BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) – The National Association of State Departments of Agriculture is calling on the federal government to revise new standards for school meals.  North Dakota Agriculture Commissioner Doug Goehring introduced the policy statement that was approved by the group during its annual meeting in Des Moines, Iowa, this week. It says the new standards are well-intentioned but won’t solve the problem of childhood obesity.

The standards approved by the federal Agriculture Department earlier this year set limits on calories and require schools to offer at least one vegetable or fruit per meal. Critics say the lunches are too light for some active teens and leave them hungry.  Goehring says children from low-income families might be affected most by the new standards because school lunches might be the most nutritious meals they get.

Officials with the Union Pacific Railroad are urging hunters to resist the temptation to hunt on railroad property this season. Wildlife will migrate and feed along the edges of freshly harvested fields, making these areas prime hunting spots. With many fields adjacent to Union Pacific tracks, hunters find it very tempting to hunt on or near the tracks.

Robert Morrison, Union Pacific Chief of Police says “Too many people have been injured or killed trespassing on railroad property over the years.” Morrison says a part of the “UP CARES” initiative, they want to remind hunters that “Walking on or near railroad tracks is extremely dangerous because you never know when a train will come along.”

Dale Bray, Union Pacific director of public safety says “It can take a mile or more to stop a train, and, by the time a locomotive engineer sees you on the track, it is too late to stop.” Bray says “Locomotives and rail cars overhang the tracks by at least three feet on either side of the rail. If you are too close to the tracks, you can be hit by the locomotive or a rail car.”

Hunters are not the only ones drawn to railroad tracks – hikers, bikers, fishermen and snowmobilers are, as well. Anyone choosing to walk on or near railroad tracks could be killed or injured by a train, and, people who enter railroad property can be arrested for violating trespassing laws.  They could serve jail time and/or have to pay a fine.

An Iowa State University economist says with the drought pushing up corn and soy beans prices, you can expect to pay more for food at the grocery store. Chad Hart says prices in 2013 could go up about one to one-and-a-half percent more than the normal. “It’s going to be distributed across the products that we buy at the grocery story. We’re likely to see more impact in the meats than we will in say the produce or the grain section of the grocery store,” Hart says. He recommends putting some beef in your freezer now before prices go up. “It’s probably not a bad idea, and if you’re also one that consumes pork, buy some pork here during the fourth quarter. These will be some of the lowest pork prices that we’ll see,” Hart says. Hart says food prices normally go up about two-and-a-half percent each year, so you can tack that additional cost brought on by the drought problems to that increase.

(Radio Iowa)

A deep disagreement over voting and lack of progress on the Farm Bill were the hallmarks of last night’s debate between Republican Congressman Steve King and Christie Vilsack, his Democratic challenger. The two candidates appeared together at a forum in Hampton and King said it’s time to not only require a photo I.D. for voting, but for election officials all over the country to check the voter registration lists for non-citizens. “There’s no reason for anybody to defend anything else because there’s voter fraud that’s determining these elections and it’s got to stop,” King said, getting cheers and whistles from his supporters in the audience.

Vilsack expressed reservations about requiring a photo I.D. “It is restrictive in many cases for people who are elderly,” she said. “There are a lot of situations where people don’t have a picture I.D. and they need to be able to vote.” Vilsack did not directly address King’s comment about non-citizens casting ballots, but she did speak to his assertion there is voter fraud. “I don’t think that there’s any evidence that there is a great deal of voter fraud out there,” Vilsack said, getting moans and groans from some in the audience and applause from others in the audience. “It’s the most important right and responsibility a person has in this country, to be able to vote, and I’ll do everything I can to make sure that people are allowed to do it.” King was given a minute to offer a rebuttal.

“I heard that, ‘We should do all we can to encourage every person to vote.’ I don’t agree. I completely don’t agree. I think they should be citizens of the United States of America in order to cast a ballot,” King said. According to King, voter fraud is “real” and if it’s not addressed, he said it will change the “destiny” of the U.S. “There are people here that might be visiting America, they might be on a green card, they might be here illegally — and there are people out there recruiting them to vote now,” King said. “We’ve got to stop that before we turn this country over to people that are not American citizens.” The subject of the Farm Bill was raised by the debate’s moderator.

Vilsack began: “I think Steve King should have shown more leadership on this and should have pounded on the door of Speaker Boehner…in making sure we have a Farm Bill.” King replied: “I’m not really sure if Mrs. Vilsack wants me to be a leader or a follower. I’ve gotten advice to be both a leader and a follower and it depends on the issue.” Throughout the debate King accused Vilsack of lobbing “baseless charges” his way. He also attacked the way Vilsack’s husband, former Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack, is running the U.S.D.A., twice mentioning a “Meatless Monday” idea unsuccessfully floated by an agency employee. Christie Vilsack did not speak of her husband’s role as U.S. ag secretary during the debate. Vilsack closed the debate by saying she’d be able to hold her own in congress because — as a former 8th grade teacher — she’s “used to dealing with adolescent behavior.”

(Radio Iowa)

Nearly a quarter of Iowa’s corn crop has been harvested and it’s in slightly better condition, according to an update from the U.S. Department of Agriculture.  The USDA report shows 22-percent of Iowa’s corn was harvested by Sunday. That compares to the usual 7-percent for this stage of the season. Farmers are trying to salvage a drought damaged crop before stalks weaken further. The USDA report rates 48-percent of Iowa’s corn in poor to very poor condition. That’s a slight improvement from 52-percent one week ago. Thirty-four-percent of Iowa’s soybeans are in the poor to very poor category, down from 36-percent last week.

(Radio Iowa)

Governor Branstad says the lawsuit filed by meat processor B-P-I will be hard to win, but it’s a legal fight worth waging.  “I know a lawsuit is an expensive proposition, but I hope it does make people think before they just repeat inaccurate smear language,” Branstad says. “There is a responsibility on the part of journalists to be fair and accurate in their presentation of information.”

B-P-I is suing A-B-C and others for repeated use of the term “pink slime” to describe the company’s lean, finely-textured beef. “It’s never easy on a case like that, but I just think when you have somebody that conducts a smear campaign — they know full well there’s no health issues and they purposely use language and I will not use the term because I think it’s inappropriate because it conjures up all kinds of things that are inaccurate,” Branstad says, “and they’re playing on people’s lack of knowledge on food and food processing.”

Branstad says there “ought to be consequences” for broadcasting “inaccurate” information about lean, finely-textured beef. “Now, what’s going to happen in the courts, but I hope it makes other people think about the language they use and that they need to be careful to be honest and accurate with their descriptions and not use charged words and smear language,” Branstad says. An A-B-C vice president has said the lawsuit is “without merit” and said the company will “contest it vigorously.” According to court documents, B-P-I lost 80 percent of its business in a month because of the negative publicity and closed three of its four plants, including one in Waterloo where 220 people were employed.

Iowa’s governor suggests lean, finely-textured beef could make a comeback on the market. “What you do is you separate the fat from the lean and you end up with a leaner product which is really healthier for you than hamburger that’s got more fat in it and then also this puff of ammonia kills e coli and other bacteria, so you protect the safety,” Branstad says, “and the USDA has always said it’s a safe product.” Most legal experts say for B-P-I’s defamation lawsuit to succeed, the company will have to prove the defendants intended to cause harm with their reports.

(Radio Iowa)

A Drake University expert says the billion-dollar lawsuit filed against A-B-C News and others by Beef Products Incorporated over the stories that called its finely textured beef product “pink slime” will break some new ground. Neil Hamilton is the director of the Agricultural Law Center at the Des Moines school.  “You never know how a case might come out, but it’s certainly going to be an uphill battle because there are a number of important First-Amendment issues and other issues as well as issues of interpretation of the South Dakota law they are filing it under. But I’m sure their attorneys believe they have a fighting chance,” Hamilton says.

The lawsuit was filed under a 1994 law that makes it illegal to defame a food product. Hamilton says proving the law was violated poses a challenge. “Whether any of the information was false and also the question of what the defamation was, so there are a number of important issue,” Hamilton explains, “and many of these statutes have ever been interpreted in court.” The lawyer for B-P-I says A-B-C News ran stories over a 30-day period that caused them to eventually have to close three of the plants that make the product, even though it was approved by the F-D-A as safe. Hamilton says proving the stories did the damage is the key. “Many of the news stories had that other side, but of course it came later in the stories and so I think there argument would be that the weight of what the stories were was to build that this was somehow and unsafe product,” Hamilton says.

B-P-I is seeking one-point-two BILLION dollars in the lawsuit. Hamilton says 13 states have this type of food product disparagement law, but there is very little history of the laws being used successfully in the courts to recover damages.

(Radio Iowa)