By MIKE DEERING
Washington D.C. Correspondent

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Senate failed to pass a resolution (S.J. Res 26) to prevent the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from over-regulating U.S. agriculture, said American Farm Bureau Federation President Bob Stallman.

The resolution, offered by Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), would have prevented the EPA from regulating greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act (CAA). The resolution failed on June 10 by a 47-53 vote.

“The American Farm Bureau is disappointed that the Senate failed to halt the Environmental Protection Agency’s regulation of greenhouse gases (GHG) by failing to approve S.J. Res. 26. This was one of the most important votes in the Senate this year affecting U.S. agriculture,” said Stallman.

“Additional EPA regulation for farmers will likely mean higher food costs for consumers because of higher input and energy costs to grow our food and result in negative economic impacts on the agriculture sector.”

With President Barack Obama’s climate change legislation struggling for support in the Senate, U.S. agriculture groups saw the vote as a way to avoid Congressional debate on cap-and-trade and other similar proposals.

The Murkowski resolution garnered support from all Republican senators. Democrats supporting the resolution included Senate Agriculture Committee Chair Blanche Lincoln (Ark.); Ben Nelson (Neb.); Mary Landrieu (La.); Mark Pryor (Ark.); Evan Bayh (Ind.); and Jay Rockefeller (W. Va.).

According to Colin Woodall, vice president of government affairs for the National Cattlemen’s Beef Assoc., the Senate voted to allow the EPA to unilaterally regulate GHGs under the CAA, and not wait for the complex issue of climate change to be handled through the proper channels of “thoughtful” Congressional debate.

“As EPA moves forward with its efforts to regulate GHGs under the CAA, we’ll see significant negative economic impacts not only on agriculture, but on the entire U.S. economy,” said Woodall. “Title V operating permits alone would cost farmers more than $866 million, in addition to increased costs for feed, fuel and other inputs necessary for running agriculture operations. These increased costs will be a direct result of GHG regulations on the energy and other economic sectors.”

In addition to supporting S.J. Res. 26 and similar resolutions introduced in the House by Reps. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) and Joe Barton (R-Texas), the Coalition for Responsible Regulation, has taken legal action to prevent EPA from moving forward on GHG regulation.