If climate change legislation were to become law in the United States, our farmers and ranchers would be put at a competitive disadvantage in international markets with countries that do not have similar carbon emission restrictions that the so called “cap-and-trade program” would bring.



If climate change legislation were to become law in the United States, our farmers and ranchers would be put at a competitive disadvantage in international markets with countries that do not have similar carbon emission restrictions that the so called “cap-and-trade program” would bring.
Countries that do not have the onerous can-and-trade regulations would not suffer from the added production costs that will burden America’s farmers and ranchers under a U.S. cap-and-trade program. 
In fact, the House-passed climate change bill would actually increase total greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture worldwide because countries with less efficient agricultural operations would have to fill the void of food production.
The countries that could compensate for lost U.S. markets or food production, such as Brazil, Russia, India, China and Argentina, would release more greenhouse gases per unit of food production that would U.S. farmers.  Due to more food being produced by less-efficient agricultural operations would have to fill the void of food production.
The United States can’t go it alone in greenhouse gas reductions. 
It is wrong and unfair to put the undue burden of “cap-and-trade” on America’s farmers and ranchers who are the most productive in the world.
Steve Bunch, President
Camden County Farm Bureau Board