank explosions. The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) was enacted to ensure that parties who emit hazardous chemicals submit reports to their local emergency responders to allow for more effective planning for chemical emergencies. Farm Bureau does not believe farms need to report air emissions under interpretation of this law and have communicated this to Congress and the Administration.
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None
U.S. SENATE, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
18. Name of each individual who acted as a lobbyist in this issue area
First Name | Last Name | Suffix | Covered Official Position (if applicable) | New |
John |
Kran |
|
|
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above Check if None
Information Update Page - Complete ONLY where registration information has changed.
20. Client new address
Address |
|
||||||
City |
|
State |
|
Zip Code |
|
Country |
|
21. Client new principal place of business (if different than line 20)
City |
|
State |
|
Zip Code |
|
Country |
|
22. New General description of client’s business or activities
LOBBYIST UPDATE
23. Name of each previously reported individual who is no longer expected to act as a lobbyist for the client
|
|
||||||||
1 |
|
3 |
|
||||||
2 |
|
4 |
|
ISSUE UPDATE
24. General lobbying issue that no longer pertains
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AFFILIATED ORGANIZATIONS
25. Add the following affiliated organization(s)
Internet Address:
Name | Address |
Principal Place of Business (city and state or country) |
||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
|
26. Name of each previously reported organization that is no longer affiliated with the registrant or client
1 | 2 | 3 |
FOREIGN ENTITIES
27. Add the following foreign entities:
Name | Address |
Principal place of business (city and state or country) |
Amount of contribution for lobbying activities | Ownership percentage in client | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
|
% |
28. Name of each previously reported foreign entity that no longer owns, or controls, or is affiliated with the registrant, client or affiliated organization
1 | 3 | 5 |
2 | 4 | 6 |