As a nation, we honor TV dinners every March, catfish every June and ice cream every July. Yet the firefighters, police officers and emergency medical personnel who work to protect property, uphold the law and save lives have no such national day of appreciation. The First Response Coalition (FRC – www.firstresponsecoalition.org) believes our first responders deserve better.

The contributions that our nation’s 1.1 million firefighters, 670,000 police officers and 891,000 Emergency Medical Technicians (EMTs) make in our communities are familiar to us all.  From recent tornadoes in Florida to blizzards in the heartland, wildfires in the west to flooding in the northeast, our first responders are right there with us, sharing in our tragedy even as they risk their lives to protect us.

In doing so, thousands of first responders have made the ultimate sacrifice. Over 100 firefighters are killed in the line of duty every year. A law enforcement officer is killed somewhere in America every 53 hours. And though many might not think a career in the emergency medical services (EMS) is dangerous, EMS workers have an occupational fatality rate that is comparable with that of firefighters and police officers.  These figures alone justify a national day of appreciation.

Yet to recognize our first responders only for their sacrifices would be to ignore the contributions that they continue to make in communities throughout America.  In addition to battling fires, firefighters perform important public education duties, like teaching our children how to be “fire safe.” Police officers don’t simply arrest criminals – they actively prevent crime and make our neighborhoods safer and more livable. And if we or our loved ones experience a medical emergency, EMTs are there to provide life-saving care.

Throughout the country, first responders of all stripes have earned the praise of local citizens and policymakers. Communities often recognize the contributions made by their local first responders by declaring a “first responder day.” Even a few states, like Kentucky, have passed resolutions acknowledging and celebrating first responders’ contributions.

Don’t we as a nation owe these brave men and women the recognition and appreciation they deserve? A number of first responder groups think so.  Southeast Louisiana Search & Rescue, which coordinated rescue efforts in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, says “Our police officers, firefighters, and emergency medical workers play a critical role in keeping us all safe.  Our nation’s first responders are very deserving of such an honor.”  The National Black Police Association, a nationwide organization of African American Police Associations, has called this important initiative “long overdue.”

Congressional support for the FRC’s initiative is growing, as well.  Maine Senator Susan Collins, ranking member on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, has publicly endorsed the effort.  And California Congresswoman Jane Harman has commended the FRC “for its efforts to honor [first responders] with a national day of recognition,” but cautioned that “Congress must also do much more to provide the support and equipment they so urgently need.”

Representative Harman is right – Congress must do much more to support our first responders, and designating a national day in their honor is the right place to start.  This simple, yet powerful, gesture, when coupled with efforts to provide first responders with the resources they need to safely and effectively protect our communities, is the best way for Congress to honor first responders for their contributions, sacrifices and dedication to public service.

Thousands of people have already shown their support by signing the FRC’s online petition, but it will take several thousand more signatures to convince Congress to act.  By signing the petition to make September 22 nd “National First Responder Appreciation Day,” citizens can let their leaders in Washington know that if catfish deserve a national day of recognition, then surely those who risk their lives to keep us safe deserve at least the same.

The National Grange joined more than 200 consumer and farm groups to support implementation of the country-of-origin (COOL) labeling by September 2007. The coalition recently wrote to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, Minority Leader John Boehner, House Agriculture Committee chairman Collin Peterson, and House Agriculture Committee Ranking Member Robert Goodlatte urging them to change the date of implementing mandatory COOL for beef, pork, lamb, produce and peanuts. Even though the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 included a COOL provision, previous Congresses have delayed its implementation by restricting USDA funds.

Opponents of mandatory COOL are trying to convince Congress that a change in statute is needed even though COOL has only been implemented on farm-raised and wild-caught seafood. The Coalition disagrees and believes USDA should utilize the experience gained from seafood labeling to implement COOL for other commodities. Consumer surveys demonstrate overwhelming support for mandatory COOL. A recent survey found that 82% of Americans believed food should be labeled for its country of origin.

The letter ended by stating, “The time has come for Congress to end the prohibition on implementation funds for USDA and require the department to immediately prepare a common-sense rule for implementation of mandatory COOL; the regulation does not need to be burdensome or expensive.”

By the year 2025, America’s farms, ranches and forests could provide 25 percent of the total energy consumed in the United States, while continuing to produce safe, abundant and affordable food, feed and fiber. To obtain this lofty goal, a 25x’25 Action Plan was written by the 28-member 25x’25 National Steering Committee in consultation with more than 400 25x’25 Alliance partners. The Coalition included agricultural forestry, business, labor, environmental, and civic organizations working together to advance renewable energy solutions from our nation’s farms, forests, ranches, and other working lands. National Grange was a part of this process.

On the legislative front, bipartisan leaders in the Senate and House have reintroduced concurrent resolutions in the 110th Congress that would establish 25x’25 as a national goal. The House Resolution (H. Con. Res. 25) was introduced with 25 original co-sponsors and the Senate version (S. Con. Res. 3) was introduced with 22 co-sponsors. More than 400 organizations, 23 current and former governors and more than 100 members of Congress have endorsed 25x’25.

Studies have found that reaching the 25x’25 goal would have extremely favorable impacts on rural America and the nation as a whole. Rural communities will benefit from value-added jobs to support distributed energy production platforms. Production of renewable energy will stimulate local ownership and investments and that will produce much-needed tax revenue to finance schools, roads and basic health, safety and support services provided by state and local government. The projected annual impacts on the nation from a 25x’25 energy future would be in excess of $700 billion in economic activity and 5.1 million jobs by 2025, with most of that occurring in rural areas.

The National Grange believes that to achieve a 25x’25 energy future, six key goals must be met. First, energy efficiency improvements must be the option of first choice in all energy decisions. Second, we must dramatically increase the production of renewable energy. A third key area is the delivery of renewable energy to markets. Fourth, a renewable energy market must be built by increasing consumer demand for bio-fuels and renewable electricity. Fifth, steps must be taken to conserve, protect and enhance natural resources by maintaining or improving soil, water and air quality. Finally, a significant private and public investment in renewable energy must be made to enable achievement of the 25x’25 goal.

The National Grange recently endorsed Federal Communications Commission (FCC) steps to facilitate open competition in America’s video franchise markets. The Grange has long supported federal regulations that make it easier for rural areas to have universal access to competitive and affordable telecommunications services. National Grange President William A. Steel expressed appreciation to the FCC for its efforts, and congratulated Chairman Kevin J. Martin for his leadership on this issue. He said that the new FCC regulations are “bold, necessary and beneficial to the interests of the nation’s rural consumers.”

The FCC’s action provides long-sought reform for outdated video franchise regulations; ensuring consumers freedom from cable monopolies and access to program choice, lower rates and better technology . The Commission closely followed recommendations filed by the National Grange in drafting these regulations. They include recommendations to specifically assist smaller rural jurisdictions that currently lack video franchises to begin issuing video franchises for the first time.

The National Grange pledged to work with the Commission and Congress on the important issues of video competition, as well as cable and broadband deployment in America’s rural areas. The National Grange believes it is only through progressive and innovative policies, like those put forth by these FCC regulations, that every American will receive accessible and affordable video and broadband service, regardless of their geographic location.

Recently, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) proposed a budget allowing America's biggest commercial airlines to avoid paying billions of dollars in user fees and instead force small and independent businesses and pilots across rural America to foot the bill. For decades, community airports and general aviation has been a lifeline for small towns and communities throughout our nation. These community airports and small general aviation businesses are critical to our security, our mobility during national emergencies, and to our local rural economies.

General aviation often provides the fastest transportation option to emergency medical facilities in rural areas.   It is responsible for our forest fire-fighting capabilities, farm area pesticide control, traffic enforcement on rural highways, wilderness search and rescue, just-in-time package delivery and many more uses critical to maintaining a healthy rural and small town economy. Additionally, "crop-dusters" are a critical part of maintaining a safe, high quality and low cost food supply.   The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that aerial application is responsible for protection of $13.5 billion in food and fiber grown in the U.S.

The FAA budget proposal would impose a new scheme of "user fees" that would decimate rural general aviation businesses. It amounts to a tax hike into the billions by nearly quadrupling the fuel tax on general aviation from about 19 cents a gallon to 70 cents a gallon, thus shifting financial burdens away from major airlines and squarely upon the backs of small rural general aviation businesses. The budget proposal also significantly cuts every single FAA program directed at protecting air service for rural communities.   It cuts funding for the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) by $765 to $950 million less than budgeted in previous years.

National Grange believes Congress should support rural communities and small towns by ensuring their continued access to general aviation and the host of economic benefits it provides. The bill put forth by the FAA and the big airlines will isolate our farming communities and cause severe economic harm by unfairly imposing new fees and taxes upon small rural businesses and general aviation.  We are urging Congress to vote in favor of amendments to the FAA’s proposed budget that are more equitable for small and independent businesses and pilots across rural America.

Connecticut has a goal of protecting 130,000 acres of prime farmland throughout the state.  The Department of Agriculture has preserved 31,275 acres so far and is averaging 773 new acres each year.  At this rate the State will not achieve its goal until the next century.  The problem is they are irretrievably losing 7,000 to 9,000 acres or approximately 12 percent of their farmland to development every year.  This is the highest rate of loss of any state in the United States.    

The bottom line is money.  The Connecticut Department of Agriculture is currently negotiating for the purchase of development rights on 32 farms and has a backlog of applications where they have not started negotiations.  Public Act 05-228, now known as the Community Investment Act, provides some funding, but most of the funds must still come from the sale of the State’s general obligation bonds, the government equivalent of IOU’s.  The General Assembly has authorized bond funds to purchase development rights easements, but the State Bond Commission must approve the sale of the bonds before the money actually exists.   

The Connecticut Farmland Trust and several land trusts are doing what they can to preserve farmland.  These trusts may apply for limited state and federal grants, but they must raise most of the funds to purchase easements and all of their operating costs on their own.  Most experts now agree that all of Connecticut’s prime farmland will either be preserved through development rights easements or permanently lost to development within the next fifteen to twenty years.   

The Nature Conservancy and the Rhode Island Policy Council have identified an area along the Rhode Island - Connecticut border where there is a substantial amount of open land that could be preserved in both states extending from the Massachusetts state line to Long Island Sound.  Some of this area is prime farmland and some is more suitable for forest and open space land.  It is generally considered to be the last remaining large tract of rural land between Portland, Maine and Washington, D.C.  The small towns in this area are preparing themselves for the growth that will inevitably come, but they want to retain as much of their local character as possible.  The Nature Conservancy and the Rhode Island Economic Policy Council have designated this area as the Borderlands Project and made several proposals to accommodate growth while retaining open areas and local character.  One of these is the transfer of development rights.     

Connecticut Rep. Diana Urban (R-43rd District) said at a recent hearing on the transfer of development rights proposal that enabling legislation would be necessary before towns in Connecticut could initiate such programs.  She indicated she may file such a bill in the 2007 General Assembly. For more information on the Borderlands Project, visit their website at www.borderlands.org.

Maine State Grange testified recently at a public hearing on LD 185 “An Act to prohibit certain uses of Monosodium Glutamate” conducted by the Joint Standing Committee on Agriculture. The bill was introduced for the Maine State Grange by Rep. Jim Annis, who is also a Grange member. Monosodium Glutamate has been used in food for many years. It became widely used in America as a flavor enhancer after the Second World War having been discovered in Japan in 1907. It occurs naturally in many foods, but is bound to protein causing slow release, which is generally not a problem. Unfortunately, some people are severely allergic to MSG. MSG-sensitive people do not react to protein (which contains bound glutamic acid) or any of the minute amounts of free glutamic acid that might be found in unadulterated, unfermented, food.