![](media/image1.jpeg){width="6.5in" height="1.4534722222222223in"}

Release No. 0332.05 Contact: USDA Press Office (202) 720-4623

**TRANSCRIPT OF WISCONSIN FARM BILL FORUM LISTENING SESSION WITH
AGRICULTURE SECRETARY MIKE JOHANNS AND MODERATORS PAM JAHNKE, WISCONSIN
FARM REPORT, WTDY/Q106 RADIO IN MADISON, WI; BOB BOSOLD WAXX/WAYY RADIO
IN EAU CLAIRE, WI; AND MIKE AUSTIN WTAQ/WDEZ IN GREEN BAY, WI AT THE
WISCONSIN STATE FAIR\
IN WEST ALLIS, WISCONSIN ON AUGUST 4, 2005**

REP. MARK GREEN: We\'re here today to talk about ways in which
government can be at least a little piece of the answer. The 2002 Farm
Bill has worked well for Wisconsin. I am proud of what we\'ve been able
to accomplish. I actually had one of the covered seats on that final
committee that wrote the MILC program, Milk Income Loss Contracts. And I
have great pride of authorship on it.

No program is perfect. But as the previous speakers have mentioned it
brought into the state over \$430 million. Every one of us here hopes it
never kicks in. We hope nobody has to rely on the MILC program. But the
fact that it is there provides an important risk management tool that
our farmers need, something that they can take to the bank when they
look to get financing assistance to afford the MILC program is very
important, very helpful.

Now we have a wonderful opportunity, and so we have this forum on the
Farm Bill. We have a wonderful secretary in Mike Johanns, someone I\'m
proud to know. I think he\'s doing a great job for us in Washington.
We\'re very lucky to have an Ag Secretary who\'s from the heartland. He
grew up on an Iowa dairy farm. He has been a leader in agriculture as
governor in Nebraska. He is someone who understands what farming is like
in the heartland, in the upper Midwest. So I think that all gives us
great confidence.

As the previous speakers have mentioned, the governor has mentioned, and
he\'s right to point to it, President Bush did express his support for
the MILC program back some time ago here in Wisconsin. The speaker of
the House Denny Hastert a couple months ago did the same. Now we\'ve got
to get it done.

And nothing is easy. As Senator Kohl rightly pointed out this isn\'t one
person, the secretary by himself. The senator and I and so many others
have to have worked to get it done, and I believe we will because it is
so very important.

Without further ado, let\'s get the Forum going. I want to introduce to
you the great Ag Secretary, someone who\'s a friend to all of us who
understands dairy farming and understands the great challenges we face
here. Please join me in welcoming the governor and secretary, Mike
Johanns.

\[Applause.\]

SEC. MIKE JOHANNS: Thank you very, very much. Thank you. It\'s great to
be in Wisconsin. Let me start out and make a couple of acknowledgements
here to your governor. It\'s great to see you again, great to see
Jessica. I spoke to Stephanie right before I went on stage with you, and
she sends her warm regards, wished she could be here with us, but she
wanted me to say hi to Jessica.

Senator Kohl, it\'s so good to see you. Thank you for being here. From
the first day I met the senator we hit it off because we share this
dairy background in common. So it is good to see you here. And then the
congressman Mark Green, thank you for your very kind words.

As the congressman indicated I did grow up on a dairy farm near in a
community called Osage, Iowa, not all that far from here. Now I see
puzzled expressions on your face here thinking well where is Osage,
Iowa? So I\'ll start out and explain that to. Osage is actually south of
Stacyville and St. Ansgar and straight east of Manley, so now you know
where Osage is at.

\[Laughter.\]

We grew up on a dairy farm. There were three sons and a daughter, and my
parents were very, very hard workers. I tell people that after growing
up on a dairy farm with John and Adeline Johanns everything in life has
been really pretty easy after that if you know what I mean. But anyway,
Dad had three sons, and he knew how to build character in his sons, and
discipline. He would hand us a pitchfork and send us to the barn or the
hog house or whatever, and we would stand you know knee-deep in you know
what. And we would pitch away, and that\'s how he built character in his
sons. Now little did he know that actually what he was doing was
preparing his son Mike for a life in politics, right?

\[Laughter.\]

I want to also say thanks to our singers. They are so great. The young
people that were here to do the Pledge of Allegiance, and let me also
acknowledge our great moderator Pam. Pam, you\'ve got a lot of
personality. I\'m going to tell you that.

\[Laughter and applause.\]

I\'m also going to do some tag teaming on the moderators. Bob Bosold \--
is it Bosold? Bob is going to be with us a little bit and Mike Austin.

This is actually the fourth forum we\'ve done, and we will be doing
these all across the country. We started in Tennessee, went to North
Dakota. We were in Minnesota yesterday. When Pam interviewed me this
morning she said, well you were the toast of the town in Minnesota. I
said, No, you heard that wrong; it was actually very toasty in Minnesota
yesterday. It was pretty warm. But we\'ve had great forums, great input.

First and foremost I wanted to emphasize this is your forum. I\'m going
to sit back mostly, take notes, listen to what you have to say. Those
microphones are there for you. There is no comment that we don\'t want
to hear. This is really your opportunity to offer your thoughts about
the Farm Bill.

Now reference has been made to the Milk Income Loss Contract program,
the MILC program. The administration supports that program, I support
that as Secretary of Agriculture. One of the things that the Senator
asked me when we first met is, will they have money in the budget for
the MILC program? At that time I hadn\'t seen the budget because I
hadn\'t been confirmed yet, so I said I\'m not sure. But I will tell you
soon after I was confirmed the budget came out, the money was in the
budget for the MILC program, so now the remaining piece of this is to
get the job done.

\[Applause.\]

Now if I might just offer just a couple quick thoughts on where we\'re
headed here. When I first started out on this idea of getting across the
country to do Farm Bill Forums I will tell you the person who encouraged
me most is a great friend of Wisconsin, and that\'s the president of the
United States, President Bush. In fact it was interesting to me, we had
only started to talk about this and I saw him at the White House a day
or so after those initial discussions had started. I don\'t know who his
contacts were, but the first thing he said to me is, I hear you\'re
going to do listening sessions across the country for the next Farm
Bill. He said, I am really excited about that.

So why don\'t we start out today and hear from a good friend, President
George W. Bush? Take it away.

\[Showing of audio video tape.\]

PRES. GEORGE W. BUSH: "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\'m 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 overseas. 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.

"Finally, we must ensure 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."

\[End of video\]

SEC. JOHANNS: Great. That\'s the president.

\[Applause.\]

As we headed out to do these, ladies and gentlemen, we wanted to provide
some thoughts about areas of interest. And so we\'ve identified six
areas of interest. We\'d ask you to offer some thoughts on those, but
it\'s an open mike, so we welcome your thoughts really on any topic.

I would mention if you do have a specific issue relative to a farm
program and something you\'re trying to work your way through, we do
have USDA employees here that will help you on those specific issues. So
if there\'s something specific we can help you with, we want to connect
you with the right person.

The six areas: Challenges for new farmers. We start our Farm Bill Forums
by hearing from the next generation of farmers who are out there, and we
want to make sure our policy is doing the right thing for the next
generation. So we raise issues about this Farm Bill and unintended
consequences. Are there things happening with this Farm Bill that would
make it difficult for that next generation of farmer or rancher to get
into agriculture?

The second question relates to a topic the President referenced, and
that\'s competitiveness. How can we remain competitive not only in our
own domestic market but in the global markets? I will share with you
that 27 percent of U.S. farm cash receipts come from foreign markets.
Therefore it\'s a significant issue that we remain competitive in those
markets.

The third area relates to farm program benefits. Is the current
distribution program of benefits effective? Benefits could stabilize
farm prices and incomes. Current programs however \-- crop insurance is
a good example \-- distribute assistance based on past and current
production levels. And some argue that what this really does as a matter
of policy is result in the creation of large farming operations.

The fourth area relates to conservation. Farmers we believe are the
first and the very best stewards of the land. Agriculture plays a major
role in managing our nation\'s resources. What are we doing with our
conservation programs that you like? What could we be doing that would
be better?

The fifth area is rural economic development. It is hard for me to
imagine a Farm Bill that doesn\'t have a significant rural economic
development component. What can we do in farm policy that encourages a
strong and vibrant rural America?

And then the last area is the area of expansion of ag products, markets
and research. Just recently an Energy Bill was passed. A major component
of that Energy Bill for agriculture is a renewable fuel standard of 7.5
billion gallons. In those states that produce ethanol and biodiesel that
was met with just tremendous applause if you will. People were very,
very excited about that opportunity. But I will share with you, 25 years
ago had you promoted ethanol in a Farm Bill people would have been
puzzled by that. Why are you doing that? Why would that be a part of the
Farm Bill? But research has shown that we can produce energy in this
country \-- I\'ve said many times I\'d much rather secure our energy
from the fields of America than the oil fields of the Middle East.

With that, ladies and gentlemen, let me just say it\'s a pleasure being
here. This is your time; we want to hear from you. God bless you. God
bless America.

\[Applause.\]

MODERATOR: Well, with that being said, thank you, Mr. Secretary \-- we
are just about ready to begin with your thoughts and comments. Again my
name is Pam. I am with the farm broadcaster Network in Madison. I have
the privilege of speaking on behalf of agriculture on the radio stations
as well as television stations across Southern Wisconsin. It\'s my
privilege to be here.

Ground rules. I am, as another governor would say, the boss. We are
going to try to be as strict as possible with regard to the time limits
and also keeping you corralled on certain subjects. The Secretary
alluded to it. In the back of the room there\'s a pamphlet with the six
questions USDA would appreciate your attention to. We know many of you
have other issues that aren\'t covered by these six questions, but with
regard to a free-flowing and constructive Farm Bill Forum, we\'d like
you to concentrate on these six issues and save the non six issue
comments if you will for the open microphone portion of the forum at the
very end.

If you deviate too far from these six questions it is my prerogative to
essentially dismiss you and ask you to please be seated. We will not
tolerate (unclear). There\'s not going to be any finger-pointing,
accusations and so forth. As you heard the Secretary is here to listen
to constructive comments on where we go in 2007. If you prefer to turn
this into a stage play and drama, you will be excused from the tent. So
let\'s make sure we\'re clear on that.

There\'s a set of lights you can pay attention to if you\'d like. They
will essentially tell you green is go, red means that will be enough.
Like I said, I get to the point pretty quick. You\'ll know when your
time is up. Let\'s make sure we don\'t have to go any farther than that,
all right?

The six questions are in this folder. If you need one, put your hand up.
You are not required to get up and speak in the microphone because I\'ve
interviewed some of you. I know that\'s real thrill for you, so feel
free to submit written comments. There are comment boxes around the edge
of the tent. You can submit those. Also on-line, great opportunity to
concentrate on those six questions. Think about your answer and then
submit it via the Internet\-- USDA.GOV, and then click on the Farm Bill
Forums and you\'ll find the six questions there you can e-mail your
responses back.

Everything you say is being transcribed including the moderator\'s
comments, and it\'s all designed to make sure they don\'t miss any
details and can take it all back to Washington, DC for the record. Keep
that in mind.

That also means I need you to be pretty good on the enunciation, ladies
and gentlemen. That means say your names slower and where you\'re from
clearly and if you prefer what you represent or what your occupation is.
All right?

With that being said, one of the first questions we want to address in
this Farm Bill Forum is the next generation. I\'ll read the question.
First one on the list is, "How should farm policy address any unintended
consequences that discourage the next generation of farmers from
entering production agriculture?"

Our first speaker is a young lady you\'ve already recognized\-- who will
introduce herself. To my left, kicking us off on our Farm Bill Forum.

MS. SHANNON DWYER: Thank you. Hello, and welcome to the Wisconsin State
Fair. I would first like to thank Secretary Johanns for his time here
today. My name is Shannon Dwyer, and I\'m a member of the Kewaskum FFA.
I am a diary producer from Allenton, Wisconsin, which is a little
agricultural community just 45 miles north of Milwaukee. I\'m a fifth
generation dairy producer, and my parents, Tom and Mary Dwyer, own 65
Holsteins and rent the dairy from my grandparents. I\'m not just another
girl wearing a blue and gold jacket. My roots are deep into the
Wisconsin dairy business, and I am proud of my family\'s dairy.

FFA has helped develop my communication and leadership skills and
encouraged me to get involved in agriculture and pursue my career into
the heart of the dairy industry. It has allowed me to see changes in
others and see shy children blossom into leaders within their community.

Programs like FFA and 4-H are great institutions that help us to develop
our skills and become strong leaders. What a great way to invest in
tomorrow while growing the leaders of today.

Today I would like to thank you for recognizing the young people
dedicated to a profession in agriculture as the future and heartbeat of
America. This fair is a place where we celebrate this fact and display
the fruits of our labor. As your administration balances the budget and
continues to invest in America and world peace, we ask for your
continued support for the FFAs, 4-H and other programs and locations for
the most skilled leadership and communication and to teach constructive
community engagement.

Secretary Johanns, as a farm boy yourself, upon your arriving here in
Wisconsin I\'m sure you quickly realized that you have arrived in cow
country. Welcome to America\'s dairies. Dairying in Wisconsin is more
than a lifestyle for over 15,000 families. It is the economic giant of
our state. Dairying is everyone\'s business here. If you live in
Wisconsin the cows directly impact you. Dairying is the lifeblood of the
state. In fact 11 cents out of every Wisconsin dollar is generated
directly of dairypersons just like me. And one of every eight jobs in
Wisconsin provides a paycheck and a steady income for thousands working
in the dairy industry.

Did you know that every cow in my family\'s farm generates \$17,000 \--
that\'s right \$17,000 for our local community annually? The cool thing
is, my cows never go on vacation, take sick days, call for 911 or attend
school. But their economic impact helps build roads, support education
and keeps the local businesses running. They do all this while caring
for the land and water. Because they do it all naturally, many people
don\'t understand cows are the state\'s first natural recyclers, turning
grass into milk in a glass.

Dairy cows because they are natural recyclers help keep our soils
healthy. The manure they produce is 100 percent organic natural
fertilizer and it\'s the absolute best way to naturally feed our soils.

The Farm Bill is going to impact me and other professionals in my
generation. And while Americans deserve an abundant food supply, they
also exist in a world of global terrorism. Let\'s keep America\'s food
grown on American soil. Where else in the world do we have the ability
to care, protect and monitor our performance other than here?

Thanks to your agency the USDA, our performance in agriculture is
monitored and measured far beyond (unclear). Together with you I pledge
to produce the world\'s safest foods and most environmentally friendly
products possible just (unclear), watch out for policies that lack
common sense and sound science, continue to support programs that allow
young and new farmers to begin a career in agriculture.

This can be accomplished in the upcoming Farm Bill by supporting
programs that allow Wisconsin to stay competitive both nationally and
globally. Don\'t allow divisional disputes within the diary industry to
divide our industry. Keep programs that are national in scope like the
MILC program. This effort has taken the regional polarization out of the
area and has helped take some of the volatility out of our prices.

Like the FFA creed suggests I would pledge to the generations who
follow, I believe in the future of agriculture, with a faith born not of
words but of deeds. As FFA members and young producers, we look to
government leaders to provide a clear vision and a sense of direction
for this great nation. May the present and future generations of
producers have faith in the future of this great industry and the hope
that this Farm Bill will provide (unclear) and better days through
better ways.

Secretary Johanns, ladies and gentlemen, I am proud to stand before you
today, and I\'m even prouder to represent the hands of thousands of
producers just like me that feed America and the world.

MODERATOR: Thank you.

\[Applause.\]

We\'re going to concentrate our attentions on young folks in our
audience right now. Again, remember the first question, how should farm
policy address the future generation? Our speaker to the right also
addressing the same subject.

MR. STEVE SCHALLA: Thank you. My name is Steve Schalla, and I\'m a
member of the Kirchayn Trotters 4-H Club. And on behalf of Wisconsin 4-H
program, we\'d like to again welcome Secretary Johanns to the Wisconsin
State Fair. The state fair is a perfect place to experience how
significant agriculture is to the state of Wisconsin. Of course
Wisconsin is the dairy state. The dairy industry contributes over \$20
billion to the state economy and provides over 160,000 jobs.

While walking the grounds here at the fair it\'s easy to see that
Wisconsin is not only the dairy state. Top commodities produced in
Wisconsin behind number one milk include cattle, corn, soybeans,
potatoes, cranberries, hogs, eggs and broilers. Wisconsin leads or is
the top producer nation of many products, some of which may surprise
you. In addition to number one cheese production, for example, we\'re
also number one in snap peas, cranberries and ginseng. These diverse
industries combine to provide over 400,000 jobs and generate over \$50
billion in state economic activity.

As you can see, agriculture is a big deal in the Badger State.

So with this rich agriculture history, how do we encourage today\'s MTV
generation to get into agriculture? With Wisconsin continuing to become
more urban and ethically diverse, how do we reach those city youth and
embrace these new cultures? The answer is the continued support and
growth of youth programs such as 4-H and FFA.

Personally, without the 4-H program I never would have considered the
agriculture field as a career path. Looking back on my 4-H career, I am
amazed and privileged and so appreciative of all the opportunities and
experiences I was able to take advantage of. The importance of programs
like 4-H, FFA can never be overlooked. These programs plant seeds of
tomorrow\'s agriculture industry.

People ask me all the time why I chose agriculture as a career path. I
like to joke\-- I say \"job security.\" America isn\'t going to stop
eating anytime soon. But in all reality, I like working on the farm, my
grandparents\' farm, and I enjoy working outside and working with the
livestock. But there\'s one reason, one thing that really sold me to the
industry, and that\'s the people. These people hold the highest
standards, ethics and morals. They\'re friendly, kind, caring, yet
disciplined and hard-working. I am inspired by their accomplishments and
will strive to be as successful as they have been.

In short the 2007 Farm Bill provides a fantastic opportunity to ensure
that current and future generations have the best education, resources
and support to fulfill their potential.

To conclude I would like to thank Secretary Johanns for coming today to
listen to the agriculture communities of Wisconsin. We understand what a
tremendous opportunity this is, and we\'ll do our best to help you with
your tasks of preparing the 2007 Farm Bill. Thank you.

\[Applause.\]

MODERATOR: Thank you. Well, we are going to take a break because we\'ve
got other farm broadcasters that are going to get up here and moderate.
The microphones are open. We ask you state your name, where you\'re from
and your occupation. We\'ll begin with the grower to my right\-- name,
occupation and location, please?

MALE: (unclear), town of Randall, Kenosha county. I am a small dairy
farmer, grow corn, soybeans, some hay for sale, occasionally some wheat.
My wife stated the other day, been watching the crops dwindle in the
field from the heat and said, she\'s not signing for another loan. We
have been at the same location for 142 years. We worked daily without
interruption for over 100 years without a mistake\-- no change of
tenants, ownership family all the way through. I am the end of the line.

And far as milk prices are better right now but right now crops are
killing us. We\'re in the driest part. If we don\'t get federal
assistance I\'m through next year. Oil is \$60 a barrel, how are we
going to grow corn at \$2.00, beans at \$5.00 a bushel and even begin to
think about coming out? It doesn\'t work. As far as crop insurance goes,
suburbanites can probably better understand it if you got a \$200,000
house, if you got a fire the first \$60,000 you eat yourself. And
that\'s about the way it stands with crop insurance.

The way my pencil runs and talking to the local co-op, anybody paying
land-rents in the \$80 to \$100 range already got \$300 in an acre of
corn. And that didn\'t figure harvesting, trucking, drying, crop
insurance or interest on the loan. And here we are. Some of our corn
crops in that area down there already figured to be paid at a 60 percent
loss.

Crop insurance won\'t even come close to making the expense. Without
federal help we are in trouble. And that\'s before we can get to the
rest of the Farm Bill.

Some of the other issues I want to cover\--

MODERATOR: Well, you\'re not going to get a chance. I appreciate what
you\'re saying but again with respect to the time I\'ll have to again
remind everybody two minutes and focus on the six questions that are \--
I\'m sorry.

Young lady, go ahead. We\'re going to go to 12:00 or a little after
because we\'ve got a slight delay. Go ahead, young lady.

MS. JILLIAN MCGUIRE (sp): My name is Jillian McGuire. I am from
Dodgeville. I am the Dodgeville FFA president, and I think we need to
get more youth involved into the ag program because when I get older and
have children I want my children to be able to put a face to their food.
I want (unclear) to get involved in the agriculture so we don\'t have to
go to other countries to get our ag products that we\'ve been making
back here. And I\'d like to quick jump to confirmation. Through the past
Farm Bills my family was able to take sensitive land and to conserve it
to a trout stream without using up any valuable (audio break).

\[Applause.\]

MODERATOR: Thank you, Governor Jim Doyle, for joining us today. They\'ve
got other commitments. Senator Kohl is obviously going to go milk those
cows again I guess and make sure we\'re all supplied well. Good to see
you.

\[Applause\]

Let\'s continue on \-- the gentleman to my right.

MR. TOM SHWARTZ (sp): Good morning, Mr. Secretary. My name is Tom
Shwartz, and I represent Wisconsin Rural Partners, the USDA recognized
Rural Development Council for the state of Wisconsin. In 1972 the Rural
Development Act gave secretary of agriculture a responsibility for
coordinating Rural Development. In 1988 the Presidential Initiative for
Rural America created a national rural development partnership which was
funded through multiple federal agencies including Transportation, HHS,
Veterans Affairs, and USDA. All this was coordinated through USDA but
funding was discretionary.

From 1980 to 2000 Rural Partners received between \$50,000 and \$116,000
per year through the cooperative agreements with USDA, but because it
was discretionary the funding for these states and also the funding
amounts varied.

It causes problems (unclear) planning, yet we were able to deliver the
programs and services mandated by the cooperative agreements by
leveraging the federal money (unclear) three times. The 2002 Farm Bill
included the National Rural Development Partnership codification and was
given (unclear). The effect was to give NRDP structure in the right
funding and the Ag Appropriations Committee recommended a \$10 million
funding. We continue to wait for the provisions of the Farm Bill,
however, to be implemented. USDA has not lived up to its statutory
responsibility, but it has however provided some funding.

The most recent funding was in 2003 in the way of \$72,000, and in 2005
we have received no funding. We\'re operating entirely on private funds
and waiting for USDA to implement the new structure, and we have
contacted our assigned leadership, notably Undersecretary Dorr and
Deputy Undersecretary Gonzales. Neither has taken action to implement
those mandated provisions of the Farm Bill.

Frank Frassetto, our director in Wisconsin, has done an outstanding job
being our advocate, and we really appreciate the help he\'s provided us.

The inaction (unclear) to all state Rural Development Councils in
extreme financial jeopardy. The 37 cooperative agreements currently in
force, all have ceased operations. The rest, including us, are in
serious financial trouble. We have operating funds until the end of
October.

One last thing. Here\'s what we\'re looking for. We need implementation
of the National Rural Development Coordinating Committee, State Rural
Development Councils being provided with emergency funding for structure
until structure is implemented, and finally that the Secretary of
Agriculture recommend full funding in the 2007 Farm Bill as recognized
by the Ag Appropriations Committee.

And if I could, I would like to present you with a couple of things.
Hopefully they will not be collector\'s items.

MODERATOR: Thank you. I\'m going to continue while you hand that off to
the Secretary. Now it\'s time to channel the microphone to my left, and
Stewart, again remember concentrate on the Farm Bill questions. Two
minutes.

MR. STEWART HOOVER: Thank you, Mr. Secretary for coming to Wisconsin.
Welcome. We appreciate you coming here and hearing our concerns. I would
mention three things.

MODERATOR: Introduce yourself, Stewart.

MR. HOOVER: I\'m Stewart Hoover. I\'m a dairy farmer, and I\'m with Farm
Family (unclear) USA. I\'m up in Northeastern Wisconsin.

The current Farm Bill represents protection through the countercyclical
program for most farm commodities, and it extends through 2007. As you
mentioned MILC program will expire if it\'s not extended. We appreciate
the comments of support we\'ve had previously, but it has to get done
because September 1 is coming.

Mr. Secretary, I must tell you that I think perhaps AMS has perhaps lost
its direction. The fact is, especially in terms of the federal order
hearings and the comments and the directions that have come down from
AMS. As you remember the dairy program was considered in the last Farm
Bill, and a centerpiece of the reform was open cooling. That meant a
Wisconsin farm could be pulled on say the Midwest order or the Florida
order or wherever those federal order. And it worked super. It said that
now the new rules that are coming down from AMS are putting fences
around our market. And that\'s very much of a concern to us.

I had one more thing but I\'ll skip it.

MODERATOR: You can always write it up, Stewart, and submit it before you
leave, or on the Internet. Thank you my friend. Good to see you. We\'re
going to wrap up just this hour with the gentleman to my right
representing Wisconsin Agribusiness. But now remember, we\'re only going
to take about a five-minute break just long enough for me to get off and
him to get up here. So don\'t hesitate to keep your place in line if you
want or at least to resume testimony. And now the final speaker for this
hour, and I\'ll thank you in advancer for your attention. Go ahead.

MR. RICH SCHEUERMAN: Thanks, Pam. Mr. Secretary, my name is Rich
Scheuerman. I\'m the president and CEO of Alto Dairy Cooperative. Alto
is in Wisconsin (unclear) owned by farm families from across the state
and the upper peninsula of Michigan, and they provide us with over 1.5
billion pounds of milk annually and we convert into commodity and
specialty cheeses.

Our cheese and its associated byproducts are distributed nationally into
food service, industrial and retail markets. Alto has 500 hardworking
employees, and the largest of our two plants in Alto, Wisconsin is the
largest cheese plant east of the Mississippi.

I appreciate the opportunity to share with you today my concerns as you
and your staff begin the daunting task of drafting the next Farm Bill.
My focus is of course on the dairy provisions in that important
legislation.

The health of U.S. dairy producers is tied directly to the health of
dairy processing. Our ability to turn milk into quality products is in
turn dependent on our ability (unclear) on the investment being employed
in the commercial process.

The current federal milk pricing system is complex and is unresponsive
to changes in the industry. It favors some regions of the country over
others, and is based on milk allowances and yield factors that do not
reflect reality.

The largest milk producing state California, actually opts out of the
federal system and replaces it with their own state system which in my
opinion serves that state\'s processing industry better than the federal
order system.

I worry daily about the 1100 member employee families that rely on
(unclear) dairy for their livelihood. Our ability to provide them with a
long-term source of income is dependent on being able to produce our
products profitably. We work hard to control our nonmilk costs, but are
pressured by (unclear) industries by rapidly escalating utility and fuel
costs. We improve efficiencies every day and (unclear) the size of our
manufacturing facilities. But industry-wide cost pressures along with
the shrinking milk and cheese (unclear) which resulted from the last
round of dairy reforms make bringing an adequate return to our members
very difficult.

A more processor-friendly milk pricing system in California gives those
processors a competitive advantage over those who buy milk in the
federal system. (unclear) dairy provisions of the next Farm Bill, I
encourage you to close oversight to ensure it is not business as usual
The dairy industry needs your strong leadership to make (unclear)
changes in the federal order system to ensure the U.S. dairy industry is
competitive both domestically and globally.

These changes should include a simpler pricing mechanism which is more
responsive to changes in plant cost and technology. The milk pricing
system should provide fair returns to producer and processor alike in
all regions of the country.

Changes I feel should be implemented include mandatory inclusion of
California in the federal system; streamlining of the current hearing
process; and reduction or elimination of multiple product
classifications (unclear) orders.

I know this is a lot to ask. But my conclusion from observing the dairy
industry for the last 17 years is that the system is broke and it needs
to be fixed. Thank you.

MODERATOR: All right. That\'s the beginning of what is going to be the
Wisconsin version of the Farm Bill Forum. Remember, we will be taking
your comments until 2:00 this afternoon with the last few moments really
open mike. So if you\'re in line please feel free to maintain that
position. We\'re going to take about a five-minute break, allow the
Secretary to stretch his legs, and we\'ll swap moderators. My name is
Pam. I\'m privileged to be along with you. Thank you to the Ag Secretary
for selecting Wisconsin. Take a break and we\'ll be back in a moment.

\[Recess is taken. Off and on the record.\]

MODERATOR: Why don\'t we start with your name, where you\'re from and
your affiliation if you would because this is being transcribed and
recorded so the Secretary and his staff in the future will know. So
we\'ll turn it over to you \-- name, affiliation, and two minutes. Thank
you.

MS. MARGARET KROME: Thank you very much. Margaret Krome. Policy Program
Director of the Michael Field Agricultural Institute. Also I\'m
privileged to serve on the board of the Agriculture Trade and Consumer
Protection for the state of Wisconsin. I appreciate being able to serve
(unclear) tremendous leadership. I don\'t normally get this personal,
Mr. Secretary, but I want to compliment you on your ears. I think it\'s
rare for the USDA to undertake this kind of comprehensive listening, and
I appreciate the time and I appreciate the thoughtfulness of the
questions that you asked. You really get to the point. I appreciate them
and I will get to the point as well.

How do we address getting farmers into agriculture? One of the big
things is to try to reduce some of the deterrents. We need a healthcare
policy, we need to do everything we can to support cooperative
healthcare. Cooperatives \-- any number of opportunities for pooling our
rural citizens so that we can provide healthcare that will allow farmers
to get into the business. It\'s one of the biggest deterrents.

One of the other things that we need is to support some of the programs
that are in the last Farm Bill. The Beginning Farmer Ranch and
Development Program is one small example. We need to look at our
commodity program policies. We need to be changing them, restructure
them around support around conservation. That will help as we decouple
that from export commodity to produce, we\'re able to get away from
building up the cost and pricing of land that our commodity produce
currently obviously favor, and that is a major impediment for beginning
farmers.

How do we support competitiveness overseas? I think the Secretary
(unclear) comments about bioenergy, energy-based initiatives are
important. We need to be structuring our policy around a WTO-compliant
program, Conservation Security Program kind of program. We need to have
that implemented as it was passed in the last Farm Bill.

We need payment limitations so that the commodity programs we have go to
all farmers and are accessible to all farmers.

Last comment. We have all around this nation tremendous capacity for
entrepreneurial development. We don\'t give it the support that it
needs, technical assistance for things like a dairy business innovation
center in Wisconsin that builds on specific technical assistance to
farmers and others wanting to do rural entrepreneurial development.

MODERATOR: Thank you, Margaret. Let me just say as you start \-- because
obviously two minutes isn\'t a lot of time, let me just say a blanket
thank you to the Secretary. We all know we appreciate him coming here,
and I don\'t think that\'s going to go a long way in developing farm
policy because he knows he\'s appreciated. I think he\'s heard that a
lot and he knows he\'s appreciated, so start right off with your name,
affiliation and get into the meat of your topic, please. We\'ll get a
lot more done. Thank you. You\'re on.

MR. MIKE RYAN (sp): Yes. I\'m Mike Ryan from (Bon Bright) (sp) County.
Myself, my wife, my son and daughter-in-law run an 80-milking herd,
Holstein herd. We\'re very appreciative of the MILC program that was
ended, and we\'re hoping that it will continue. For myself and the
upcoming generations it is very important that they can make their
payments and pay their bills and support their local implement dealers
and feed mills in the community. And that is very important that we keep
our businesses close to us, and that this makes for less time (unclear).
Thank you. I support it and I hope you support the MILC program.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Also, joining us for the session is
Congressman Mark Green who has rejoined us. Thank the congressman for
being here too in real support of the MILC program. Over here.

MR. DAVID DUSKY (sp): Thank you. My name is Dave Dusky. I\'m a farmer
from Southern Green Lake County, northern Dodge County, (unclear), and I
farm approximately 800 acres producing corn, soybeans and vegetables and
also raise Holstein steers. Along with my brother I\'d like to take this
opportunity to thank you to provide comments to the Farm Bill because of
the short time frame, (unclear) Questions Number 1 and 3 relating to the
farm program benefits and the changes needed to correct unintended
consequences from the last Farm Bill as the prohibition on growing
fruits and vegetables on program acres had significant consequences for
my operation and others in Wisconsin.

The Farming Flexibility Act of 2005 cosponsored by most of the Wisconsin
congressional delegation would correct the situation immediately, but if
it does not pass right away it needs to be included in the next Farm
Bill.

The prohibition on growing fruits and vegetables, particularly hits
Midwest grower myself. I grow vegetables for processing for DelMonte and
other vegetable processors, and I rent a large portion of my land.
Landlords are reluctant to rent land to process vegetable growers
because it will hurt their base calculations in the future.

Because of our wonderful climate we cannot double-crop on a consistent
basis to eliminate the vegetable growing prohibition. Also I cannot pass
my personal vegetable growing history to my family. Wisconsin is a
leader in the process vegetable production and this provision in the
Farm Bill does not help growers like me. We need to have that provision
which allows fruits and vegetables for processing to be grown on program
acres as long as there is an acreage reduction in the payment.

Additional future recalculations of base acreage should treat vegetable
growing for processing on base acreage to be the same as production of
the program crop.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. We have time for \-- if you\'ve got more
comments don\'t forget you can go online. Make sure you pick up one of
these brochures. The web address is on the back, written (unclear)
online comments are accepted. This microphone to my right.

MS. SHERRIE TUSSLER: Good afternoon. My name is Sherry Tussler. I\'m the
executive director of the Hunger Task Force of Milwaukee. Hunger Task
Force should be familiar to the USDA. We\'re the USDA\'s 2004 Sunshine
Award winner. We won the (unclear) in Excellence Award. Hunger Task
Force is a hunger public policy organization with deep roots in the
local community. Today we\'re operating a food drive at the Wisconsin
State Fair. Fairs (unclear) change (unclear) can get in for reduced
price admission, \$1.00. Last year we raised \$99,000 (unclear) at this
fair alone. (unclear) show you the support that we receive from the
community.

Our concern about the Farm Bill for 2007 is that you didn\'t extend any
invitation to anti-hunger groups, and we\'re very concerned about the
Food Stamp program. USDA\'s Food Nutrition Consumer Services oversees
the Food Stamp Program and it represents more than 40 percent of USDA\'s
budget. The Food Stamp Program is the first line of defense against
hunger in the United States. In our opinion it\'s the most important
federal food assistance program that helps low-income people get the
food they need when they lack money to buy it.

Here in Wisconsin this program has a well-established history of being
broken. Federal oversight of the program results in hefty fines for the
state in the largest urban area, Milwaukee. The primary role of having
full participation in the program (unclear) back burner to secondary
issues such as error rate reduction strategies and seemingly ridiculous
investment activities. The net result is an overly complex, heavily
administered federal programmatic (unclear).

Last year Hunger Task Force distributed 10 million homes, food to 85
local charities serving 45,000 individuals on an average in Milwaukee
County. A fully-run Food Stamp Program not only makes people dependent
on charitable organizations but it confuses people about the true
strength of the farming and agricultural aspects of our economy.
Everyone knows that we produce enough food in the United States to feed
every citizen and that we cheaply feed other nations, so what excuse
could there be for children to go to bed hungry in Milwaukee or any
other community?

I hope that in the future listening sessions you will invite other
public policy folk. I think it\'s important to include all of us. Thank
you.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Before move on the Secretary has a few
comments he\'d like to make.

SEC. JOHANNS: Let me just tell you thank you so much for being here. I
would mention that we are actually going to do forums that are dedicated
to the issues you talked about across the country as a part of our Farm
Bill listening sessions. So we heard your comments a month or so ago,
and so we are dedicated to doing exactly what you have suggested. And
stay tuned, get on our website, and you\'ll see information as to where
we will be at with those forums.

MS. TUSSLER: We appreciate that.

SEC. JOHANNS: Thank you.

MODERATOR: We move on to my left.

MS. JUDY SKOAGE (sp): Hi. My name is Judy Skoage, and I\'m here as a
consumer not a farmer. I care about what I eat, I care about how it\'s
grown, I care about how the farmer and his (unclear) workers are
treated, and I care about how they are able to treat the land. I mostly
am interested in provisions of the Farm Bill that will make the
transition to organic.

This will help bolster local markets, keep the farmers, smaller and
mid-sized farmers in business, keep money in the local economies, the
local communities. That will support the local communities and it
reduces transportation. If I can buy vegetables that are grown 50 miles
from my house why should I buy it when they come from Brazil or
wherever?

I do not want GMO. I do not want BSE. I do not want hormone additives or
antibiotics improperly used on my food. This is this \-- not GMO, not
BSE. This is cutting edge agricultural products and research, organic.
The provisions in the Farm Bill \-- the way to do this the best is
support the conservation provisions in the Farm Bill that are already in
the 2002 Farm Bill fully funding, cap payment levels at \$250,000 that
will help pay for these other programs.

Support small and mid-sized farms. The sustainable agriculture research
and education programs, the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Program, the
Conservation Security Program\-- this is the key. This will help the
farmers keep their land. Value added products grants, farm market
promotion program, farm (unclear), all good programs that need more
money. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. To the right.

MS. VALERIE GAFFNEY (sp): Hi. I\'m Valerie Gaffney from (Marcel)
Wisconsin. I talked to you. I\'m a wife, a mother, a business partner
and (unclear) operation and a full-time ag teacher. My students spoke to
you earlier about the programs she sees working. I personally know in my
30 short years here on this earth I have three brothers come into
agriculture on the production side. Each took a different route as far
as getting set up. Your programs are working. You just need to continue
your on-the-farm support.

As far as my home base on our angus operation, the programs we are
concerned with is the large number of acres coming out of the CRP
program in the next year or two. Those bids compete against us when
we\'re bidding for pasture-land, extra cropland. And we use it a little
bit more differently than the majority of the states. We rely on pasture
to grow our feed.

Thirdly, it\'s through the conservation programs we\'re redoing our
barnyards and some of the silting on our land since we have such
sensitive soil that there is no one else standing at the end of our
driveway offering us matching or helping us fund these programs. And
that\'s very helpful. The downside is we\'re committed to 20 years with
the U.S. government to maintain those things. And who wants to commit
that long to that kind of program and keep that kind of (unclear) \--
it\'s a deterrent for young producers.

On the other side, in the next generation going I think that\'s up to
this audience. We all have a personal stake in that, and that needs to
be our message. I ask that the older producers leave the industry
gracefully and with encouragement, it did feed your children. It
provided you income. It put your kids through college. Let us younger
generation have a chance to produce the next generation of farmers.
Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Remember, if you don\'t finish in two
minutes you can go back and get in the back of the line. Just let
everybody have a chance to at least present one two-minute opportunity.
Sue.

MS. SUE BEITLICH: I\'m Sue Beitlich, and I\'m president of the Wisconsin
Farmers Union. And we think it\'s important to remember that the support
of individual producer income with an adequate safety net is vital in
farm programs. We need to keep in mind and not lose sight of what the
original federal farm programs over the past 50 years have ensured with
orderly marketing of commodities so that the American people have a safe
and reliable supply of their food, nutritious food and provide farmers a
fair return for their labor and their product.

The program has helped reduce hunger, improve the health of American
families and kept farmers on the land, and we want the 2007 Farm Bill to
assure the same goals. We also support components of direct and
countercyclical payments, marketing loans and loan deficiency payments.
These dollars have brought money to our state farmers and rural economy.

We also think it\'s imperative that a dairy component be included in
this Farm Bill and one that is comparable to the current MILC. We
appreciate your words of support today, saying you do support MILC. We
hope that can get done, we can get that extended. Time\'s clicking away
here and dairy farmers do deserve a safety net.

It\'s a different climate now negotiating this Farm Bill than it was in
2002. We\'ve gone from federal budget surpluses to very large deficits.
We\'ve gone from relatively high crop prices to lower prices, and our
balance of trade has weakened where we\'re becoming an importer of food
importing more than we are exporting.

Our producers\' costs of production are skyrocketing. When we talk about
countercyclical payments, these types of things, Farmers Union does
support payment limitations. We believe targeting benefits to more
producers is important. The concentration of large payments to a few
producers is not the intent of farm programs, and we support efforts to
cap payments at lower levels and to eliminate the multiple entity and
the generic certificate loopholes in the 2002 Farm Bill.

We also wonder about the overproduction that occurred with this 2002
Farm Bill, and we think there\'s a few things we can do; it\'s listed in
our comments. I think the main one is the renewable energy. We need to
continue pushing for that, we\'re pleased with it. We can appreciate the
Conservation programs. We want to keep extending those and fully funding
them. And most important is country of origin labeling. We need to see
labels; people have a right to know where their food comes from. I\'ll
submit my written comments.

MODERATOR: Thank you, Sue. Appreciate it. To my right.

MR. JOHN DINOWSKI (sp): Good afternoon, Mr. Secretary, Congressman
Green, Mr. Moderator. (audio break)

\-- spend a couple minutes today talking about the Food Stamp Program as
well. The Hunger Task Force has been in business since 1974, and we\'ve
got a lot of insight into and experience with the needs of low-income
people in this community. Because this particular program feeds over
350,000 people in our state, which by the way is a record, and also
feeds over 140,000 people in Milwaukee County, I think it shows the need
for this vital supplemental nutrition program.

Two significant points I\'d like to make today, and I\'ll submit the
rest of my comments electronically tomorrow. First, we ask, we strongly
encourage congressional decision-makers to maintain and preserve the
existing structure of the Food Stamp Program. There are congressional
proposals out there to block-grant the program, and also provide
so-called super-waiver authority. We think these are absolutely the
wrong policy priorities for this particular program. That will not help
more hungry people.

Secondly, we ask, strongly encourage congressional decision-makers to
preserve the Food Stamp Program during this fall\'s budget negotiations.
We\'ve heard a lot of talk about the difficult budget choices the House
and Senate Agriculture Committees need to make. And we know there\'s
some very difficult choices ahead, but we do not understand how a
supplemental nutrition program like Food Stamps might be
disproportionately targeted for cuts while massive subsidy programs to
large agriculture interests are not.

Food Stamps provide about \$1 of benefit per meal. Our nation\'s
priorities ought to start (unclear). We can maintain and expand
(unclear) allowance (unclear) benefit. Like I said I\'ll submit the rest
of my comments tomorrow electronically, but thank you for your
attention, and enjoy the rest of your time in Wisconsin.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Brad.

MR. BRAD DOOSY (sp): Good afternoon. I am Brad Doosy. I\'m vice
president and agriculture banking officer for M&I Bank of Marshall,
Wisconsin, right in the heart of berry country here in Wisconsin. I\'m
also a member of the Wisconsin Bankers Association Agriculture Section
Board of Directors.

I want to address the question regarding the future of production
agriculture as it relates to the Farm Bill. I\'m what they call part of
lost generation here in Wisconsin in the dairy industry and agriculture
as a whole. I was one of the generation that graduated from college in
the early \'80s, mid \'80s, and were discouraged by our parents from
farming. I was not able to get out of the family farm, (unclear) farm.
Luckily I was fortunate enough to get into the banking world. I actually
find it kind of ironic because I\'m pretty lucky; in the last 18 months
I started 10 young farmers in this state, which it\'s a great thing.

The biggest challenge I face as a banker when we address young farmers
is lack of equity as it relates to the amount of capital investment it
takes you to get into agriculture. My request is that in the future Farm
Bill you expand upon the FSA Beginning Farmer Direct Loan Program and
Beginning Farmer Guaranteed Programs. On the direct loan side, we need
the individual loan limit increased from \$200,000 to \$400,000. In
addition I feel this money should be more flexible to account for entity
formations between family members, niche marketing ideas, agritourism
enterprises, and other related industries that support agricultural
interests and the rural communities they support.

The time for this is now. Based on demographics, in the next 10 years
many farms in this state and I venture across the nation will be
changing into the next generation\'s hands. If we fail to address this
issue now we will fail the next generation. We could end up with another
lost generation from our rural landscape. Thank you. Have a great day.

MODERATOR: Thank you, Brad. To my right.

MR. NICK DANIELS (sp): Thank you. I\'m Nick Daniels. I\'m a dairy farmer
from Kenosha County. First thing, don\'t fix parts that are not broken.
Planting flexibility, continuation of loan rates and programs that allow
farmers to take their planting signals from the marketplace, not from
the government. And progress on the environmental front with practices
that improve soil, water, and air quality.

On question number one, we need a level playing field out there. We need
to also have flexibility in the Farm Bill when WTO negotiations are
completed that they can mold and fit into each other.

On question number two, the next generation of agriculture producers are
a combination of both new farmers and siblings of farmers today. A key
factor in determining success in any business is the education and
experience base of the individual starting the new enterprise. These
attributes will be needed to use new technologies that will be coming in
the future. We also have great Land Grant Universities here in Wisconsin
which some dollars can be funneled into to expand on those technologies
and bring those things to light.

One example in Europe students that complete or advance their training
are eligible for higher payments or they have access to programs that
otherwise would not be available to them.

It should also be recognized that more rural parts of the country have
special needs. It is important to remember that a healthy agricultural
economy is important to a healthy rural economy. Along with that rural
businesses need equal access to Internet and other telecommunications,
support to education and healthcare.

The significant way of improving farm income is to increase the
investment by farmers in projects that will capture more value added
dollars. Such farmer-owned ventures provide for rural development,
increased competition in the marketplace, and increased farm income from
the market. An example of that is the ethanol and the biodiesel things
that are coming about.

MODERATOR: Thank you. Thank you. To my left.

MR. JOHN PEDERUSI: Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for coming today. I\'m John
Pederusi, vice president of Ronde (sp) Cheese Company in Brownsville,
Wisconsin. As a proprietary cheese company we process approximately 1.5
billion pounds of milk annually, which we market nationally as a
trademark cheese and we market our whey and protein products globally.

As you contemplate the 2007 Farm Bill I ask you to use the marketplace
more and regulation less. The support program MILC program, the federal
market order system (unclear) prices mixed with the NASS survey, the CME
cash and futures market creates a massive root that frustrates many of
the market participants. The forward contracting this past spring or
early in the year, risk management tool used by commodity markets
worldwide, has led to legislatively denying deny many market
participants but not all.

The support program conflicts with the hedging, and in turn the direct
conflict with the MILC program has been discussed repeatedly. At the
recent CNE Dairy Forum floor traders expressed their frustration very
succinctly. Their industry is so complex no one can help you.

Market participants rely on a price support to coordinate their
activities. Prices are distorted or hidden by regulation; participants
cannot knowingly participate correctly. In today\'s marketplace winners
and losers are too often determined in the political arena rather than
in the competitive market arena.

Diligent government employees are denied doing the best things because
the political process is a process of compromise. The best ideas are
negotiated off the table in search of the lowest common denominator
acceptable to the political power brokers. This is not a good business
model. Innovation and price practices (unclear) in competition are
smothered by jockeying political and regulatory advantage and also
limits the effectiveness of your own personnel.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. To my right.

MR. RANDY GEIGER (sp): I am Randy Geiger. I\'m been a dairy producer all
my life, 36 years on my own. I live in Manitowoc County, Wisconsin,
about 30 miles south of Green Bay. The farm has been in the family 138
years, and I\'m also chair of a milk co-op, Manitowoc Milk Producers,
which has about 2800 members mainly in Wisconsin.

Challenges facing new farmers and ranchers \-- dollars to get up and
going are virtually impossible when you look at land prices that are not
priced in relationship to commodities. There should be some type of
incentive that those who sell land to producers or new ag producers get
some type of incentive that the money can be used to set aside for
retirement without a huge tax because producers let\'s face it are using
that for their retirement.

World trade has some drawbacks. We at times are competing with Third
World countries and Third World wages. In the United States we cannot
survive on that. When it comes to world trade with food, my main concern
is that a very small percentage of this food is inspected from foreign
countries. This in turn puts a huge disadvantage on the American
producer because we are inundated with different types of regulation.

And with animal ID coming down, our products could be mixed with the
foreign products. If there\'s contamination, the U.S. producer with
animal ID will be the target of an investigation.

Effectiveness and distribution of farm program benefits. For years most
commodities have had a consistent safety net. Milk, which is probably
the most perishable, has not had a consistent safety net for years. That
is why I feel it\'s important that the Milk Income Loss payment continue
through the 2007 Farm Bill and also some type of very positive safety
net into the 2007 Farm Bill.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Again, if you\'ve got more comments than
you can get in in two minutes, please submit them in a written form or
on the web or if time allows back to the end of the line and again. To
my left.

MS. SIMBERLY MARSH (sp): Thank you. Greetings to the congressman and to
Secretary Johanns. I\'m Simberly Marsh and I direct the Lutheran Office
for Public Policy in Wisconsin which is the legislative advocacy office
of the largest Lutheran denomination in the country, (unclear) Church of
the Miracle. I grew up in Waukon, Iowa, and I know where Osage is. I
have a friend from there as well who\'s been called to be the president
of (unclear) college in Blair.

This year there\'s a large number of faith leaders across the country
who have called on Congress in relation to the reauthorization of the
Farm Bill and particularly because of the Food Stamp Program. There\'s a
real concern within the faith community about any possible cuts in the
Food Stamp Program because we were very thrilled that the Child
Nutrition Programs were reauthorized very well last year and we were
pleased with the improvements in the food stamp program current 2002.
I\'m not quite as harsh on the program as Sherrie Tussler. I think she
sees firsthand problems with it in Milwaukee.

But the state is able to take the form from 18 pages to four. We now
have a swipe card, and it\'s much easier to use the program. (audio
break) \-- we\'d like to see the bottom benefit of \$10 raised at least
to \$25 so people who go through the work of bringing in all their
paperwork to sign up. It is very important, and I\'d like to see lots of
more elderly women around the state who probably are ones who are least
enrolled to consider doing that.

The program really is important for so many of the families in our
state, and the partnership we see within the faith communities that
exists between our networks and service providers and the Federal
Nutrition Assistance Programs is very important. So we\'re very
concerned that there is a sort of an unnatural competition between the
commodity programs and the Food Stamp Program. I agree with John
Dinowski (sp)\-- we\'re very afraid of having a block grant or a
super-waiver related to Food Stamps because many of the entitlement
programs such as AFDC no longer are entitlements. We don\'t want to see
that happen to Food Stamps.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Again, written comments on the web \--
you\'re all invited. To my right.

MR. RANDY SHORE: My name is Randy Shore representing M&I Bank. M&I Bank
continues to support FSA Direct and Guaranteed Programs to protect
against long-term liability of production agriculture in this country.
We are the eighth largest ag bank in the United States serving Wisconsin
and seven other states. Meeting the financial needs of livestock
producers in our trade areas is a substantial part of our business.

Nutrient management issues are challenging producers on several fronts
\-- environmental, economic and social. New technologies are being
evaluated and implemented to address livestock waste concerns. FSA needs
to partner with producers, technology developers and ag banks to finance
facilities and processors that will address these concerns.

We need to embrace viable alternatives for nutrient management that will
recycle the (unclear), reduce odor and improve water quality at the same
time the system should ensure a return for the stakeholders and provide
(unclear) in the rural community helping to ensure their economic
future.

I am proposing a producer loan guarantee program and technology
developer grant program to assist in moving nutrient management plans
forward. We\'re submitting those today. These programs would be outside
of and in addition to any guaranteed or grant programs currently in
place.

Another issue is feed store facility loan program eligibility which
should be expanded to include not only whole grains, other than whole
grains, but hay crops such as alfalfa, clover and so on for the storage
for baleage, large and round square bales and so on.

Thirdly, the direct and guaranteed loan program should be expanded to
include technical service providers to production ag, including present
field operations such as planting in spring and spreading applications,
harvesting and manure handling. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you, Andy. Mila.

MR. BILL AUSTIN: Hi. My name is Bill Austin and I\'m a corn farmer,
corn, bean farmer from Columbus, Wisconsin. I just have a couple of real
quick comments. I can talk 10 minutes on any one of these six or all of
them, but one, don\'t fix what isn\'t broken. The commodity programs
have worked fairly well. There\'s problems, but you know between the
Farm Program, the LDP payments, CCP payments, the crop insurance
payment, the package has worked if you look back over the last four
years. Don\'t change everything.

Number four, how best to achieve conservation and environmental goals\--
the CSP program looks like it has tremendous potential. We\'re four
years into the PINE program. We\'re still in pilot programs. We\'ve got
two in Wisconsin \-- you know, the second one this year, second
watershed. I mean if you\'re serious about conservation, fund the darned
thing. I think it has a lot of potential.

The third thing, you mentioned with ethanol saying 7.5 billion gallon
renewable fuel standard in the Energy Bill \-- we\'ve been talking 20
years about it. I don\'t know what the next ethanol issue or idea is.
But when somebody comes with a new idea give them a little bit of rope
to at least hang themselves with. Some of these things will work. Some
won\'t. But ethanol is one that\'s been there for 20 years and it\'s
finally just getting enough traction \-- you know it\'s proven it works.

There are other things like that out there that have worked very well
for rural development. You know, when people come up with them let\'s
try them. Let\'s not be so rooted in the past or in some other industry
or whatever that we don\'t look at the real issue. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you. To my right.

MS. SALLY KOONTZ (sp): Good afternoon. I\'m Sally Koontz. I\'m from
Jefferson County. My husband and I are fourth generation farmers, and in
the last two years Jefferson County (audio break) this acreage base is
1.4 percent of what Jefferson County has \-- put in reserve. Is this the
best program dollars to use for our Farm Bill, also to promote and
enhance and stabilize farm income and prices?

This program raises farmland prices, retail values of cropland, affects
land adjacent to the wetland reserve area. Both federal and state tax
dollars are also used for these programs. In many cases they are also
sold back to the DNR after cost share payments are sold to the original
owners.

I myself have bought land and are affected by these acreages. I\'m not
saying Wisconsin\'s Wetland Reserve Programs are bad. They are very
useful. But I think the dollars, there needs to be more study into these
programs on the effects it causes us farmers.

MODERATOR: Thank you. We\'re going to take a break here in a couple
minutes, but we\'re going to take one more from each side and then just
take a quick five-minute break again. Michael Austin from Green Bay is
scheduled to be here and take over our last hour. We will do that. But
again, one more from each side. Mike, you\'re up.

MR. MIKE SOLTER (sp): Mike Solter. Again, (unclear) pork producer, past
president of Wisconsin Pork Association. I got one comment, animal ID is
pushing and you hear great things coming out of DC about that,
implemented instantly, how good it works. I've been in a pilot project
down here in Wisconsin for a year. It\'s very cost-effective. It\'s not
anywhere\'s near \-- you can implement it as we hear from the DC.

So if you put anything in the Farm Bill let\'s handle it very cautious.
If we\'re going to put it in it has to make sense to the farmers time
wise and cost wise (unclear) facility. Then there\'s the liability
process of it \-- who handles the records, when do they become
available. There\'s many concerns with this animal ID. COOL is
mentioned. It\'s great. But that\'s with a lot of added cost in handling
food.

You have to take a survey, people say they\'re willing to pay for it.
When you go in the grocery store it\'s a different thing when you look
at the cost of putting this implemented animal ID in place. So as a pork
producer I do agree it\'s needed, but it cannot be pushed on to any
farmer whether it\'s a pork producer, beef producer, fish producer.
There has to be supplemented \--

Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you, Mike. One more before I break over here and then a
quick five-minute break. So don\'t go away.

MALE SPEAKER: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, Congressman Green
soon to be Governor Green and (unclear) \--

MODERATOR: You got two minutes. You got two minutes.

MALE SPEAKER: Fine. There are only three guys. I\'m here to thank you
for streamlining Section 515 in the Rural Housing Program and I\'m the
president of Wisconsin Housing Preservation Corporation. As a result of
that streamlining we\'ve purchased 18 properties here in Wisconsin and
we want to purchase more. We\'re particularly grateful for Russell and
Mike's efforts on our behalf. I talked to Congressman Green about it.
They have solved some problems. We need to get more because you need to
be able to purchase these properties without spending a lifetime talking
to you and your staff to get it done. Thank you.

MODERATOR: All right. Thank you very much for all the good comments.
Again we\'re going to take a five-minute break so the Secretary can
stretch his legs, let a drink of water, and we\'ll be right back so
don\'t leave your place in the line. Mike Austin from Green Bay will be
up next as your emcee. Thank you.

\[off and on the record\]

MODERATOR MIKE AUSTIN: (in progress) WTAQ/WDEZ Radio in Green Bay. And
WFRV-TV in Green Bay as well. I must admit I\'m honored as well. You
talk about two strong advocates for agriculture \-- our Secretary of
Agriculture Mike Johanns and also a congressman I\'ve known for a couple
of decades has always been on the side of Wisconsin agriculture. That\'s
Mark Green. So I appreciate both of them listening today.

Again I want to remind you, this is not a debate, not a dialog, it\'s
just a conversation. So please do share your couple of minutes and the
secretary as we can see has been taking notes, taking everything to
heart. I do want to remind our speakers, you see the lights\-- green
means, yellow means you have 30 seconds, and then red means stop. Please
try to stay within those limitations.

Also kind of limit your comments to the six questions. I think you\'ve
heard those before, so I hope you will stay with those. First we had Pam
Jahnke, a former Regional Farm Broadcaster of the Year. Bob Bosold was
on, and he was National Farm Broadcaster of the Year. People are
wondering, what are you doing up here, Mike? I say, Well, I was brought
here just in case we had technical problems and the Secretary of
Agriculture\'d have a spare light real close to him, so that\'s the
case.

Again, when you go to the microphones please state your name and if
you\'re representing an organization.

MS. ANN LINEBERGER (sp): Good afternoon. My name is Ann Lineberger. I\'m
from Chicago public schools, consists of 613 schools and over 400,000
students, 85 percent of whom are eligible for important income support
programs like Medicaid and Food Stamps. I\'m really happy to hear
you\'ll be having hearings to address that.

I do in fact want to address the six points but as they relate to the
Food Stamp program. Number one, talking about our next generation almost
a fifth of the children in the United States are living in food insecure
households. In terms of our country\'s ability to compete
internationally, I don\'t know how we can expect our kids to be
competitive if they are going to school hungry and can\'t benefit from
the education they are receiving.

The Food Stamp Program is both fair and effective. Over 95 percent of
the benefits from the program go to households with incomes under the
federal poverty line. The Food Stamp Program also encourages work
through the incentives that it provides to Food Stamp recipients.

As I\'m sure you\'re aware hunger is not isolated to urban areas. It\'s
also a rural issue. And I would really encourage everyone to not support
the proposed cuts to the program, to bring them full circle and relate
it back to the agricultural piece.

The USDA\'s Economic Research Service estimates that for each \$1
billion of retail demand generated by Food Stamps, \$340 million are
generated in farm production, 3,300 farm jobs and over \$110 million in
farm value added. So I encourage you all to support the Food Stamp
Program and maintain its current structure. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much for your comments. Will you tell us who
you are?

MR. RICK: Good afternoon. Rick (unclear) with Farm, 1600 acre, South
Central Wisconsin.. I have basically three comments on your questions.
Your 1031 land exchange is hurting land prices. I deal with eight
landlords and there\'s lawyers that don't know the difference between
cropland and rockland. Eliminate that. And also the payment limits which
help big farmers. All they do is just gobble up more land and (unclear).

Even the farm payments might be too high. I know you don't like to hear
that, but that encourages landlords hear that you\'re giving them ten
bucks they (unclear). So I guess that\'s basically all I had to say. I
heard last weekend you want to make sure all the (unclear). I listen to
this Milwaukee station inner city once in awhile and first thing they
say, (unclear) negative. But I don\'t hear that. All I hear is
(unclear). Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much for our insights. Appreciate that. The
good looking gentleman with the glasses, go ahead, sir.

MR. ED BROOKS: My name is Ed Brooks. I\'m chairman of the Board of
Wisconsin Federation of Cooperatives which is a trade association of all
different cooperatives in Wisconsin and also chairman of the board of
Foremost Farms USA which is a regional dairy co-op. We have members in
the (unclear) and western states. I\'m a dairy producer in Sauk County,
(unclear) which is 90 miles north of here. My wife and I milk all 50
cows, gentle brown Swiss cows.

One of the questions you pose is how should farm policy be designed to
effectively and fairly distribute assistance to producers. One of the
programs in the last Farm Bill was Milk Income Loss Contract program.
This program has been incredibly important to dairy farmers across the
country, in particular to those of us in the upper Midwest and in the
Northeast. These are areas where the dairy economy is the predominant
factor in the overall rural economies of the region.

Because of scarce federal dollars the program places a limit of
assistance that any one producer can receive in the program in any given
year. As a result we\'ve seen the very effective and fair distribution
of the dollars to dairy farmers. And unlike other farm commodity
programs where benefits tend to accrue disproportionately to some very
large operations, the MILC program and its common sense limits has
resulted in a much more equitable distribution of the scarce dollars.

All farmers are eligible to receive MILC payments on the first 2.4
million pounds of milk. The volume cap means that 85 percent of all
farmers in the country are fully eligible; even those that exceed the
limits are fully eligible up until that limit.

We have seen the strong interest in seeing the MILC program or something
similar continued in the next Farm Bill. We greatly appreciate the
residents efforts and the other gentlemen on that stage earlier of
continuing after this Farm Bill. We\'re talking about the next one.
We\'d like to see it continued in some form or other. We\'d also like to
see it not expire this year. Do something about that.

I will close by saying I perceive the MILC program as a very important
supplement to the dairy price support price program. That\'s an
important part of the dairy safety net, for the price support program by
itself in its present form is an insufficient safety net for dairy
producers. Thank you.

MODERATOR: And thank you for your comments as well. I\'m sure both the
Secretary and the Congressman appreciate them. You can applaud. There\'s
certainly nothing wrong with that if you\'re a supporter of the MILC
program. Sir, go ahead.

MR. WALTER BEEDER (sp): Good afternoon. My name is Walter Beeder. I\'m a
dairy farmer 50 miles northwest of Milwaukee. I serve on the board of
directors of Family Dairies USA. And also I\'m director of Wisconsin
Farmers Union. I\'ve been an advocate for family farmers to the Ag
Department of Wisconsin in helping farmers with financial problems and
addressing the problem of young farmers. We need to give young farmers
low interest loans like the United States government gave Chrysler.

Interest is way too high for these young people to start and to make the
bottom line a lot easier. We need to address the problem with USDA as
far as the problem with how they treat farmers with loans, that they
clean up their act---(unclear) and other things like that.

On the subject of the MILC Program, we as Family Dairies support the
extension of the program through the Farm Bill and like others say, why
fix it if it\'s working?

Also the 15 cent assessment on dairy products should be assessed on all
imports and our fellow producers in Hawaii and Alaska. If everybody
pays, there\'s no problem. Otherwise, I don\'t think anybody should pay.

On the issue of country of origin labeling, it not should be voluntary.
It should be mandatory so we know where the food is coming from and if
we have a problem.

Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you, sir. And we thank you all. We want to remind you
if you just came in you can go to either one of the lines, and sir
you\'re up.

MR. BILL OEMICHEN: Good afternoon, Mr. Secretary, Congressman Green.
I\'m Bill Oemichen, I\'m president, CEO of both with Wisconsin and
Minnesota Cooperative Associations. Together we represent about 800
businesses owned by 2.9 million Wisconsin citizens and 3.4 million
Minnesota citizens. And you may ask the question, how can the federal
and rural farm programs give effective assistance in rural areas?

I want to talk about two. First of all, the MILC program you\'ve heard
quite a bit about today. But it obviously provides assistance to
directly to dairy producers but it\'s also supporting the whole rural
infrastructure. I can tell you back in the deep and dark days of 2002
and 2003 because of those payments most of the rural infrastructure was
able to stay in place and continue supporting agriculture. Many of those
are cooperative businesses, and so we strongly relied on the MILC
payments. And they\'re very vital for the continued help of rural
Wisconsin and the rest of the country.

So it\'s greatly appreciated your continued support for that program.

Secondly, is healthcare for farmers. Margaret Krome from the (unclear)
Board talked about this earlier. But this is a vitally important issue
not only for Wisconsin and Minnesota dairy producers and other farmers,
but producers across the country. (unclear) are at a real disadvantage
when it comes to healthcare. Just a couple quick statistics.

The average Wisconsin farmer for example pays three times as much for
their health insurance as salaried employees, twice as much for their
health insurance as other self-employed individuals. Why? Because
insurers view farmers being a very risky occupation. Something that most
Wisconsin farmers don\'t know that they need to know is that most
insurance policies now exclude farm-related accidents. So if they\'re
injured, they\'re not going to have coverage.

Well, USDA through USDA-Rural Development is providing support, and
Congressman Green as well as Senator Kohl and Representative Obey have
provided support to the Federation so we can create healthcare
cooperatives. There\'s \$2.23 million already been appropriated, an
additional \$2.25 million in the Senate Appropriations Bill, and we
appreciate your support from that. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you, Bill. Sir, your name and who you represent?

COUNTY COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN, JEFFERSON COUNTY: (unclear), dairy farmer
from Jefferson County, and I\'m here as a county committee chairman
hoping that as FSA runs this farm program you will maintain the county
committee form of running this program. Lately they\'ve taken funding
and put it into the temporary employee pool that we get paid out of, and
I don\'t believe that\'s right because I think it\'s somebody\'s way of
trying to eliminate the program.

I\'m not here trying to keep my job because I\'m running out of time
next year. My job\'s over. I\'m looking to the future. The county
committee oversees the local administration of the program benefits,
provides input for disaster notifications and weather and crop
conditions. We handle appeals in a fair and equitable way of handling
appeals between the farmers and the office. And I don\'t know who is
going to do it if you don\'t have a county committee there to do it.
Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much, sir. We appreciate it. Again if you
would like to share your comments with the Secretary please get in one
of the two lines. Sir, go ahead.

MR. KENNY DEVORE (sp): My name is Kenny Devore (unclear) Clear Horizons
LLC, which is bioenergy (unclear) enterprise. Section 9006 of the Farm
Bill promotes (unclear) unintended consequences, strictly nonfarm,
nonrural, entrepreneurial participation in the grant competition for
biomass, biogas. Please let me draw an analogy. Wind farm grants are not
exclusively contracted to rural businesses or farmers. In fact they are
constructed by developers and entrepreneurs in collaboration with
landowners. So please don\'t continue to restrict biomass, biogas
projects from the funds.

Representative Green, with such a combination in the Farm Bill you will
find more urban Americans with a vested interest in participation in
rural America as well as ensure more interest by America\'s elected
(unclear). Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. We appreciate it. Go ahead, sir.

MR. PETER BODKIN (sp): My name\'s Peter Bodkin. I\'m coordinator for the
public policy with the Wisconsin Council of Churches. I\'m here to
express my strong support for the Food and Nutrition Programs
administered by the USDA. For the sake of all of those who face food
insecurity including low income families and individuals, the
unemployed, children, students, the homeless, the elderly, the disabled,
we urge that these programs must be preserved and strengthened.

Among the member churches of the Wisconsin Council of Churches are many
congregations and individuals who are providing emergency food services
and adequate paying policies to alleviate food insecurity. Through food
pantries, meal programs and food banks congregations and community
organizations are doing their part, but they cannot do it alone. As a
nation we must also act through government assistance programs to help
our neighbors in need.

According to one researcher, evidence of severe malnutrition-related
health problems has almost disappeared in this country. The primary
reason is Food Stamps. We hope you will advocate with policymakers on
behalf of protecting the Food Stamp program from excessive budget cuts
and oppose efforts to transform Food Stamps into a block grant program.

Many families that receive nutrition assistance still struggle to make
ends meet in the face of rising costs. Moreover, many genuinely needy
people, particularly unemployed childless adults and illegal immigrants
are denied Food Stamp benefits. We urge an increase in the minimum
benefit level (audio break) administering program increase it becomes
much more difficult to give clients the attention they need. We urge
that measures be taken to ensure that applicants have access to local
offices while keeping caseloads management.

The USDA\'s Food and Nutrition programs are crucial instruments by which
we can manage our abundant resources for the good of all, and we
fervently hope that the 2007 Farm Bill will preserve and strengthen
them. Thank you for this opportunity to express our concerns.

MODERATOR: And thank you. We appreciate that as well. Glad to see so
many of you are articulating your thoughts so clearly and also putting
such an emphasis on families, because that\'s what\'s made this country
great and makes agriculture great as well. Sir, thanks for being
patient. You\'re up.

MR. DOUG GASSLET (sp): My name is Doug Gasslet. I\'m actually wearing
two hats. I\'m a (unclear) and cash crop farmer in Dodge County and also
biologist for a conservation organization called Pheasants Forever. So I
get to deal with both sides of a lot of the Farm Bill together, both the
agricultural and the conservation end.

I want to make a couple comments on, first of all, the unintended
consequences of the Farm Bill. As a person that rents most of the land
that I work, some of the farm programs like the direct and
countercyclical programs do very little to benefit me as a farmer. Most
of that money goes directly towards land rent where the landlords are
raising their land rent by \$20 to \$30 an acre because they know they
can get that money in return. So that money really just goes through my
hands into the landlord\'s, really not benefiting the rural landowners.
Especially if that landlord does not live in the rural community that
money does nothing to help the rural community.

The other part of that is the LDP, loan deficiency payments. I feel a
lot of that money is just a subsidy to help farmers produce crops on
poor-producing ground that they shouldn\'t be farming in the first
place. It gives them a little added additional bonus to try and put that
land into production. Ideally I\'d like to see that money go towards
working land programs like the CSP which really helps benefit the
farmers that are doing the right thing on that land.

The other thing I want to touch on is the conservation role. I really
feel those conservation goals should be fully funded and fully
implemented. We need to be able to continue the CRP, the WIP, WRP
programs, to help those farmers stay on the land, take that land that\'s
not producing good crops, take that out of production to benefit
wildlife, the environment, help that farmer stay on the land as well.

We need to look at the sodbuster provision, which seems to be relatively
weak in not stopping farmers from busting new land out into production,
and we also need to really look closely at the 22 million acres of CRP
that\'s coming back in for, may be coming back in for renewal in the
next couple years.

My fear of that is that as a farmer I can barely make a living on the
price of corn the way it is, and I can\'t imagine what adding 22 million
more acres of crop production into production will do to the price of
those commodities. Thank you.

MODERATOR: And thank you very much for your heartfelt thoughts as well.
Those in line looking at those six points, please stay in line. But at
this point and until the Secretary speaks we\'re actually going to just
open it to any comments about the Farm Bill. So if you have some other
comments you want to share and you get those to the point as well, we\'d
appreciate it. Again, please stay within your two minutes. Sir, please,
introduce yourself?

MR. KEN BLOMBERG: Thank you. My name is Ken Blomberg, and I\'m the
executive director of Wisconsin Rural Water Association. We\'re an
affiliate of the National Rural Water Association, and we represent over
600 public water supply communities in the state of Wisconsin.

As I drove down here from (unclear) Wisconsin, I passed scores of rural
communities, farming communities that have benefited from the Rural
Development Loan and Grant Programs. I\'m here to ask that program to
continue as hundreds of farming communities rely on the Loan and Grant
Programs to keep their infrastructure and water and wastewater systems
viable. As you know, a strong farming community will support a strong
farming industry.

Our state association, the Rural Water Association, has a circuit-rider
program that hopefully you\'re familiar with. Our circuit riders are
working across the state of Wisconsin. The circuit-rider program works,
achieves results. We\'re into our third decade of water circuit riders,
wastewater circuit riders to keep communities across our state and
across the nation strong and viable. And I thank you for the opportunity
to give our program.

MODERATOR: Thank you for taking the time to be here today, and everyone
who\'s here, be it oral or written comments. Don\'t forget as well you
also can make written comments if you don\'t feel comfortable in front
of a microphone, or you can go to USDA.GOV/FARMBILL and add to your
comments as well. Ma\'am, go ahead.

FEMALE VOICE: Hi. My name is Nita (unclear). My concern is for the
family farmer as they compete against factory farming because it\'s
lower, and for example, they have smaller pens, smaller cages for
chickens. Family farmers can\'t compete with those, so I wanted to voice
my opinion that I think family farmers need more aid and assistance and
also more incentive and assistance for organic farming because if
(unclear) healthcare issues, and it\'s a great way to start on that is
with prevention and having healthy food to (unclear). Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. Sir, go ahead.

MR. TOM CROW (sp): My name is Tom Crow. I\'m a private conservation
consultant. I\'m here today representing Environmental Defense. In
Wisconsin only 48 percent of our farmers receive commodity subsidies,
and the top 20 percent of the subsidized landowners are collecting 71
percent of the subsidies. Subsidies as they are now are harming farmers
at home and abroad by inviting higher tariffs on our exports and driving
down crop prices in developing nations.

Many farmers are not surviving the system. Many farmers are not even
eligible for subsidies because of the crops that they grow. We urge you
to revamp the subsidy program, consider making payments to farmers based
on those producers who are minimizing the ag impact on the environment.

Farm policy should reward producers who take steps to improve air and
water quality, provide habitat for wildlife and serve in the frontline
against sprawl. Shift payments to reward farmers who are doing a good
job in harmony with the environment. Programs like the Conservation
Security Program are doing just that, and the CSP is well-accepted here
in Wisconsin. We only have a few watersheds that were eligible because
of a lack of funds. We need much more funding for that Conservation
Security Program.

We also urge you to put a cap of \$250,000 on federal payments, and we
also urge you to not decrease spending for conservation programs. Those
programs are very important to our state, and we don\'t want to see
those dollars cut. Thank you.

MODERATOR: And thank you very much. Again, we have opened it up to any
kind of comments. If you want to stay with the six questions, that\'s
fine. But we have 18 minutes until the secretary will be speaking, so
again if you\'d like to share a comment please get in the line. Go
ahead, sir.

MR. LEN BIRDIE (sp): Just a couple points as the next generation
involved in agriculture. My name\'s Len Birdie, from southern Wisconsin.
I\'m a producer, custom operator, DSM (unclear) seeds. The estate tax. I
hate that. I don\'t know if you knew about it, but (unclear) a little
bit going back on that, the opposite side, gift taxes. Try and purchase
the family farm has been in our family for over 150 years. We (unclear)
gift tax. My friends working 40 years and do it more like 2 without
getting into that. On top of that the 1031 is killing us in production.
We\'re fighting Corporate America. The 1031 is just driving our land
rents and land prices to where the average producer, even big producers
can\'t compete.

The only other thing I guess I have an issue with is something with
health care, the story of America. Cooperative healthcare, any options,
any alternatives would be appreciated. I guess that\'s why I\'ve taken
an occupation off the farm. So thank you for your time.

MODERATOR: Thank you for your time. The Secretary and Congressman are
glad to hear all these comments. Your name and your concerns?

MR. WILL HANSEN (sp): Will Hansen, State FSA Committee Chairman. I\'m
speaking for myself only. The next Farm Bill has to be WTO-compliant. It
has to be something we can continue to promote, and 27 percent of the
stuff we grow has to be sold someplace else. We can\'t quit doing that.
Probably some of the things, the biodiversity that is happening we have
to continue to push that forward. There\'s some things we can do for
Third World countries that we are going to have to continue to promote.
We can\'t put our head in the sand. I have nothing against the
individual who wants to be organic. If you can do that, that\'s a
value-added and work here.

We cannot continue to do that in Third World countries. Third World
countries are totally organic. They are not being successful at it. We
have to continue to tell the European communities that they have to
accept some of these things, and do the best we can do to help the Third
World communities because it is the European communities who by not
taking some of these things makes it impossible for some of the Third
World communities to have some of the biodiversity that will make it
healthier for them. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you as well. Thank you for the diversity on comments.
Ma\'am, go ahead. Identify yourself, please?

PAMELA: Thank you for giving me the opportunity today. My name is Pamela
(unclear). I\'m a vegan and an animal activist. I realize the Farm Bill
does not address animal issues. But nevertheless I would like to take
the time to speak up.

To begin I would like to thank the produce farmers of Wisconsin. Without
them we vegans would not have the bountiful array of food that we enjoy
daily. It is to those who raise animals for the human consumption in
factory farm conditions that I make an appeal today.

Mahatma Gandhi has said the greatness of a nation and its moral compass
can be judged by the way its animals are treated. Please let our nation
be (unclear) in the way it treats its animals. Let us put a stop to
gestation crates, battery cages, steel farming, factory farming, downers
and growth hormones. Let us allow the animals to lead the dignified life
they deserve. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts. Go
ahead, sir.

MR. JOHN UMHOEFER: Hello, Mr. Secretary. I\'m John Umhoefer, executive
director of Wisconsin Cheesemakers Association. And you\'re here in a
state with 125 cheese and butter factories, and we make the most cheese
in the United States, and we\'re proud of that.

I want to leave you with one statistic that 90 percent of the milk
coming from the state goes into cheese, and my message today for my
manufacturers, I want to leave you with the thought that what we want is
for you to help the dairy farmers of Wisconsin.

We need these dairy farmers in Wisconsin. We actually import milk to
make enough good Wisconsin cheese for the United States. So we need
every drop we can get and we need every dairy farmer in Wisconsin.

So let me mention just a couple things we\'d like to see happen. You had
a great program at USDA for forward contracting milk, and it\'s allowed
our proprietary plants to do that with their dairy farmer. That program
ended last December. It would be great to bring it back. It was a risk
management tool, a modern tool, and there\'s no reason for it to expire
other than politics perhaps. We need to have that come back.

The other thing we could do is shrink the number of federal orders in
the United States. They\'re too complicated, they\'re too slow-moving,
they\'re too hard to figure out, and they\'re too easy to manipulate by
the larger players in this country. We need fewer orders and we need
faster decisions from orders. If you could give us simply that, a
six-month decision on federal order decisions instead of the two-year
decisions we\'d have something. We\'d have good (unclear). Thank you,
sir.

MODERATOR: Thank you, John. We appreciate it. Again, we do have the
mikes open for about 10 more minutes, so if anybody else would like to
share a comment either on the six questions or anything else, please get
in line. Sir, thank you.

MR. MIKE WELLER (sp): My name is Mike Weller\-- a hog, cattle and crop
farmer from southwest Wisconsin. I\'m proud to be a meat eater. I take
good care of my animals because if I didn\'t those animals would not be
economical to have on my farm.

The real issue I want to raise is the issue of continued regulation,
more and more regulations coming down the pike that Wisconsin farmers
and others have to deal with. Whether it\'s the CAFOS, the nutrient
management plans, the (unclear) citing in this state, the list goes on
and on. While we recognize we need to do better jobs in all these areas,
to the extent these are unfunded mandates puts economic pressure on
Wisconsin farmers. And it\'s almost to a point in some cases where
we\'re going to be forced to have compliance officers on our farms to
deal with these regulations in the future.

So to the extent that we can be sure that they are funded mandates, I
think adds to a level of importance to these regulations as necessary.

In addition I\'d like to speak to the competitive area for USDA to
provide more applied research dollars in the production and health areas
of animals. These are areas that can directly benefit Wisconsin farmers,
and much of those research dollars appear to be going in basic research.
While that\'s important it\'s the applied research dollars that really
help us in the short term as farmers. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much, and thanks for everything you do every
day. Sir, go ahead.

MR. GERRY LEHMAN: I\'m Gerry Lehman from Reedsburg, Wisconsin. I\'m a
member of Sauk County Board of Supervisors and also a member of its Land
Conservation Committee. When you talk about the Farm Bill, I\'m the only
active farmer on county land conservation (unclear).

To me this is the biggest throwaway tax dollar program I\'ve ever seen.
The CSP program, if we had the dollars that has been thrown at issuing
press releases regarding the Conservation Security Program we probably
could fund twice as many acres as we have funded.

We seem to be running these offices with people as I say took five and a
half years to get a degree in environmental resources and no one told
them how to spell \"cow\" when they were in college. And it sure seemed
like anybody that\'s targeted to the Grassland Reserve Program, the
Wetland Reserve Program, the tree-huggers and the bunny-snuggers have
found a way to siphon those dollars. I want to see that money go to
actual farmers.

And I have a couple other issues. My neighbor from Reedsburg got up here
and bragged about the MILC program and how we need it. And it\'s totally
amazing about the people that think we need the MILC program need milk
to keep their plants full. Have you ever thought about claiming a
subsidy so Tyson can keep their plants full? That\'s all I have to say.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much, sir, for your comments and your candor.
Sir, you\'re up. Go ahead.

MR. DON FREDERICK: I am Don Frederick. I\'m a (unclear) member from
Walworth County. Roger Zimmerman made a comment about protecting the
county committees. I too feel we have to do that because I can assure
you we don\'t even get along with our state committee all the time on
decisions.

Another thing we want to be cautious of is the loss of personnel in our
county offices. We need them. We\'re running a full person short right
now. If the rest of the government offices worked as hard as our FSA
offices in the state of Wisconsin do, our counties and our states would
be a lot better off. (audio break) \-- administration at the county
levels. So that makes (unclear). Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much.

\[Applause.}

MODERATOR: We have five more minutes for you to give your comments again
on those six questions or anything else. Sir, go ahead.

MR. HERRING (sp): Bob Herring, town of (unclear). I was first speaker
after (unclear). I didn\'t quite address all the issues I wished to
address at that time. I\'d like to address the CWT program. While it is
considered successful in supporting the price of milk, it also
encourages our dairy farmers to get out of business (unclear) those that
are ready to retire, whatever, it may be a good program to them.

But also it probably is necessary the way it seems on some of our trade
deals we are letting in more dairy products. Prime example, Australia.
In talking with our Congressman Ryan, he defends the deal. He defended
CAFTA. I\'m not a big supporter of all these deals even though I am a
farmer and I guess we\'re hoping to sell a few kernels of grain to some
foreign countries. It\'s been noted we need to sell 27 percent of our
product elsewhere. We need trade. We need fair trade.

However, our imports increased from Australia by 1 percent, was pointed
out to me by our congressman this is an insignificant amount. However,
you take New Zealand, Australia, Chili, Argentina and a lot of other
countries we get in under these good trade deals at 1 percent, pretty
soon you got at least 5 and 6 percent. Two percent surplus is what kills
our milk price.

NAFTA. When NAFTA started we had an agricultural trade surplus. We are
now headed for a deficit. I don\'t know if there hasn\'t been anything
to be learned from some of these deals or what, but I think some people
are starting to catch on because the vote on the CAFTA agreement is much
tighter. Even the farmers in CAFTA region had been opposed to this deal
because they say it\'s more about the corporations than it is about
farmers.

And also the other thing I\'d like to address, probably the biggest
threat probably in Wisconsin is elsewhere the agriculture and the
farming community is land issues and the cost of land with the pressure
from residential housing, especially like Kenosha County, Washington
County, many of the different counties it\'s all taking place. It\'s
almost impossible for farmers to compete. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Appreciate your time. We have two more people and want to get
them in before the time\'s up. Sir, quickly to the microphone?

MR. RICHARD KLOSSNER: Mr. Secretary, thank you for coming to Wisconsin.
My name is Richard Klossner. I\'m with Family Dairies USA, general
manager. We have about 4,000 members, about seven states. Our interest
is with the MILC program as everybody else is, to get that extension
done. We\'d also like to comment on trade issues. We feel that when we
do trade that we want to have fair trade, not free trade.

We want to make sure that our farmers come out of the deal with more
than what we give away. We\'ve got too many of these deals get cut
because we give away technology or (unclear), and these things lead to,
we seem to be the pawn in these trade negotiations. We\'d like to not be
that pawn.

I\'ve heard a lot of the talk about federal programs and guarantees. I
also farmed for 25 years. I\'ve been through those guaranteed loans.
When we do these guaranteed loans, we\'d like to maybe have the
government say how much money the bank can make off this guaranteed
loan. I mean it\'s nice to have the government guarantee the loan, but
if the bank is still making 2 to 3 percent over what they\'re borrowing
the money for we\'re not coming out a whole lot ahead.

I\'ve gone through the years of where we borrowed money and read into 18
percent interest. It\'s awful tough to survive when you\'re borrowing
money that goes to 18 percent interest, and somebody else borrowed it
for 8 or 10 and now you\'re paying 18.

We need to figure out how these things come together and make it so
people can live on the land. We talked about food and we\'ve heard Food
Stamps all morning here. We have so many people that need Food Stamps,
and here we\'re supposed to be one of the richest nations in the
country, and we have our own farmers that are barely making it. We
can\'t get money through our own farmers\' pockets to continue. A nation
who has a strong agriculture is the one that\'s going to survive in this
world.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much, sir. We appreciate it. We have one more
comment. Thank you all again for all your insight, your time. Sir, will
you identify yourself?

MR. ROSS BISHOP (sp): My name is Ross Bishop. I operate a farm in
Washington County. I have a commodity and beef operation. Thank you for
coming so we can speak to you. I can add on his comments, my father and
brother lost the farm in the 80's. We went through that 18 percent
interest. I probably (unclear) rich person in that (unclear) my own
place and continue farming. Interest rates are going to be an issue if
the United States want to have cheap food policy it\'s going to fall on
the farmer.

We need to somehow help the young farmer that wants to continue in this
operation. I have crop insurance. And every time I make a claim, and
I've made a claim five years in a row, my yield goes down so I don\'t
get as much for my crop insurance. It's not helping me. I pay the same
premium every year.

COOL I think is important if we\'re going to bring food in from Canada
and Mexico no matter what it is, beef or vegetables, I think it\'s
important to know where that comes from. I know where my shirt comes
from. I know where my underwear comes from.

I hope the United States and Wisconsin, if you want to keep food
produced here in the United States, which is the cheapest and safest, we
need to help the farmer. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much.

\[Applause.\]

MODERATOR: How about a round of applause for everyone.

On behalf of all the ag media in the state, Mr. Secretary, thank you for
coming to Wisconsin and this unprecedented listening session. If you
don\'t think the Secretary\'s taking your comments seriously, this is
the fourth listening session he\'s had. When I shook his hand, his hand
was like this from all the notes he\'s taken. So again, we appreciate
you taking all this information, and we know it\'s more than just
dialog, that you will use this information to create legislation down
the road.

Just an aside, I don\'t know if you noticed this, Mr. Secretary, or not,
but I\'ve noticed almost everybody that I\'ve met that\'s been very
articulate, outspoken, congenial, friendly and somewhat good looking is
named Mike. Did you notice that as well? I was wondering about it.

Ladies and gentlemen, Secretary of Agriculture, Mike Johanns.

\[Applause.\]

SEC. JOHANNS: Well, thank you very much. Maybe before I wrap up, because
the congressman has diligently sat through all of this and I appreciate
it so much, I would like to offer you an opportunity to say a few words.
Then I\'ll kind of wrap it up. Congressman?

\[Applause.\]

REP. GREEN: Thank you. I\'ll make it a very few words. I want to thank
all of you for coming out. You are helping us prepare the Farm Bill for
2007. And just to sort of build on what Mike Austin said, I can tell you
as I was watching the Secretary here taking copious notes, paying
attention, writing it down \-- this input is important. It gives all of
us a chance to make sure the Farm Bill is part of the answer and not
part of the problem as we go forward in agriculture. Again, thanks to
all of you for coming out and making it possible.

Lastly of course, thank you to our Secretary to take time to come all
the way here to spend this time with us and listen to our comments. I
think it speaks well for him and people of his office, and I think it\'s
just wonderful. So thank you.

\[Applause.\]

SEC. JOHANNS: Ladies and gentlemen, thank you so very, very much for
being here. I appreciate it immensely. This is our fourth forum as I
indicated. Next week we stay in the Midwest for the first part of the
week. We\'ll be in Iowa at their state fair; looking forward to that.
The state I grew up in, so it\'s always nice to get back to Iowa. Then
from there we go way out West to California where of course they have a
very large ag industry also. I would mention that we\'ll be doing these
forums all across the country in the months ahead.

We\'ll also be doing some of the specialty forums I\'ve referred to when
the lady got up and talked about the Food Stamp issues.

About 50 percent of our budget, actually more than 50 percent of the
budget at the USDA relates to nutrition programs. People oftentimes have
the impression that budget Congress allocates to the USDA is used for
farm programs. Well, it really isn\'t. More than 50 percent is used for
Food Stamp programs, the School Lunch program comes out of the USDA;
Women, Infant and Children Program comes out of the USDA. Then in
addition to that, when you read about fires across the country or the
management of the 190 million acres of forestland in this country, that
also comes out of the USDA. The Forest Service is under our umbrella.

So when you add that all in, it is a smaller percentage of our budget
actually that is devoted to farm programs. Not many people know that,
but since we had so much testimony today on food programs I wanted to
point that out.

You can see from the forum today how valuable these events are for us at
the USDA as we start to get thinking about the farm program. Our belief
was, before we started this, that the people who understood the programs
the best and would have the most specific thoughts about how programs
are working or not working are people like you. Farmers across the
country who are involved in the program every day, people in Rural
Economic Development that are involved in the program every day, people
whose clients are dependent on that food assistance program whether
it\'s the hot lunch at school or Food Stamps or whatever who are
involved every day \-- have stepped up to the microphone at these forums
and given us some great ideas on how we might be thinking about the next
Farm Bill.

Now let me, if I might, just kind of walk you through the process here
as best I can determine it now some months ahead. We will wrap up these
forums probably by the end of the year. We may do a few after the first
of the year, but the vast majority of them will be done by December 31
of 2005. We will then start to work more specifically on what this Farm
Bill should look like. In that effort, we will work with the House and
the Senate, we\'ll work with the committees of jurisdiction, and by and
large that\'s going to be the House Ag Committee, the Senate Ag
Committee.

I am asked on an ongoing basis, "Will the Administration actually put
forward a specific piece of legislation?" It\'s a little early to tell
that. We want to get some more forums under our belt. But that is very
possible that for the first time in 20, 25 years the Administration will
have a specific proposal. In the event that is in fact the case, that
will occur sometime a little later on in 2006.

Now in 2006 you can almost expect that the work on this Farm Bill
legislation will be going hot and heavy. The House, the Senate, the
administration, all of us will be working on this. Why? Not necessarily
because we intend to pass the Farm Bill before the end of 2006, although
that\'s possible \-- but because as we turn over the calendar we\'ll be
in 2007 which is year where it must be reauthorized, and we have to give
the ag sector the road map of where the Farm Bill legislation is going
to be headed because cropping decisions will be made, programs like the
nutrition programs, they\'ll need to have an idea of what this program
is going to look like.

So you can see we\'re actually not out here that early when you consider
the timeline that we have to deal with. We would like to get the next
Farm Bill in place as early in 2007 as possible.

The other thing I wanted to mention, we\'ve heard a lot about trade
today and we have at every Farm Bill session. The consistent message we
hear is, look Mike, we\'re ready to compete with anybody in the world,
and we believe in trade, but we want to make sure that we have fair
trade, make sure we have the ability without unnecessary barriers to
enter into marketplaces to sell our products.

We agree with that. That\'s the same language that I use and President
Bush uses when he talks about trade.

If I might just offer a thought or two\> A word of advice about the
trade issue. It is very easy these days to kind of beat up on it. But it
is enormously important part of what agriculture is about. It is 27
percent. Ninety-fivepercent of the world\'s customers don\'t live in the
United States. They\'re outside of our borders. All of those issues
weigh down on us. And it is also very easy to become convinced that
every trade agreement has serious problems and downside for agriculture.

I will tell you in reference to the recent trade agreement which we had
so much debate upon, the current situation today is this\-- 99 percent
of the products from those nations, those Central American nations, by
prior trade concessions were in our marketplace duty-free, competing
with the products that you raise, beef and pork, soybeans, dairy
products, on and on. Duty-free, 99 percent of them were duty-free.

On the other hand, when you marketed your products into those nations,
and it was not a small market, but 2.5 billion for ag products, much
larger for all other products \-- you paid very high duties. Beef 30
percent, and I could go on and on, product after product. And the WTO
rules allowed those duties to go much higher.

The passage of this agreement leveled the playing field. Those duties
will now come down for the majority of products immediately. For the
rest of the products, they\'ll be phased down over a period of time. But
because of the fact I believe that it\'s so easy to beat up on trade
agreements, that message really never got delivered out there.

I would have beef producers stand up and say, "Mike, why is this good
for me?" Well, it was so obviously good for beef, but it was obviously
good for the rest of agriculture.

So I ask you then to work with these trade agreements, and you work in
the organizations you\'re involved in, be very, very discerning about
what that specific agreement is. Each agreement is different.

Let me just wrap up finally and tell you how much we appreciate what you
do. It was great. I was in Minnesota yesterday. I heard from a lot of
people and a lot of people from the dairy industry. Ladies and
gentlemen, I\'m going to go back to my job in Washington believing that
you did that just for my benefit because that\'s where I grew up, on a
dairy farm. I could not be more honored to be your Secretary of
Agriculture.

And I also want you to know you could not have a better friend for
agriculture than the gentleman we have in the White House at the moment,
George Bush. I don\'t have to sit down 15 minutes and brief him about
what agriculture is about. He comes from one of the largest ag states in
the nation and he was governor there in the state of Texas and he has
been a remarkable champion for agriculture in the United States, and
it\'s a pleasure to work for him too.

God bless you all. Thank you for what you do.

\[Applause.\]