TYLER—Since before he became Agriculture Commissioner and continuing all the way to his inauguration, Todd Staples was very vocal about food safety and protecting Texas from agroterrorism. However, since taking office, Staples’ rhetoric hasn’t come close to matching his actions. He has done essentially nothing to combat agroterrorism or promote food safety at the Texas Department of Agriculture.

In Staples’ inaugural address upon taking office in 2007, he listed “food safety and security” as among his top priorities. As a State Senator, Staples delivered a major address in which he discussed agroterrorism, noting that the state was a “soft target” for agroterrorists.

“Minutes after he put his hand on the Bible and took the oath of office, he said food safety was a top priority for him. I’d like to know, if food safety was a top priority for Todd Staples, how badly his lesser priorities have faired under his reign,” said Hank Gilbert, the Texas Democratic Party’s nominee for Agriculture Commissioner.

“He said in 2004 that Texas was a soft target for agroterrorists, but to date he’s done nothing about it. He said food safety was a top priority but his agency has expended relatively little time, effort, and money to make our food supply more safe,” Gilbert said. “His reign as Commissioner has been nothing but a long line of broken promises to the people of Texas. It is, in fact, the only consistent thing about his tenure,” Gilbert said.

Gilbert pointed out that, while Staples’ likes to talk about what he’s done for food safety, the hard reality is much different.

As recently as this past April, Gilbert said that Staples wrote on his official TDA blog that he was taking credit for establishing food safety as one of “only four founding priorities” under the federal Specialty Crop Block Grant administered by TDA.

“That’s the funniest thing I’ve ever heard, because right in black and white in the USDA manual for these grants, it says that states are encouraged to develop certain projects pertaining to the specific areas and, lo and behold, food safety is right there,” Gilbert said. “He didn’t even come up with that on his own. He plagiarized it from a manual created by someone in the Obama Administration he claims to hate. In East Texas, we call that kind of thing a textbook example of hypocrisy,” he continued.

Gilbert also questioned why, if food safety was so important to Staples, of the 18 projects TDA selected for the Specialty Crop Block Grant awards in 2009, only three impacted food safety while seven focused on marketing and eight were to “influence industry development.”

“How is food safety your top priority if less than 20 percent of the grants you award—in a program you tout as being so key to a food safety initiative—have to do with food safety,” Gilbert said. “It simply numbs the mind,” he continued.

As for agroterrorism, Gilbert said he challenged TDA to point to any major initiative undertaken during Staples’ tenure as Commissioner designed to combat agroterrorism. “I don’t see any TDA inspectors at the Port of Houston, and I doubt many make it down to the Mexican border to look at commodities coming from Mexico, Central, and South America because they don’t even have enough inspectors in the agency to even keep gas pumps properly inspected,” Gilbert said.

“He’s blustered and deceived Texans in a vain attempt to make himself look good for the last four years. Now, all of the sudden, with food recalls in the news and people concerned about the safety of their food, he’s nowhere to be found. Texans realize all he’s done these last four years is hand out novelty checks and told Texans to go eat out more, because he damned sure hasn’t been on the forefront of food safety issues,” Gilbert said.

“He’s just the biggest empty pair of khaki pants in all of state government, and Texans should be scared for the safety for themselves and their families because Todd Staples is the absentee landlord of the Texas Department of Agriculture. He may be showing up at work, but he’s not doing anything for Texans,” Gilbert continued.

“No wonder his own employees call him ‘Tater Salad.’ He’s done about as much for food safety in Texas as a bowl of potato salad left out in 100 degree heat surrounded by horse flies at an August picnic in Llano,” Gilbert concluded.

FACT SHEET

Agrowhozawhatzit? Food Safety? Nah, Just Handin’ Out Big Checks.

FACT: Staples takes credit for making food safety a key part of Texas’ Specialty Crop Block Grant awards. [Staples’ Official TDA Blog, April 10, 2010. LINK]

EXCERPT: Here at the Texas Department of Agriculture, we continue to find new and better ways to protect consumers. For instance, we have invested more than $340,000 into projects that assist producers in adopting and implementing good agricultural practices. The funds specifically pay for the education of producers, audits on their farms and costs associated with implementing good agricultural practices in their operations. This funding resulted from actions I took in 2007 to establish food safety as one of only four funding priorities under the federal Specialty Crop Block Grant TDA administers.

FACT: Food safety was already built in to the modeling criteria for Specialty Crop Block Grant awards. [Specialty Crop Block Grant Program – Farm Bill

(SCBGP-FB) guidance manual. USDA. Page 3-4. [LINK]

EXCERPT: AMS encourages states to develop projects solely to enhance the competitiveness of specialty crops pertaining to the following issues affecting the specialty crop industry: increasing child and adult nutrition knowledge and consumption of specialty crops; participation of industry representatives at meetings of international standard setting bodies in which the US government participates; improving efficiency and reducing costs of distribution systems; assisting all entities in the specialty crop distribution chain in developing “Good Agricultural Practices”, “Good Handling Practices”, “Good Manufacturing Practices”, and in cost-share arrangements for funding audits of such systems for small farmers, packers and processors; investing in specialty crop research, including organic research to focus on conservation and environmental outcomes; enhancing food safety; developing new and improved seed varieties and specialty crops; pest and disease control; and sustainability.

FACT: In the 2010 TDA guidelines for the same block grants, the words “Food” and “Safety” appear only once together. [LINK]

FACT: In Staples 2007 Inaugural Address, he listed Food Safety as one of his top priorities. [Palestine Herald Press, January 5, 2007. LINK]

FACT: As a State Senator, Staples was a strong proponent of protecting Texas Agriculture from agroterrorism. [Todd Staples’ speech to State of The Agriculture Industry Meeting, 2004. Records of Senator Todd Staples, Texas State Library and Archives, 2007/130-13.

EXAMPLE: [From Staples’ address to the State of the Ag Industry Meeting, 2004] “An attack on agriculture would threaten our physical and economic health and have significant psychological impact….While agencies like TDA, Animal Health, and the service agencies at A&M are working, we need more preventative and proactive initiatives….Texas takes seriously its charge to protect agriculture, which may be viewed as a soft target because of the lengthy international border, the high volume of agricultural products entering the state through its sea ports; and the diversity of the state’s agricultural crops and products.”

Groupo Bimbo, PepsiCo and McDonald's are some of the national brands benefiting from Texas taxpayer dollars in Todd Staples new advertising push with Texas Monthly

TYLER-Hank Gilbert, the Texas Democratic Party’s nominee for Texas Agriculture Commissioner, on Monday questioned why Texas Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples was awarding more than $50,000 for a four-to-five page advertising spread and online banner ads to Texas Monthly magazine during tough economic times when agriculture producers are suffering and the state is facing an $18 billion shortfall.

“This is a prime example that illustrates the misplaced priorities of Todd Staples’ reign as Agriculture Commissioner. Not only is the state facing an $18 billion shortfall, but agricultural producers across the state are suffering in these tough economic times,” Gilbert said.

The ads, for Go Texan programs and the Go Texan Restaurant Round-Up, will run in the October issue of Texas Monthly. Web advertisements associated with the recently awarded bid will run in September and October according to bid documents from the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts.

“I want Texas agricultural producers to gain more and better marketshare for their products as much as the next person. However, the Go Texan program has become a diluted brand.  Somewhere between retirement communities and rural communities and restaurants, the program seems to have lost sight of its mission-which was to promote the use and purchase of Texas agricultural products to help small and midsize agricultural producers,” Gilbert said.

Gilbert also said far too much is being spent on expensive marketing projects like the Texas Monthly advertisement spread and not enough time, effort, or funds are being spent actually connecting producers to a market for their products. Gilbert also said the Go Texan Restaurant program is misleading to consumers and Texas producers.

“Restaurants interested in joining the program only have to list five products made, grown, or ‘value added’ in Texas they regularly purchase-and pay a fee-to become part of the program. A restaurant that buys meats from Tyson, Frito Lay Chips, Mrs. Baird’s Bread, Pace Picante Sauce, and a bottle of Dripping Springs Vodka on whatever the department defines as a ‘regular basis,’ would qualify,” Gilbert said.

“With the exception of the Vodka, every one of those brands with manufacturing plants in Texas is or is part of a major American or Mexican multi-national company and produces a product in Texas in such a way that it qualifies under the ‘value added’ aspect of the Go Texan Restaurant Program,” Gilbert said.

Gilbert noted that the mission of Go Texan programs should be to help small and medium-sized businesses, farmers, and ranchers earn more and employ more Texans by creating greater in-state and out-of-state markets for Texas products.

“Groupo Bimbo and PepsiCo don’t need help from TDA to gain a greater marketshare for their products; they have billions of dollars to spend on advertising,” Gilbert said. “This program should be working to help Main Street businesses and local ag producers employ more people and turn a bigger profit. Helping Wall Street companies and traders on the Bolsa Mexicans de Valores and corporate agribusiness is not what Go Texan was intended for,” Gilbert said.

“We know–and Republicans like to remind us–that small businesses are the growth sector when it comes to adding jobs to our economy. Yet, we have Todd Staples creating more profit for McDonald’s and PepsiCo instead of standing up for small business,” he concluded.

Gilbert noted that a number of national chain restaurants-including McDonald’s-are listed as Go Texan Restaurants by the Texas Department of Agriculture. “This would be wonderful if those locations were buying a large portion of everything they use from small and midsize producers right here in Texas, but who knows how much or how many Texas products they really use,” Gilbert said.

“Staples has expanded a program developed by his Republican predecessors into a PR machine for himself and the Texas Department of Agriculture without really doing anything to monitor how much Texas produce these establishments use or to monitor if they are even really using the products they claim to use,” Gilbert said.

“Why, when we’re facing an $18 billion shortfall, is TDA spending more than $50,000 on advertising with Texas Monthly to promote restaurants like McDonald’s which-for all consumers know-are simply able to claim they use Texas products because they buy something from a multi-national like Groupo Bimbo that just happens to be made in Texas,” Gilbert questioned.

Gilbert said more efforts should be focused on actually connecting agricultural producers to restaurants and manufacturers. He said that, instead of a $50,000 glossy magazine spread, TDA should spend more time and money actually making farmer-to-producer connections. “This is more than $50,000 that could be better spent,” Gilbert said.

Click here for a copy of the supporting documents obtained from the Texas State Library and Archives

TYLER—When given the opportunity to comment by the Texas Department of Transportation on a major transportation strategic plan that was heavily slanted toward toll roads, then-Senator Todd Staples passed up the opportunity to say anything about them or how strongly they were emphasized in the plan.

The new revelation, found in documents from the Texas State Library and Archives, calls into question Staples’ newfound distaste for toll roads and his disingenuous work as a supposed champion for eminent domain reform.

“The words ‘toll,’ ‘toll road,’ or some variation thereof, are mentioned more than half a dozen times in a three page strategic plan proposal. I can’t believe that escaped his notice,” said Hank Gilbert, the Texas Democratic Party’s nominee for Texas Agriculture Commissioner. “In his response, he had absolutely nothing to say about toll roads or the eminent domain land grab that was the Trans-Texas Corridor,” Gilbert continued.

The Texas Mobility Fund Proposed Strategic Plan on which Staples’ comment was requested by TxDOT in the summer of 2004 included as a guiding principal that “toll roads are the fastest way to accelerate needed projects and stretch limited transportation dollars,” and “when feasible, every effort will be made to leverage the fund with toll projects.”

“Once again, we scratch the surface and expose the truth about Todd Staples’ record. He claims now to be a champion of eminent domain protection, yet as a State Senator, he couldn’t be bothered to comment at all on the fact that a major transportation plan was going to make as its number one priority toll roads—including Trans-Texas Corridor toll road projects which would have eaten up hundreds of thousands of acres of Texas farmland and condemned it using eminent domain,” Gilbert said.

“The most shocking omission is any protection for the taxpayers of this state who stand to lose tens of billions on these projects. This is what Staples missed, as I and many others realized early on. This is an inexcusable lapse in judgment that, unfortunately, is not an isolated event. Even today, rather than address issues, he spends his time slinging mud and lies at me. Voters won’t be fooled by Toll Road Todd this time around,” Gilbert continued.

DSHS Documents Highlight Gaps In Food Safety System In Texas

Click here to download the supporting documents released by DSHS.

TYLER—Several recently released state documents highlight alarming gaps in Texas’ food safety system and highlight the need for food safety reforms recently proposed by Hank Gilbert, the Texas Democratic Party’s nominee for Agriculture Commissioner, as part of his plan to restructure the Texas Department of Agriculture.

According to the documents released to the Gilbert campaign by the Texas Department of State Health Services in response to a public information request, numerous gaps exist in the food safety system as food makes its way from farms to consumers’ dinner tables and lunchboxes.

In one document, a briefing paper prepared to address food safety gaps following two nationwide salmonella outbreaks in 2008 and 2009 involving Texas food manufacturing or distribution entities, DSHS contends that the outbreaks have “brought to light a number of gaps in the food safety system in this state.”

Among gaps along the “farm to fork” continuum identified by DSHS include:

• Many food manufacturers unlicensed by DSHS who deliberately or accidentally fail to obtain a license are licensed by other state agencies including the Texas Department of Agriculture, the Texas Secretary of State, or the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts.

• Distributors of fresh, uncut produce are exempt from DSHS licensing requirements and FDA standards.

• Businesses that repackage but do not process fresh, uncut produce are exempt from DSHS licensing requirements and FDA standards.

• With the exception of milk, seafood, and meat, no state regulation exists relating to the transport of food products.

• Food manufacturers and distributors aren’t required to test their products for pathogens causing human disease (excluding some exceptions such as milk, meat, and bottled water).

• Food manufacturers who voluntarily test for disease-causing pathogens aren’t required to report positive test results to the state.

Additional documents released by the Department of State Health Services relating to salmonella tainted peanuts processed at the Plainview, Texas facility of Peanut Corporation of America—one of two PCA plants at the epicenter of a 2008-2009 salmonella outbreak—show confusion over whether or not specific state agencies possess the authority to inspect farms, that the Deputy Commissioner of the Texas Department of Agriculture was calling a state agency to determine if a municipality had licensed the PCA Plainview facility, and significant confusion over what state agency may—or may not—have been inspecting agricultural products for salmonella contamination near the Texas-Oklahoma border in the days and weeks following the recall.

In one e-mail exchange dated February 25, 2010, the manager for Policy, Standards, and Quality Assurance at DSHS’s Division for Regulator Services contacted the TDA Deputy Commissioner to inquire if TDA had inspectors with badges stopping trucks along the Texas-Oklahoma border testing produce for salmonella.

In his reply, TDA’s Deputy Commissioner fully illustrated both the complicated and confusing food safety bureaucracy that presently exists in Texas as well as the failures of the Texas Department of Agriculture to take any significant steps to protect the state’s food supply:

“We are not operating a road inspection station in Grayson County along the border….These road stations run for 72 hours straight and we are NOT sampling for salmonella. We do inspect all trucks with produce and we only pull samples in instances where a plant health issue is suspected.” TDA’s Deputy Commissioner wrote [emphasis added].

In an email from DSHS’s Food And Drug Safety Officer to other DSHS employees dated February 13, it becomes clear that high-level TDA employees were in such a state of confusion over the Plainview peanut debacle that they didn’t even appear to understand where municipal food facility permitting records would be kept. According to the e-mail, TDA’s Deputy Commissioner called the Food and Drug Safety Officer at DSHS to ask if the Plainview PCA facility had ever been licensed by the city of Plainview—instead, evidently, of realizing that this information was maintained by the city itself. DSHS employees called the city and reported the information back to TDA.

In in a string of emails spanning a month from March 2 until April 2, TDA’s Deputy Commissioner contacted DSHS on behalf of Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples concerning a situation in Oregon in which it was alleged bulk peanuts from Texas were contaminated with Salmonella. Although the Plainview peanut debacle was still in full swing, the Deputy Commissioner of TDA wrote Dr. David Lackey, Commissioner of the Department of State Health Services asking “is it possible or probable to have salmonella on unprocessed nuts?”

In a later exchange, further confusion abounds when the Deputy Commissioner tells Lackey he “thought state law prohibited DSHS from conducting inspections on the farm,” and inquires about Lee County Peanut, inquiring, “Is Lee County Peanut not a farm?”

Closing the exchange, Lackey writes back to TDA that the department did investigate at Lee County Peanut, it was indeed a farm, and that the inspection was the result of a separate regulated activity conducted on the farm—peanut shelling. Lackey wrote:

“Due to our responsibility to protect public health, we have broad authority relating to compliance activities…Again, we would not typically be on a farm unless they were conducting a regulated activity or unless we were investigating an outbreak or food safety issue that led us there.”

Finally, in an email exchange that Hank Gilbert classifies as “stunning,” the number one bureaucrat in charge at TDA under Commissioner Todd Staples is engaging in an email exchange with various high-level DSHS officials to attempt to coordinate the Texas Department of Agriculture’s revocation of an organic certification for the plant. “I am REALLY hopeful that we can issue a revocation of a certification that this plant carries with us SIMULTANEOUS to your recall announcement. Is there anyway I can even get an email confirmation of the terminology of what your inspector found? It is essential to our revocation order,” the official writes. This email came days after the plant had voluntarily shut its doors following laboratory tests indicating the presence of salmonella.

“These documents clearly show that Texas’ food supply is at risk,” Gilbert said. “The patchwork quilt of regulation that exists for food safety is confusing and has gaping holes in it,” he continued. “DSHS has pointed out six major vulnerabilities that exist with regard to food safety, and the logical way to remedy these problems is by combining food safety and regulation under the Texas Department of Agriculture while removing bureaucracy and confusion from the process,” he said.

“Texans need to know that, from field to fork, their food is safe. Moms and dads need to know that the fruit, lunchmeat, and even packaged or processed foods they are putting in their child’s lunchbox every day aren’t contaminated with disease causing pathogens that will make their child sick or worse,” Gilbert continued.

“The time for finger pointing and playing the blame game is over. Under my reform plan, we’ll take a common sense approach to food safety in Texas by centralizing regulation and inspection under one agency and, by reducing the size of the bureaucracy, and being able to put more inspectors on the streets and in the fields,” he continued.

“Here, we have an email where the head bureaucrat in the Texas Department of Agriculture is telling the head of the Department of State Health Services that they only test produce when the health of a plant is questioned. That’s unacceptable. We need common sense reform that puts the safety of Texans first,” he continued.

Addressing the Plainview related emails, Gilbert said he was astounded. “It looks more like TDA was concerned about getting earned media by making its revocation simultaneous with DSHS’s recall announcement than actually revoking PCA’s organic certification. TDA didn’t need this information from DSHS. Federal regulations allow them to undertake their own investigation of an organic certified plant and provide provisions for revocation and denial of certification for which the findings published to that point would have been sufficient,” Gilbert said, referring to 7 CFR Sec. 205.661 and other provisions of the Code of Federal Regulations.

In terms of securing energy independence for our state and our nation, the Texas Department of Agriculture is truly an untapped resource. In spite of the fact that the Texas Legislature has given the department oversight of two biofuels and bioenergy committees, to date they have done little except spend $75,000 on a report–which has yet to be delivered—and will likely simply tell us what we already know: Texas is ready to become our state’s leading biofuel and bioenergy producer.

One of the biggest problems this state and our nation face is our dependence on fossil fuels, especially those sourced outside of the United States. As we’ve seen in the Gulf, drilling our way out of this problem can be extremely dangerous and it ignores one simple fact: the well will, at some point, ‘run dry’.

The solution to this problem will come from agriculture.

Two centuries ago, economist Thomas Malthus postulated that the population of people on earth would rapidly exceed the ability of the planet to sustain that population. Agriculture, time and again, has made tremendous advances that have led to our ability to feed a population that now numbers in the billions.

It is to agriculture that we must turn now to solve our future energy needs, end our dependence on foreign oil and provide cleaner burning fuels to protect the air and water on which we all depend.

In Unity,

Hank Gilbert

FIELD TO PUMP BIOFUELS INITIATIVE

Hank proposes launching the Field To Pump Biofuels Initiative, which will involve stakeholders including growers, refiners, distributors, and retailers and the promotion of cooperatives to more effectively generate crop production by creating a stable, efficient marketplace.

HOW IT WORKS:

Under the Field to Pump Biofuels Initiative, the Texas Department of Agriculture will make use of grant funding from Texas Agricultural Infrastructure & Economic Development Fund (proposed under his TDA reform plan) to provide seed funding to producers and refiners to help producers grow new, non-foodstock biofuel crops and help refiners develop refining capability for those products.

In addition, the Texas Department of Agriculture will work to help promote partnerships and cooperatives between growers, refiners, distributors, and funding partners to help make new biofuel crops and refining capability a reality in Texas.

WHAT CROPS ARE INVOLVED?

Cassava and sugar cane are two crops that are suited to both growing condition and land availability in Texas. Cassava can be grown in vast areas of West and South Texas which are not presently engaged in significant agricultural production of any kind. Sugar Cane can be grown in land currently encumbered under the Conservation Reserve Program because it is not soil degrading and would provide landowners a far better income stream than they receive from the USDA’s CRP payments.

DOES THIS ENDANGER OUR FOOD SUPPLY?

No. New sugar cane crops in Texas would be strictly for biofuels. Cassava is not considered a food staple in the United States and its growing and use wouldn’t alter food supplies. Cassava is used in both China and Brazil for ethanol production.

WON’T BIOFUEL CROPS IN WEST TEXAS NEED IRRIGATION TO GROW?

No. Cassava is a crop that requires little water to grow and is well-suited to the climate of West Texas and produces more ethanol per bushel than corn and doesn’t effect the world food supply.

WHAT IT DOES:

The Pump to Fuels initiative will produce biofuels at a price that’s completely competitive in the open market. Because of the significant amount of land available in Texas to produce biofuel crops, coupled with existing biofuel production in West Texas, Texas can and will become a biofuels leader and secure our state’s energy independence.

This will also help put our country on the track to energy independence and reducing our dependence on foreign oil.

THE TEXAS ADVANCED BIOFUELS RESEARCH INCUBATOR

Hank proposes to create the Texas Advanced Biofuels Research Incubator at one of our state’s major four-year universities in order to foster additional research in areas such as using algae to produce biofuels and to study the best applications of other microbial biofuel stocks to produce biofuels in Texas.

BENEFITS OF HANK’S PROPOSAL

Carbon Credits will be a profit source for participants.

Since biofuel crop production removes carbon from the atmosphere that is not full replaced during conversion or combustion, producers would be entitled to sell carbon credits should a market develop for them. There is a lifecycle reduction of 61% for sugarcane ethanol and 41% for biodiesel.

Cleaner air.

Blending with highly oxygenated fuels increases combustion efficiency of petroleum based fuels, reducing the pollutants that enter the atmosphere as a result of burning transportation fuels. Such gases include carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide, a leading cause of smog.

Enhanced performance of biodiesel.

Most biodiesel helps enhance performance in diesel engines using ultra low sulfur fuel by increasing lubricity.

Research to develop market based solutions.

A key component of Hank’s plan includes the formation of a technology incubator which will work with Texas Universities and private enterprise to create the next generation of biofuel feedstocks and develop new technologies to enhance current production.

“Texas has the potential to become a major biofuels producer,” Gilbert said. “There are crops—like cassava—which we can grow in areas of West Texas where nothing else is being grown right now that can produce alternative fuels and not increase the cost of the foods we bring to our family’s dinner table,” Gilbert said.  “Too, land near the Gulf Coast in South East Texas is perfect land on which we can grow sugar cane to use to manufacture fuels,” Gilbert continued.

Under Gilbert’s plan, entitled the Field to Pump Biofuels Initiative, the Texas Department of Agriculture would utilize funding from the Texas Agricultural Infrastructure & Economic Development Fund (proposed by Gilbert under his previously released reform plan for the agency), to provide start-up funding to agricultural producers to help grow new, non-foodstock biofuel crops and to refiners to help develop refining capacity for those products.

“The state would also help assist agricultural producers to help establish new cooperatives which would allow them to seek funding from outside sources to grow, market, transport—and even refine—their biofuel crops,” he continued.

Gilbert also noted that biofuels made from cassava and sugar cane will result in less pollution, cleaner air, and even additional money for farmers—should a market develop for the sale of carbon credits.

Do you know who is ultimately responsible for keeping our food supply safe? If you answered “the federal government,” or “the state health department,” think again. A myriad of state and federal agencies are tasked with varied responsibilities in the area of food safety and none have complete authority.

Do you know how often the gas pumps you use every day are checked to see if they are accurate? If no one complains about them, only once every four years.

Do you know who is inspecting meat and other commodities coming into Texas from foreign countries to see if it is free from toxic pesticides or dangerous bacteria? Probably not who you think.

Do you know why there isn’t greater marketshare nationally for Texas agricultural products? Do you know what elected official’s job it is to build this market?

Chances are, I’ve just asked you several questions that have made you think about the safety and security of our food supply, whether or not you are getting what you pay for at the gas pumps, and whether or not Texas farmers are getting a fair shake in the global economy.

If you have doubts about these things, you aren’t alone. I do, too.

That’s why I’m running for Texas Agriculture Commissioner and why I am proud to announce the unveiling of Advancing Markets, Protecting Consumers: Rebuilding The Texas Department of Agriculture for the 21st Century.
This is my reform plan for the Texas Department of Agriculture.

I hope you will take a moment to read it and let me know what you think.

In Unity,

Food Safety

Under current Texas law, food safety inspections are performed by varying state and federal agencies depending upon the type of facility being inspected, the commodities being processed, and other factors.

This system leaves gaping vulnerabilities in our state’s food supply.

Many issues contribute to the likelihood of unsafe food in the early links of the food chain, and Texas must do more to protect its consumers from harm resulting from things such as:

• Producers in foreign countries that use pesticides or fertilizers outlawed in the United States to treat fruits and vegetables.
• The intentional or accidental misuse of regulated medicated feeds which can cause livestock products to test positive for various substances unhealthy for humans.
• Unsanitary conditions for agricultural workers such as defecation in open produce fields, lack of bathroom facilities, and lack of hand washing facilities.

BACKGROUND: Under current law, the Texas Department of Health, local health authorities, and federal agencies are responsible in whole or in part for various aspects of food health and safety inspections in Texas. As a result of so many different agencies being involved, no centralized agency is either responsible for or a repository for inspections of agricultural commodities or food products in Texas all the way from the producer’s fields to the grocery store shelves. While other states have such programs—and even redundancy protections such as state inspections of meat and poultry plants to protect citizens beyond rudimentary USDA inspections—Texas does not, and Texas’ food supply is less safe as a result

The TEXAS Food Safety & Security Initiative

As Commissioner, Hank will work with the legislature to institute the TEXAS Food Safety & Security Initiative to insure that Texas’ food supply is safe from the field to grocery store shelves. Standing for “Tested, EXamined, Approved, & Secure,” the initiative would require:

• Texas Department of Agriculture food safety inspections for grocery stores and convenience stores.
• TDA food safety and security inspections of food warehouses, food processors, food manufacturers, wholesale bakeries, beverage producers, and refrigerated warehouses.
• TDA food safety inspections of slaughterhouses, meat and poultry plants, fish processors, and rendering plants.

The initiative would mandate that the Texas Department of Agriculture both permit and:

• Conduct regular food safety inspections for grocery stores and continence stores (although inspection authority for in-store restaurants and all restaurants would remain with current authorities).
• Conduct regular food safety and security inspections of food warehouses, food processors, food manufacturers, wholesale bakeries, beverage producers, and refrigerated warehouses.
• Conduct  regular inspections of slaughterhouses, meat and poultry plants, fish processors, and rendering plants.

The TEXAS Food Safety and Security Initiative would protect Texans’ food supply from dangerous bacteria, pesticides, and tampering in a number of ways. For example, the initiative would mandate:

• TDA inspection of a representative sample of all raw commodity agricultural products imported into Texas from another country or state (specifically meats, poultry, fish, vegetables, and fruit) and testing of that sample to determine the presence of outlawed or toxic pesticides, herbicides, or fungicides; harmful bacteria (such as E. coli); dangerous insects or other invasive species; testing for substances that might indicate bioterrorism.
• TDA inspection of grocery stores and continence stores to insure the safe handling and display of agricultural commodities, and to insure that each raw commodity sold in the store is free of toxic pesticides, harmful bacteria, etc.
• TDA inspection of food warehouses, food processors, food manufacturers, wholesale bakeries, beverage producers, and refrigerated warehouses to insure both food safety but also food security. Texas’ food manufacturers and processors must be kept safe from the threat of those who may wish to deliberately harm our state’s food supply.
• TDA inspection of slaughterhouses, meat and poultry plants, fish processors, and rendering plants to insure that the meat, poultry, and fish products do not contain toxic substances from pesticides or feeds, and that fish don’t contain high levels of mercury or other substances that can cause harm when ingested.

The TEXAS Food Safety & Security Initiative would also give the Texas Department of Agriculture new authority to keep Texans safe.

Under Hank’s plan, the Texas Department of Agriculture would have legal authority to immediately stop the sale, processing, or use of any food product under its jurisdiction if that product is deemed to be unfit for human or animal consumption.

Under current law, the Texas Department of Agriculture has limited powers to stop anything from entering the food chain—even when its inspectors enter a factory covered in rat feces or witness a field of crops that has been treated with an illegal poison.

Under Hank’s plan, TDA will be able to stop dangerous food products from entering the food chain without first going through one or more state agencies.

Weights & Measures

Are you getting what you pay for?

BACKGROUND: Prior to the non-substantive statutory revision of the Texas Agriculture Code in 1981ⁱ and continuing for nearly a decade following the revision, equipment used to sell goods by volume or weight (scales, price scanners, and gas pumps) were required to be inspected by the Texas Department of Agriculture annuallyⁱⁱ. In 1989, a major rewrite of the Texas Agriculture Code changed the one-year re-inspection period to three yearsⁱⁱⁱ.

In 2005, the Texas Legislature, at the urging of former Agriculture Commissioner Susan Combs, amended the Agriculture Code once again to change the period of inspection from three to four years^iv. According to analysis at the time, the change would save the equivalent of the hours worked by 9.5 full time agency employees and cost savings of less than half a million dollars annually^v.

A False Sense Of Security for Consumers

BACKGROUND: Over the last several years, more and more grocery stores are replacing TDA-inspected scales with “for estimation purposes only” scales that aren’t regulated by the Department. Whether this is to get out of inspections or because of the optics resulting from grocery stores presenting to their customers scales inspected every four years is unknown at this time. Whatever the reason for the trend, it is a dangerous trend that is resulting in less consumer protections for Texans at the grocery store.

More False Security At The Gas Pump

BACKGROUND: Four years is a long time for a gas pump to go without inspection—especially when consumers examine that in light of the fact that their motor vehicles must be inspected annually. As a result, for likely altruistic reasons, major gasoline retailers have started marking their pumps as having been independently inspected and certified as pumping the right amount of gasoline. The state and the consumer have no way of verifying this information.

More Weights & Measures Reform

Agency Reform & Restructuring

Under existing Texas law, a number of functions which should be under the direction of the Texas Department of Agriculture rest with private universities, the Texas AgriLife Extension Program, or under independent state agencies, boards, and commissions. Hank proposes restructuring these agricultural programs under the umbrella of the Texas Department of agriculture.

Since 1915, the Texas Forest Service has been key to maintaining and protecting Texas’ forests and has operated under the control of Texas A&M University. Under Hank’s plan, the existing Texas Forest Service would move under the Texas Department of Agriculture. Forestry is a part of our state’s agricultural market and landscape, and as such, the agency should be joined with TDA.

Under Hank’s plan, TAHC would become part of the Texas Department of Agriculture and be renamed as the Texas Department of Agriculture Bureau of Animal Health. It would maintain an independent advisory board—appointed by the Agriculture Commissioner—but would no longer be an independent state agency.

The functions of the Texas Animal Health commission—which are essentially to protect the health of Texas livestock—are key to agriculture and Texas and as such should be married with the state’s main agriculture agency. Texas farmers and ranchers shouldn’t have to be shuffled between multiple agencies for the assistance they need to keep pests from becoming a problem with livestock.

Too, the TAHC’s legislative authority to make and enforce regulations to prevent, control, and eradicate infections animal diseases would be transferred to the Texas Department of Agriculture.

Under Hank’s plan, the Texas Wildlife Services, which is given authority under the Texas Health and Safety Code to protect the state’s agricultural, industrial, and natural resources from damage caused by wildlife, would come under the Texas Department of Agriculture.

Additionally, all state funds spent on feral hog eradication and all feral hog eradication programs would be administered by the Texas Department of Agriculture as a result of this move. At present, TDA issues millions in grants funding to AgriLife Extension and other agencies for feral hog eradication. Hank believes that the best way to fight the menace of feral hogs is to centralize the duty for their eradication—and funding for their eradication—under the umbrella of one agency that will then have the power to make grants to local government entities and engage in other programs to eradicate feral hogs under the guise of a multi-year master plan for feral hog eradication.

In order to insure complete food safety and security, Hank proposes that the existing Agriculture Code authority being exercised by Texas Parks and Wildlife be transferred to the Texas Department of Agriculture in order to best protect Texans.

The passage of the Limited Agricultural Cooperatives Act would help farmers and ranchers in rural Texas obtain capital necessary to establish and expand agricultural cooperatives by allowing investment by non-agricultural investors.

The creation of these cooperatives in rural Texas is necessary to allow farmers to pool resources to promote their combined interests through marketing and distribution. This action will promote an increase in rural economic development and spur outside investment.

Allowing the creation of such cooperatives will generate for increased funding for biofuel and biomass initiatives involving agricultural products.

Every biennium, the Texas Department of Agriculture processes or disburses millions of dollars worth of grant and other funding for programs ranging from feral hog eradication to nutrition programs.

Additionally, because the Texas Department of Agriculture is tasked with enforcement of dozens of laws, and many more administrative penalties, Hank believes an Office of Inspector General is necessary to preserve the integrity of the agency, protect consumers, protect the environment, and keep a watchful eye on taxpayer funds.

Under Hank’s plan, the Inspector General would relieve the TDA General Counsel’s office of oversight and processing of the legal aspects of all administrative and legal complaints relating to the various laws and administrative regulations TDA enforces. Additionally, the Office of Inspector General would have investigative authority to investigate misuse of TDA disbursed funds.

Reforming GoTexan & Other Agricultural Marketing Programs

As part of Hank’s overall reform plan for TDA, Hank will reform and restructure the existing Go Texan and similar marketing programs. The reform package for these marketing programs will be released in August of 2010.

Protecting Texas Landowners: Eminent Domain Reform

In recent years, massive transportation projects, multi-national pipelines, and more have threatened to destroy family farms and ranches across Texas by allowing the state or private companies to seize land using eminent domain. Hank has been a strident opponent to ED expansion and has fought continuously for enhanced protections for property owners. Even though Texas voters have approved a constitutional amendment in recent years to provide some eminent domain reform, it still contains loopholes that must be closed.

Under Hank’s plan, Texas farmers, ranchers, and landowners will have more protections than ever before from eminent domain abuses.

The Agriculture Preservation Areas Program. This program will establish the statutory authority for landowners, counties, and the state to preserve farm and ranch land from development for successive ten year periods. Modeled after the successful Agriculture Security Areas Program in use in Ohio, the APA program will allow the preservation of farm and ranchland consisting of at least 500 contiguous acres.

One or multiple landowners with at least 500 contiguous acres of farm or ranch land located in unincorporated areas who haven’t committed civil or criminal violations of conservation, pesticide, or similar laws within the last ten years may apply so long as the farming or ranching on the land is conducted in accordance with best practices established by the Texas Department of Agriculture.

Upon application to the Texas Department of Agriculture and the County Commissioner’s Court of the county in which the land is located, land subject to approved applications will be subject to the following protections:

• No new roads, utility, or pipe lines may be installed on the land without approval from the Texas Department of Agriculture’s Office Of Farm and Ranch Land Protection.
• Improvements on the land for agricultural purposes and improvements relating to the development of biofuel or biomass feedstocks make the land eligible for up to a 50 percent tax exemption on improvements at the discretion of the County Commissioners when said development begins at least one year after the designation.
• Non-agricultural development is prevented within the APA (excluding single-family homesteads) is prohibited for ten years without permission from the Office of Farm and Ranch Land Protection.

The Office of Farm and Ranch Land Protection will provide guidance and technical assistance to landowners seeking to enroll in the program and assist APA landowners in understanding the full measure of agricultural development opportunities available to them.

The Agricultural Easements Program. Under this program, the Office of Farm and Ranch Land Preservation will be granted the authority to obtain and hold—through purchase or donation—agricultural easements to allow land to remain predominantly in agricultural production. The Department of Agriculture would receive the statutory authority to take necessary steps to retain the agricultural land gifted or acquired and continue agricultural production on that land including but not limited to lease or rental of the property to persons who wish to engage the land in agricultural production. The land may also be sold or leased to young farmers with provisions providing for a permanent agricultural easement so the land may not be sold for profit or otherwise leveraged in a way that will take it out of agricultural production. The state will retain repurchase rights to the land.

Reforming The Texas Agricultural Finance Authority To Expand Economic Development

While the 81st Texas Legislature enacted some reforms to help move the Texas Agricultural Finance authority out of a lengthy period of difficulty, there remain other programs the TAFA could devise to help better promote agriculture in Texas.

Under Hank’s plan, the Texas Agricultural Investment & Development Fund (Texas AID) would be funded through legislative appropriation. Hank proposes an initial investment of $300 million in the fund.

Texas AID funds would be utilized to attract agricultural business investment to Texas, help existing agricultural businesses expand, and help keep existing agricultural business in Texas by helping fund expansion, local tax and development incentives, and local infrastructure development.

Under Hank’s plan, Texas AID funds would be awarded based on job creation, economic impact of the agricultural business to the community, the impact the business has or will have one expanding markets for Texas agricultural products, and other matrices related to the economic impact of the business.

Even when paired with matching funds required to participate in the program, grants of $5,000 to $10,000 don’t go far at a time of rising costs and increasing financial burdens on agricultural producers. Under Hank’s plan, young farmers will actually be able to apply for meaningful funds to help grow their family farms, ranches, and agribusinesses.

ⁱ Revisor’s Report, Texas Agriculture Code, Texas Legislative Council, 1981.

ⁱⁱ House Bill 1436, 67th Regular Session of the Texas Legislature.

ⁱⁱⁱ Senate Bill 489, as Enrolled, 71st Regular Session of the Texas Legislature, p. 19

^iv House Bill 2382, 78th Regular Session of the Texas Legislature

^v Fiscal Note, House Bill 2382, 78th Regular Session of the Texas Legislature.

Food Safety And Consumer Protection, Eminent Domain Reform, Help For Producers Take Center Stage

[You can download a copy of Hank's Reform Plan for the Texas Department of Agriculture  in PDF format here (LINK) or view it online here (LINK).  You can also read Hank's remarks as prepared for delivery on his TDA Reform Tour here (LINK).]

ABILENE—Hank Gilbert, the Texas Democratic Party’s nominee for Agriculture Commissioner, Wednesday morning unveiled a sweeping and historic reform package to reshape and rebuild the Texas Department of Agriculture Wednesday morning in Abilene.

The Abilene stop was the first of a 23-city tour during which Gilbert will address portions of the policy across the state. The campaign had stops planned in Lubbock and Big Spring for Wednesday and Midland, Odessa, San Angelo and Waco for Thursday.

“The Texas Department of Agriculture can and should be doing more for Texans,” Gilbert said. “TDA has the potential to become the state’s strongest consumer protection agency,” he said as he introduced the policy, which was centered around food safety and consumer protection, eminent domain reform, agency restructuring and providing economic incentives to boost Texas’ agricultural economy.

“We must put an end to the patchwork quilt of regulation and inspection that has put our state’s food supply in jeopardy and streamline the regulation and inspection process to keep Texans safe,” Gilbert said.

Under Gilbert’s plan, the Texas Department of Agriculture will institute the TEXAS Food Safety & Security Initiative (standing for “Tested, Examined, Approved, & Secure”) which will require comprehensive food safety inspections for agricultural commodities and grocery stores, food wholesalers and warehouses, food processors, food manufacturers, wholesale bakeries, beverage producers, refrigerated warehouses, slaughterhouses, meat and poultry plants and fish processors centralized under the Texas Department of Agriculture.

“Texas ag producers, Texas businesses, and Texas consumers shouldn’t have to turn to three or more state agencies for permits, regulation, or to determine if the food they are purchasing is safe,” Gilbert said. “The present hodgepodge of regulation only aides in allowing state agencies to point fingers at each other and say, ‘that isn’t our job,’” Gilbert said. “Under this plan, consumers, producers, and businesses won’t have to be shuffled from agency to agency,” Gilbert continued.

In terms of consumer protection, Gilbert called for a roll-back in the four-year inspection period for weights and measures devices such as grocery store scales and fuel pumps. “I propose a two-year inspection period and a three-strikes policy for habitual fuel cheaters,” Gilbert said. Under Gilbert’s reform plan, if a fuel retailer is found to be out of compliance as a result of consumer complaints more than three times in a year, they will face criminal charges.

Additionally, Gilbert said Texas agricultural producers and businesses are overburdened as a result of being forced to turn to a myriad of state agencies for assistance depending on the exact nature of the agricultural problem they need to address.

“Producers, farmers, ranchers, or businesses shouldn’t have to be shuffled between TDA and the Texas Animal Health Commission and the Texas Wildlife Service to have agricultural problems addressed,” he said. Gilbert proposed moving the Texas Forest Service, the Texas Animal Health Commission, and the Texas Wildlife Services—and all feral hog abatement programs—directly under the umbrella of TDA.

Gilbert also proposed several measures to help grow the state’s agricultural economy, including passage of the Limited Agricultural Cooperatives Act, which would allow the creation of agricultural cooperatives to help farmers and ranchers, especially in rural Texas, obtain better prices and expanded market share for their products.

Gilbert also proposed historic eminent domain abuse protections centralized under TDA through the establishment of the Office of Farm and Ranch Land Preservation.

Under Gilbert’s plan, two new programs, the Agricultural Preservation Areas Program and the Agricultural Easements Program—both modeled off Ohio programs—would provide strong new eminent domain abuse protections for Texas landowners.

“It past time for Texas to stop paying lip service to the idea of protecting Texans from eminent domain abuses,” said Gilbert, who co-founded TURF, an organization dedicated to preventing eminent domain abuses and stopping unwanted toll roads. “Event he recent constitutional amendment passed by voters has significant loopholes,” Gilbert said. “Yet politicians have sold this to Texans as the silver bullet for protection from eminent domain abuse. It is far from it,” Gilbert said.

Gilbert also proposed creating a $300 million investment fund, the Texas Agricultural Investment & Development Fund (Texas AID), to attract agricultural business to Texas, help existing agricultural businesses expand, and help fund agricultural innovation. He also proposed significant increases in the Young Farmer Grant Program.

You can download a copy of Hank’s Reform Plan for the Texas Department of Agriculture  in PDF format here (LINK) or view it online here (LINK).  You can also read Hank’s remarks as prepared for delivery on his TDA Reform Tour here (LINK).

To view the PDF copy of the plan,  you will need Acrobat Reader.  Download it from Adobe’s website.

By JESSICA MEYERS | The Dallas Morning News

At an unveiling last month, the Texas Department of Agriculture touted its map of broadband Internet availability as the first step in closing a “digital divide” that denies rural Texans critical services.

But a political divide has opened instead, as critics question the tool’s accuracy and Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples’ relationship with the organization that created it.

Staples’ Democratic rival, Hank Gilbert, and a handful of local providers, consumer groups and mapping organizations say the agency tailored the application to fit Connected Nation, the nonprofit selected by the department and the Texas Public Utility Commission to create the map. The Agriculture Department and the company defend the process, while their critics contend that the map will direct federal stimulus money toward major telecommunications companies at the expense of smaller Internet providers.

‘Oh, really!’

“They hit the big guys,” said James Breeden, founder of LiveAir Networks, which covers rural parts of Central Texas. “I didn’t even know they were putting together a broadband map until I saw it on the news and went ‘Oh.’ Then I logged in and went, ‘Oh, really!’ ”

He said he couldn’t find his company or two nearby providers on the map. Some areas didn’t show the correct distributor. Others named one when none existed. “The map is just off. It’s not technically accurate,” he said.

The federal government plans to use such maps to target $7.2 billion of investment in new Internet infrastructure. Released in its first phase last month, Texas’ earth-tone online map details what high-speed Internet services are available at a specific address. The data from Texas and other states will feed into a national broadband map with more detailed geographic availability, types of technology and speed of broadband service than the Federal Communications Commission currently makes available. That map will launch in February.

In an era of technological necessity, Americans without reliable Internet lack access to education, health care, government services and economic growth. A quarter-million Texas households face that challenge, Staples said in a written statement released soon after the map’s launch.

About 65 percent of the country has broadband at home, according to a Pew Center on the States report last month. That amount worries the report’s authors, who say Americans need to improve the quality and speed of their broadband service to keep up with other nations. A March study by two Philadelphia organizations – Digital Impact Group and Econsult Corp. – estimated that the U.S. loses more than $55 billion a year in economic activity because of spotty access.

“Every Texan should have the opportunity to drive in the fast lane on the information superhighway,” Staples said. “However, some Texans are stuck on a dirt road.”

The U.S. has allocated $350 million for broadband mapping nationwide. Connected Nation, one of the first organizations to do broadband mapping, will receive $3 million for its Texas work.

Gov. Rick Perry designated the Agriculture Department the lead agency for the project because it oversees rural development issues.

The Gilbert campaign challenges the state’s choice of contractors. “Staples and … [the Agriculture Department] are willing to let a bid go to a company with such close ties to the telecom industry,” said Vince Leibowitz, Gilbert’s campaign manager. “That means they’re not doing their job as a consumer protection agency.”

Connected Nation has received support from telecommunications powerhouses including Verizon Communications and AT&T Inc. Cable and phone company leaders sit on its board. AT&T contributes heavily to Staples’ campaign. Staples also owns small amounts of stock in Verizon and AT&T.

That doesn’t mean he’s done anything wrong, said Bryan Eppstein, a Staples campaign consultant. “This is federal money under a federal timeline,” he said, pointing out that the Public Utility Commission also participated in the map’s development.

Connected Nation “was selected under standards set by the [U.S.] Department of Commerce. Yet … [the Gilbert campaign] makes it look like this was totally controlled.”

Connected Nation also denied that the telecom industry wielded influence.

The Washington, D.C., nonprofit, which has conducted similar projects in 11 other states and Puerto Rico, has used both private and government funding to accomplish its work, said chief executive Brian Mefford. But the federal and state grants fund virtually all the company’s efforts now, he said.

Connected Nation’s board oversees how the agency runs but doesn’t make policy decisions. It also includes health care representatives, labor unions and consumer groups.

“We have made all efforts to account for every single provider,” Mefford said. “It doesn’t help us in any way, shape or form to leave people off the map.”

Update coming

He instructed any undisclosed providers to call Connected Texas, the local subsidiary. They plan to update the map in the fall.

It took six months to canvas the state, persuade wary providers to hand over their market information, and follow extra requirements related to the federal funds, Mefford said. “We never viewed the maps as the end-all. They are the start of a comprehensive process.”

Five other organizations responded to the Agriculture Department’s request for proposals. Luisa Handem of the Austin nonprofit Rural Mobile & Broadband Alliance said her group never heard back.

“We didn’t think the process was transparent,” she said. “We’re not even sure they looked at our application.”

The Agriculture Department restricted the opportunity to nonprofits, based on its interpretation of federal law. The agency told the University of Texas at Austin it could apply, but officials didn’t think they could complete the proposal in a month. The Agriculture Department said the federal government set the timeline.

One watchdog group sees design flaws in the entire governmental setup.

“It’s a scandal, a total scandal,” said Art Brodsky, communications director of Public Knowledge, a public interest group that follows digital culture. A longtime critic of Connected Nation, Brodsky has tracked the nonprofit since Kentucky officials accused it of overestimating broadband availability several years ago. The agency that grew into Connection Nation started there in 2001.

Brodsky said nondisclosure agreements make it difficult to see who really benefits from the mapping process.

Terry Hadley, a spokesman for the Public Utility Commission, said officials haven’t heard complaints about the map and are pleased with its progress.

Agriculture Department officials stand by the agency’s selection of Connected Nation. They say the organization received the highest score for selection criteria that included transparency, technical approach, experience and timeline. The department’s general counsel, Dolores Hibbs, said Connected Nation had disclosed its affiliations to the department’s satisfaction.

The department “has not received any credible information that would lead the state to question Connected Nation’s performance,” she said.

TYLER—Hank Gilbert, the Texas Democratic Party’s nominee for Texas Agriculture Commissioner, Wednesday assailed incumbent Commissioner Todd Staples for what he called “stupid, look-at-me political tricks” designed to make Texans believe the incumbent is actually doing something to help increase broadband connectivity in Texas.

Gilbert’s comments came hours after Staples made a significant production of unveiling a map of Texas illustrating areas that have and do not have broadband access.

“That map will do nothing for people without broadband access,” said Gilbert (D-Whitehouse). “I’m sure people on landline modems will be grateful to Todd—after the 45 minutes it takes them to actually view the map to determine, sure enough, that their area isn’t served by broadband,” Gilbert continued.

“This is yet another stupid, sleazy, ‘look-at-me’ political trick designed to cover up the fact that he’s one of the best at wasting tax money in the history of the state,” he noted.

Gilbert also questioned why Staples was only now, in an election year, making an issue of increasing broadband access in Texas.

“Aside from the fact that he considers the federal stimulus dollars for broadband an excuse to gain further name recognition, what has Todd Staples really done to increase broadband connectivity in Texas,” Gilbert asked. He also questioned why TDA officials have said publicly, in the weeks prior to the map’s unveiling, that they didn’t know what areas of Texas were not served by broadband or high-speed internet access.

“It is a sad day when the agency and commissioner in charge of making sure rural areas get broadband don’t know which areas are underserved. It’s even more sad that the TDA had to depend on a public-private partnership with a non-profit agency to figure it out. I don’t think it will come as a surprise to anyone that telecom companies have far more granular information on existing service areas,” Gilbert said.

“Based on the information available on the website Staples is touting, anyone with a pulse, vocal chords, and the ability to dial the keys on a telephone could have collected this information from providers. I don’t see why it has taken Todd Staples nearly four years to do this,” Gilbert said.

Gilbert also noted that the benefits of bringing broadband to underserved areas of Texas has been widely known and circulated for several years. “A study released two years ago showed that a one-percent increase in Texas broadband penetration would bring 21,000 new jobs to Texas and that a three-percent increase would mean 63,000 new jobs for Texas. Why didn’t he bother to do something in 2007 when these figures were revealed,” Gilbert continued.

The Democrats’ nominee also noted that, even without stimulus funds being available in 2007, incumbent Staples could have done more to increase broadband penetration. “Todd Staples could have done far more to encourage telecom companies to reach these underserved areas. He didn’t have to wait for federal stimulus funds to roll down from Washington to ease out of his perpetual state of inertia and snap into action,” he said.

Finally, Gilbert why it took TDA was generally dragging its feet on broadband projects. “Staples announced last August that the agency was in partnership with the same organization that was a party to today’s release. At that time, they had just finished surveying local governments on broadband access. That was supposed to lead to the designation of priority broadband corridors. To my knowledge, TDA hasn’t done anything about that,” he said.

“Todd Staples hasn’t done one concrete thing about biofuels and alternative energy since he’s been in office. These two commissions actually came in the form of a legislative mandate; he didn’t create them himself. Now that it is an election year, he’s just using it as an excuse to make it look like he was doing something worthwhile for the past three years,” Gilbert concluded.

FACT SHEET

Rural Broadband: Another Excuse For Todd Staples To Look Busy

FACT: Todd Staples’ staff publicly admitted that they wouldn’t know what areas of Texas really needed broadband service until a non-profit operating in a public-private partnership with the state provided them a map showing those areas. [“Boosting Broadband,” TriBlog, The Texas Tribune. June 2, 2010. LINK]

FACT: The finding that a one-percent increase in Texas broadband penetration would bring the state 21,100 new jobs, while a three-percent increase would result in 63,300 new jobs was widely publicized as far back as the summer of 2007. [“The Effects of Broadband Deployment On Output and Employment: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of U.S. Data.” Robert Crandall, William Lehr, and Robert Litan. Issues In Economic Policy, No. 6. July 2007. LINK]

FACT: The magical broadband data maps touted by Todd Staples were not crafted in any special or complicated way. It was simply a compilation of data provided by service providers:

This map, as of May 28, 2010, includes data provided by 123 Texas high-speed Internet providers. In Texas, 97% of households have access to terrestrial fixed broadband service of at least 768Kbps downstream and 200Kbps upstream (excluding mobile and satellite services) – leaving approximately 258,000 unserved households – or 3% – that do not have access to a fixed wireless or wired broadband service offering. With mobile broadband service included, 99% or 7.35 million Texas households have access to broadband service of at least 768Kbps downstream and 200Kbps upstream. [Connected Texas: Interactive Map. LINK.]

Although the maps provide interactive components, the data itself came from service providers, which could have easily been compiled by TDA staff.

FACT: Todd Staples’ office noted almost a year ago that his agency had completed a survey of local governments relating to broadband access which would allegedly lead the department to develop a list of “priority broadband corridors” to help guide recommendations for federal Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP) grants. To date, the agency has announced no such corridors. [Texas Department of Agriculture Press Release, August 12, 2009. LINK.]