![](media/image1.jpeg){width="6.510416666666667in"
height="1.4583333333333333in"}

# Release No. 0429.05 

USDA Press Office 202-720-4623

**of**

**Ohio Farm Bill Forum with Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns and**

**Moderator Andy Vance with WRFD Radio Farm Science Review**

**London, Ohio - September 20, 2005**

MODERATOR ANDY VANCE: \[In progress\] \-- Secretary of Agriculture, Mike
Johanns and his team at USDA have been conducting a national tour of
Farm Bill forums. This marks about number 22 or 23 on the list. Number
15 for Secretary Johanns.

And these forums, as I've been watching the stories come back in from
the field and hearing some of my colleagues in the radio business
comment on what they have heard from the field, it's been very
interesting to find out what the Farm Bill means to so many different
facets of our industry. We know our own portion of the industry very
well if we're involved in grain, livestock. We know exactly what the
Farm Bill means to our segment of the business. But the Farm Bill is a
very, very large document that encompasses so much of the food, fiber,
and natural resource industry. That's why it's been absolutely critical
that the Secretary find out from all different portions of the industry
what that Farm Bill means as we go into the 2007 version of the Bill.

Of course the 2002 Farm Bill was written many years ago. Now it seems
like in agriculture so much has happened and changed in our industry.
And as we get ready for the 2007 crop year in that next Farm Bill it's
up to each of us to make sure that USDA and, more importantly, our
members of Congress know what it is we need in the next piece of farm
legislation.

The Secretary has undertaken this national listening tour to find out
exactly what's on your minds and on your hearts in production
agriculture. And we just thank the Secretary for joining us here at the
Farm Science Review and for Dr. Moser and Chuck Gamble and the team of
Farm Science Review here for hosting such a wonderful event.

Right now we welcome the color guard. Today our colors are being carried
by the color guard of the 121st Air Refueling Wing of that Ohio Air
National Guard.

Please stand with me for the presentation of the colors.

\[Presentation of the colors.\]

MODERATOR: And now the National Anthem presented by Julie Watson, Ohio
FFA Association state president and Tim Hornsby a 4-H member from
Delaware County.

\[Singing of the National Anthem.\]

MODERATOR: Thank you. And now our National Anthem will be sung by Molly
McIntyre.

\[Singing of the National Anthem.\]

\[Applause.\]

\[Pause.\]

MODERATOR: Thank you. You may be seated.

Before we get into the format of this afternoon's forum, I want to
introduce Secretary of Agriculture, Mike Johanns for some comments. The
Secretary has been conducting this tour and has been leading the charge
here as we prepare for the Farm Bill Forum. Secretary, I imagine you've
heard quite a bit of emotional outpouring from folks in the industry,
agriculture being such a visceral business for our nation in farm and
food policy. Welcome to Ohio and give us some opening comments here as
we kick off this afternoon's event.

SECRETARY JOHANNS: Thank you very much. It's great to be in Ohio and
thank you everyone for your warm welcome. Maybe especially warm, huh?

\[Laughter.\]

SECRETARY JOHANNS: It is great to be here. These Farm Bill forums have
been quite a hit all across the country. We have turned out great crowds
like we have today. We spend three hours, and as you can see from the
way we will do this forum, this is really your opportunity. I figured
out right from the very first forum that the more I talked, the less
opportunity you have to talk. And so the whole goal here today is for me
to say a few words and get things started. But then what you are going
to see from me is I'm just going to sit back take notes and listen to
what you have to say. I'll make some notes of comments that you've made,
and hopefully at the end of the forum we will have five, ten minutes and
I'll do a wrap-up kind of the topics identified by what you have brought
up. But, again, the whole idea here is to build a forum that says to
you, step up to the microphone and offer your thoughts.

This Farm Bill lasts through 2007, the crop year of 2007. We will wrap
up these forums pretty much by the end of the year. The House and the
Senate will probably do some hearings, I think, across the country, next
year and we'll be working with the legislative process to put a Farm
Bill in place so ideally it is passed typically should be passed in that
last year of the Farm Bill. So the first part of 2007 is kind of what
we're thinking about at this point.

The administration does intend to be very significantly involved in that
debate. I've been asked, do you think you will submit your own piece of
legislation? That is possible. We have not made a final decision on
that, but that is one possibility.

So, ladies and gentlemen, again, let me reiterate today, today is your
forum. It is really an opportunity for you to get to the microphone and
offer your thoughts about what's working relative to farm policy, what
you would like to see differently. And I'm just going to be here all
ears anxious to hear your input.

Let me, if I might, wrap up by saying thank you to Andy Vance from WRFD
Radio. We appreciate you being the moderator. He's the guy that's going
to have to tell you when two minutes are up, and two minutes goes pretty
fast. So, Andy will be the time enforcer too.

MODERATOR: I do very little when I'm on the air in two minutes,
Secretary Johanns.

\[Laughter.\]

SECRETARY JOHANNS: I do also want to acknowledge, you all know Fred
Dailey, the Ohio director of agriculture. Fred, it's so good to see you.
How about a round of applause for Fred?

\[Applause.\]

SECRETARY JOHANNS: And to those, the color guard, the folks who led us
in the Pledge of Allegiance, the young lady who sang the National
Anthem, they just all did a great job and I appreciate it.

You will see today, I should mention one last thing, we start every Farm
Bill Forum with a young person from FFA and a young person from 4-H to
talk about the future of agriculture. Because we should be building
policy that allows for young people to get involved in agriculture.

When I was growing up on that dairy farm in northern Iowa, I was a
member of both, of 4-H first and then FFA. And so I have a tremendous
amount of fondness for both organizations. So we will start the forum
with those folks and let them offer their thoughts.

So I think with that, that's what I've got to say and I'll turn it back
to the moderator and offer an opportunity for him to say a few words
about the forum and where we're going from here and whatever else. So,
ready?

MODERATOR: Very good. Thank you, Secretary Johanns. We will look forward
to hearing your thoughts throughout the afternoon as it becomes
applicable.

The way this afternoon's forum works is all about hearing what's on your
mind and on your hearts about this piece of legislation known as the
Farm Bill. You will see we have two microphones stationed on either side
of the house. If, Tim, you will raise your hand there at that
microphone, Julie over on the other side. They're going to be starting
the forum off in just a moment.

The way this will work is everyone is welcome to come to the microphone.
We invite you to come up and offer comments. Everything that is said
here today will be transcribed and entered into the comments that the
U.S. Department of Agriculture and Secretary Johanns will evaluate and
take into consideration as they decide how to proceed with whether or
not to make a recommendation to Congress on this Farm Bill.

Also, if you would like to enter comments and you're not comfortable
coming to the microphone, I see a comment box straight in front of me
there and there may be others around the room. But right in the center
table here is a comment box. Everything that is entered into that
comment box will go into the written record as well.

You may also submit your comments on line. The web site USDA.gov and you
click on the Farm Bill forum section. You can also enter comments there
electronically. You can also submit written comments through the U.S.
mail, although obviously in this day of high technology, when we can do
our LDPs on line and everything else, it's far preferable to do things
the electronic way. So feel free to do that as well.

You will see to my left, your right, a series of lights. Those lights
will indicate the time. We ask that you respond to the questions in the
pamphlets. You can see the pamphlets laying around the tables. There
should be some on the table in front of you. There are six questions
outlined there and we will kind of go over those briefly.

The Secretary wants to find out your opinion on the following subjects:

Number one, how should farm policy affect next generation of
agriculture? How should it address what we call "unintended
consequences"? There are some folks who indicate one of those might be,
for example, how farm program has affected the price of land. That may
be an unintended consequences that the Farm Bill should address.

Number two, how farm policy might maximize our competition in the global
marketplace?

Thirdly, how farm policy should effectively and fairly distribute
assistance to producers from one end of the spectrum to the other?

Fourth, how can farm policy can achieve conservation goals?

Number five is, how can federal rural programs can impact your rural
communities?

And finally, how agricultural product development, marketing and
assistance should be addressed in the next Farm Bill?

We use the colored light systems, there you are, sir. We use the colored
light system to let you know where we are in the process of your two
minutes. Once you step to the microphone you will have two minutes to
address one of those six questions. When you see the green light, that
indicates that you have 30 seconds left of your two minutes. When you
see the green light you will have 30 seconds left. When you see the
yellow light you have 15 seconds left, and when you see the red light,
that means your two minutes have expired and we would ask you to wrap up
your thoughts so that we can get as many comments today as humanly
possible.

You will notice that we have a packed house this afternoon and I expect
it to stay that way throughout the forum. We will take a break at about
the halfway period and then we'll come back and hear some more.

Secretary Johanns.

SECRETARY JOHANNS: When you see my boss, don't tell him I overlooked
this, but I brought greetings from a great friend of yours. So let's run
those greetings.

PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH \[Taped\]: Thanks for letting me speak to you at
this Farm Bill Forum. America's farm and ranch families provide a safe
and abundant food supply for our people and for much of the world. You
represent the best values of America, stewardship of the land, hard work
and independence, faith, service, and community.

Mike Johanns understands the importance of America's farmers to our
country, which is why I chose him to lead our Department of Agriculture.
I am proud of his work and he will lead our efforts on the next Farm
Bill. Secretary Johanns and I believe the first step in this process is
to ask each of you how today's Farm Bill is working and how it can be
better. As we look to improve America's farm policy, we will continue to
focus on the following goals:

See, America has about 5 percent of the world's population which means
95 percent of your potential customers are over seas. So one of our
goals must be to ensure that America's farmers and ranchers have access
to open, global markets.

A second goal is that we want future generations to have plenty of
opportunities to go into agriculture.

Thirdly we need cooperative conservation that encourages good
stewardship of our land and natural habitats.

We also need to act wisely in delivering help to our nation's producers.
And we must promote cutting edge, agricultural products and research.

And, finally, we must ensure a good quality of life in rural America.

The Farm Bill is important legislation that meets real needs. The next
Farm Bill should further strengthen the farm economy and preserve this
way of life for farmers and ranchers of the future.

Hearing your advice is an important step toward meeting these goals. I
thank you for all you do for our country. And thank you for listening.

MODERATOR: Also, I would be remiss if I didn\'t introduce a very good
friend of ours, the Executive Dean of the College of Food, Agriculture,
and Environmental Science and Vice President of Agriculture
Administration of the Ohio State University, Dr. Bobby Moser.

\[Applause.\]

DR. BOBBY MOSER: Andy, thank you very much. And, Mr. Secretary, I just
want to say we are very pleased that you have chosen to come to Ohio and
be a part and have a listening session here and a forum here at the Farm
Science Review. I am very pleased with the turnout that we've got here.
A lot of people here wanting to know and hear and discuss the Farm Bill.

Let me just make one comment on behalf of the Land Grant system who has
had a partnership with USDA for over 100 years. And the need for
continuing the balanced research portfolio of extension and research and
extension where we've got the base formula funds as well as the
competitive grant funds. We think that's very important and that has
been very successful over the years. When we're talking about developing
new energy sources or functional foods that prevent certain types of
diseases or that treat certain types of diseases, whether it's making
young people \-- developing young people to be responsible adults, or
working in small communities for rural development areas we work very
closely with USDA in those types of programs and we would like to keep
those strong.

A new proposal, Mr. Secretary, that task force that was put together and
they have recommended a new program for the future funding of Ag
research called NIFA, the National Institute of Food and Agriculture.
It's a merit-based competitive grants program very similar to that of
the NIH and NSF. And we think that's a very positive program. If we
could get that one implemented, that would be great.

What we want to do with our system, the Land Grant system us supportive
of this, because what we want to do is to help agriculture, American
agriculture, maintain its competitive advantage in the world market
today.

Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here.

SECRETARY JOHANNS: Thank you.

MODERATOR: And thank you, Dr. Moser, for hosting this very important
Farm Bill listening session here at the Farm Science Review, as well.

With that I think it's time for the first comments. Again, two
microphones for you. You can start getting in line to the microphone and
we will begin addressing the first question, our state FFA president,
Julie Watson, and 4-H member, Tim Hornsby.

MS. JULIE WATSON: All right. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, Dr. Moser, and
Mr. Vance. First off, I would like to start off by saying that I grew up
on a family farm. That's what my dad does full time is farm 350 acres.
So I know first-hand from experience that it can be a difficult life.
But not just for me, but to talk about a first generation farmer that
wants to go out there and start his own farm, probably the biggest
challenge that he faces today is getting the money initially to start
that farm. Because a lot of banks won't provide that.

So I guess the biggest thing is to be able to have a farm program that
will afford farmers the opportunity to loan that money, to get a hold of
that money to start that farm, pay it back over a series of years with
low interest rates and a high loan-to-value ratio. And that's not just
for first-generation farmers. Because, for instance, in my family I'm
one of three children. And while the farm will be passed down to my
brother, if it were divided by my parents into three sections between
the three of us children and my brother being the only one who has a
desire to go into production agriculture, he wouldn't have the money at
the time starting out in his 20s or early 30s to purchase the other two
portions of the farm from my sister and I. So it's extremely difficult,
you know, with the cost of land, the cost of machinery and equipment and
to get started buying animals and seed for anyone to get that involved
in the industry right from the very beginning.

So with that, I guess the biggest thing, again, is to have some sort of
loan program to help farmers start from the very beginning. And now,
like I said, I won't be going directly into production agriculture,
though my brother hopes to, but I'm hoping to one day maybe do the
second best thing and that might be to be the U.S. Secretary of
Agriculture. So, Mr. Johanns, with that if I can't be out there tilling
the soil, but my brother hopes to, maybe I could one day serve in
agriculture in a different way.

Thank you very much for allowing the FFA to be here today and I wish
everyone the best of luck with this preliminary Farm Bill Forum.

\[Applause.\]

MODERATOR: Thanks, Julie.

Tim, your comments from a 4-H member's perspective.

MR. TIM HORNSBY: Hello. My name is Tim Hornsby and I am from Waldo,
Ohio, up in Marion County. I have been a 4-H member for nine years. I'm
very active in 4-H and have recently been awarded the National 4-H Youth
Directions Council which I'll be going out in Washington, D.C. to get
some training, so maybe I'll see you around.

\[Laughter.\]

MR. HORNSBY: It's an honor to be here today representing the nearly
3,000 4-H members from across Ohio, as you receive comments regarding
the Farm Bill.

As many of you know, the roots of 4-H had begun at the turn of the
century when a progressive educator named A. B. Graham from right here
in Ohio engaged young people in a learn-by-doing aspect of learning and
building better agriculture education.

Most states organize 4-H clubs outside of school time with parents
serving as volunteers, leaders, county extension educators providing
resources, materials, and leadership. Today 35 percent of youth reached
by 4-H are from rural areas and small towns. The Cooperative Extension
Service of the USDA as established by Congress in 1914, works with
partnership with the Ohio State University which is the Ohio Land Grant
University. State Land Grant University and Cooperative Extension
Services of the USDA supported the development of 4-H.

Here in Ohio 4-H youth development, the Ohio State University Extension
and the College of Food and Agriculture Environmental Sciences are
helping young people to become more mature, competent adults capable of
participating and of being leaders in their community.

USDA's support of the Farm Bill enhances this effort through programs
such as the Rural Youth Development. Four-year Rural Youth Development
grants have allowed 4-H to successfully address the economic and
physical barriers that rural youth and their families face.

And I would thank you again for letting us come and suggest that you
look at the prices of land as a way and helping people get into
specialty crops as a way to maybe strengthen this bill. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you, Tim.

\[Applause.\]

MODERATOR: Again, as you come to the microphones make sure that for the
record you state your name and your hometown, your involvement in
agriculture. The green light will run until you hit the, I believe it's
the 60-second mark when it will switch to the yellow. The 30-second mark
it will switch to yellow. And when you see the flashing red light, that
means your two minutes have expired.

We will start off here on the western mike.

MS. DEANNE DICK: Mr. Secretary, thank you for the opportunity to speak
before you today. My name is Deanne Dick, and I'm originally from
Prairie Home, Missouri, but I am now based out of Cincinnati, Ohio and I
am part of the AFA Alliance and I am currently employed with Hormel
Foods.

Mr. Secretary and the members of the committee, as the face of rural
agriculture and production agriculture continue to change, the bonds
between the two shall remain strong. Agriculture has and will continue
to support rural America.

I believe the 2007 Farm Bill should continue to examine how to
strengthen that bond. Being a young professional from rural America in
agriculture, I have had numerous opportunities to see first-hand the
role that education and youth development play in our local communities.
I have had the opportunity to be part of an organization called
"Agriculture Future of America," AFA. AFA identifies, encourages, and
supports college age youth preparing for careers in agriculture and the
food industry.

Since 1997, AFA has, with the support from hundreds of sponsoring
partners, invested in more than 3,500 college students' preparation and
has awarded more than 900 college scholarships totaling \$2.9 million.
These scholarships have been funded by hundreds of individuals and rural
businesses.

In 2002, Farm Bill Section 7412 provides for youth grants administered
by CSREES for national 4-H, national FSA, Girl Scouts of the United
States of America and Boy Scouts of America.

Agriculture Future of America seeks your support to participate in this
grant program. We strongly encourage the Department and the Congress to
include Agriculture Future of America as a grant recipient within
Section 7412 of the 2000 \[sic\] Farm Bill.

I just wanted to kind of tell you my personal experience with AFA. I had
to get all that, you know, out of that way. But I was a scholarship
recipient my senior year of high school. I participated in three AFA
conferences that kind of, you know, sharpens your skills and knowledge
of the agriculture industry. I grew up on a small, family farm. My
brother is currently running my family farm. My mom works for USDA, FSA.
And so that's how I began my career with agriculture. But after the
three conferences, it's just a great opportunity. I believe it's what
helped me get my career today with Hormel Foods and I hope you consider
AFA in your next Farm Bill.

MODERATOR: Thank you.

Next comment from the eastern mike.

MS. LISA HEMLER FUGATE \[sp\]: Good afternoon, Mr. Secretary, and thank
you for holding this listening session and welcome to Ohio and Ohio's
premier Farm Science Review. My name is Lisa Hemler Fugate \[sp\] and I
serve as the executive director of the Ohio Association of Second
Harvest Food Banks. Which represents 12 food banks and 3,000-member
charities, food pantries, Soup kitchens, and homeless shelters across
the state of Ohio. Unfortunately, these are difficult times for not only
the folks we serve, but Ohio farmers and growers.

I'm here to talk to you a little bit about what we would like to see in
the Farm Bill as far as food stamp benefits and strengthening this
critical lifeline for more than one million Ohioans who participate.
Food Pantry recipients, about 62 percent of them, currently participate
in the food stamp program, although all appear to be categorically
eligible. While benefits used to get them through about two and a half
weeks of each month, we are seeing them return now after two weeks.

These, again, are uncertain times, Mr. Secretary, and you and your staff
at USDA are to be commended for your prompt response in responding to
the disaster along the Gulf. Certainly your rapid response for the
issuing of disaster declaration that permitted persons affected by
Katrina to receive food stamps, national school lunch, school breakfast,
TFAB, and WIC are to be commended, sir.

Mr. Secretary, I am here representing organizations that are concerned
about the projected three billion in federal cuts and the structural
threats of the food stamp program pending in the reconciliation bill
before Congress. I urge you to communicate to the President immediately
to stop these cuts.

In addition, food stamps are important to our local communities bringing
over a billion dollars into the state. Food stamps help keep businesses
in areas that would not otherwise be there. Food stamps help ensure
private charitable resources are focused on emergency and we can help
address the long-term food security needs. I ask you to index food stamp
benefits to the moderate food plan, therefore providing a more adequate
reflection of the actual food costs.

Eliminate food stamp provisions that limit food stamp benefits to
able-bodied adults without dependents. Expand food and fund for the TFAB
program to a minimum of \$500 million a year. Immediately exercise your
authority under Section 32 to purchase more fresh fruits and vegetables
for the emergency food assistance system and provide funding to support
innovative local and statewide market clearing programs such as Ohio's
own Agricultural Surplus Production Alliance Program.

And last, allow demonstration projects that further simplify the
application process and ensure that those who are eligible for food
stamps can participate and increase the minimum issuance for senior
citizens and persons with disabilities to a minimum of \$50 a month.

Thank you very much for your time.

MODERATOR: And now would be the appropriate time for my friendly
reminder that the light system on the right side of the stage, the
yellow light means 30 seconds and when the red light starts to flash I
will be glad to step on your toes.

We will go back to the western mike. If you will just state your name
and your question that you are responding to, Mr. Jackson.

MR. TOM JACKSON: Good afternoon. Mr. Secretary, I am Tom Jackson. I am
president and CEO of the Ohio Grocer's Association. I represent grocers
throughout the state of Ohio.

Unfortunately in the 2002 Farm Bill COOL or Country of Origin Labeling
was an 11th-hour, last minute with no hearings and very little debate.
It became a mandate that has been delayed and has gone through a lot of
consternation. What I would hope in the 2007 Farm Bill is to work
productively with our industry and the producers together so that we can
make an effective, voluntary program. I understand that it would be
incumbent for you to enforce what is presently on the books, so to
speak. I think the best thing that could happen would be for us to delay
that until the 2000 Farm Bill so that we could have a productive
dialogue and have a productive session as far as working with the
retailers an the producers to do what is best for the country.

In our global economy, I think this is very, very critical. This, in my
opinion, and in the opinion of the distribution end of this program is
that it is going to do nothing but raise the price of food to the
American consumer. And I think that we can be very proud, and the people
in this room can be extraordinarily proud of the fact that we feed our
people for less than 10 percent of the disposable income. And if we are
not careful and if we mess with that delicate balance, we are not going
to be able to do that and we only have to look at many other countries
to see what they're paying. So as a representative of the grocers, our
goal is to bring it to the consumer at the lowest possible cost. And if
we are not careful and if we don't work together, producer and
distributor together, for a voluntary program that's effective that we
all buy in on, I'm afraid all we will do is increase the cost and we'll
do nothing for safety.

MODERATOR: And don't forget, we have the pamphlets in front of you that
have six questions that we would like you to address here. We will have
a period for open comments on the Farm Bill toward the end of the
session. But if you will, make sure you focus on the six questions in
the Farm Bill pamphlet.

Back to the eastern microphone for more comments.

MR. BOB SLICKER: Good afternoon. Bob Slicker from Wayne County. I farm
with my brother Fred and three sons between the age of 26 and 32.
Between us we have 12 grandkids and the oldest is 16.

This message is from them who are back home harvesting. They said, "Dad,
go down there and tell those guys we need some common sense in this Farm
Bill. We need some simplicity to this Farm Bill, and we need to get away
from the political answers to this Farm Bill."

And I will express to you what these young people back home are telling
me that they think they need to build a farm in the future and manage
risk. They think you should get rid of the permanent payments. Permanent
payments do anything but raise the price of land, make it harder for
them, the young farmers, to expand. They keep inefficient people on the
land. That also interrupts the markets on the peaks and valleys, and we
need both in order to be able to do a good job of marketing risks, and
we will get higher peaks and valleys if we take those permanent payments
out of there.

We do need loan deficiency payments when we have a long drought of two
or three years of low-cost to production in order to compete in the
world and the other people that have subsidies. But hopefully if we can
do a good job of managing marketing, we shouldn't need those very often.

We need crop insurance that these boys can afford to have. So they can
go to their bankers and get the loans and the operating loans they need
to continue to farm and be able to judge what they need in the way of
cash flow to keep continuing the farming.

Along the simplicity lines is, I will say, if you get rid of the
permanent payments, you will take the workload off of the Farm Service
Agency office, they can do crop insurance for us instead of this
helter-skelter we got and the crop insurance people are completely
federal bureaucracy. When you have one that uses 6.6 bushel for a ton of
silage and one that uses 7.93 at the ASC office or Farm Service, you've
got people that are using different compaction factors for measuring
bins. This is not simplicity, this is not stuff people can manage. This
is risk factors we need to have to keep those young boys on the farm.
Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thanks.

More comments from the western microphone.

MR. FLOYD GIDDING: Mr. Secretary, my name is Floyd Gidding and I'm from
Prevo County. I am a farmer/owner producer. I would like to thank you
for taking the time to listen to us Ag producers.

The statement by J. B. Penn, Under Secretary of Agriculture just
recently said we never consolidated, we may consolidate functions, but
we are going to improve service. If that means the goal to modernize the
agency and to train employees for continued service improvement to the
producers, then I understand. Service is the issue so that the producer
have convenient access to NRCS office or FSA offices. These comments to
go item three and item six of your brochure. That's more important than
the number of offices.

If you close FSA offices, that will impact services. Let alone impact
time and costs and production and travel to those offices out of their
area or out of my area. There is no substitute for the face-to-face
interaction that we have with our FSA personnel who are local and
familiar with our area. If FSA offices are closed, then I also feel that
fraud can also become an increasing problem because our elected county
committee would not be the watchdog of the county. Instead, a larger
area would be watched by boards that do not recognize local problems or
live in the area.

We are a very small county with 45,000 people and with an income from
FSA of over \$9 million. That does have an effect on the economy. As a
producer, I would ask that the new Farm Bill continue with the people
that I have known and trusted to run the FSA.

Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you, sir.

Comments now from the eastern mike.

\[Applause.\]

MR. DWIGHT WISE: Mr. Secretary, my name is Dwight Wise. I'm a retired
farmer. I was in the state legislature for 12 years until the voter box
put me out. I was chairman of the House Agriculture Committee for eight
years.

In response to number three, how should farm policy be designed to
effectively and fairly distribute assistance to producers? The safety
net of \$5 per bushel for soybeans, \$2 per bushel for corn is essential
to be included in the 2007 Federal Farm Program if the family farmer is
to make enough profit to stay in business.

Recent federal farm benefits are the major reason that many family
farmers have any profit at all and are able to remain on the farm. A 20
percent reduction of the safety net to \$4 for beans, \$1.60 for corn
would result in a \$50,000 loss in gross receipts for a farmer who has
500 acres of soybeans and 500 acres of corn. There are very few family
farmers who could stand this amount of loss in their operating
statement. The present federal farm program is less than 1 percent of
the total federal budget. There should be no reason that the safety net
in the present farm program should not be included in the 2007 program.

Included in this letter are the current prices of soybeans and corn and
wheat as indicated in the September 17th, 2005, Freeman, Ohio newspaper.
Corn at Clyde, Ohio, \$1.68 presently. At Norwalk, soybeans, cash bid,
\$5.35. The definition of a family farmer is a family farm is a unit
using land and other capital investments operated by a family operator
and his or her family who provide the management, take the economic
risks, and provide a vital part of the work and supervision of the unit.

MODERATOR: Thank you.

MR. WISE: Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you, Mr. Wise.

Mr. Peterson.

MR. BOB PETERSON: Good afternoon. I'm Bob Peterson, a grain and
livestock farmer from Washington Court House, Ohio. I farm with my
father and brother. I thank you for the opportunity for farmers to share
their opinions. I think today you will find out that we have some.

The vast majority of farmers throughout the U.S. will tell you that
their ultimate policy vision would be a level playing field or chance to
compete in open markets. That is my view and that is also the view of
the Ohio Farm Bureau. I have the pleasure of serving as President of the
Ohio Farm Bureau and we believe that should be our policy goal for the
21st century, a world where our farmers and ranchers are allowed to
compete in open markets without tariffs, without export subsidies,
without currency manipulations, and, yes, without production distorting
domestic subsidies. Frankly that view of agriculture policy is still
very much in the developmental stages, but one that makes a lot of sense
to many people.

Given a world where we have access to foreign markets and where farmers
are allowed to compete with other farmers and not against national
treasuries is clearly the ideal. Ohio farmers are willing to discuss a
reduction in commodity loan payments, countercyclical payments, and the
like if, and I need to emphasize "if" we are able to remove other
barriers to more open trade.

Moving toward this goal is becoming more difficult every year. As
American farmers and some U.S. legislators feel that negotiated
agreements are not being met and promises are not being kept. Each
political failure is putting our delicate world trading system in
jeopardy. We all know what is at stake and the potential economic
catastrophe if we don't continue to move forward with meaningful
discussions. But we must implement policies that will grow our markets.
As markets grow, farm program costs will decrease and farmers' incomes
grow from the marketplace.

Bridging the gap between where we are now and where we want to be in the
future will require time. The short-term reality is that we will
continue to need income support consisting with our international trade
obligations. Part of this income support will likely need to be
countercyclical in nature and therefore (unclear) opportunities for
market growth are realized.

Thank you very much.

MODERATOR: Bob, I think we would all agree the number "some" doesn't
cover the amount of opinions farmers have, but thanks for the thought.

Comments from the eastern mike.

MR. DAN HILLER: Thank you very much. I am Dan Hiller from Hardin County.
And at my age I am just starting to farm as a second career.

I would like to address the history. The current and past farm programs
have had the fatal side effect to many rural communities particularly
noticed in western United States of depopulating very many areas. They
have encouraged the expansion of farms at the sacrifice of a viable
rural life.

Do we want to continue on with that, or do we want to maintain rural
agriculture and the rural way of life? That is a question that can only
be answered by the people of the community, not just a few farmers and a
few special interest farm groups.

We have to, in order to build rural America, rebuild it, not just build,
rebuild, we have to have an effective noncircumnavigable system with a
ceiling of payments, not an individual having a number of corporation,
like the gentlemen who received several millions of dollars in
government subsidies from Oklahoma has and complains he needs double
that to make a living.

I think the thing that we have overlooked and it is to our detriment
today has been our cutback in federal and state funding of research. In
order to keep that research in the public domain where it can be
licensed to companies in the United States for use in the United States,
that we have competition for supply. If we do not do this, then our days
as an agricultural giant are definitely marked and we will succumb to
the Brazils, the Ukraine, and other areas of the world that have lower
cost structure than what we have.

Thank you.

MODERATOR: More comments from the western mike.

MS. ROBIN RADLEY CALICOAT \[sp\]: Good afternoon. My name is Robin
Radley Calicoat \[sp\]. My husband and I farm in Clarke County near
South Vienna. We have two small children, two boys, which hopefully
eventually will go into agriculture one way or another. I would like to
discuss the number one question concerning new entry into agriculture.

I am also involved in Clarke County Farm Bureau as their vice president
and also on the Ohio Farm Bureau as well. There are a lot of different
reasons why there are new farmers not coming into agriculture including
the booming economy in the 1990s and the changing demographics. Without
the access to government support, producers will have a lot of
challenges in the future. Two other limiting factors are the government
support payments as well as its effect on the land payments.

Government's payments tie to both land in price and higher rental rates.
Renting land and investing the sweat equity needed to produce the crop
is one of many ways producers get into agriculture, including my husband
and I which are first-generation farmers.

Average net paid rent to non-operator landlords during 1995 to 1999 was
only 15 percent compared to just ten years before. The cash back from
that is only 15 percent. Excuse me, was 40 percent and 15 percent.

The asset value of land and agriculture is estimated at \$1.2 trillion.
Some of the government payments right now boost the land prices from
18.3 percent in some areas to almost 40 percent in other areas. If
adjustments are going to be made for government support programs that
affect land prices, those adjustments must be evaluated very carefully
and over a period of time. As a current young farmer and as a mother of
hopefully two future farmers, I look to the USDA, yourself, and other
governmental officials and administrations for sound policies to
compliment Ohio's and America's number one industry, agriculture.

Thank you very much.

MODERATOR: Thanks, Robin.

More comments from this side of the house.

MS. GRETCHEN GRIFFIS: Good morning. Hello, Mr. Secretary, Dr. Moser. My
name is Gretchen Griffis, I'm from Wooster, Ohio. I work as a public
health nutritionist. I'm also a tree farmer with my husband. We have
farmed in Wayne and Holmes County. My son-in-law is a dairy farmer who
started from scratch on his own.

I am here to speak in terms of some of the other federal programs
through the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The Department has been the
lead organization in the anti-hunger relief through the Food Stamp
Program, WIC Program, School Lunch Programs, these sorts of things.
There have been comments made that these are just free handout programs.
I would like that to be known that it is not. Particularly the WIC
program, particularly the School Lunch Program. At least half of the
money spent on these programs goes towards nutrition education, goes
toward making sure that our children, our future receive the nutrition
they need. And that is our future. Those programs also teach people the
right types of food, teach them to buy the foods at our farmers' market.
Both of these programs are an essential part of our economy.

The Food Stamp program, also provides food for many of our folks in
need. It might be advantageous in reviewing these programs to put in a
component to teach these folks how to use those food stamps correctly.
Most of our folks that do partake of Food Stamp Programs, WIC Programs
aren't there just for the hand out. They're there for the safe gap until
they can earn on their own and to keep their families healthy. Thank
you.

MODERATOR: Thank you.

More comments.

MS. TANYA STORM: Good afternoon. My name is Tanya Storm and I serve as
the information coordinator for the Cart County Farm Bureau.

Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for this opportunity for farmers to share our
views regarding the next Farm Bill. I would like to focus my comments
today on the USDA question number four.

Since their introduction into the Farm Bill conservation programs have
proven their value to the agricultural sector as well as the general
public in enhancing our environment. The recent shift towards
conservation programs for working lands is a welcome one and should
continue to be the priority in conservation program delivery.

In addressing this issue concerning the millions of acres in the
conservation reserve program, USDA should focus on creative approaches
which stimulate program acreage providing greater environmental benefits
placing existing and potential new contract holders on an even and
competitive basis and spending taxpayer dollars wisely.

We believe the best approach for addressing expiring contracts is for
the USDA to offer one to five year extensions for existing contract
holders. This strategy would allow the USDA to even out the USDA
workload while maintaining and championing an ongoing competitive
bidding process. This type of extension strategy should be staggered to
allow four to five million acres into the program on an annual basis.

Thank you for your time.

MODERATOR: Thank you.

Comments from this side of the room.

MS. KIM CLARK: Good afternoon, Mr. Secretary. My name is Kim Clark. I am
the program services director with Girl Scouts, Seal of Ohio Council.
And I am addressing question five today.

Grant funding for the Girl Scouting in rural communities initiative has
allowed Girl Scouts Seal of Ohio, Black Diamond, and Heart of Ohio
Councils to build in collaboration a new model for serving girls in
rural Appalachian communities. These programs are critical to keeping
communities thriving and viable for generations to come. By investing in
our youth we can put forth the greatest infrastructure imaginable for
long-term economic development growth, and sustainability in these
distressed regions. Education is the key, financial literacy, social and
entrepreneurial leadership, mentoring, community engagement. By building
these skills, the young women we see today will be the leaders of
tomorrow and key contributors in solving the questions put forth on the
list today.

I would like to share from a letter that was written by a parent of a
girl participant in our programs. "Our daughter is 12 years old and the
Girl Zone Project has been fantastic for her and other girls in this
area. We have no rec center, swimming pools, bowling alleys, movie
theaters, no jobs, the list goes on and on. What we do have is drugs,
alcohol, violence, and young girls having babies. The Girl Zone Project
has given many of these girls the opportunity to grow and learn and to
see the other side.

My daughter has received her first aid certification, traveled to
Pittsburgh for a science program, Washington, D.C. to learn about our
nation's capital and to Mountain State University where she lived in a
dorm and learned about college life and careers.

On her trip to D.C. she called us every night to tell us what she did
and saw. I was so happy to hear the excitement in her voice. Our
daughter worked hard to earn extra money for her trip. She made and sold
address labels, we gathered up stuff for a yard sale. Her friend baked
cookies and pies for her church. So each girl learned so much including
the money part. They both knew that we don't have the extra money.

As you can tell, these experiences have impact beyond just one girl.
That excitement fills a home and in turn fills a community and brings
hope to the future."

Thank you very much.

MODERATOR: More comments from this side of the room.

MR. CLARK SHEETS: Welcome to the great state of Ohio, Mr. Secretary. I
am Clark Sheets a farmer from Hawking County. I am also a board member
of the local Soil and Water Conservation District, have been for over 20
years. And we serve on that board voluntarily. It's a nonpaid position.

I also represent the Ohio Federation of Soil and Water Conservation
Districts as a vice chair. And my concerns are about the conservation
and environmental goals in the next Farm Bill.

We would like to see that expanded more on conservation issues. The CRP
program that we've had here in Ohio, those have gone over well. The Lake
Erie CRP and also the Sciota River CRP, the CSP programs, we would like
to see that as it was originally initiated in the current Farm Bill to
be an entitlement, not just on a watershed basis where we can \-- the
phrase is "reward the best and motivate the rest." It is a great
program. We have the technical staff in place to administer these
programs to get the farmers involved with them on the local district
level and also working in partnership with the NRCS personnel. Our
concerns are down the road that a lot of us are getting older. That
means retirement is coming up for a lot of people, career people in
NRCS. And we would like to see the money available there that they could
add more people to help with these programs and continue the working
relationship we have with the farmers in the area to get the job done.

Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you.

Now to this side of the room.

MS. SARAH COSKA \[sp\]: Hi, I'm Sarah Coska \[sp\]. I'm a middle school
student from Massillon, Ohio and talking on question five. I'm with the
Girl Zone Program.

When people think of Girl Scouting, they think camping and crafts and
cookies. There is so much more than that. Girl Scouting has taught me
how to set goals and how to achieve them. Through Girl Scouting I have
got a greater self-esteem to talk to people and try new things. It also
gives me the opportunity to know my community and like through service
\-- through services.

Over and above that the Girl Zone Program has taken me beyond the
community to connect with other girls my age that share the same
interests who aren't like even anywhere near me in the U.S. And I still
talk to them everyday through new technologies like AIM and Instant
Messaging. And we even cheer each other on at sporting events.

Through Girl Zone I have done so many things my friends will never have
the chance to do. I am the outdoor person in my troop and my family
aren't so much. I've gotten to go skiing, I've backpacked, I've biked,
I've even gone whitewater rafting which I would have never been able to
do.

Through Girl Zone I visited four colleges before I even entered eighth
grade. Last summer I went to a teen techno venture challenge which
opened my eyes to what college is really like. I slept in dorms, I
walked to my classes, and I even ate in the cafeteria.

As many girls leave Girl Scouts as they grow older, Girl Zone has kept
them active providing programs to hold their interest. Girl Scouts who
decide to stay in troops have wide opportunities to connect with other
girls in their communities by attending Girl Zone Programs. As Girl
Scouting is still a part of my life Girl Zone has opened me to greater
experiences.

Thank you for your time.

MODERATOR: Thank you for your comments.

More from Mr. Wilnow.

MR. SPARKY WILNOW: Good afternoon, I'm Sparky Wilnow answer I own and
operate a farm in Mylon \[sp\], Ohio. I want to thank you, Secretary
Johanns, for this opportunity for farmers to get together and speak with
you about this next Farm Bill. I would like to focus my comments upon
the USDA question number one, which reads: How should farm policy be
designed to maximize U.S. competitiveness and our country's ability to
effectively compete in global markets.

As you know, Mr. Secretary, our ability to compete in global markets
will be affected greatly by the outcome of the ongoing DOHA round of the
trade negotiations I the World Trade Organization. This round is
unlikely to conclude successfully before 2007. The results of the
negotiation, and particularly the results on domestic support comments
must be better known and taken into account as we make major public
declarations about changes to the current Farm Bill. Any attempt to
seriously modify the current Farm Bill prior to the completion of the
round may place U.S. farmers and ranchers at a serious competitive
disadvantage.

Many farmers and I strongly agree and support the WTO negotiations as a
means to achieve reductions in trade distorting domestic subsidies. The
elimination of export subsidies, and the harmonization of tariffs from
U.S. agricultural products around the world. This view is also shared by
the Ohio Farm Bureau of which I serve as vice president.

The modalities for the negotiations on domestic supports need to be
clearly defined before it is reasonable to change the Farm Bill. Without
the specifics of the agreement, including concessions in the key areas
of market access, it is simply not enough to reduce program spending and
assume that future U.S. compliance with WTO domestic support commitments
will be met. In the transition to more market-oriented programs there is
no greater need than eliminating market barriers and other limitations
to market-based trade. In this transition period, Ohio Farm Bureau will
likely ask for your assistance to offset the negative effect here at
home from the trade distorting practices of other government.

MODERATOR: Thanks, Sparky.

MR. WILNOW: You're welcome. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thanks, Sparky.

More comments?

MR. BRYCE SIMMS: Yes, I'm Bryce Simms, Jefferson Township Trustee,
southwest of Dayton, Ohio. I came here to thank you because of what you
done for us.

We went everywhere trying to get a loan, but our economic conditions
couldn't afford a loan. But we came to Hillsboro and we start working
with you and we got a loan for \$812,000, 5 percent, 30 years. I want to
let you know that if it hadn't been for you, we wouldn't be in this new
facility. The only reason I came up here is to just thank you. We are in
our new facilities, our new administration building, our new fire
station, and we are all happy.

\[Laughter.\]

MR. SIMMS: So the concern I have now is trying to get some more money.

\[Laughter.\]

MR. SIMMS: On that 5 percent loan. But that's one reason I came. I seen
some people that helped us, but the thing about it is, you're doing a
great job. I wanted to welcome you to Ohio, Ohio Buckeyes. All right.

\[Applause.\]

MR. SIMMS: So that's one reason I'm here and I just want to let you know
that our community is so proud. Mike and them, they come back all the
time, you know, and we go out for dinner and everything. But, keep on
doing the good work.

Look here, citizens, you all got money out here. You all \-- if you got
money, they will help you. I'm serious, if you qualify. I'm serious. We
didn\'t even know. But we got the money and we're happy. Thanks a lot.

MODERATOR: Thank you, sir.

More comments from this side of the room?

MR. JEFF SELLERS: Good afternoon. I am Jeff Sellers, a third-generation
vegetable grower/shipper from Hartville, Ohio. Thank you for this
opportunity, Secretary Johanns.

Historically farm policy has been written with little input from and
attention to the U.S. fruit and vegetable sector. Limited dollars have
been made available for research while separate legislation has pursued
market access activities.

The central component of recent Farm Bills for the fruit and vegetable
sector has been the prohibition of planting fruits and vegetables to
acres receiving direct payments. I urge the administration to leave this
prohibition in place. The fruit and vegetable sector has operated in a
market-driven environment that as such is sensitive to changes in supply
and demand. Removing the prohibition creates an unlevel risk exposure
for growers entering and exiting the fruit and vegetable market while
continuing to receive direct government payments during the off years.

We urge the administration to address the WTO cotton case ruling by
requesting and fighting for an exemption during the DOHA negotiations
that allow us to maintain this prohibition and green box status for
direct payments.

For the 2007 Farm Bill fruit and vegetable producers would benefit from
non-trade distorting, assistance in the form of risk management, tools
designed for specialty crop growers, research and nutrition, and real
regulatory reform.

Regulatory actions cost the Ohio fruit and vegetable sectors millions of
dollars annually affecting our competitiveness both domestically and
internationally. During this current energy crises, regulatory reform is
desperately needed to reduce the refining bottleneck strangling our
agricultural businesses and our ability to deliver products to its final
destination. We seek a positive business climate under which we can
operate. This will only come about with the right kind of tax policies
and labor laws that provide the flexibility needed while rewarding
productivity, health care systems that continue to provide some of the
best medical services in the world, infrastructure that allows us \--

MODERATOR: Thanks, that's your two minutes. Appreciate that.

More comments. Mr. Sharp.

MR. DON SHARP: Yes, my name is Don Sharp. I own and operate a dairy farm
in Fairfield County.

I am requesting that an agriculture easement program be developed as a
part of the new Farm Bill. This program will allow farmers to agree to
an agriculture easement to satisfy increased loan obligations brought
about by maturing shared appreciation agreements. Such an easement
program was a part of the Senate version of the present Farm Bill, but
was lost in committee before the final version of the bill was passed.

One of the directives to the USDA of the Agriculture Credit Act of 1987
was to restructure loans and write down farm debt. In order to be
eligible for these restructuring programs designed to help keep
producers on the land, thousands of farmers across the country were
required to sign ten-year shared appreciation agreements. Due to
increased upward pressure put on farm land prices from residential and
industrial development, these agreements, even though not explained as
such as the time of signing, are now being interpreted at the time of
maturity by the Farm Service Agency as to allow for 100 percent of the
restructured write down to be recaptured and added back to the farmers'
debt. This occurs at the end of the ten-year shared appreciation
agreement even though the farmer has remained on the land and made all
loan payments due.

These large increases in debt often leads to a farmer being unable to
cash flow the new debt. Increased land value only translates to the
ability to cash flow a large debt if all or part of the land is sold.
This defeats the initial intent of the program to keep farmers on the
land.

An agriculture easement program can accomplish the following goals:

Allow farmers to complete their loan agreements without assuming
addition large loan obligations; fulfill the initial intent of the loan
restructuring program to keep family farmers on the land; prevent farm
land from being lost to residential and industrial development and can
accomplish all these mentioned goals without any cash expenditure by
USDA.

I think this addresses question number three.

MODERATOR: Thank you, Mr. Sharp.

More comments \--

\[Tape break.\]

\[In progress.\]

MR. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_: Rural community assistance
partnership. I'm in Washington County. I want to give a thanks to the
administration and to the Department for your coming out here in
supporting of the infrastructure, water and sewer and wastewater
projects throughout Ohio and to the rural communities through the Rural
Development Agency. And we want to thank you for this support. We
believe that this addresses or is in response to question number five
and will also help retain young people in small communities.

MODERATOR: Thank you.

More comments, Mr. Logan.

MR. LOGAN: Thank you, Andy, thank you, Mr. Secretary, and Dean Moser. We
appreciate the opportunity. On behalf of the Ohio Farmers Union we would
like to respond to a few of the questions that you had proposed.

The first has to do with the unintended consequences of USDA supported
trade policy.

First, let me say, we fully acknowledge that today's agricultural
markets are unquestionably global in nature. We take no issue with those
who seek to access overseas markets, and we acknowledge that some very
valuable opportunities exist in overseas markets. Our concern relates to
the unintended consequences of advocating a particular set of trading
rules which ignore many trade distorting factors such as variances in
currency valuation, variances in environmental standards, sanitary
standards, and labor standards while focusing exclusively on the
conventional three pillars.

The unintended consequence of the adoption of these policies has been to
put American agriculture producers at a distinct disadvantage to those
foreign competitors whose countries manipulate currencies and to those
who may \-- and also rewards those nations who may abuse their
environment or exploit their workers.

The results of the adoption of these trade rules has been a dramatic 62
percent increase in agricultural imports into the U.S. while Ag exports
have managed only a modest 4 percent increase since 1995, that's
according to USDA and Department of Commerce statistics. The bottom line
net effect has been a consistent erosion in U.S. Ag trade balance from a
comfortable \$24.7 billion in '95 to near zero this year.

So despite our nation's very abundant natural resource base, our climate
and unparalleled technology we stand poised to be a net food-importing
nation.

Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thanks, Joe.

More comments from this side of the house.

MR. GARY BALDEZER \[sp\]: Good afternoon, my name is Gary Baldezer
\[sp\] and I'm a fourth-generation corn, wheat and soybean producer from
north central Ohio in Seneca County. I would like to focus my comments
today on question number four, which reads:

How can farm policy best achieve conservation and environmental goals?

Conservation compliance has long been a part of farm policy. Though
often overlooked as a conservation component, it has contributed
significantly to the reduction in soil erosion and other environmental
benefits. Sod Buster and Swamp Buster have resulted in improved water
quality and worked to protect our natural resources.

Since their inception, conservation programs have continued to grow and
evolve. The 2002 Farm Bill included more authorized funding for
conservation than any other Farm Bill in history. We expect programs
like the Conservation Security Program, CSP, or program applying
conservation practices on specific working lands to become the lynchpin
of conservation titles and possibly an important means of supporting
farm income in years to come.

The CSP must be available to all producers, implemented as a nationwide
program that is workable and adequate funds must be appropriated to make
it an effective program. Producers must receive assistance to help
defray the cost of ongoing environmental improvements and regulations.
CSP has suffered from a restricted watershed-based approach that has
limited it to a relatively small number of producers. Virtually no lead
time has been incorporated into the announcement of selected watershed
and when producers can apply for the program.

In conclusion, let me turn to EQIP. The existing Environmental Quality
Incentive Program reflects and carries out the intent of the 2002 Farm
Bill. The priorities promote agricultural production and environmental
quality as compatible goals and to optimize environmental benefits by
assisting producers in complying with local, state, and governmental
regulations and requirements concerning soil, water and air quality
along with wildlife and habitat.

Thank you very much.

MODERATOR: Thanks.

Comments from this side of the room.

MR. ERIC METZGER: Thank you for joining us this afternoon. My name is
Eric Metzger. I serve as general manager of National All Jersey, a
national dairy organization of approximately 1,000 members. Towards that
end, I have three comments in regards to the dairy provisions of the
upcoming Farm Bill.

Number one, we believe that the federal milk marketing order system
needs to be reviewed in its entirety. Many of the principles used to
establish the federal order system nearly 70 years ago no longer apply
to the current dairy industry. Far more milk is produced than is needed
for class one use. Class three milk is no longer simply reserve milk,
but rather an integral part of the dairy industry and federal order
receipts.

One particularly troubling tend in recent federal order hearings is the
move to exclude grade A producers from sharing in pooled receipts simply
because they do not belong to a co-op or marketing agency that happens
to supply the class one market.

If market wide pooling is restricted to only producers that actually
ship milk to bottling plants along with what is deemed to be an adequate
reserve, the result will be a vast discrepancy in on-farm prices
creating classes of have and have not producers. All grade A producers
should have the opportunity to share in market wide pooling if they
choose to do so.

Secondly, the next Farm Bill should consider replacing the MILC and
dairy price support programs with a countercyclical payment program. The
MILC program causes divisiveness between producers and regions. The
price support program causes market distortions through encouraging
production of products that are not needed by the marketplace, but whose
world prices happen to be below U.S. support price.

Finally, any safety net program should be based on milk solids and not
simply milk hundred weights. The true value of milk lies in its
components, not in its volume.

Finally, we believe the next the Farm Bill should focus on helping to
develop infrastructure for a domestic milk protein concentrate bill
instead of simply relying on import tariffs.

Thank you.

MODERATOR: More comments from this side of the room.

MR. JESSE MEESHAW \[sp\]: Yeah, I would like to thank the Secretary for
the opportunity to speak. My name is Jesse Meeshaw \[sp\]. I'm from
Wilshire, Ohio, Van Wert County, Ohio. And I'm a farmer and I've been a
county committee person for 19 years.

A couple issues I would like to address the home security issue relating
to farming and ranching. This is a very important issue that needs our
immediate attention. I would like to suggest to you, Mr. Secretary, that
we have an agency in place that is ready to work with the APHIS which is
the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service on this security issue
relating to crops and livestock.

The FSA office has the infrastructure in place and they can get very
close to the problem buildings where a problem might exist and some
states are already working on this. Tennessee, for example, is number
one.

And another program I would like to be one that assists farmers,
especially young farmers, that are under stress to improve their farming
abilities to provide a positive cash flow and allow the control and
operation of the family farm. This program could help farms diversify by
assisting in capital costs of building and equipment and other
farm-related items. FSA has the data to help assess this program and it
could be a combination of both state and federal funds.

And I also have a lot of other things, if anybody wants to talk to me
and different plans, thank you.

MODERATOR: And for those of you who have prepared written comments that
you don't have time to get through all during your two minutes here, the
comment box is in the middle of the room, you are more than welcome to
submit those or on line at USDA's web site.

More comments now from this side of the house.

MR. DAVID STARNER \[sp\]: Mr. Secretary, welcome to Ohio and the Farm
Science Review. My name is David Starner \[sp\], chief credit officer of
Ag credit, Agricultural Credit Association. We are part of the Farm
Credit Service system serving 18 counties in north central and
northwestern Ohio. Our headquarter office is located in Fostoria.

Ag Credit is a single-industry lender financing only agriculture in
rural America. Due to our industry concentrations we have utilized FSA
guarantees for over 20 years. And in the last six years or so have,
after becoming a preferred lender, have dramatically increased their
use. Currently we have 1,400 loans, FSA guaranteed. That's about \$147
million of our \$635 million of our portfolio volume. That's 23 percent
of the portfolio.

Recently we have been informed by FSA that we have the highest number of
guarantees of any lender in the United States. In an effort to bring
young farmers into production agriculture, we have utilized the
guarantee program on young, beginning, small farmers loans instead of
asking for parents or grandparents to cosign loans. This keeps family
members from risking their equity due to the uncertainties of farming.

We participate with FSA on 50/50 real estate loans where FSA provides
half of the funding and we provide the other half. We generally also
obtain an FSA guarantee on our portion of the loan. With the first
mortgage on that property along with an FSA guarantee, the Association
is basically taking no risk in that type of financing. Most often these
loans are also to young, beginning, small farmers.

During the farm crisis of the 1980s we used FSA guarantees to keep
farmers in business with less than 10 percent owner equity. We needed a
lender to stick with them and FSA was the only way that we could.

We encourage continued funding of the FSA guarantee program in the 2007
Farm Bill \--

MODERATOR: Thank you, sir.

MR. STARNER: \-- so that we can continue financing families in northwest
and north central Ohio. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you for the comments.

Over to this side of the room.

MR. ANDY STEVENS: My name is Andy Stevens. I am currently owner and
editor of American Small Farm Magazine. My comments will relate to
question number six.

I grew up on a 40-acre farm in Delaware County. Delaware County is the
fastest growing county in the state of Ohio. So we grow houses faster
than we grow corn. The goal of my magazine is to help family farms
discover new ways of producing and marketing so they can survive on a
small farm. That's the goal of the magazine.

I had four children that were raised on a farm and all four of them were
in 4-H and FFA. I also was in 4-H and FFA. And all four of them were
state farmers. So my comments are directed towards the USDA's small farm
program. I would like to see that continued. I would like to see it be
more active in developing things that small family farms can use. I know
that they have a national conference every few years. Their fourth one
is coming up in October, but I would like to see more activity from
that.

Many of the land grant colleges have small farm programs. Here in the
state of Ohio we have the sustainable Ag working and they've over in the
small farm center. But that is something that needs to be developed also
more.

And, of course, research and new products and marketing are also in very
much of a need. I guess that's all I can say about the question six. I
won't comment on some of the others.

Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thanks, Andy.

More comments from this side of the room.

MS. BECKY RONDI \[sp\]: Thank you. My name is Becky Rondi \[sp\]. My
husband and I have 120 certified organic acres in the beautiful rolling
hills of Athens County in southeastern Ohio. We are produce growers and
we are very blessed to have a diversified market down there of CSA
marketing community-supported agriculture which are direct sales to our
customers, farmers market and we also sell locally and regionally to
wholesale markets.

We are very fortunate that the region that we live in, the local
businesses are very committed to buying from local growers and
supporting those local growers. So I guess my comments address number
five.

The development of local food systems to me is critical. It is critical
for lots of reasons. It's critical because it provides jobs in an
economy that has very few, especially down in southeastern Ohio. We
alone employ four people full-time and we have a lot of part-time help.

The fresh locally produced food that we are able to sell is better
nutritionally; the nutritional content because it's so fresh is much
higher. And we can't grow enough food. We are constantly sold out, which
I guess is a good place to be in, but sometimes very frustrating.

And I think my last comment, as the cost of shipping and trucking is
increasing more and more and more, to me it's only going to get more and
more expensive. We are not ever going to have more fuel. So, I think
that growing local food systems is absolutely our best form of homeland
security.

Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you. More comments from this side of the room?

MR. MARK FORNEY \[sp\]: Thank you, Mr. Secretary and Dr. Moser. My name
is Mark Forney \[s p\]. I am a county commissioner from one of the
smallest counties in Ohio and my comments are directed to number five.

Being from a small county grass roots is very important to us. The
things that come from the grass roots, extension, soil and water, are
programs that we can get behind. We feel that it addresses our issues.

Another one of the programs that USDA through NRCS has is the RCD
program which is resource conservation and development. We think that's
a very important component of government helping smaller governments and
private industry. So my comments are basically addressed to keep that
partnership as strong as we can. It's a partnership between federal,
local and state and private industry. We have leveraged about 14 \-- or
for every dollar we get of federal money, we leverage about \$14 to do
projects through the state of Ohio.

Ohio was one of the states that is completely covered by RCD regions or
councils. Nebraska has got some very fine ones out there too that you
may be very familiar with.

So I would just, along with the comment of common sense in the Farm
Bill, I would want to keep in there that the grass roots is really where
it's from. Like I say, extension, I think, does an excellent job of
getting that message up to the top, and I think RCD does too.

Thank you very much.

MODERATOR: Thank you. More comments?

MS. ELLEN JOCELYN: Good afternoon. My name is Ellen Jocelyn and my
husband and I farm a cash farm in Sidney, Ohio.

Thank you, Secretary Johanns, for this opportunity for farmers to share
our views regarding the next Farm Bill. I would like to focus my
comments as to the previous two speakers on question number five.

Farming operations are dependent on rural economies and rural economies
depend upon agriculture. The United States must create the business
climate that fosters entrepreneurship that encourages people to start a
business and gives them the tools to compete in a global environment.
Tax policy, environmental regulations, labor and health care policy and
infrastructure are among those that most quickly come to mind. A
well-educated and trained work force must be high on the list as well.
These conditions should be the standard at all levels of government
regardless of rural or urban setting.

At the same time, it should be recognized that the more rural parts of
the country have special needs. This is particularly true in terms of
infrastructure investment. There may be a need for greater investment by
the federal government in outcomes-based rural infrastructure
investment. There are clearly different transportation costs faced by
agricultural goods produced in one part of the state versus other parts.
A resident of rural Ohio, however, should have access to the same kind
of Internet and other telecommunications support. This compares to a
resident outside of Cleveland.

It is also important to remember that a healthy agriculture economy is
important to a healthy rural economy. Very conservatively it is
estimated that each farm program dollar turns over three and one half
times in our local community. Production agriculture will continue to
fuel the economic engine that powers the bulk of rural America. The
economic priming effect of our farm programs provide the foundation on
which an enhanced rural development program can build.

Thank you for your time today. We appreciate you coming to Ohio.

MODERATOR: Thanks, Ellen.

More comments from this side of the room.

MR. BRENT PORTEOUS \[s p\]: Good afternoon. I am Brent Porteous \[sp\]
and along with my brother are the middle of three generations involved
in our family business which also includes my 80-year-old father and my
two daughters in their mid-20s. We own and operate a 1,600-acre beef and
grain farm in Coshocton in east central Ohio.

Thank you, Secretary Johanns, for this opportunity for farmers to share
our views regarding the next Farm Bill. I would like to focus my
comments on the USDA question number three which reads:

How should farm policy be designed to effectively and fairly distribute
assistance to producers?

Let me first state that the Farm Bill is unequivocally working. It
provides an adequate safety net to farmers and ranchers when commodity
prices are low. When prices rise, the land functions without additional
funding from the government via the countercyclical payments or loan
deficiency payments and the CBO says the actual spending level for the
bill is \$15 billion less or 40 percent lower in the first full three
fiscal years than originally projected, which is a very good thing.

The planning flexibility provisions provided farmers in the '96 Farm
Bill are working and we should not consider reverting to provisions that
would require farmers to plant a specified crop to receive support.

As a member of the Ohio Farm Bureau, we generally support the concept of
the \[unclear\] payments based on cropping history rather than on
current plantings.

We also continue to oppose any changes in the current Farm Bill payment
limitations. If limitations on benefits are made more restrictive a
significant number of farmers would not benefit from that improved
safety net. As payment limits bite hardest when commodity prices are
lowest. Our federal farm program clearly is based on production and
farmers who produce more traditionally receive larger payments, but they
also take larger risks and have significantly higher investments on
their farms.

Farm policy has always been production-based rather than socially based
and only if we once allow someone inside the beltway to decide winners
and losers should we move to a socially based policy.

I also believe that Ohio and U.S. farmers are open to discussing
different approaches to farm policy providing that such programs will
continue to assure an adequate safety net while they continue to try and
save the American taxpayer dollars \--

MODERATOR: Thanks, Brent.

MR. PORTEOUS: \-- thank you.

MODERATOR: Appreciate your comments.

More comments from this side of the room.

MS. CHRISTINE HODSON: Yes, thank you very much. I appreciate the
opportunity, Dr. Moser and Secretary Johanns. My name is Christine
Hodson. I am the chair of the Ohio Tree Farm Committee. So I am here
representing the 1,700 family forest land owners in the state of Ohio.

Our challenges are great in this state and we were very, very dependent
upon, and appreciate in the past, the conservation programs that have
been available to the family forest land owner. Things have changed over
the past as the agricultural conservation program from the beginning and
up to today with the forest land incentives program and also the EQIP
program which is very essential to us in our implementation of our
sustainable forest land and management activities.

I just want to kind of emphasize that Ohio is facing new challenges, not
only with the forest fragmentation that's going on in our state, but
also with the influx of our invasive plants that I know even with the
Forest Service has kind of come to a notation that we are having a
problem with that. So I am hoping that you will think of us in the
future, the forest land owners in the Farm Bills that we have today and
try to keep them funded and then to also include them also in the 2007
Farm Bill.

So, with that, thank you very much.

MODERATOR: Thank you.

More comments here.

MS. SUSAN McCORMICK: Howdy-do. Susan McCormick from Liberty, Indiana.
I've been married to a farmer for 37 years, the same farmer.

\[Laughter.\]

MS. McCORMICK: And I think I'm going to address two and four. I like the
crop insurance and I like the crop revenue insurance. I wish it was a
little less costly. Because in times when we have the low prices, we
still need to live.

The other way you can help us with the living is for us to be able to
get better prices abroad by getting the ocean rates, you know, the ships
that carry, the freight is too high and we can't compete. The way I
understand it now, the barges, maybe we need the Mississippi or the Ohio
dredged out because it's down too low and we can only fill the barges 42
percent, that's what I'm hearing now. I mean, a month ago I could get
\$2.46 up the road, now I get \$1.65 for my corn. So, I mean, if you
could, please help the Port of New Orleans out pretty shortly.
Otherwise, we're going to have a real mess. Okay.

Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you.

More comments from this side of the house.

MR. TRAVIS WEST: Yes, thank you for the opportunity. My name is Travis
West representing the Ohio Cooperative Development Center. Basically I'm
addressing question number five.

Two issues that relate to cooperatives as a business model in the United
States, number one, the continued support of the Rural Cooperative
Development Grant program which our center is funded through. Basically
this provides professionals to assist groups of producers that want to
sell a product, provide a service, provide a marketing opportunity that
they can't do alone, but they can do it together. And basically this
grant program funds centers who provide that technical assistant for
feasibility studies, business planning, that make those cooperatives
successful in the long run.

The second one is support or programs that encourage the use of the
cooperative business model outside the traditional farm supply
cooperative in actually, the Ag arena including those issues that affect
rural communities, home health care, housing, and any nontraditional
community development opportunities that might arise that the
cooperative business model fits very well into and could benefit those
rural communities that are outside the Ag sector.

Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you.

More comments from this side of the room.

MS. DEBBIE BOWDEN: Yes. Thank you. I'm Debbie Bowden from Ostrander
\[sp\], Ohio. And I am addressing probably issues, one, two, four and
five. They're more general in nature.

I just would encourage policy in general to encourage the fact that the
world is flat and we have to compete and so programs of education, FFA,
where people have to take on their own free market types of businesses,
and actually experience risk, and perhaps have some wins and losses to
me continue to be important. Because I actually own some land in
addition to Ohio in Louisiana and the culture is quite different there.
But people taking responsibility for their own learning, having
infrastructure for learning, to me, will be absolutely essential for
people to compete in the global environment in the future.

Thank you.

MODERATOR: More comments over here now.

MR. MIKE VALLERY: Mr. Secretary, I would like to welcome you to Madison
County, Dr. Moser, Andy Vance. My name is Mike Vallery. I am a Madison
County Farm Bureau member. I guess my remarks are to question one.

I've benefited as a beginning farmer from the direct loan program that
the FSA has and I just have a few ideas. Increasing loan limits for
direct farm ownership and operating loans. The current limits of
\$200,000 for farm loans and \$200,000 for operating loans were set over
20 years ago. Production costs and real estate values have greatly
increased over the past 20 years. These low lending limits are greatly
limiting our ability to help beginning farmers, socially disadvantaged
farmers, and financially stressed farmers, and ones that want to expand
their farm operations. We think the loan limit should be increased on
that.

In an effort to help beginning farmers, I feel that we should have \--
that the \$250,000 limit on purchase price should be raised because of
our new rising farm values. We would also like to allow FSA to guarantee
loans made by commercial lenders on like tax-free bonds.

Another idea is providing incentives that allow FSA to offer innovative
financing solutions for beginning farmers such as providing tax
incentives or benefits to land owners that sell or rent their property
to beginning farmers.

Increase the maximum FSA loan term for beginning farmers, the
down-payment loans to 20 to 25 years instead of the 15 years now. And
also change crop insurance subsidization to make higher levels of
coverage more affordable to improve the farm safety net.

Thank you for listening to our comments.

MODERATOR: Thank you, one more set of comments before the break.

MR. CHRIS RIDDLE: Good afternoon. Thank you. My name is Chris Riddle. I
work with the Sandusky River Watershed Coalition. We are a
community-based group trying to improve water quality in northwest Ohio.
We serve an area that's 85 percent agriculture.

I think one of the most important things that we see locally is a need
for local leadership and local ability to have some flexibility with
programs. The same tool doesn't fit every situation. I think that
providing some local ability to work with programs gives us the ability
to kind of adjust as things happen. I think this really addresses number
four, looking at water quality goals.

As a water quality professional, I have definitely seen, even in the
short time I've been in the field, a loss in funds that are available to
agricultural communities to do things that benefit both agriculture and
the farm side and the bottom dollar that the producers need as well as
the water quality benefits that people off farm are going to see. We
need to pay people for these programs if they're going to be doing
things that produce off-farm benefits. I think allowing local people to
have some ability to oversee those can really help us make those work in
a way that fits that may not fit several counties away, or in a
different community with a different set of folks.

And I think that also looking at as we lose some of our farms and how we
have fewer and fewer farms and they're getting bigger and bigger, that
is definitely having an impact on people's ability to manage water
quality and their land because they're managing so many more acres and
as these farms get bigger, it's get harder for new farmers to get
involved with the increased cost of getting started.

So that's just a couple of things and we'll be submitting written
comments a well. Thank you very much.

MODERATOR: Very good. Thank you.

At this point we are pretty excited. We have had a good round of
comments thus far. And the microphones haven't stayed cold for very
long, and we will keep it that way here for the rest of the afternoon.

Right now we are going to take a brief break, about five minutes, and
then we will come back and we'll accept more comments as well. So don't
stray far. We will be here until 5:00 this afternoon taking some more
comments on the Farm Bill.

\[Brief recess taken.\]

MODERATOR: Grab your seats, we will kick of the next segment of this
Farm Bill listening session and forum here.

We've gotten some great comments already regarding what Ohio agriculture
needs in the next piece of Farm Bill legislation and the many varying
aspects of agriculture.

I want to thank again Dr. Bobby Moser, the Ohio State University,
College of Food, Ag, and Environmental Sciences for hosting and
Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns for listening and taking our
comments where as they get ready to help develop the next Farm Bill.

Just a reminder of how the forum process works. We have two microphones,
everyone here is invited to come and offer comments. Everything said
today will be transcribed into the official record and the Secretary and
his staff will evaluate all of the comments we present here today.

If you haven't noticed, the Secretary takes copious notes. I don\'t know
how many note cards you go through on a national tour, but I imagine
that some of those forest owners are very thankful you're buying their
products.

We have two microphones for you. You remember the light system, the
green light will be on the entire time you speak. When you get to 30
seconds, we will shift to the yellow light, and when the red light
starts to flash, well this is the lightning round, so someone will come
up behind you and whack you on the back of the head. No, I'm kidding.

We will start with this microphone, Director of Agriculture Fred Dailey.
And Director Dailey, Larry Adams told me to remind you, the red light
means you're done. No, I'm kidding.

\[Laughter.\]

MODERATOR: I guess we're giving deference to the director here for a
special presentation.

MR. FRED DAILEY: Well, I don\'t know the red light what it means because
I'm color blind. But I'll do my best to stay on schedule.

Mr. Secretary, once again, welcome to Ohio and the eastern corn belt. As
you heard earlier today, agriculture is Ohio's number one industry. It
supports 78,000 farmers, farm families, throughout Ohio. And they work
hard every day to feed our consumers as well as feeding a hungry world.

Mr. Secretary, the producers that you see in the audience here today are
proud, independent businessmen and women. They don't want to become
wards of the state nor do they want agriculture to become a public
utility. Therefore, the top priority should be the continued viability,
productivity and profitability of our family farms and ranches in Ohio
and throughout our nation.

We should ensure that our children and grandchildren don't have to
depend upon off-shore food production for survival. To accomplish that
goal, we must remove trade barriers and have greater access to
international markets. We must continue to protect and screen our
borders from foreign diseases and invasive species such as Emerald Ash
Borer. We must also address the unintended consequences of the last two
Farm Bills which has stifled the production of processing tomatoes in
northwest Ohio.

We must continue our conservation programs, our rural development
programs, and our farmland preservation programs. We must also encourage
more intergovernmental cooperation and remove arcane trade prohibitions
such as the ban on the interstate shipment of state-inspected meat
products which is slowly killing the meat processing industry in Ohio
and 27 other states.

It is shameful that third-world countries can export their meat products
to all 50 states under an equal-to program and yet our own small packers
cannot sell products processed under the same equal-to program to a
neighboring state.

\[Applause.\]

MR. DAILEY: And, Mr. Secretary, I want to thank President Bush for his
leadership with the whole new renewable fuels industries being built in
Ohio as we speak. We need to build upon the success of the energy bill
and grow the critical industry which will reduce our dangerous
dependence upon foreign oil.

Mr. Secretary, a 17th century French nobleman once said that agriculture
is like a tree or a state is like a tree, agriculture is the roots, the
population is the trunk, the branches are commerce and industry, the
leaves are commerce and the arts. It is from the roots that the tree
draws the nourishing sap and it's to the roots that a remedy must be
applied if the tree is not to perish.

Mr. Secretary, the 2007 Farm Bill, more than anything else, should serve
as a remedy to the roots of this great country which you and I both
proudly serve.

In closing, Mr. Secretary, I would like to make a presentation to you. I
know you have many responsibilities, but if you were the director of the
Ohio Department of Agriculture, you would work very hard to implement
the suggestions that you heard here today. And by virtue of the powers
vested in me and a few that probably aren't, I am going to confer upon
you the title of Honorary Director of Agriculture in Ohio.

\[Applause.\]

MODERATOR: And Director Dailey didn\'t do too terribly bad in staying on
the time restraints of the light system. So, colors or no colors,
Director Dailey, thanks for being here this afternoon and sharing
comments on behalf of our industry.

More comments now from this side of the house.

MR. HOWARD DOSTER \[sp\]: Thank you. Mr. Secretary, Mr. Vice President,
Howard Doster from Waynesville, Ohio, A sixth-generation independent
farmer, an independent farm consultant, farm management consultant and a
very independent land grant professor emeritus.

For various reasons, less land grant money is now being directed to
teaching farmers the decision making problem-solving process and to
providing unbiased, unbundled farm management information. Doing nothing
is an alternative that worries me. The seed patent law of 30-plus years
ago changed U.S. agriculture forever. But I still want my descendants
and yours to have the opportunity to thrive as successful, independent,
decision making producers, not barely survive as serfs taking Internet
order from someone in Basil, Switzerland, Beijing, China, on the moon or
wherever. I think now it's the time to revitalize the land grant system.

While farmers now farm more acres, most corn belt farmers are still
one-combine, family operations. The very descendents of the producers
and consumers who benefited from the Morrill Act. That act and others
that followed provided the way for small farmers to learn how to improve
the problem-solving process and how to get unbiased, unbundled,
management information from land grant research, teaching, and
extension. Most farmers are still small compared to the multi-national
firms they now buy from and sell to. Their need to learn the
problem-solving process and to get unbiased, unbundled management
information is still great.

MODERATOR: Thank you, Mr. Professor. We may have some more time at the
end for more comments.

We will have more comments from this side of the room now.

MR. CHESTER MURPHY: Thank you. I'm Chester Murphy from Cedarville
Township, Greene County. I don\'t have a page or two of prepared
comments, but I would like to reinforce some of the comments made
relative to question four. I'm sure as you've traveled the country
you've seen a greater utilization of conservation practices such as the
grass waterways, filter strips, better use feeding paths among many
others. And those uses are come about one, because of the farmer's
commitment to stewardship of the land. Another part though is the
cost-sharing provided by various federal, state, and local sources.

I want to encourage you to maintain not only maintain or expand those
sources, but also the funding for the various departments that help to
supervise, design, and implement those programs. Without them nothing
would happen.

I do have one correction I would like to make to some comments made
earlier. And that's that this is Buckeye country, the light isn't red,
it's scarlet.

\[Laughter.\]

MODERATOR: And we'll take some more comments now from this side of the
room.

MR. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_: Hello, gentlemen. Thank you
so much for the opportunity to speak on the 2007 Farm Bill. On question
four.

We target acres for erosion control, water quality, wildlife
conservation, why can't they all be the same acres. I think we have to
take the acreage that we have and use it to the very fullest potential
that we could possibly gain from those acres. I know there's
organizations like Pheasants Forever that come into an area I grew up in
an area where our pheasant population was very large at one time and
it's almost completely gone now. So maybe in the future we can see some
of these things come back off of these acreages that we're using for
multiple purposes.

Thank you, again.

MODERATOR: Thank you, sir.

We will accept more comments from this side of the room.

MR. VALENTINE YETSY \[s p\]: I'm Valentine Yetsy and Dr. Moser would
know who I am and a lot of others here also. Kind of a maverick when I
was on the Extension Advisory Committee of Ohio State.

My children and grandchildren are the fourth and fifth generations on a
family farm. A small family farm that has taken no money from the
government at any time for any program. For you young folks, I would
love to be your age today and be able to start farming in the United
States of America without any farm programs. You can still make it on
your own. You heard this lady here behind me talk about Athens County
can't keep up with what she has to produce.

We are trying to make a manufacturing process out of a biological
process. Do you realize that in farming the American farmer is the most
efficient producer per man of any place in the world. But he is probably
the lousiest producer when it comes to net energy. We do not produce any
net energy. Right now our production in reverse is 15 calories input for
one calorie output.

Lester Brown challenged me back in 1972 in Washington, D.C. about being
net energy producers. And I vowed then I would be. And I've tried to be
ever since. And we can do it, folks. The comments I heard here today
every one but one of them was, what can the government do for me? Let us
take the initiative and do for our own. Let us take care of ourselves.
This is just the beginning of what I would like to talk about. And Dr.
Moser would know that because I've been kind of a burr under his saddle
for quite a few years.

But remember this, it isn't what you can do for the farmer, let's have
the farmer do for himself. You make the farmer to be dependent upon you
and when the farmer is dependent upon you, you make him a slave to you.

In all of my years of community development work, that was the one thing
I never wanted to do, only to have them do for themselves what they
should be doing for themselves. Never make them dependent upon you.

MODERATOR: Thank you.

More comments. We would invite you, if you didn\'t get a chance to
expound all your comments during your two minutes, we have open mikes,
feel free to join us. We'll take comments right here.

MR. JAMES HARRIS: Yes, my name is James Harris. I'm from a farm family
in southwestern Ohio. I would like to propose a fix to a farm tax
anomaly regarding payroll taxes, regarding a self-employment tax. For
example, in the base case a farmer that is renting somebody else's land
will pay an SE tax on his net profit and the farmer owner from whom he
rents the land won't pay that SE tax. But putting A and B together, an
actively managed family farm owned by that family will be paying tax not
only on the net profit of labor but also on the imputed land rent. So I
would suggest that there would be a mechanism to take that into account
and to subtract or otherwise allow for the imputed land rent to be not
taxed under the SE tax regime.

MODERATOR: We will accept more comments now for the Secretary regarding
the next Farm Bill at either microphone.

Professor, go ahead.

MR. BOB HUFF: My name is Bob Huff. I'm from Scioto County, one of the
distressed Appalachian counties on the Ohio River.

Agriculture is extremely important to all of us in the state of Ohio. I
would like to address question five which is the Rural Development
program.

To us in incorporated small communities throughout the state of Ohio,
the Rural Development programs, infrastructure programs, lending
programs, are the best economic development tool that we have. In our
particular case we are an intermediary relending program partner with
the Ohio Rural Development program. It is extremely important to us to
be able to borrow funds from the USDA, relend it to our local businesses
and industries to help them to invest and grow, retain jobs, and create
new jobs for our young people and retain them in the state of Ohio. We
hope, as you consider the new Farm Bill, that you can help to strengthen
and increase the Rural Development program and in turn help all of us in
rural communities.

Thank you, sir, for being here.

MODERATOR: Thank you. And invite anyone in the room to come to the
microphones. Even if you didn\'t get a chance earlier to make new
comments, or if you were able to come up earlier and didn\'t get all
your comments in, in two minutes, you can certainly come back and have
another two minutes to share.

Yes, sir.

MR. HOWARD DOSTER: Thank you. For various reasons state and federal
legislators have cut funds for practical farm research, teaching, and
extension. Farmers can specialize and buy and sell more from rapidly
integrating multi-national firms, but these firms often bundle their
perhaps biased management advice with their products and services. I
say, farmers must have the management skills and the information to
challenge the numbers of the firms they contract with. It's not a level
playing field now.

The public sector, that is the land grant system, has the comparative
advantage for providing this. Many colleges have chosen to broaden their
field to non-farm kids even at the expense of losing their comparative
advantage for serving the farm audience. With so many others
de-emphasizing farming education some land grants can and should
emphasize it. Who knows, you might even ask Congress to financially
reward some land grants to serve farmers in all the states they touch or
whatever.

But I came here to offer you a handout, not to just ask you for one.
While I'm not speaking only for myself, I think many of my farmer
friends and clients are now able and will be willing to appropriately
pay land grants the variable costs for helping to discover, deliver, and
use unbiased, unbundled management information. Some land grant faculty
and staff still have the comparative advantage to discovery, deliver,
and teach.

I will quickly propose two projects and a teaching learning method to
present to farmers to test the hypothesis that many farmers are able and
willing to pay land grants for the right to unbiased, unbundled,
management information. I am personally familiar with the potential of
both these projects and I personally know land grant faculty who are
still able and willing to make these into effective, efficient and
enjoyable programs.

Site-specific grain farming and site-specific dairy grazing are the two.
If a half dozen farmers who don't compete for land, but who do have
similar soils use the same protocol to produce the same and different
seed, fertilizer, chemical tillage recipes with the assistance of a land
grant person who uses newly perfected statistics to analyze the data and
report significant effects on yields and profits \--

MODERATOR: Thank you, sir, we are going to go ahead and \-- if you will,
give us your name and town for the record.

MR. HOWARD DOSTER: Howard Doster, Waynesville, Ohio.

MODERATOR: Great. Thanks, Howard.

Comments from this side of the room.

MS. DEBORAH MARTIN: Good afternoon. Mr. Secretary, thank you for the
opportunity to be here today and offer comments. My name is Deborah
Martin and I'm from Freemont, Ohio. I represent the Rural Community
Assistance Partnership and RCAP is a nationwide network that provides
technical assistance to small communities. So my comments go to question
number five.

Increasingly rural communities are burdened by infrastructure capital
costs for water, wastewater and other infrastructure that is far beyond
their ability to pay. The communities that we serve rely on Rural
Development funding to upgrade their water and wastewater systems. And
these systems are critical not only to helping meet environmental and
public health goals, but they also provide the foundation for other
economic in-community development. So, we look at these as very critical
systems.

The Rural Development water and wastewater loan and grant program has
been absolutely essential to helping thousands of communities, not just
in Ohio, but across the country, in meeting these goals. So I would just
urge you to continue the funding for Rural Development. And in addition,
we've seen that in the last several years the trend has been for
Congress to allocate far more loan money and much less grant money. And
while we understand the competing needs and everything else, and we
understand and actually support that the users of these systems pay
their fair share. And I'm talking in communities that have populations
under 500, it's very difficult for communities that small to achieve any
kind of economy of scale that would allow them to keep those systems
affordable. So we would urge you to consider increasing the grant
funding and particularly targeting that to the communities with the
greatest needs.

Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you. More comments.

MR. JOHN STEVENSON: Mr. Secretary, welcome to Ohio. I'm John Stevenson a
farmer south of Columbus, also the past associate administrator of the
Farm Service Agency from '89 to '93. During that time I had the
displeasure, actually, of occasionally being the executive vice
president of the Commodity Credit Corporation and making sure that food
and water got into hurricane victims at Charleston and also after
Andrew. So I commend you now. I know what the Agency can do getting in
food and water. I think in the Charleston we had product in there in 12
hours. And I appreciate what you have done for the folks in New Orleans
and that associated area.

Thank you very much.

MODERATOR: Thanks, John.

Any other comments from the floor now for the Secretary as they prepare
for the Farm Bill in the next year or so?

Yes, sir.

MR. VALENTINE USEY \[sp\]: I'm Valentine Usey from Madison County, Plain
City, Ohio. I didn\'t say that before. My background is that I spent
quite a few years in the Orient as a missionary and in community
development and also in Central and South America before leaving Ohio
State Med School and coming back to the farm as such. Then since then
though I didn\'t really buy a lot of the technology from Ohio State I
did a lot of things and one of the county agents once told me, he said,
"You're just three years ahead of us." I said, "No, I'm coming to you
for information." But then they awarded us with awards later on like
conservation farmer of the year for the state of Ohio and also
nationally.

So, young folks, the field is wide open. Learn. Don't be afraid to be an
apprentice. After all, 70 percent of all new revenue for any country
comes from the cyclical harvest of the energy of the sun; 70 percent. It
doesn't make any difference what country you are. So what we are trying
to do in America now is take this 70 percent and distribute it through
the whole society. And your job is an unthankful one, Mr. Secretary. In
trying to do this and having special interest groups, they all want
their share of the gravy train.

So I'm coming back to a thing again that, look, if we can do something
to reinitiate personal initiative, personal desire, personal ambition, I
say, hey, you've got to put man back and manage. If you take man out of
manage all I've got left is age and I've got too much of that already.
So you young folks and for you Mr. Secretary, I would be willing and
glad to work with you or try to help you in how do we kind of tweak this
program away from the thing that we are going to be the granddaddy or
helper of everybody, underwrite everything, and if things go wrong, the
U.S. Government will bail us out. Where is your personal responsibility?
How do you bail yourself out?

Now, our farm is a little farm of 200 acres, making a good living for
two families. And some of you in here have been on the farm several
times, you know what I'm talking about.

MODERATOR: Thank you, sir.

Any other comments before we ask the Secretary to share his thoughts?
Any other comments on the Farm Bill? If you will make your way to one of
the two microphones.

Yes, sir.

MR. JEFF WEBKER \[sp\]: My name is Jeff Webker, I'm a farmer from Dart
County and a graduate of Ohio State. And hopefully I'm holding the
future of our farm in my hands here today.

My comments, I don't have your questions. I read them briefly, and I
don\'t know which one exactly I'll address. But my concern is with
disaster payments. It seems like if a county or a state is declared a
disaster, that everyone is engulfed in that same payment whether parts
of an area or a county may not have had the disaster, they benefit from
other people's detriment. And I guess, to me there already is a \-- we
have a safety net and that's called the crop insurance program and
that's subsidized obviously very generously and I hope we continue that.

If there is a need for disaster payments, I wish they would be yield
specific; the farmer would have to prove his yield that it was a
disaster and not just a blanket for the county. Because one part of the
county may have very good yields and take advantage of that. And I think
with all the press that Hurricane Katrina and FEMA is getting with some
money being spent in the wrong directions for people who may not need
it, I think that's somewhat attunes to the same direction where
sometimes some people get money that didn\'t necessarily need it.

That's my comments. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thanks, Jeff.

Comments from this microphone.

MS. AMANDA HARDESTY: Yes, my name is Amanda Hardesty and I'm a student
at the Ohio State University. In the last couple of hours I've been
trying to think a little bit about how the Farm Bill relates to me
personally.

I am from Brown County on the river in southern Ohio. But my father runs
a welding shop, we basically, you break it, we fix it. Which is a whole
other aspect of agriculture that we haven't discussed here today. My
father and I have had lots of discussions about things like the steel
trade, how that affects things like building and repairs. There's a lot
of things that we do as far as housing, so those are some of the things
I'm running through my mind.

But one of the things that sticks out the most is one of your questions
that hasn't really been addressed this afternoon was number six. Which
you kind of relate more to marketing and how you reach that technology
point. But I wanted to take a moment to speak from a student perspective
to talk about some of the things that I've been doing as an ambassador
that we do at the college that could really make an impact on where this
is going, make the Farm Bill relative to what we do. And I think one of
the biggest problems that we run into with agriculture is the lack of
knowledge.

I love the rural lifestyle. I very much cherish that and that's
something that we've all talked a lot about this evening. But the thing
is, the consumers are coming from the city. They're coming from the
suburbs and from areas that aren't completely knowledgeable about what's
going on. And as the ambassador team, as our Agricultural Educational
Society with the Ohio Farm Bureau we are in a lot of educational
programs that suffer sometimes from a lack of funding. We try to make
our best efforts to get out to communities to reach out to elementary
school students to make those type of efforts to educate future
consumers about the market and about agriculture and where their food
comes from. And I think that that should be a very important topic in
the next Farm Bill or in the future as you start to consider what other
things do we need to be worried about in agriculture. And education of
consumers is really something that could use some attention.

Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you.

Mr. Schreiber \[s p\].

MR. MARK SCHREIBER \[s p\]: Very good, Andy, thank you, you remembered
my name. Good afternoon, Secretary Johanns and Dr. Moser as well. Thanks
for this opportunity.

I hope to provide a couple things that aren't doom and gloom and
hopefully before I'm done it is fantastic and the future for agriculture
is bright.

I'll address a couple of question, just hit on a couple items very
quickly.

Number one talks about unintended consequences. Indeed, I can cite from
1990 to year 2000 in excess of \$100 billion was infused into the Ag
economy primarily through commodity subsidations. That did keep a lot of
farmers marginally profitable. But also many of those dollars were
capitalized into land costs and rental rates. That's a great detriment
to beginning farmers wanting to make inroads to start in our business.
So it cuts on one side and helps on the other side.

But us all involved in leadership, Dr. Moser at the University at the
Federal Government level leadership does not just mean trying to secure
the most generous or lavish safety net that we can possibly acquire.
Those needs need to be addressed in a balanced fashion. I believe the
current Farm Bill has done a pretty effective job on that. And probably
more importantly is that we need to spark and spur and nurse the
imagination of producers, the entrepreneurial spirit, if you will.

USDA is in a great position to do that. I have had the chance to visit
with Under Secretary Tom Dorr and he endorses many of these concepts and
projects very well. We talk about how can farm and rural programs be
helpful? Rural business opportunities have done a great deal of benefit
to enhance the profitability and not just of individual producers, but
the communities that surround them. The generation of what I call
"wealth creation" has helped a great many of those communities go from
being just almost impoverished rural communities to now being
successful. Farm Futures magazine highlighted the 100 top counties
across the U.S. In those 100 counties, most of those were located in
those upper Midwest areas that have done a lot to help themselves.

So I think USDA can play a great role in helping (unclear) do that. And
I know the red light is blinking, so you're about to get out the
shepherd's crook.

\[Laughter.\]

MODERATOR: Thanks, Mark.

We may have some more time for you to give comments here later on.

More comments from the floor now. Yes, sir.

MR. JAY GRIFFITH: Yes. Good afternoon, Mr. Secretary and Dean Moser. My
name is Jay Griffith. I'm a first-generation cash grain farmer and
currently president of the Ohio Wheat Growers Association.

I will be addressing points three through five on your listing.

How corn, wheat and soybean producers have done fairly well through the
current Farm Bill. Primarily due to market prices that have been greater
than the loan rate.

I'm sorry. Okay.

Ohio farmers producers current payment structure and loan rates of the
2002 Farm Bill, future support of CRC insurance rates combined with
current crop loan rates provide a necessary economic floor during times
of depressed prices. Conservation environmental goals will be met if
they're implemented with economic incentives that parallel both
importance and the cost to the producer.

Mr. Secretary, you have at your disposal generations of accumulated
research and development capacity in land grant institutions such as
Ohio State University and state and federal producer governed commodity
boards. With appropriate revenues (unclear) through these channels,
setting loan rates could become a nonissue in the future. This local
research will drive then local rural development as is appropriate,
where it comes from.

In closing, there are currently three vacancies at the Soft Wheat
Quality Lab in Wooster, Ohio. Soft red wheat growers in Ohio need these
positions filled promptly. As this is the most pressing local issue here
in Ohio, please contact myself or I believe Kay Simmons in the
Belleville, Maryland \--

\[Tape break.\]

\[In progress.\]

MR. MARK\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_: \-- research be directed to help.
Agriculture has been long known to be a producer of food and fiber in
the Us. Done that job very well. But today it's demonstrating its
ability to be a strategic national assets in the production of energy,
in the production of raw industrial products that can replace the need
for reliance on petroleum-based products. Dr. Moser you are very much
involved with Ohio bio initiative; is that correct? An excellent example
of putting that sort of thinking into action.

Again, what I talked about earlier, the future is very bright. Ag can
play a strategic important role in assuring us to achieve more energy
independence, but also in the manufacturing of a variety of products
that use biologically based materials as opposed to petroleum based. And
that offers great promise and the opportunity for us not to just only be
the producers of that, the growers of it, but also to have an ownership
stake in those future businesses. That enhances all of our profitability
and that's good for all of us involved.

Thank you much for your attention this afternoon.

MODERATOR: Thanks, Mark.

Other comments from the floor on the Farm Bill as we continue the
listening session here? We will take a few more comments if you haven't
had an opportunity yet before we ask the Secretary to share his thoughts
on the Farm Bill.

Yes, sir.

MR. BILL DAVIS: Good afternoon, gentlemen. My name is Bill Davis and I'm
from Washington Court House which is in Fayette County. And I'm with the
Mutual Self-Help Housing Program in Fayette County, in conjunction with
Community Action Commission.

Since 2002, we've helped over 150 low-income families in Fayette County
realize the American dream of building and owning their own home. And in
the process along with building their home they've also built their
self-esteem and their pride and brought a lot of stability into their
families. So on behalf of all those families, we would like to say thank
you. And thank you for the access to the 502 loan programs and the 522
or 523 self-help housing development grants. And I guess that's it.

Oh, and also I guess in keeping with President Bush's spirit of his home
ownership initiative, keep us in your thoughts and your budgets on
future farm bills. Thanks.

MODERATOR: Thank you, sir. Any final comments from the floor for the
Secretary and USDA as they consider the next Farm Bill?

Mr. Sharp.

MR. KYLE SHARP: I'll just do a quick one. I'm Kyle Sharp, I'm editor of
a publication here in Ohio called "Ohio's Country Journal." And twice a
month, basically, I visit farms and do a livestock feature on a
livestock farm.

I've seen many of those farms who have benefited from the EQIP program,
the conservation programs that are currently in existence. And I guess
I'll just reiterate what several other people have said today. That
continued support for programs like that, I think would be good down the
road. Because I know a lot of those people wouldn't have been able to do
some of the things that they have done if it wasn't for that cost share
that's there. So, again, just reiterating that support and I've seen it
myself many times over that the EQIP program is something that is
working well and farmers are willing and able to take part in it and
just continuing that would be a good thing.

MODERATOR: Thanks, Kyle.

With that, I think we've had some great comments this afternoon. I would
invite Secretary Johanns to share some of his thoughts after touring the
wide expanses of the corn belt and beyond and listening to folks talk
about the Farm Bill.

SECRETARY JOHANNS: How about a round of applause for the moderator? I
thought he did a great job.

\[Applause.\]

SECRETARY JOHANNS: You know, a couple of other comments, if I might.
Director Dailey, thank you for being here right to the end. I think that
is enormously impressive and thank you for making me \-- am I now the
director of agriculture here?

\[Laughter.\]

SECRETARY JOHANNS: Did I miss something? Oh, honorary, okay. He said to
me as he was handing it to me, now don't go pounding any herds around
here, or something.

And Dean Moser, gosh, this \-- ladies and gentlemen I've done 15 of
these, the Department has done, I think, over 20, this is the only time
we have had a dean, not only present, but he stayed to the very end. And
I think that speaks volumes about his commitment to you and to
agriculture.

\[Applause.\]

SECRETARY JOHANNS: And I also want to acknowledge these folks in the
blue jackets that are here. There was a time in my life where I had one
of those jackets. And so wherever I see the FFA it's encouraging to me
because you do represent our future. And those involved in 4-H too, and
the other great programs for young people relative to agriculture. So
thanks a lot for being here.

And these are ambassadors, in the red shirts, as I understand it, from
Ohio State University. And I'm guessing ambassadors put the best foot
forward, right, for the university system. And you guys did a great job
of it. So we are real proud of you. You bet.

Well, a couple of things. I promised you I would kind of take a note or
two here and I did. But I also identified some things that I wanted to
visit with you about quickly and then I'll send you out so you can enjoy
the rest of the day.

The first thing I wanted to mention is that we do get a lot of
discussion at these forums relative to trade issues. And any time you
bring up trade these days you're bound to encourage a lot of discussion.
But I'll share some things with you about trade that I think are
important to keep in mind.

The president has said on a number of occasions that it's not just about
free trade, it is also about fair trade. It's about that leveling of the
playing field that we talk about so much and that you hear people talk
about. And therein lies the key. I heard people from Farm Bureau get up
and it's consistent with what I've heard from other state Farm Bureau
organizations. Hey, our goal is to be independent. Our preference would
be to move toward a direction of being independent from government
programs and sell our products in the marketplace. I share that goal.
The reality is today that there are many parts of the world, however,
where tariffs are so high that the playing field isn't level. And when
you pay that additional tariff for your products, the difficulty that
you run into is you've just priced yourself out of the marketplace in
that country. That's what the WTO process is about is trying to get
reform in agriculture on a worldwide basis to level that playing field.

If you think about trade, 27 percent of the gross receipts from
agriculture come from the foreign marketplace. So it's a significant
piece of agriculture, 27 percent. In given commodities it is even more.
For example, in a state like Ohio, if you did not have the foreign
marketplace it would be a very bad deal. It would be devastating to
agriculture here. Because you need to ship that corn, those soybeans
into the foreign market.

If you ever had any question about the significance of trade you should
look at the impact of backing up transportation in the Mississippi
through the New Orleans port for a couple of weeks here and see how that
has rippled across very, very quickly into the interior of the country.
Compare the prices of commodities before Katrina and after. Compare the
prices of fuel and diesel fuel before and after, and, again, you begin
to understand that those who are advocating for a more closed position
relative to trade are risking America's farmers and ranches in my
personal opinion. So trade issues are important, but, again, we are
devoting a tremendous amount of time to this WTO process because we
believe that trade needs to be reformed on a worldwide basis.

We have relatively low tariffs in this country. We are a pretty open
marketplace. By comparison, in Europe they have very high tariffs. And
you can see our sales into the European Union countries are going in the
wrong direction. We want to encourage trade and competition.

Many people spoke to the issue of renewable fuels. I'll put it in that
classification. Oftentimes in corn country we hear about ethanol. And I
come from a state where we really, really promoted ethanol. We passed
some state legislation to encourage ethanol development.

Twenty-five years ago I was a young lawyer, I had just gotten out of law
school, and a client came to me and talked about ethanol. And I said,
"What the heck is that?" And he said, "Well, you actually produce it
from corn." And I said, "Well, what do you do with it then?" And he
said, "Well, you burn it into fuel." And I said, "Well, that's a great
idea. Is there much of that being done today?" And he said, "No, not
really." He said, "We are going to be pioneering in this effort." Fast
forward 25 years, 12 percent of the United States corn crop is now
produced into ethanol. And I got very involved in ethanol when I was a
governor, and I also chaired the Governors Ethanol Coalition.

But I will also tell you that the Energy Bill that was passed, and we
applaud Congress for passing it, we needed that bill a lot of years ago,
but it did get passed, so let me just leave it there. We are happy it's
in place now. But it raised the renewable fuel standard. You thought I
was going to say something really critical, didn\'t you? And then I
would have trouble when I went back to Washington tomorrow. No, I'm
going to be careful. We applaud them for passing that bill.

But they raised the renewable fuel standard to 7.5 billion gallons in a
pretty quick period of time here. We are now producing about four
billion gallons, so you can see the impact on states like Ohio. And,
again, it's alternative fuels. It's not just ethanol, it's biomass, it's
biodiesel. Believe me, I've always believed here that this was a great
opportunity. I think with this energy bill we've got some really
exciting opportunities in this area.

Diversifying the use of our Ag products, some call it value-added
agriculture, whatever title you put on it, but making that product more
available for consumer use, who would have thought that 12 percent of
our corn crop would be so widely used that you could drive to any gas
station in America, practically any gas station, pull up to the pump and
fill your car's gas tank with a 90/10 blend of ethanol. That's rather
remarkable, if you think about it.

So I know you are working on that here. I would encourage that and
applaud you for your efforts.

This forum was consistent with what we've heard at every forum. To our
Rural Development partners out there, thank you so very much for being
such great advocates. The Rural Development programs have been unanimous
in terms of support. Whether it is the new ambulance \-- and we
announced some Rural Development grants here in Ohio today \-- or
whether it's utilities or wastewater or water treatment or whatever it
is, they are making a difference in rural America, and we could not be
more excited about that. So far we haven't had anybody be critical of
the Rural Development programs.

Conservation, a lot of support for conservation. Conservation was grown
in the last Farm Bill, as you know, and it just gets a lot of good
support pretty well around the country. Did hear a little bit of
discussion in North Dakota that our conservation programs sometimes
compete with the cow/calf people who are looking for range land to graze
cattle on. And so you would hear some of that out there, but that's not
been a lot of discussion. By and away, far and away, 95 percent of the
discussion on conservation has been very positive.

The last thing I wanted to just visit with you quickly about, the most
interesting piece of the Farm Bill Forums so far. We talked a lot at the
USDA about what kinds of things do we want to encourage discussion on.
And as you can see, we really have an open mike. But we put these six
questions out and one question that gets to the issue, is there a fair
distribution of farm program benefits? And I think we knew that was
going to encourage a lot of discussion. And believe me, this Farm Bill
Forum is pretty indicative. Has it ever encouraged a lot of discussion.

I was back at Husker Harvest Days just a few days ago in Nebraska, last
Thursday, and I wasn't inside Husker Harvest Days more than five minutes
when a farmer came up to me and said, "Mike, you need to get payment
limits. We can't understand why you haven't gotten payment limits done
yet." Well, I've only been there nine months. Now, I will tell you, I've
heard significant support for payment limit throughout the Midwest. But
I said to him, I said, "You need to come south with me. Because there
isn't very much support for payment limitations in the south, just a
different kind of agriculture and a different approach."

I'll offer a couple of statistics that you can ruminate on here if you
would. And I don\'t have them in front of me, so I'm drawing them from
memory and I may actually have them reversed. So, give me that leeway. I
think these numbers are on the web site for the USDA, however.

If I remember correctly, two-thirds of U.S. agricultural production is
not subsidized. And three-fourths of U.S. farmers are not subsidized
under the farm program. Now, give me the leeway of telling you I'm
pulling that from memory and I may have actually reversed that. But
reverse it or not, we're pretty close there. And the point is that the
vast majority of American agriculture is not subsidized. It is the
fruits and vegetable person that gets up here, they're not a program
crop. They don't have a safety net, they don't have a floor, they don't
have a subsidy. They certainly encourage research, and they certainly
encourage a lot of other things that they believe are very helpful to
their program. But pretty much, they're in the free market. They are
operating in a very free market sort of orientation. But that's true,
again, for the majority of crops, the majority of production, the
majority of farmers in the United States.

So I guess maybe it's obvious that when you ask a question, is the
distribution of the benefits strike you as fair, you're going to get a
pretty significant debate upon that depending upon what part of the
country you are in.

When we did one of these in California, where they have a lot of fruits
and vegetable production, we heard about that. Just yesterday I had a
farmer from California ask me this question. He said, "You come from the
Midwest." I said, "Yes, I do. I grew up in the Midwest, I was the
governor of a Midwest state." He said, "Explain to me, Mr. Secretary,
how it is fair to have programs for corn and soybeans, but not for what
we raise in California." And I thought that was a very, very interesting
observation. I don\'t know what the answer to that is quite honestly
because I'm not even sure that the majority of people in that situation
are advocating to be program crops. But it is an interesting issue. It
is a little bit like what this gentleman is raising in terms of where do
we go from here in terms of Ag policy.

And then the last thing that has been very interesting, and you heard it
today, many people getting up and saying, you know, pay very close
attention here, because we think what we are seeing is the
capitalization of these dollars into land prices and to cash rent. If in
fact that is the case, these folks are going to have a very difficult
time entering into agriculture, a very, very difficult time.

Now, I haven't verified this, but in the area where I grew up somebody
told me recently that a piece of land sold for \$8,000 an acre. And that
isn't based upon development potential, that I'm aware of anyway. That,
again, is just a very interesting thing to contemplate, but we've heard
it in just about every Farm Bill Forum that we have done.

Last thought, these are all the reasons we do the Farm Bill Forums. Some
people said to me, you know, Mike, why are you doing this? You're going
to go out and you're just going to hear from people and they're going to
say, well, do some more, do much more of what you're doing. It's been a
very different discussion than that. Good support for conservation,
Rural Development, a lot of discussion about subsidy programs, a lot of
discussion about how we lay the platform for these young people. They
have been a great opportunity for all of us at the USDA to get a notion
of what's on your mind. And I could not be more appreciative for that.
So, those are just general observations. No conclusions. We've got a lot
of forums yet to do.

Thank you for participating, stay in touch with us on the USDA web site
or write us a letter. Let us know what's on your mind as this continues
to roll out.

Thank you, God bless you.

\[Applause.\]

\[Whereupon, the Ohio Farm Bill Forum was concluded.\]

-   30 -