LANSING, Mich. (Michigan News Source) – When a Michigan farmer’s equipment comes to a stop because it needs a repair, their manual will most likely tell them to call a technician for help. That’s because the farmer doesn’t have access to the software, information and tools to diagnose in order to fix the issue themselves which can sometimes put their livelihood in jeopardy.

In order to help farmers fix their own equipment, a group of 37 Democratic Michigan Legislators have introduced House Bill 4673 which is referred to by the legislators as the “agricultural equipment repair act” and is called the “Right to Repair” all around the rest of the country.

MORE NEWS: Noncitizens ‘Generally Not Eligible’ For Food Stamps? In Michigan, There’s More Than 32,000.

Michigan’s agricultural equipment repair act requires “certain original equipment manufacturers and authorized repair providers of agricultural equipment to make diagnostic, maintenance, and repair parts, tools, and documentation available to independent repair providers and owners of that equipment; and to provide remedies.”

HB 4673 was introduced in the Michigan House in May and was referred to the Committee on Agriculture. On June 7th, that committee had a meeting and heard testimony regarding the bill.

The “Right to Repair” movement, as it relates to farmers, includes having them work with legislators to make it cheaper and easier for them to fix their own products by requiring manufacturers to share repair information and diagnostic tools and supply service parts.

Right to Repair legislation for tractors passed in Colorado in April of this year, the first state to pass such a law. A few other states have passed legislation that covers other products. A Massachusetts law covers vehicles, New York and Minnesota has legislation that covers electronics. There is a lot of pending legislation all over the United States for the right to repair agricultural equipment as well as other digital electronics – but there are also many states in which the legislation has failed to pass.

Arguments from manufacturers and opponents against these Right to Repair laws say that giving access can pose dangers to consumers and their equipment and also compromise the safety and security of the devices by allowing farmers to wrongfully modify their equipment. They also argue that the legislation would hinder competition and expose proprietary information.

Some opponents also point to what they say is the “real” problem with equipment repair currently and that is a shortage of agricultural repair technicians. At the committee hearing, Eric Wareham of the North American Equipment Dealers Association admitted, “We have a serious shortage of technicians in our industry. And you’ve heard about wait times, mostly attributable to lack of personnel in the dealership.”

PIRG (Public Interest Research Group), a consumer protection advocacy organization, who also testified at the hearing, said that passing the repair legislation in Michigan legislation would decrease downtime for farmers and also provide much needed relief to dealerships who don’t have enough staff to keep up with their customers’ repair demands.

MORE NEWS: No Guesswork, Just Grades: Detroit Teens Fast-Tracked to Wayne State

In January of this year, John Deere did what many are calling a “pinky swear” in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the American Farm Bureau Federation, promising equipment owners better access to their own equipment. Others also did the same including CNH Industrial, Kubota and AGCO. These MOUs, PIRG says, “fail to guarantee comprehensive repair access to independent fixers” and they want more to be done. They say the John Deere MOU lacks the force of law, contains loopholes, allows John Deere to walk away from the contract with 30 days’ notice and some are saying that it just doesn’t do much at all.

Walter Schweitzer, Montana Farmers Union president and a third-generation farmer, told PIRG, “We could have a dozen pinky swears from a dozen tractor manufacturers, but we still wouldn’t have comprehensive repair materials. I’m running out of pinkies and I still can’t fix my damn tractor.”

PIRG says, “Binding legislation is necessary to guarantee that every farmer with every brand of equipment can fix every problem with their tractors.”

When PIRG testified at the June committee hearing they said, “If a farmer’s equipment breaks down at the wrong time and they can’t get it fixed, farmers can be forced to watch as their crop – and their profits – wither on the vine.” PIRG also provided research that shows that Right to Repair would save Michigan Farmers an estimated $89 million in avoided downtime and $35 million in repair costs.

Jacob Faist, a Jackson County farmer and member of the Michigan Corn Growers Association board of directors also spoke at the hearing and said, “You can take your vehicle to an Auto Zone or any other place and they plug in. I’ve certainly never seen anyone who has the ability to come out and scan my tractor other than the dealer.”

 Democratic Rep. Reggie Miller (D-Van Buren Township), chief sponsor of the bill, said it was a “common sense” move to expand the options for farmers to fix their own tractors and other equipment. Although she continues to discuss concerns with manufacturers and lobbyists, she is optimistic that an agreement can be made.

Similar bills to HB 4673 have been introduced in the Michigan house and senate including, SB 341 and 342 and HB 4650 and HB 4651 that would give farmers and independent service technicians access to the same diagnostics, information and parts that are available to agricultural equipment dealers. The Senate bills were introduced by Republican Senators Joseph Bellino (R-Monroe) and Rep. Dale Zorn (R-Onsted).

Bellino said about the bills, “This is about standing up for our local farming families and making sure they have the tools they need to fix their own equipment quickly and affordably. Michigan farmers are too often prevented from repairing their own agricultural equipment, or taking it to a locally owned repair shop, because large manufacturers withhold the complete set of tools and software necessary to make timely repairs. These bills will assure hard working farmers will have access to everything needed to repair the equipment they own.”

Bob Thompson, president of the Michigan Farmers Union says about Michigan’s agricultural equipment repair act, “Simply put, this bill is about making sure we have the right to fix our own farm equipment or to take our equipment to a repair professional of our choosing. It’s about choice and fairness for farmers.”

In support of HB 4673 are groups like the Potato Growers of Michigan and Michigan Corn Growers. The environmental group Sierra Club Michigan Chapter also supports the legislation because they believe it will help the environment. Christy McGillivray, legislative and political director of the Sierra Club Michigan Chapter says, “We must design and build for durability, longevity and repair. This is a next step in acknowledging our economy exists within our ecosystem, which has limits.”

However, manufacturers and dealerships say that giving equipment owners tools and information would allow them to illegally crank up horsepower and bypass emissions controls which would put both the environment and operator safety at risk.

Some also question a farmer’s ability to repair their equipment themselves, even when given the information on how to do so. A Michigan repair technician that Michigan News Source spoke to said that farmers often try to fix their own equipment and then call into the dealerships angry that their “fix” didn’t work and their machinery ended up worse off than when they started.

The Harvard Business Review also did an analysis on Right to Repair legislation and concluded that they can create a lose-lose-lose situation that “compromises manufacturer profit, reduces consumer surplus, and exacerbates the environmental impact despite repair being made easier and more affordable.” They go on to say, “Conventional wisdom suggests that giving consumers the right to repair benefits consumers, improves overall social efficiency (although to the detriment of manufacturers), and reduces the environmental impact. Our research challenges these intuitive predictions.

The Harvard Business Review also pointed out that manufacturers would most likely adjust product prices and redesign product durability in an attempt to mitigate the inevitable profit loss that would occur once Right to Repair legislation is enacted on a larger scale.