close
close

Nebraska, Iowa attorneys general join 11-state push for EPA rules on agricultural chemicals • Nebraska Examiner

Posted on by darion

OMAHA — Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers and Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird joined two farmers and state agriculture officials Wednesday in marking the boundary of fertile soil.

Two farming states are among 11 that have called on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to end inconsistent labeling of agricultural chemicals.

The attorneys general of Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Carolina and South Dakota have asked the Environmental Protection Agency to issue new labeling regulations.

Hilgers and Bird said their states typically push the federal government in the opposite direction, against national regulation. But this time, farm states are more wary of California’s regulation.

California’s Labeling Ruling

Golden State has pushed to label the herbicide glyphosate as a carcinogen, meaning a chemical that may cause cancer. Glyphosate is commonly known by the trade name Roundup, a weed killer.

Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird (left) talks about how long her family and other farmers have been safely using glyphosate. (Aaron Sanderford/Nebraska Examiner)

California officials say the decision is based on science. They and others point to a 2015 decision by the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer that labeled glyphosate a probable cause of cancer in humans.

States that oppose labeling the chemical as a carcinogen, including Nebraska and Iowa, say that’s not true. They point to older, longer EPA studies that find glyphosate safe for agricultural use as long as people follow use instructions.

“We know the labeling, it’s a nationwide market for this particular product,” Hilgers said. “EPA has been given the authority to actually help regulate labeling in this context.”

The goal of agency-state collaboration, he said, is to avoid the costs associated with meeting competing labeling requirements in multiple states, the associated logistical challenges and potential litigation.

Glyphosate Concerns

Some scientific studies have shown that glyphosate contributes to cancer when people are exposed to too much of it or when they use it incorrectly.

A tractor sprays a field. (Getty Images)

Bayer, which bought Roundup from Monsanto, removed glyphosate from the Roundup spray people use in their homes in 2023 after lawsuits were filed. Some farmers said they didn’t want to lose the ability to use the product on their fields.

A University of Washington review of research on the chemical found that the risks are real, and another study it cited Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Traces of the chemical were detected in the urine of 80% of 2,310 people included in the national study.

Four Nebraskas farmers sued Monsanto in 2016 claiming that its use was the cause of their non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. They claimed that the product was mislabeled and should have included warnings.

Farmers need reliable weed control

Glyphosate advocates say it is cheaper and more effective at killing weeds than other products, citing EPA findings that the chemical is safe to use when instructions are followed.

Bird, who said she still lives on her family farm, said agriculture faces enough challenges without having to worry about whether one state might ban something that farmers in other states rely on to control weeds.

Kevin Ross, a farmer from Underwood, Iowa, and a former president of the National Corn Growers Association, said there is no easy replacement for glyphosate for killing weeds. (Aaron Sanderford/Nebraska Examiner)

She said her family and Iowa farmers have been using glyphosate for decades without any problems. Bird said if they have to resort to different methods to control weeds, it would increase farming and food costs.

“It says something when farmers need a lawyer to represent them in their fight against this legislation so they can continue farming, and I’m very happy to do that,” she said.

Asked why companies that make glyphosate and other agricultural chemicals can’t just print California-specific labels and sell their products elsewhere, Hilgers said laws in Nebraska and other states prevent misleading and inaccurate labeling.

Bird and Hilgers wondered what would happen if other states wanted to label products they disagreed with. Bird said it was a question of why one state should dictate to another.

“There’s no way a state like California should tell a farmer in Nebraska or Iowa how to farm,” she said. “That’s none of their business and none of their place when it comes to the law.”

Hilgers added that farmers may also have to worry about the cost of potential lawsuits if they use a product labeled as a carcinogen, whether that label is scientifically supported or not.

Agricultural prospects

Sherry Vinton, director of the Nebraska Department of Agriculture, said farmers have no control over the prices of produce and livestock in the marketplace, but they do try to control input costs.

“We do not need to be forced to inflate the prices of our products through unnecessary government regulation,” she said of the California labeling decision, which was stayed by a court injunction.

Nebraska Department of Agriculture Director Sherry Vinton talks about the importance of glyphosate to farmers. At right, Mark McHargue of the Nebraska Farm Bureau. (Aaron Sanderford/Nebraska Examiner)

Kevin Ross, a farmer from Underwood, Iowa, and former president of the National Corn Growers Association, said farmers need the EPA to establish nationwide regulations that everyone must follow.

He said glyphosate is one of the most cost-effective tools he has for controlling weeds. Other options require more expensive chemicals that don’t work as well and can be more damaging, Ross said.

The competition is real

Mark McHargue, president of the Nebraska Farm Bureau and a corn and soybean farmer in Merrick County, said there are a limited number of tools farmers can use to grow food.

He added that U.S. farmers often compete with growers from Argentina and other countries where glyphosate is used with fewer restrictions.

McHargue said farmers aren’t asking to put people at risk. They’re asking for consistent, science-based rules that are set nationally.

“There’s a growing trend as new herbicides, chemicals and animal production methods are developed and farmers are starting to use those tools,” he said. “A movement of some people, maybe not based on science, saying, you know, ‘I don’t like this.’”

Hilgers and Bird said their job is to protect farmers and ranchers from that uncertainty. Hilgers said farm states want to encourage the EPA to do the right thing and use the authority Congress has approved.

If that doesn’t happen, Hilgers said, states are ready to consider other options, such as: address this issue in the Farm Act to file lawsuits. He said glyphosate is that important.

“There is no substitute for it,” Hilgers said. “We don’t have a substitute that is as effective and as cheap as there is.”

GET MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX