U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

46–170 PDF 2009

S. HRG. 110–798 

ASSESSING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF 

AGRICULTURAL DISASTER ASSISTANCE 

PROGRAMS IN THE WAKE OF THE 2008 

MIDWEST FLOODS, HURRICANE GUSTAV, 

AND HURRICANE IKE 

JOINT HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, 

NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

AND THE

AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEE ON DISASTER 

RECOVERY 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY 

AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

SEPTEMBER 24, 2008 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.agriculture.senate.gov 

COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY 

TOM HARKIN, Iowa, Chairman 

PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont 

KENT CONRAD, North Dakota 

MAX BAUCUS, Montana 

BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas 

DEBBIE A. STABENOW, Michigan 

E. BENJAMIN NELSON, Nebraska 

KEN SALAZAR, Colorado 

SHERROD BROWN, Ohio 

ROBERT P. CASEY, Jr., Pennsylvania 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia 

RICHARD G. LUGAR, Indiana 

THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi 

MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky 

PAT ROBERTS, Kansas 

LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina 

NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota 

MICHEAL D. CRAPO, Idaho 

JOHN THUNE, South Dakota 

CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa 

MARK HALVERSON, Majority Staff Director 

JESSICA L. WILLIAMS, Chief Clerk 

MARTHA SCOTT POINDEXTER, Minority Staff Director 

VERNIE HUBERT, Minority Chief Counsel 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut, Chairman 

CARL LEVIN, Michigan 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

BARACK OBAMA, Illinois 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

JON TESTER, Montana 

SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine 

TED STEVENS, Alaska 

GEORGE V. VOINOVICH,Ohio 

NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota 

TOM COBURN, Oklahoma 

PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico 

JOHN WARNER, Virginia 

JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire 

MICHAEL L ALEXANDER, Staff Director 

BRANDON L. MILHORN, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

TRINA DRIESSNACK TYRER, Chief Clerk 

AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEE ON DISASTER RECOVERY 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana, Chairman 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

TED STEVENS, Alaska 

MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas 

PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico 

DONNY WILLIAMS, Staff Director 

APRILLE RAABE, Minority Staff Director 

KELSEY STROUD, Chief Clerk 

(III) 

(V) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

HEARING(S): 

Assessing the Effectiveness of Agricultural Disaster Assistance Programs in 

the Wake of the 2008 Midwest Floods, Hurricane Gustav, and Hurricane 

Ike .......................................................................................................................... 1

Wednesday, September 24, 2008 

STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY SENATORS 

Harkin, Hon. Tom, a U.S. Senator from the State of Iowa, Chairman, Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry .................................................. 1 

Landrieu, Hon. Mary L., a U.S. Senator from the State of Louisiana ................ 3 

Vitter, Hon. David, a U.S. Senator from the State of Louisiana ......................... 4 

Panel I 

Conner, Charles F., Deputy Secretary, U.S. Department of Agriculture; accompanied by Kate Houston, Deputy Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, 

and Consumer Services, and Arlen Lancaster, Chief, Natural Resources 

Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture .................................... 6 

Panel II 

Asell, Lyle W., Special Assistant to the Director of Agriculture, Iowa Department of Natural Resources, Des Moines, Iowa .................................................. 27 

Ellender, Wallace ‘‘Dickie’’ IV, Southwest Louisiana Sugar Cane Farmer, 

Bourg, Louisiana, and Chairman, National Legislative Committee, American Sugar Cane League ...................................................................................... 29 

Hardwick, Jon W. ‘‘Jay’’, Northeast Louisiana Cotton Farmer, Newellton, 

Louisiana, and Vice Chairman, National Cotton Council ................................. 34 

Jayroe, Natalie, President and Chief Executive Officer, Second Harvest Food 

Bank of Greater New Orleans and Acadiana, New Orleans, Louisiana .......... 32 

Prather, Barbara, Executive Director, Northeast Iowa Food Bank, Waterloo, 

Iowa ....................................................................................................................... 25 

Strain, Mike, Commissioner, Louisiana Department of Agriculture and Forestry, Baton Rouge, Louisiana ............................................................................ 22 

APPENDIX 

PREPARED STATEMENTS: 

Grassley, Hon. Charles E. ................................................................................ 42 

Asell, Lyle W. .................................................................................................... 47 

Conner, Charles F. ........................................................................................... 49 

Ellender, Wallace .............................................................................................. 59 

Hardwick, Jon W. ............................................................................................. 71 

Jayroe, Natalie .................................................................................................. 75 

Prather, Barbara .............................................................................................. 79 

Strain, Mike ...................................................................................................... 83 

DOCUMENT(S) SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD: 

Commissioner of Agriculture for the State of Texas, prepared statement .. 88 

Louisiana Bankers Association, prepared statement .................................... 90 

Page

VI 

DOCUMENT(S) SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD—Continued 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services, 

prepared statement ....................................................................................... 91 

United Way of Central Iowa, prepared statement ......................................... 96 

USA Rice Federation and U.S. Rice Producers Association, prepared 

statement ....................................................................................................... 101 

‘‘Restoring the Hoosier Heartland’’, written report submitted by Governor 

Mitch Daniels of Indiana .............................................................................. 107 

Written letter to Hon. Nancy Montanez-Johner, Under Secretary of Agriculture for Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services from various Members of Congress ............................................................................................ 125 

QUESTION AND ANSWER: 

Chambliss, Hon. Saxby: 

Written questions to Charles F. Conner ......................................................... 128 

Coleman, Hon. Norm: 

Written questions to Charles F. Conner ......................................................... 129 

Grassley, Hon. Charles E.: 

Written questions to Lyle Asell ....................................................................... 130 

Written questions to Barbara Prather ............................................................ 132 

Asell, Lyle: 

Written response to Hon. Charles E. Grassley .............................................. 133 

Conner, Charles F.: 

Written response to Hon. Saxby Chambliss ................................................... 138 

Written response to Hon. Norm Coleman ...................................................... 142 

Prather, Barbara: 

Written response to Hon. Charles E. Grassley .............................................. 147 

(1) 

ASSESSING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF 

AGRICULTURAL DISASTER ASSISTANCE 

PROGRAMS IN THE WAKE OF THE 2008 

MIDWEST FLOODS, HURRICANE GUSTAV, 

AND HURRICANE IKE 

Wednesday, September 24, 2008 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY, AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEE ON

DISASTER RECOVERY, 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY

AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committees met, pursuant to notice, at 10:16 a.m., in room 

SR–328A, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Tom Harkin, Chairman of the Committee, presiding. 

Present: Senators Harkin, Landrieu, Chambliss, Thune, and 

Grassley. 

Also present: Senator Vitter. 

STATEMENT OF HON. TOM HARKIN, A U.S. SENATOR FROM 

THE STATE OF IOWA, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION AND FORESTRY 

Chairman HARKIN. The Senate Committee on Agriculture and 

the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 

Affairs will come to order. 

We thank you for joining us today as we begin this joint hearing 

between these two committees. I especially want to thank my colleague Senator Landrieu for her hard work in helping to put this 

hearing together. 

The devastation caused by these natural disasters has turned the 

lives of thousands of Americans upside down. I hope the hearing 

today can help provide some insight into how the Federal Government has helped and how it can improve its ability to help communities in need following a disaster. 

Now, of course, I will speak about what happened in Iowa. Perhaps the biggest remaining need of agricultural producers hit hard 

by the floods involves restoring the land. The flooding that we had, 

some tornadoes, of course, the hurricanes have devastated conservation structures that will need to be rebuilt and shows the 

need for a greater effort to prospectively address conservation 

needs through more floodplain easements and better conservation 

2 

stewardship. A famous cartoonist but also a famous conservationist 

by the name of J.N. ‘‘Ding’’ Darling, from Iowa, a very famous cartoonist but one of the first of the conservationists back in the early 

part of the last century, once said that the best way to prevent 

floods is to stop the raindrop where it falls. And I have thought 

about that a lot, seeing all these floods in Iowa. 

For emergency conservation needs, the supplemental appropriations bill passed before the July 4th recess provided funding to the 

Emergency Conservation Program and the Emergency Watershed 

Program. 

I did a lot of flying over Iowa in a small plane during and right 

after the flooding in Iowa, and I saw and actually took some pictures—which I gave to Secretary Schafer at one time, Chuck, you 

may remember—of the dramatic benefits of sound agricultural conservation practices. I have pictures where you could see buffer 

strips, grassed waterways, no-till, and wetlands that kept the topsoil in place, filter sediment helped hold the water back. By contrast, I took other pictures of bare black fields with little or no conservation measures in place that had obvious erosion of topsoil 

from the rains and the flooding. 

So Iowa’s experience over the past couple of months demonstrates the need for the future conservation investments that we 

wrote into the new farm bill. We have to do more in every State 

to improve conservation activities. At the same time, it is important to provide farmers with the financial and technical assistance 

they need to achieve demonstrably greater conservation performance, through things like the EQIP program and the CSP program. 

For farmers facing significant crop losses, USDA has in place 

both the Federal crop insurance program and, beginning for this 

crop year, the 2008 crop year, a standing crop disaster assistance 

program that was established in the 2008 farm bill. That legislation also included additional disaster assistance for livestock farmers, tree crop producers, producers of other things like fish and others that do not neatly fit into these other programs. It is critically 

important that USDA reach out to farmers so that they have the 

information they need to understand whether these programs will 

be of use to them, and that be the focus of the line of questioning 

that I will pursue on that. 

Last, lest we forget, one big role of agriculture is food assistance. 

And on the food assistance side of the equation, we know that the 

Federal Food Stamp Program is the first line of defense against 

hunger not only for low-income families but for people who have 

been hit by a natural disaster, and it becomes even more important 

there. The experiences in Iowa—and I am sure in Louisiana and 

Texas—will offer us insight into how the Federal Government can 

help make sure that that food assistance is there readily and rapidly and make sure it gets to people who need it, those who were 

impacted by these disasters. 

The waters in our State have receded, the rebuilding phase is 

underway, but significant challenges remain for low-income families hit hardest by the flooding. So continued support is needed for 

them, and continued support is needed for agriculture and rebuilding and renewing some of the things that were—conservation 

measures that were damaged or destroyed. But then, again, I alVerDate Aug 31 2005 16:07 May 01, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\46170.TXT SAG2 PsN: SAG2
3 

ways say we have to think prospectively. Let’s think ahead, and 

what can we do to be better at stopping that raindrop when it falls 

in the future? 

With that, I would recognize my dear friend and colleague, Senator Landrieu. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARY L. LANDRIEU, A U.S. SENATOR 

FROM THE STATE OF LOUISIANA 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you, Chairman Harkin, and I so appreciate your willingness to co-host this hearing with me as we try 

to bring some focus on a disaster that has unfolded and is continuing to unfold today as we speak in several States throughout 

our country. 

Those of us who represent strong agricultural economies understand, Senator, that natural disasters are not just about the 

human tragedy of cities and urban areas besieged by water and 

wind in hurricanes and storms and heavy rains. But we have all 

seen reporters at the seawalls in Galveston or at the Industrial 

Canal system in New Orleans. But that only tells part of the story, 

Senator, of these hurricanes that have rammed the Gulf Coast. 

Far from the television cameras, there is an economic crisis unfolding of major proportions throughout Louisiana. Northeast Louisiana particularly has been an agricultural breadbasket of our Nation since the 1790’s. From soybeans to sweet potatoes, cotton, and 

corn, Louisiana farmers have been an integral part of the food 

chain in our country. And looking further south, of course, you 

know because you have visited, sugar cane has been the part of our 

economy since the Jesuits planted the first stalk on Baronne Street 

right now across from St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New Orleans. 

These centuries of productivity, culture, and history are literally, 

Senator, threatened by the devastation caused by Gustav and Ike. 

Our farmers are not standing on rooftops. They were not rescued 

by the Coast Guard. But the tragedy and loss that they have experienced is every bit as real as the loss that other citizens in Louisiana have experienced through these storms. 

The point of our hearing today is to bring the spotlight on this 

untold story of this disaster and to bolster our request for immediate and substantial assistance to the agricultural sector of Louisiana and other States that need similar help. 

I want to say that both in Iowa, where your industry, your agriculture industry, is about a $19 billion industry and ours a $10 billion industry is one of the largest in our State. The storms that hit 

Louisiana—Faye, heavy rains in Faye, although it hit Florida, the 

rains traveled throughout our area of the country—not just inches, 

Senator, but feet. Gustav and Ike then came on the heels of Faye, 

and not only had tremendous coastal flooding, saltwater intrusion, 

but, again, dumped heavy rains and precipitated flooding in creeks 

and rivers and streams throughout bayous throughout our State. It 

has caused unprecedented damage, which is the testimony that you 

will hear. 

So we are not just talking only, though, about the farmers and 

the fields. Right here is a good picture. I do not know whether this 

came from Louisiana or Iowa, but a lot of our fields look just like 

this. I was walking through them this weekend. But these storms 

4 

have a domino effect on our entire agricultural industry. Lenders, 

grain storage elevators, and our bankers are all sitting on pins and 

needles. 

This is a rice farmer holding the destroyed rice in his hands in 

Cheneyville, Louisiana, and up here is a picture of our cotton crop 

in North Louisiana. Right before these rains, Senator, this was the 

most beautiful cotton crop that you could have ever seen in Louisiana. Our farmers were giddy with excitement about the banner 

agricultural year that they were just about ready to have. And unfortunately, these storms hit right before harvest time. So we are 

literally sitting in miles and miles of fields of cotton that looks like 

this, rice that looks like this. Some of our rice was harvested, but 

not enough of it. 

So far, the estimated damage—and these are simply, Senator, preliminary estimates—is $700 million just for Gustav because the 

Ike numbers have not come in yet. We have not seen agricultural 

losses like this in memory—in memory. 

So that is what this hearing is about. I am very happy to have 

our Commissioner of Agriculture Mike Strain, newly elected but 

not new to this issue. He comes to us as a veterinarian and as a 

leader of our ag community. He has been walking the halls of Congress here with our Lieutenant Governor and other elected officials 

for days trying to bring this message to Congress. 

So I thank you. I am going to submit the rest of my statement 

for the record, but, again, the point of this hearing, Senator, is to 

really sound the alarm before Congress leaves to give some special 

attention to the agricultural sectors of our State that have not been 

photographed very much. And this is not a hit to the press. They 

have more pictures than they know what to do with to take of Galveston and other areas that have been flooded. But we must bring 

this issue to the attention of our Congress, and I thank you very 

much, and I will have more questions later. 

Chairman HARKIN. Thank you very much, Senator Landrieu. 

Now I yield to Senator Vitter, our other Senator from the great 

State of Louisiana. 

STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID VITTER, A U.S. SENATOR FROM 

THE STATE OF LOUISIANA 

Senator VITTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I will be very 

brief. 

First of all, I, too, want to thank you for this hearing and also 

express our support for your people and all of the difficulty you all 

have gone through with enormous flooding in the Midwest for several, several months. So we certainly stand with you with regard 

to that, and you can count on our help in any way possible. And 

certainly we feel the same way about the people of Texas who were 

very hard hit and face significant ag impacts. In general, the impacts are great there, particularly southeast Texas and areas like 

Galveston. 

Mary is exactly right, and the horn of our dilemma or the nature 

of our challenge is this: First, I think the Nation has a general 

sense that although Gustav and Ike were significant storms, we 

sort of dodged the bullet in Louisiana. Well, certainly that is true 

in the sense that it did not cause crisis and devastation like 

5 

Katrina and Rita did, particularly in urban areas like New Orleans. But, in other ways, it is really not true, and the biggest area 

where it is really not true is agriculture. And, unfortunately, Gustav and Ike together caused more devastation and more loss across 

more of the State in agriculture than Katrina and Rita. 

It is hard to really grasp that just based on the nature of the 

storms and the categories, but it is true. Gustav and Ike impacted 

almost every corner of the State, including with torrential rains in 

central and north Louisiana. And so the impact to ag was enormous and was absolutely greater than the impacts of Katrina and 

Rita. 

Now, you couple that with the fact that under our disaster laws 

like the Stafford Act, many things happen automatically once you 

have a Presidential disaster declaration. But, unfortunately, for the 

most part, help for ag and fisheries does not happen automatically. 

For the most part, we need to act affirmatively for anything meaningful to get done. There is no automatic grants of certain monies 

as there is for debris removal or individual assistance under the 

Stafford Act. 

And so that is really the nature of our challenge: enormous loss, 

particularly in ag and fisheries, that is widely underappreciated on 

the national scale, with the fact that there is nothing in Federal 

law that automatically kicks in. So we really truly need to act, and 

I appreciate your leadership as we do act on a very tight timetable. 

Chairman HARKIN. Thank you very much, Senator Vitter, and, 

again, to both of you, again, whatever help we can be we are sort 

of all in this together. And we need to let the rest of the country 

know just how badly our people are hurting and what is happening, of course, in the area of agriculture, is not highlighted as 

much, perhaps, as you said, as other things are highlighted. 

I just remember the floods in Iowa. All over the world TV viewers saw pictures of Cedar Rapids underwater, and it was devastating. But you did not see much about what was happening out 

on the farms, and those farmers out there and stuff like that in 

their fields just gone. 

Once I was in a field of a number of farms where a levee broke, 

and there was, I think, about 12,000 acres totally devastated. You 

just do not see pictures of that. It sort of looked like that, Mary, 

something like that. 

Well, we have two panels. Our first panel, Mr. Chuck Conner, 

Deputy Secretary, U.S. Department of Agriculture; Ms. Kate Houston, Deputy Under Standard for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer 

Services; and Mr. Arlen Lancaster, Chief of the Natural Resources 

Conservation Service. This will be our first panel. The next panel 

will have people from both Louisiana and Iowa testifying. 

So, Mr. Conner, welcome to the Committee. Your statement will 

be made a part of the record in its entirety. If you could summarize 

for us, we would be most appreciative. Welcome back. 

6 

STATEMENT OF CHARLES F. CONNER, DEPUTY SECRETARY, 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE; ACCOMPANIED BY 

KATE HOUSTON, DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY FOR FOOD, 

NUTRITION, AND CONSUMER SERVICES, AND ARLEN LANCASTER, CHIEF, NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION 

SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Mr. CONNER. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman Harkin, Chairwoman Landrieu, and Senator Vitter. I am pleased to be here 

today to share with you the Department of Agriculture’srole in disaster response and recovery in the wake of the 2008 Midwest floods 

and, of course, Hurricanes Gustav and Ike. 

I am joined today by Arlen Lancaster, our Chief of the Natural 

Resource Conservation Service, and Kate Houston, the Deputy 

Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services. They 

will be available to help me with any questions that you may have. 

I also have a number of other technical experts that we have 

brought with me today in order to respond properly and in detail 

to your questions. 

This year’s natural disasters did wreak havoc, serious damage 

throughout the Midwest, Texas, and Louisiana. They destroyed 

crops, killed livestock, put thousands of people out of their homes, 

and destroyed businesses. They presented a serious test of our Department’s emergency response capabilities. But, ladies and gentlemen, I am here to say today and am proud to say today that I believe the people of USDA did rise to this occasion. 

Most of USDA’s 110,000 employees, Mr. Chairman, live in the 

very communities where they work. And when USDA responds, it 

is often our employees helping their neighbors, their family, and 

others in their communities. This year, they applied lessons 

learned from our experiences with Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 

2005. They worked tirelessly and effectively to deliver essential 

services and supplies for the people who needed them most and to 

cut through bureaucratic red tape wherever it was possible. 

USDA, as you know, carries out a very broad range of missions. 

They range from fighting hunger through our nutrition programs 

to assuring the safety of food products through inspection and public education efforts, to protecting soil and water resources through 

conservation, to supporting our agricultural producers and managing our Nation’s forests. Nearly all of USDA’s 17 agencies have 

been involved in our disaster response efforts to some degree. 

Mr. Chairman, as you might expect, when situations like this 

arise, providing food to the victims of disasters is always our absolute No. 1 priority. The Food and Nutrition Service meets this need 

on two levels. In the earliest stages of the disaster recovery, when 

grocery stores and banks are closed, utility services are interrupted, and people are actually displaced from their homes, we provide food supplies to shelter and food banks for use in serving 

meals and restocking household needs. 

As the recovery proceeds, FNS focuses on providing Disaster 

Food Stamp Program benefits to people who may have returned to 

their homes but still may be dealing with income interruptions and 

other disaster-related financial losses. Those who receive the benefits must meet income guidelines, but the thresholds are higher 

than they are with regular food stamp applications. 

7 

To date, FNS has provided nearly $192 million of benefits and 

supplements through the DFSP to 40,000 new and 19,500 ongoing 

households that were victims of the Midwest flood. It has also provided $184 million in benefits to 490,000 new and over 119,000 ongoing households that were victims of Hurricane Gustav in Louisiana. And in Texas, some of the data that we are just reporting 

in, we have now offered benefits to 58,000 new recipients and over 

245,000 existing food stamp households for additional benefits of 

$42 million to date as a result of Hurricane Ike as well. So these 

benefits are flowing, and they are flowing in a very substantial 

way. 

Keeping food safe, Mr. Chairman, during an emergency is another essential mission. Through alerts to the media and updates 

on its website, USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service has kept 

the public informed on how to keep food safe during power outages. 

And in Texas and Louisiana, we have also been handing out packets of information on food safety at key distribution points. This is 

the packet. We brought a few of these here today for you to have 

as a visual so that you can understand the type of communication 

that we are having with people that are adversely impacted in 

these situations who need to know what food is safe to eat and 

what is not. 

As important as they are, food supplies and food safety issues are 

only part of our overall response to these disasters. We have also 

been working to help the victims of these disasters restore damage 

done to crops, roads, homes, and infrastructure. 

In the States affected by the Midwest floods, the Natural Resource Conservation Service and the Farm Service Agency have already started distributing Emergency Watershed Protection funds 

and Emergency Conservation Program funds to restore damaged 

water management structures, farmland, and conservation projects. 

We expect to receive more EWP and ECP claims from Texas and 

Louisiana and other States as we move further into the recovery 

phase of our response to Hurricanes Gustav and Ike, and we will 

be talking to Congress about the funding for these programs. 

To properly assess the situation, of course, it always does help 

to spend a lot of time on the ground. In June, Secretary Schafer 

got the chance to see the aftermath of the Midwest floods firsthand 

when he joined President Bush and Senator Harkin in Iowa. I also 

had the opportunity to see conditions in my home State of Indiana. 

More recently, Nancy Johner, our Under Secretary for Food and 

Nutrition, visited Louisiana to see how the recovery efforts were 

going following Hurricane Gustav, particularly as it related to the 

nutrition side of that equation. 

We have also been in close touch with State officials. Last week, 

Secretary Schafer and I met with Dr. Mike Strain, who will testify 

before you later, Louisiana’s Commissioner of Agriculture, and we 

have also met with Texas agriculture officials to discuss how we 

can work together to expedite the recovery from Hurricanes Gustav 

and Ike. 

Our initial responses to these two hurricanes reflects the lessons 

that we learned from the Federal response to Hurricanes Katrina 

and Rita 3 years ago. We determined that advanced planning and 

prepositioning of people and equipment and enhanced training of 

8 

State and local emergency response personnel could all do a great 

deal to improve the outcomes from those damaged by the catastrophic storms. 

The Forest Service, of course, has deep experience in managing 

the logistical and supply challenges involved in fighting wildfires 

under emergency conditions. We drew upon that experience by 

prepositioning some 600 Forest Service personnel throughout the 

Southeast so that they would be ready to respond immediately to 

the anticipate hurricanes and tropical storms. That group included 

Incident Management Teams and other emergency specialists who 

provided direct support to the FEMA command centers. 

We also include five 50–person saw crews who tackled road clearing and debris removal throughout Texas and Louisiana. One of 

those crews, as an example, was able to clear the only road open 

on Galveston Island to the Galveston Medical Center, making medical services accessible in one of the hardest-hit areas from Hurricane Ike. 

And our response has not been solely programmatic as well. Our 

people have gone the extra mile to find a way to help. Whether 

that means scrambling to get out in a boat or up in a helicopter 

to find stranded livestock or figuring out the best way to shelter 

stranded companion animals, we have been resourceful in simply 

getting the job done. 

On a person-to-person basis, there have been innumerable examples of how our emergency personnel have helped, ranging from 

providing emergency ice to an elderly man in Texas whose insulin 

was on the verge of going bad, to helping a daughter in Chicago 

figure out how to help her mother in Houma, Louisiana, after she 

had tried to make contact with her mother and was unsuccessful 

in doing so. 

Because of the planning and prepositioning that has been done 

by many USDA agencies and their close coordination with our partners in State and local government, our response effort to these recent disasters has been rapid and, I believe, carefully targeted. 

That is not to say, Mr. Chairman, that there are no glitches or 

unforeseen events. That is always the case. But extensive preparation work helped us bypass many of these logistical and bureaucratic hurdles that have hampered us in the past. 

USDA’s overall response has been greatly aided by our centralized Homeland Security Office. This office was created by Secretary 

Ann Veneman shortly after the 9/11 attacks. In the years since, it 

has worked to break down agency barriers and build a unified Department-wide team to respond to disasters. It also works closely 

with FEMA in planning and training activities. The Director of the 

office, Sheryl Maddux, is here today, and I would like to thank her 

for all she has done to get us in shape for the tests that we have 

faced this year, and they have been substantial tests. Sheryl is a 

career professional, and she now heads an office that is staffed entirely by career professionals who report directly to the chief of 

staff. They do great work, Mr. Chairman. We are glad to have her 

on board, and with that, Mr. Chairman, let me please answer any 

questions that the Committees may have for me. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Conner can be found on page 49 

in the appendix.] 

9 

Chairman HARKIN. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. 

I have one question for each of you, and most of it has to do with 

rules. Mr. Conner, there was some confusion this summer out my 

way on some of the new provisions in the farm bill on the new disaster program. We contacted you. You were very helpful in getting 

that straightened out, and I appreciate that very much. But where 

are we in getting the draft rules for the new disaster program that 

was in the farm bill? Where are we on getting—can you give us 

some idea how soon we are going to be able to see some of the draft 

rules for farmers to take a look at? 

Mr. CONNER. Senator Harkin, that is a great question. Let me 

just say that relative to the SURE Program, our people within the 

Farm Service Agency are working very, very diligently. And this is 

a key part of our disaster response. This is money that is there, 

that is available; and such sums as necessary have been provided 

to meet the disaster requirements for those producers who qualify 

and have an eligible disaster loss, which I believe is triggered at 

30 percent, if I am not mistaken, in that. 

In this case, though, Mr. Chairman this is also a brand-new program. 

Chairman HARKIN. That is right. 

Mr. CONNER. A program that we have never offered anything 

like this before within the Department of Agriculture. It is based 

off of crop loss for the entire farm of that operation for all crops. 

Chairman HARKIN. Right. 

Mr. CONNER. Regardless of the location of those crops. If you 

have a farm that is spread out, some in the disaster area, some 

not, we have to take into account all of the income, all of the revenue from all of those crops. And that can be a very diverse situation. We were talking this morning in preparation for this. We insure, we believe, over 400 different crops, and some of those crops, 

we do not even have an accounting for in terms of income and 

prices for those crops, and we are going to have to create that in 

order to implement this new SURE Program. 

Bottom line, Mr. Chairman, is we are working hard. I do not 

want to leave you the impression that those regulations are imminent. They are going to be coming as quickly as possible. They will 

be available. Farmers who have losses in 2008 will qualify for payments under that particular program. But I would note as well, 

just in the interest of full disclosure, that the statute requires us 

to base our determination of payments off of income from the season average price associated with those crops on that farm. 

In corn, for example, the 2008 crop, we are just beginning the 

crop marketing year for corn. And we will go the full year for marketing of the 2008 corn marketing year. 

Chairman HARKIN. Right. 

Mr. CONNER. And so it will be a full year from now before you 

would actually have the price data on corn alone to make the determination to issue the payment under the SURE Program. 

Chairman HARKIN. Thank you. 

Ms. Houston, from speaking with people involved in the disaster 

recovery efforts in Iowa, I first want to thank you for the good work 

that USDA did there. Most everyone I talked to in communities I 

met with were very pleased with the way that USDA worked with 

10 

local communities and the county offices to get the Disaster Food 

Stamp Program up and running. So I just want to thank you for 

that, although I noticed long lines of 500 to 600 people in Houston, 

and hopefully you are going to be doing something about doing 

more in the future to anticipate 500 or 600 people standing in line. 

It can be very frustrating and debilitating when you have lost your 

home and everything else. So I hope you are going to be looking 

at ways of addressing that in the future, too. 

That did not happen in Iowa. I just saw that in Houston. 

Ms. HOUSTON. We certainly recognize that, particularly on the 

initial days of the Disaster Food Stamp Program getting up and 

running, there can be a number of logical challenges because everybody wants to kind of get there and get their benefits. There are 

a number of things that we can do in partnership with States to 

try to alleviate some of those crowds. Certainly pre-planning to 

make sure there are an adequate number of sites, an adequate 

number of trained eligibility determination workers can really help 

in those first few days, as well as communication with the public 

about the number of days that the sites will be open so that they 

understand they do not all need to get there on the first day. 

We have also worked with States to identify some appropriate 

waivers that can help to create some flexibilities in the way the 

system operates, and hopefully those create some expediencies. For 

example, in Texas and in Louisiana, we recently approved a waiver 

that allows potential applicants to call ahead into a phone center, 

provide their information, do as much of the intake over the phone, 

and then when they show up at the site, they just have to do some 

quick verification on the back end, and they can walk away with 

their card. We have seen that as one example as a way that we 

have really been able to minimize the crowds in the last few days 

of the operation of these centers. 

Chairman HARKIN. Very good. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Lancaster, I know it does not have anything directly to do 

with disaster response, but NRCS is now past the statutory deadline of when the regulations on the Conservation Title of the recently passed farm bill were supposed to be out. The 90–day period 

expired on September 16th, and the transition period we included 

in the Conservation Title expires on September 30th. Where are 

the regulations? And instead of addressing this, you might for the 

record tell us what programs will not be able to function as of October 1st without new regulations in place. 

Mr. LANCASTER. Mr. Chairman, certainly we are working, as the 

Deputy Secretary indicated, as diligently as possible on all our 

rules to make them available to producers in fiscal year 2009. Of 

our rules, they are in various stages of clearance within the administration and within USDA. 

Our expectation is that we will be able to offer most of these programs again in fiscal year 2009, most of them in calendar year 

2008. 

Some programs, like the Conservation Security Program, we are 

working, and it is more likely that a program like that would be— 

the rules would not be completed until calendar year 2009 because 

of the complexity of a brand-new program, essentially. 

11 

We are working with our Office of General Counsel on what provisions require a rule in order to offer the program and whether 

or not we can offer and hold sign-ups for a number of these programs prior to the rule being completed. 

Chairman HARKIN. But, again, would you for the record provide 

for us, since obviously the rules are not going to be done by September 30th or October 1st, provide us for the record what programs would not be able to function as of October 1st without these 

new regulations in place, if any? 

Mr. LANCASTER. Mr. Chairman, we will certainly do that for the 

record. We will consult with our Office of General Counsel, and, 

again, some of them we may be able to offer initially and hold 

those sign-ups because the rules are specific to how we operate on 

implementation rather than the sign-up with those producers. 

Chairman HARKIN. I appreciate that. 

Chairman HARKIN. I recognize now the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Disaster Recovery of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Senator Landrieu. 

Senator LANDRIEU. [Presiding.] Thank you. 

Mr. Secretary, if you could just clear up just a couple things in 

your testimony. One, you said that after 9/11 there was a disaster 

relief coordination effort within the Department. Who is in charge 

of that effort right now? 

Mr. CONNER. Sheryl Maddux. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Sheryl Maddux. And her title is? 

Mr. CONNER. This is Sheryl Maddux. 

Senator LANDRIEU. So Sheryl is here. Sheryl, what is your title? 

Ms. MADDUX. Director of Homeland Security Office. 

Senator LANDRIEU. OK. And you are in charge of agriculture disasters, trying to coordinate ag disasters since 9/11? 

Mr. CONNER. Sheryl’s responsibility, obviously she coordinates 

among our 7 mission areas within USDA, but then she directly 

interfaces with the Department of Homeland Security and their operations as well, and the FEMA personnel. 

Senator LANDRIEU. OK. Because I am wondering if the Secretary 

is going to declare our State an agriculture disaster or not. And if 

not, why? If so, when? And I do not know if you want to respond 

to that. 

Mr. CONNER. Yes, let me take a shot at that, Senator Landrieu. 

We have got that paperwork within the agency. I believe—I can be 

corrected here by some of our folks, but I think that it would represent the entire State of Louisiana in terms of a disaster area. 

You have already recieved a Presidential disaster declaration. In 

order for us to give you a secretarial disaster declaration—and this 

is significant because in order to be eligible for the SURE payments 

that I was discussing with Senator Harkin, you have to have not 

a Presidential but a secretarial designation. That paperwork is 

coming in now. We are still waiting on some of the loss assessments that we need from the local personnel to make that decision. 

But it will be forthcoming, and it is going to be forthcoming in a 

very timely way. Our folks have dealt with this. They approve 

these things almost on a daily basis, and those disaster declarations will come in for the State of Louisiana in a timely way 

and—— 

12 

Senator LANDRIEU. OK. Well, let me just—— 

Mr. CONNER [continuing]. Well ahead of what you are going to 

need in order to qualify for those SURE payments. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Well, that is good news and bad news. I 

mean, of course, we would rather have a declaration than not. But 

I understand that you just testified that the regulations for the 

program at not written. And so how would we write regulations in 

time to get help to our farmers? 

Mr. CONNER. Let me share this thought, if I could, Senator 

Landrieu, with you, and I think it addresses your point. 

Obviously, as I mentioned to Senator Harkin, under the SURE 

Program, we will provide payments in terms of crop losses—— 

Senator LANDRIEU. I realize that, but not to interrupt you, Mr. 

Secretary, I do not mean to be disrespectful, but I need to ask you 

something. 

Mr. CONNER. OK. 

Senator LANDRIEU. You testified just now that you have not really even started to write the regulations and that it might—and I 

think your quote was, ‘‘Chairman, do not expect it to be imminent. 

It is not going to be imminent.’’ So that led me to believe that it 

may take a year, maybe several months, a year, maybe even 2 

years. You have 400 crops, you testified, in America that you do not 

even have assessments for. I can understand—— 

Mr. CONNER. If I could, Senator Landrieu—— 

Senator LANDRIEU. Let me just finish. I can understand the challenge that is before you, but we have an immediate disaster on the 

ground right now, and you have testified that the program that we 

have tried to structure with our best efforts is not even—the regulations are not even written yet. 

So what is the Agriculture Department’s response to this? Are 

you going to ask for any special help or intermediate help? And 

what can we expect from you and the Secretary? 

Mr. CONNER. OK. If I could, in an attempt to respond to the 

points you have raised, on the SURE Program, I did not say we 

had not started. I indicated it is a difficult process. We have already literally logged in hundreds of thousands of hours to get 

ready for SURE. 

Senator LANDRIEU. I stand corrected. When do you think it will 

be completed? 

Mr. CONNER. We will be in a position to issue these checks next 

fall in a timely way once we have the data that is necessary. I am 

not talking about 2 or 3 years down the road. 

Senator LANDRIEU. OK. Then that is fine. I stand corrected. And 

you said that you can maybe deliver checks next fall, but let me 

press my point here, if I could, in the time remaining. Next fall is 

too late. Next fall it too late. 

Mr. CONNER. I understand that. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Now, the Department has some responsibility 

here, not only does Congress but the Department, I think, to come 

up with some intermediate suggestions as to how we might get ourselves from where we are today to where we are going to need to 

go before we have an economic agricultural collapse in Louisiana. 

And I am wondering if you have any suggestions today about how 

that might be done? 

13 

Mr. CONNER. I do, and I am going to make two points, if I could, 

to address that question. 

The first point is understand that we are already putting money 

into the system in terms of crop insurance indemnity payments. 

This fall, Senator Landrieu, we will make a record number of crop 

insurance indemnity payments, I am advised now estimated to be 

well over $5 billion for these types of disasters. Some of these payments have already gone out for those that received an early loss 

situation, and that is true in Iowa. In Louisiana, where the damage 

has just occurred those assessors are out there. Those payments 

will be made in a timely way, and I am talking weeks in terms of 

that money going out. And, again, that is going to be $5 billion that 

we are going to be putting out there into the world of crop loss situations. 

Senator LANDRIEU. But I thought—— 

Mr. CONNER. Also, the second part of that is in the very near future—and, again, within a matter of weeks, not months or certainly not years—within the very near future, we are going to be 

making additional payments relative to the 2008 crop in the form 

of a direct payment, and that is going to be over $4 billion—— 

Senator LANDRIEU. So you are testifying—— 

Mr. CONNER [continuing]. In a direct payment—— 

Senator LANDRIEU. Just to be clear, you are testifying that within the next few weeks, you can distribute $5 billion without the 

rules and regulations in place? 

Mr. CONNER. What I am saying is that the crop insurance system 

is in place. Obviously, this is a program that we operate with private insurance companies, with private adjusters. Those adjusters 

are literally down there in the fields now making those assessments. Some of those adjustments cannot be made until a little bit 

later because the harvest has not yet occurred on the crops that 

have survived down there. But all of that crop insurance business 

with the adjusters assessing the damage is going to be made in a 

timely way, and those payments are going to go out in a very timely way. 

You know, I am not going to nail down a time because, to some 

extent, that is an issue between the farmer and his insurance company. But the resources are there, and those payments are going 

to go out soon. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Well, let me just say for the record, I appreciate your attention, but I believe strongly that the current insurance program is not at all adequate for what our situation is in 

Louisiana. And it may not be adequate for agriculture disasters 

going on in Texas or in Iowa or in other parts of the Midwest. But 

I do not want to speak for those States. But for Louisiana, that insurance program is wholly inadequate, and the new one that we 

struggled for years under the jurisdiction of this Committee to try 

to put in place, the regulations, you have testified, have not been 

completed and will not even be available until next year. 

So I am going to conclude my 5 minutes by saying that I really 

hope that you will consider, once you have heard the testimony 

from our Agriculture Commissioner and others, something that can 

be done more immediately and substantial to help out not only our 

14 

farmers but our bankers, our grain elevators. And I thank the 

Chairman. 

I would like to call—I think the Chairman is out—on whoever 

the next questioner is in order of appearance. Senator Vitter? 

Senator VITTER. Thank you, Senator. 

Mr. Secretary, again, I want to encourage the call for a 

secretarially-declared ag disaster for the entire State of Louisiana. 

You outlined why this declaration is necessary and important. Our 

Governor, Governor Jindal, has requested it for the entire State. 

Mr. CONNER. Yes. 

Senator VITTER. I know assessment teams are on the ground. 

But the sooner that can happen, the better. 

I apologize if I missed it, but did you have an approximate timetable you expected that decision within? 

Mr. CONNER. Well, Senator Vitter, I did not. But I will tell you, 

I will commit to you and to Senator Landrieu that the Washington 

review of those assessments that are coming in from the field will 

not hold up that process. We will turn those around almost immediately, as soon as we get them in from the field, and we will not 

hold them up. 

Senator VITTER. Right. OK. And, obviously, the assessments on 

the ground need to happen quickly, too. 

Mr. CONNER. Absolutely. 

Senator VITTER. So if you can push that through the pipeline. 

The second quick issue, crop insurance deadlines for sugar. Right 

now that is September 30th, and you still have fields underwater. 

You still have folks dealing with very difficult situations. Can an 

additional 30 days be granted for that sign-up in light of the disaster some folks are still in the midst of? 

Mr. CONNER. Senator Vitter, the short answer to your question 

is I do not think that is going to be possible. This is a crop insurance program where we underwrite private insurance, and we subsidize the premiums for that insurance, but it is a privately operated insurance program. And if we allowed people to sign up for 

this program after a disaster occurs, I venture to say, Senator 

Vitter, next year we would have no companies offering crop insurance. They would not—cannot insure and allow them to get in after 

a disaster has occurred. No one would sign up ahead of time if that 

were the case. We currently have 17 companies offering crop insurance in your region, and it is a very competitive environment. We 

want that competition out there for the sake of the farmer. I do not 

think we would have it if we let them insure after a disaster. 

Senator VITTER. Let me back up, because maybe I am missing 

something. The current deadline is September 30th. 

Mr. CONNER. Yes. 

Senator VITTER. So that itself is after—— 

Mr. CONNER. Are you talking about the reporting of the loss, 

Senator? 

Senator VITTER. No. I am talking about sign-up. 

Mr. CONNER. Sign-up for the actual insurance. 

Senator VITTER. For the program. And I am just talking about 

the fact that the current deadline is after Ike, so it is not a question of moving a deadline from before an event to after an event. 

It is a question of the current deadline being September 30th and 

15 

folks still being in the midst of enormous losses and clean-up and 

extending that deadline, again, with no intervening disaster. I believe that has happened in other cases. 

Mr. CONNER. OK. I am going to say something, and then if I am 

wrong on this, I am going to ask my staff to correct me, because 

I may well be wrong on this, Senator. I believe the actual requirement on whether or not you are going to have insurance, that time 

has already come and gone. I believe that September 30th is the 

deadline for reporting a disaster on that. 

For 2009, OK, that is September—so for 2008 the loss has already occurred, you have already had to make a decision whether 

to be—— 

Senator VITTER. I am talking about next year. 

Mr. CONNER. For next year, OK. 

Senator VITTER. I am talking about just the fact that people—— 

Mr. CONNER. OK. Then I apologize. 

Senator VITTER [continuing]. Are in the midst of clean-up and 

disaster, and this deadline is coming for next year. So can we extend the 30 days? 

Mr. CONNER. Well, I think we have got some flexibility both in 

terms of when they report their loss, because obviously some people 

are trying to get back into their home situation as well. Let us go 

back and look and see what kind of flexibility we may have for 

them to sign up for next year, because I understand some of these 

people are just trying to get their homes back in order. They cannot 

deal with this. 

Senator VITTER. Right. 

Mr. CONNER. If we have got any flexibility that does not hurt the 

integrity of the program, Senator, we will try and use that. 

Senator VITTER. OK. That is all I am talking about, not moving 

a deadline—— 

Mr. CONNER. I commit that—OK. I apologize for my misunderstanding. 

Senator VITTER [continuing]. From before an event to after an 

event. 

A third and final quick question is crop insurance claims. As I 

understand it, the requirement is that a claim be filed after a producer destroys the crops involved. Again, some of those crops are 

still underwater, so the process of draining the field, pulling them 

out, destroying them is fairly significant. Can some flexibility be 

exercised so they can begin to make a claim now when there is obvious evidence of loss? 

Mr. CONNER. I am going to ask for some technical assistance on 

that. Obviously, my gut instinct is if the field is underwater, that 

is a pretty sure sign that there has been a crop loss on this. So let 

us just look at that issue. 

Senator VITTER. OK. 

Mr. CONNER. And if we have got any flexibility on that—again, 

I understand what your point is, and they are anxious to file those 

claims, and we ought to be able to enable them to file the claims 

as soon as possible. 

Senator VITTER. If you all could just follow-up with my office 

about those specific issues, I would appreciate it. 

Mr. CONNER. We will do that. 

16 

Senator VITTER. Thank you. 

Chairman HARKIN. [Presiding.] Thank you, Senator Vitter. 

Senator Grassley? 

Senator GRASSLEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The second question I was going to ask Senator Harkin has already asked, but I wanted to associate myself with the disaster 

program being implemented like yesterday. But we need to get it 

done so we can make use of it. 

The other question I was going to ask you, Secretary Conner, I 

sent a letter on September 4th to FSA Administrator Teresa 

Lasseter regarding nine counties in Iowa that had requested Emergency Conservation Program funds that have not been included in 

the Department’s announcement of $87 million that would be distributed among Midwest States. First, why were these nine counties excluded? 

And, finally, I have heard reports that the money may be going 

out, but I have not received a formal response from the Department. Will those nine counties receive the emergency funding? 

Mr. CONNER. They will, Senator Grassley. I am not sure I can 

identify exactly what happened, but there was, relative to those 

nine counties, some bad information. Those counties are eligible, 

and the payments will be going out to those nine counties. 

Senator GRASSLEY. Well, when I see the FSA Administrator for 

Hardin County in church on Sunday, I can tell her she is going to 

get it. 

Mr. CONNER. That is correct. 

Senator GRASSLEY. OK. 

Mr. CONNER. And I am further advised that the response to your 

September 4th letter was actually being sent today. 

Senator GRASSLEY. OK. Well—— 

Mr. CONNER. You should get that in writing. 

Senator GRASSLEY. That is very good, and that is a quicker response than we get from most bureaucracies around this town. 

Mr. CONNER. That does not always happen, Senator. 

Senator GRASSLEY. Thank you. 

And the next one is for Mr. Lancaster. It is a long question so 

wait until I get there. Because of the extremely wet spring, we 

have these questions, and that is the fact that what led up to the 

record flooding in much of Iowa was this 500–year rain event that 

we had. Unfortunately, some editorial writers and experts quickly 

jumped on kind of a ‘‘blame farmers’’ bandwagon for bringing these 

extreme events to us all, and one of the Washington Post’s headline 

was ‘‘Man blamed for Iowa flooding,’’ June 18th. 

How anyone can rationalize that is beyond my imagination. Keep 

in mind that most field scale practices are designed for 10– to 25– 

year rain events. Larger watershed scale structures may be designed to handle 100–year rain events. However, these practices 

and structures were obviously not designed for 500–year rain 

events, and there was severe damage. The Iowa Department of Agriculture initially put the damage estimate conservatively to 

grassed waterways, terraces, et cetera, at approximately $40 million. But officials from my State tell me where good conservation 

practices and systems were in place to protect agricultural land, 

homes, and infrastructure, they were doing a very good job. And I 

17 

think Senator Harkin saw that as we traveled by helicopter over 

Iowa back in June when the floods were hitting. The challenge is 

to get more working conservation on land where it is most needed 

and will provide the most benefit given our limited resources. 

Therefore, in the long run, how can the Federal Government best 

help my State do this, that is, target conservation practices to critical needs? 

Mr. LANCASTER. Senator, Chairman Harkin raised this point certainly in his opening statement, the fact they did conservation 

practices, have an ability to mitigate the effects of natural disaster, 

be it flooding or drought. The ability to have a more resilient soil 

that serves as a better drainage system for that is certainly important. 

I will say that the tools that Congress has provided in the 2008 

farm bill for conservation are the types of tools that we need to implement these programs on the ground. In working with our partners, with the Soil and Water Conservation Districts, delivering 

programs like the Environmental Quality Incentives Program 

where we are providing cost-share and incentive payments to producers to implement these practices, that is a tremendous tool and 

one that is very important in Iowa. 

What I cannot understate, though, is the importance of other 

programs like the Wetlands Reserve Program where you create 

buffers from flooding, where you provide a filter system, riparian 

buffers and others. And, again, I believe that the tools that Congress provided in the 2008 farm bill are broad enough that we can 

address each of these concerns, and the way we implement it is 

through our partnership with State agencies through Conservation 

Districts and, importantly, by helping producers develop a good 

conservation plan at the forefront so they can identify what resource concerns they want to protect and how best to do that. 

Senator GRASSLEY. Mr. Chairman, I do not have questions for 

these two witnesses, and we do have two Iowans, Lyle and Barbara, on the program. I have got some questions I am going to have 

to leave in writing for them to answer, unless you want to ask 

them for me, because I have got to go to another meeting. 

Chairman HARKIN. Whichever you would like, I would be glad to 

do whichever. 

Senator GRASSLEY. OK. Well, let’s just wait and see how things 

work out. 

Chairman HARKIN. OK. Thanks. 

Senator GRASSLEY. And I welcome Lyle and Barbara. 

Chairman HARKIN. Thank you, Senator Grassley. 

Senator Thune? 

Senator THUNE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to thank 

our panelists today, too, for all their assistance in dealing with past 

disasters. Many of you have been involved and played critical roles 

in helping us develop programs to respond to past natural disasters 

and are now playing, of course, a critical role in helping to improve 

Federal programs for future events. And I think all the floods and 

the hurricanes and the disasters we have dealt with this year are 

obviously going to create a great need for the type of assistance 

that I think is now available under the permanent disaster program. 

18 

As you all know, we deal with disasters in our part of the country, too, generally more along the lines of drought. But whether it 

is indemnity payments or Emergency Conservation Programs or 

impacted landowners or emergency food assistance to local food 

banks, these Federal programs are critically important in terms of 

disaster response. And so we appreciate the important role that 

you play, and it is our responsibility, obviously, to make sure that 

these programs work in the way in which they were intended and 

that they are available when they are needed. 

A lot of the disasters that strike are outside the control of agricultural producers. And as I said, in the Upper Great Plains, they 

are expected. We know we are going to have droughts from year 

to year, an occasional flood. Unfortunately, the assistance to recover from these events is not always as reliable, but we work to, 

I think, eliminate the ad hoc disaster assistance programs that we 

have been dealing with the past few years and created some permanent disaster relief, which we hope will make those programs 

less dependent upon the political currents up here and a little bit 

more predictable for our producers. 

I do want to ask a question—and some of them have been 

touched on already—on those programs, and then I want to come 

back to one other question I have on another program. But the 

whole issue of 2008 losses and sign-up period is September 16th, 

I think. Senator Grassley and I have a bill that would allow for advance payments to be made for 2008 losses and also that would expedite the rulemaking process for the new program so that it is 

completed this year as opposed to 2009. 

But I guess I would be curious in your response with regard to 

losses this year, the sign-up period, and whether or not—the question was asked that sign-up period might be extended, and even 

whether or not the sign-up period for the 2009 crop year might be 

extended based on the fact that we do not have regulations in 

place. And I guess I would like to get a response, too, about the 

whole idea of in the past advance payments have been available to 

producers for this crop year. If they do not get that payment until 

the next crop year, you miss in some respects the window or the 

timing or the opportunity to make that assistance meaningful to 

them as they planting decisions for next year. 

The question on advance payments for crop disasters that occurred this year, crop losses that occurred this year, and then, second, flexibility, again, on sign-up for the new program given the 

fact the regulations are not in place. 

Mr. CONNER. OK. Senator Thune, as you know—and I think I am 

addressing your question here—we have issued 22 percent of the 

advanced direct payment to the producers already, and the remainder of that payment will be forthcoming pretty quickly. There has 

been discussion of issuing future advance payments to producers 

for the 2009 crop once they sign up, which we will be starting relatively soon. The statute does, again, spell out for us the amounts 

of that advance payment, and so we—unlike past farm bills, where 

we had a little bit of latitude it is locked into statute in terms of 

how much of that advance payment we have to give producers and 

when they get it. So that would require a statutory change if that 

19 

were to be altered in any way, because that 22 percent and the remaining payments after that are part of the statute. 

Senator THUNE. So for 2008 losses, 22 percent payments, advance payments, have already been made. And the balance then 

would be made still in this calendar year? 

Mr. CONNER. This is the direct payment, so, remember, it is not 

directly tied to losses themselves. I mean, this is the payment that 

everybody gets. 

Senator THUNE. Right. OK. 

Mr. CONNER. That is correct. The balance would be made. 

Senator THUNE. All right. And with regard to sign-up periods on 

the—the regulations are not in place yet for the new program. 

Mr. CONNER. Right. 

Senator THUNE. You indicated that, where Louisiana was concerned, you might have some flexibility with regard to sign-ups. 

Would that also be true for other parts of the country? 

Mr. CONNER. Yes. I mean, if I understood Senator Vitter’s question correctly, that sign-up was specifically for the 2009 crop crop 

insurance program. I would expect us to start sign-up for the acre 

claims—I mean, in effect, I guess in some ways sign-up has already 

begun in that way because the statute specifically required that 

you had to have crop insurance in place. 

Senator THUNE. Crop insurance or NAP, right. 

Mr. CONNER. Or NAP in place in order to qualify for the SURE 

payment. Obviously, that came after farmers had made their decision on the 2008 crop, so the statute required us to have this buyin situation for producers for the 2008 crop. That sign-up has come 

and gone. We have demonstrated some flexibility on that sign-up 

for the buy-in because we—— 

Senator THUNE. And that is on the September 16th deadline. 

Mr. CONNER. Yes, that is on the September 16th deadline. I 

think for those disaster areas like Louisiana—and there may be 

other parts of the country on this—we have given them additional 

time look, we can be a little bit flexible on that. The statute gives 

us that flexibility, but it does require a buy-in payment in 2008 in 

order to be eligible then for those SURE payments that are going 

to come on down the road later on. 

I do want to make one point on SURE as well, and I was reminded of this by some of the folks behind me. You know, there 

are parts of the farm bill, Senator Harkin, that require us to, in 

effect, bypass the normal rulemaking process in order to get these 

programs administered quickly. But the statute is very clear on 

which provisions we can do that for and which we cannot. 

The SURE Program, we are not authorized to do expedited or, 

if you will, what I would call a short-circuited rulemaking process. 

We have to go to a proposed rule. We will obviously have to take 

comments on that proposed rule, and then ultimately go to a final 

rule in that process as well. 

So again, I say that, Senator Landrieu, in great appreciation for 

your need to get this thing rolling so the producers can count on 

that. There is a process, though, that by law we are going to have 

to go through on that, and that is probably a good process. Again, 

this is a brand-new program. You know, we need public input to 

make sure we are doing it right. 

20 

Senator THUNE. When is the end line for that? You are talking 

to get through the process and—— 

Mr. CONNER. Well, we have not published the proposed rule yet. 

We will at some point in the not too distant future and then seek 

comments probably 60 days’ worth of comments on that proposed 

rule before going final. 

Senator THUNE. Are we going to be well into 2009, do you think, 

or is this like early 2009? 

Mr. CONNER. I would not say—it will not be well into—if it is 

well into 2009, we could not get final before next fall. So I would 

not say it is going to be well into 2009. 

Senator THUNE. I have, if I could, Mr. Chairman, another question related to the disaster program, but I want to ask just very 

quickly another—— 

Senator LANDRIEU. Senator, Senator, just one more question because we have got to get to the other panel. 

Senator THUNE. OK. 

Chairman HARKIN. We have another panel. 

Senator THUNE. All right. Thank you. Thanks. OK. All right. 

This has to do with the—this is not the permanent disaster program, but it is another new program, and that is the ACRE Program in the farm bill. 

Mr. CONNER. Yes. 

Senator THUNE. And the question about which crop years are 

going to be included in determining national price. I am wondering 

if USDA has made a decision with regard to that yet. We obviously 

have contended that it should be the 2007–08 crop year, which, as 

I understand it, is what CBO used in its calibration. USDA has indicated they might use an earlier crop year, and, of course, that 

makes a big difference to our producers. Has there been a decision 

made? 

Mr. CONNER. There has not been a decision made on that, Senator Thune. You know, in the interest of time, perhaps I will withhold kind of the dilemma we find ourselves in and what we are 

weighing in that decision. But the short answer to your question 

is we have not made that call yet on which year it will be. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you. 

Senator THUNE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Mr. Chairman, if I might, Mr. Secretary, as 

we end this panel, I just really need to make this point so that you 

and I have a clear understanding as your testimony comes to an 

end. 

I acknowledge that the SURE Program is going to take quite a 

while, and I also acknowledge that you could not expedite it if you 

wanted to because Congress required you to go through rulemaking. I am clear. But I need to make this point: That program, 

even if it was finished today—which it is not—is wholly insufficient 

for our situation. I am not asking you to hurry the program because it really would not help us anyway. I am asking you to declare Louisiana as an agricultural disaster and to come up with expedited, extraordinary help for an extraordinary situation. Are we 

clear on that? 

Mr. CONNER. I understand that, Senator. I appreciate—— 

21 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you. And I want you just to consider 

that. 

Mr. CONNER. If I could, just one quick comment because I think 

this is important as you communicate with your producers as well. 

In Louisiana, and in other States as well we have a large loan portfolio of producers who borrow through the Farm Service Agency. 

Credit is going to be a key issue going forward, and we have loan 

guarantee programs that are capable of helping out in this circumstance. We have already dispatched some teams to your State 

and to other regions for those existing borrowers. The instructions 

to those teams are work with these producers to reschedule debt, 

in some cases write off debt where there has been a disaster so 

that those loans can work so that they can be in business for another year. We are very involved in that. 

Senator LANDRIEU. I appreciate that, and I want to get to this 

next panel, because if you hear the testimony of our next panel representing States that have really been hard hit, I think you can appreciate our situation. But I do want to submit for the record a letter from the Louisiana Bankers Association talking exactly about 

the credit situation. I also want to submit, Senator Harkin, a letter 

from some members of our delegation about the difficulties with 

the Food Stamp Program that, while we have made some progress, 

we have not yet gotten adequate response. And I do acknowledge 

the six-page letter that I received this morning. I have not been 

able to review it, but I want to acknowledge that. 

[The following information can be found on page 90 in the appendix.] 

Senator LANDRIEU. But as we call the next panel up, I want to 

just show you again, Mr. Secretary, to make this point, this is— 

and you do not have to be an expert, which I am not, to see this 

looks like some really good corn. It looks healthy and golden and 

something that anyone would want to consume. 

This is the rotten corn, basically, the damaged corn that has 

come out of our fields. And I am going to show you all this—this 

is throughout Louisiana, right before harvest, a bumper crop is literally being left in the field to rot. There is no market for it. It cannot be sold. There is a credit crisis in the agriculture economy. And 

I could show you soybeans, and I will put these up for our for show 

and tell. I think it is important to see it. 

And these are healthy beans, and these are rotten beans. The 

bankers and the elevators really do not know what to do with a 

crop like this. It has no value. And it is a $700 million disaster. 

So I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and we will move to the next 

panel 

Mr. CONNER. Thank you. 

Chairman HARKIN. Thank you. We will dismiss this panel. 

We will call the second panel up: Dr. Mike Strain, Ms. Barb 

Prather, Lyle Asell, Wallace Ellender, Natalie Jayroe, and Jay 

Hardwick. If the second panel will please take the appropriate 

seats. Again, we will recognize the panel in the order which I had 

outlined it: Mr. Strain, Ms. Prather, Mr. Asell, Mr. Ellender, Ms. 

Jayroe, and then Mr. Hardwick. 

I will ask each of you to keep your statements to 5 minutes or 

less, and you have a clock, and somebody up here is operating that 

22 

so we will keep to 5 minutes or less so we can have a discussion 

with you afterward. And in order to start things off, I would recognize Senator Landrieu for purposes of introduction. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. We are very 

honored to have our Commissioner of Agriculture to testify. He was 

born and raised on a cattle farm in Covington, Louisiana, has a degree in veterinary medicine from LSU. He has been a leader in agriculture his whole life, was just recently elected, Mr. Chairman, as 

our Commissioner. He served previously in the legislature on the 

Ag Committee. So he most certainly comes prepared for the post 

that he now holds, and he has my confidence as he helps to lead 

our State through this difficulty. 

And may I also say we are proud to have Mr. Ellender with us, 

who has run the Sugar Cane National Legislative Committee for 

the Sugar Cane League. He is a sugar cane farmer in the southern 

part of the State, in Terrebonne Parish, which was very hard hit 

by the tidal surge that came in in the southern part of our State, 

as well as the rains that fell in central and north Louisiana. 

So I am proud to have both of our Louisiana guests with us on 

this panel. 

Chairman HARKIN. Thank you very much, Senator Landrieu, 

and, again, we will start with Dr. Strain. Welcome. 

STATEMENT OF MIKE STRAIN, COMMISSIONER, LOUISIANA 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY, BATON 

ROUGE, LOUISIANA 

Mr. STRAIN. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing 

us to come here from Louisiana and speak. Senator Landrieu, Senator Vitter, thank you so very much. You have been with us on the 

ground as we went through these disasters, and also for all of your 

help here in D.C. We truly appreciate that. 

I also have with me Dr. Kurt Guidry and Dr. Mike Salassi, experts from the LSU AgCenter, who helped us compile data; Mr. 

Kyle McCann from the Farm Bureau, who is quite knowledgeable 

about farm programs; and Mr. Rene Simon from LDAF. 

We come to you today in a unique situation in Louisiana. We 

have in 3 years endured four major storms, and if you count Faye, 

five. The situation we find ourselves in today is that Faye brought 

unprecedented rainfall through the heartland and through the 

northeast portion of Louisiana, flooding, and an inability to harvest, following by Hurricane Gustav that came in with a great deal 

of tidal surge, saltwater intrusion, wind damage, rain, and a tremendous amount of floods, followed directly by Hurricane Ike with 

an unprecedented amount of water, saltwater intrusion, and increased damage. Never before, even with the Great Flood of 1929, 

has Louisiana seen total devastation through the entirety of its 

State to its agriculture. 

We went immediately, as soon as the winds went down, to begin 

touring the State, meeting with our farmers. We have held 11 

meetings, meeting with several thousand farmers, and a number of 

issues resounded over and over. These include in this year significantly increased input costs and total costs; inadequate crop insurance; insufficient disaster provision of the farm bill; farmers who 

have contracts with elevators and cannot deliver the commodity; 

23 

bank liens against the partially filled commodity contracts; and deterioration of the grain and cotton quality. 

Higher input costs. Fuel and fertilizer and input costs are the 

highest on record and more than doubled since last year—never before seen costs. Many farmers did not borrow enough to cover these 

high costs. They have used all available credit. Since the storms occurred just prior to and during harvest, many of the farmers have 

incurred the highest amount of costs they could prior to receiving 

dollars for their funds and are not going to be able to repay the 

lenders or suppliers. 

Inadequate crop insurance. The farm bill was signed late. Had 

the producers known that there would be a disaster program that 

was based on their crop insurance coverage levels, they may have 

made different decisions. In order to be eligible for the SURE Program, USDA requires farmers to purchase Catastrophic Insurance 

or the Noninsured Assistance Program. Due to thin margins and 

the high cost of buy-up coverage, crop insurance participation is 

relatively low in Louisiana and in other Southern States. Although 

a farmer may have harvested only a portion of his crop, he may 

have already surpassed the yield threshold. 

A farmer reported to me that he met with his insurance agent, 

and based on preliminary calculations, although he has more than 

1,000 acres of cotton and is facing a 50–percent crop loss, he will 

only receive $3,300. 

Disaster provisions of the farm bill. Many of our crops will not 

qualify for assistance under the current provisions. All of the rules 

and regulations have not been written, and payments may not and 

probably will not be available until October or November of 2009. 

Our farmers cannot wait this long. 

Partially filled contracts. Farmers prudently but cautiously forward contracted a portion of their commodities to take advantage 

of prices. We were at harvest. Because of the substantially reduced 

yields, many of these contracts will not be fulfilled. The grain elevators expect the farmer to deliver on these contracts. They could 

refuse to pay the farmer for the partially fulfilled contracts. And, 

in addition, now the farmers are responsible and financially liable 

for the unfulfilled portion of the contract. That is not covered by 

insurance. These elevators have already contracted out the grain to 

the exporters. This creates a vicious cycle. The elevators, the lenders, and the farmers are going to have to work together to try to 

stay in business. 

Bank liens against these contracts. A farmer may have already 

partially filled his contract, but the elevator may not be able to pay 

him because the banks have first title on that crop. The bank that 

has made the crop loan to the farmer has a lien. This is another 

problem. 

Deterioration of grain, sweet potatoes, and cotton. The wet 

weather has caused the quality of the commodities to deteriorate 

rapidly, which you have seen. Many of the elevators, gins, and 

sweet potato canners cannot accept the commodities because of 

quality issues. The processors who are accepting the commodities 

will have to dock the farmer because of the poor conditions. What 

we find now is that even when we bring these commodities, for instance, our soybeans and our cotton, the elevators cannot take it. 

24 

They cannot sell it downstream, and now we are beginning to look 

at dumping what we can salvage. 

Rice. Eighty-five percent of the harvest in North Louisiana has 

not yet been harvested. A lot of the rice now has begun to sprout 

in the fields. 

Corn. Twenty-five percent is left in the fields, and a lot of that 

is damaged. 

We have lost 50 percent of our cotton crop. The cotton that is left 

is of poor quality. The seed is of poor quality. We are getting calls 

from the gins today saying they cannot gin it. And, in addition, instead of receiving money for the seed, for the cotton seed, now the 

farmers are going to have to pay more to try to get it harvested. 

Soybeans. Most of the time, mostly based on 10 percent or less 

damage. A lot of the beans that are left are 30, 40, 50 percent. 

They cannot sell them downstream. So even what is left, they cannot use that to fulfill the contracts. 

Sweet Potatoes. Only a few parishes are covered under insurance 

in sweet potatoes, and that coverage is based on the firmness on 

the potato. What is happening now, because of the anaerobic environment, no oxygen, and the moisture, we estimate we have lost 

50 to 70 percent in the ground. We could lose the rest of the crop 

if it is harvest. The $2,000 input cost to plant and raise potatoes, 

$600 to harvest it. And if you spend that $600, you will get no 

value. The potatoes are rotting. 

Sugar cane. We have lost most of our plant cane. Only about 10 

percent is there, and yield loss at 15 percent. It is very important, 

though, that we do not increase allocation of imported sugar. This 

would be a double storm and would devastate our sugar industry. 

Pecans. In some areas, 75–percent loss. 

Aquaculture and fisheries, $100 million worth of damage to 

aquaculture and fisheries, not counting infrastructure. 

Overall, by and large, our farmers, ranchers, and fishermen need 

help now. We cannot wait a year. Our entirety of our State with 

unprecedented damage. We cannot bring dollars to help. Our entire 

farming economy is on the verge of collapse. We have met with 

farmers. We have looked them in the eye. They are very tired. 

They are very concerned. They are not looking for a handout. They 

are looking for a hand-up. 

We must be able to stabilize the situation to stop the domino effect from collapsing our economy because we now have to replant. 

Thank you, sir. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Strain can be found on page 83 

in the appendix.] 

Chairman HARKIN. Thank you very much, Dr. Strain, and now 

we will turn—— 

Senator LANDRIEU. Can I just say one thing I forgot? Mr. Hardwick is also from Louisiana, and please forgive me for not recognizing you. 

I was on Jay’s farm this weekend. He is a cotton farmer from 

North Louisiana. 

Senator VITTER. Mr. Chairman, let me briefly thank all of our 

witnesses. I, unfortunately, have to attend another meeting, but 

thank you all very much for your important testimony. We will obviously be acting immediately. 

25 

Chairman HARKIN. Thank you very much, Senator Vitter. 

Now we will turn to Barb Prather, Executive Director of the 

Northeast Iowa Food Bank. She has been in that position since 

1999. We all know Barb and all the great work she does here and 

in Iowa. But prior to that, Barb worked for 7 years at the Capital 

Area Food Bank here inst, D.C. She also developed and implemented and opened the Northern Virginia branch. So she has just 

been involved in food banks and operations like food banks for all 

of her adult life. She resides in Hudson, Iowa, and we are just delighted you are here. Thank you very much, Barb, for being here. 

Again, thank you for all the great work you do in our State of Iowa. 

And, again, all your statements will be made a part of the record. 

Five minutes, hopefully. 

STATEMENT OF BARBARA PRATHER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

NORTHEAST IOWA FOOD BANK, WATERLOO, IOWA 

Ms. PRATHER. Thank you very much. I want to first thank you 

for giving me the opportunity to testify today on flood relief in Iowa 

and our Food Bank’s response to it. 

To begin with, the Northeast Iowa Food Bank and the HACAP 

Food Reservoir in Cedar Rapids have provided over 400,000 pounds 

of mostly privately donated product for disaster relief in Iowa. We 

are both members of Feeding America, formally known as America’s Second Harvest. 

Disaster relief for us began a day after the EF5 tornado hit Parkersburg and New Hartford, Iowa, and traveled north through 

Black Hawk County. We were called out on Memorial Day to provide food and water to northern Black Hawk County. In the week 

that followed, working with various organizations, we provided food 

and water to relief workers and victims. 

Two weeks after the tornado, we felt the impact from many days 

of hard rain. On Monday, June 9th, we received a call from a pastor in Greene, Iowa, who informed us that the water was rising 

and there were no resources to help this small town. We made arrangements to bring product up there that morning. Greene is a 

community that had not used our services before. 

Here is a story of a family in Greene: They had to turn to the 

newly stocked food pantry. The husband had a good job, but he 

drives 34 miles one way each day, while the mother does in-home 

day care. They lost everything in the flood. The water started coming up on Sunday night, and by Tuesday they had to evacuate their 

home. They had always helped the local food pantry, but never 

needed their assistance. While the family had flood insurance, they 

knew it would be a struggle to pay their rent and their and mortgage. They eventually applied for and received food stamps, but 

they really needed the help of the pantry in the meantime. As you 

can imagine, it was hard for these hard-working people to go in 

and ask for help, but they were grateful that it was there when 

they needed it. 

The next day, June 10th, very serious flooding hit Waterloo and 

Cedar Falls. The Food Bank was called to the Black Hawk County 

Emergency Operations Center. We did get the food up to Greene 

that morning, but a 90–mile round trip ended up being a 240–mile 

round trip because the roads were all flooded. 

26 

At the same time, we began making arrangements to secure our 

facility, which was right along the Cedar River in Waterloo. However, we did not get water in it, but thanks to local support we 

were able to empty the warehouse and keep the product on trailers 

for a few days. 

Throughout the week we worked with various officials all over 

northeast Iowa. We followed the Black Hawk County Health Department when they did their immunizations to get food and water 

to people. And later in the week, parts of Waterloo on the east side 

began to have water back-up. This is a low-income area, and many 

residents in that area had water in their basements. 

To highlight what we saw during the disasters, there was considerable press coverage about the availability of disaster food stamps. 

In the State of Iowa, over 13,000 households and 35,000 people received them. I was extremely impressed with the outreach that 

took place, and people knew that they could apply for them. I believe our area did an exceptional job in regards to getting the word 

out about their availability and people applying for it. 

Our State staff who are responsible for TEFAP commodities were 

on the phone with us during the flood asking what type of extra 

resources we needed. I know that they were working closely with 

USDA officials. We were offered our July shipment in June, but we 

decided to hold off because we did not want to short ourselves on 

the product in the long term. 

Since last spring we have seen the amount of TEFAP commodity 

foods increase substantially due to increased support from USDA 

and the increased support from the farm bill. This increased funding from the farm bill is critical to our food bank and others in 

Iowa and throughout the United States. In addition to our continuing need for more food, we are really in need of additional storage and distribution funds as authorized in the farm bill. Increased 

food and fuel prices have left food banks in Iowa and throughout 

the country with a shortage of funds to pay for storing and distributing food to the agencies we serve. I want to thank you, Senator 

Harkin, for your leadership in getting that vital funding included 

in the bill. 

What would be helpful in the future is to be able to access USDA 

TEFAP commodities immediately rather than having to take our 

July allotment of entitlement food early, from day one of the crisis 

without having to worry about them counting against future shipments. We know that once the waters recede, we need to have 

product available immediately to help meet the immediate needs, 

and the future needs will be even greater as people work to recover 

from the disaster. 

To date, the Northeast Iowa Food Bank itself has provided over 

280,000 pounds of disaster assistance product to nearly 60 organizations. It is a small part of a much larger picture of what is happening and continues to happen in northeast Iowa. Because of the 

increased need because of the struggling economy and the impact 

of the disasters, as fast as the product comes in, it goes out. The 

need is there. Even before these tragedies, we had seen an increase 

of 25 percent in the numbers of clients our agencies have been 

serving. We are anticipating seeing even more coming through the 

doors of food pantries in Iowa this winter. 

27 

Recovery takes many years. We are going to need ongoing help 

to help these families who are working and living on a limited income. With high food and fuel prices, budgets are already 

stretched, and adding a disaster to the mix does not help. The family I talked about is trying to do their best, and they will bounce 

back. This is just one example of many similar faces in Iowa. 

Please continue to help us. Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for 

giving me the opportunity to share our experiences in helping to 

meet the food needs of people in northeast Iowa and Iowa following 

our back-to-back tornado and flooding disasters. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Prather can be found on page 79 

in the appendix.] 

Chairman HARKIN. Ms. Prather, thank you very much for that 

testimony and for all the good work you do in Iowa. 

Next we will go to another Iowan, Mr. Lyle Asell. I hope I pronounced that right. Mr. Asell was raised on a livestock and grain 

farm in southwest Iowa, graduated from Iowa State University 

with a bachelor’s degree in fish and wildlife biology, had held positions as soil conservationist, district conservationist, biologist, 

RC&D coordinator, assistant State conservationist, for NRCS all of 

this in Iowa. He lives on a small farm near Chariton, has a partnership farm interest in family farms in both Mills and 

Pottawattamie Counties. A Vietnam war veteran, he and his wife 

Charlotte have three sons, and Lyle currently serves as a Special 

Assistant to the Director for the Department of Natural Resources. 

Mr. Asell, welcome to the Committee, and please proceed. 

STATEMENT OF LYLE W. ASELL, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE 

DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE, IOWA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, DES MOINES, IOWA 

Mr. ASELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The Iowa storms of 2008 are approaching or surpassed the tenth 

largest natural disaster in U.S. history. We have seen precipitation 

increase approximately 10 percent over the last 30 years, and we 

have seen a change in the pattern of precipitation. This will lead 

to increased flooding over time. 

Farmers in Iowa use financial risk management tools very effectively, with about 90 percent of farmland covered through crop insurance at relatively high rates. However, the land itself is at risk 

and was hurt very badly during these storms. 

The primary tools that we have available to help heal these 

wounds come from the Emergency Watershed Program and the 

Emergency Conservation Program. We have a current need of $225 

million in Iowa for the Emergency Watershed Program, and this is 

growing. Sign-up continues through the end of the month for conservation easements on floodplains. 

As both Senators Harkin and Grassley recognized, conservation 

practices in systems work very effectively to reduce damages. However, the precipitation simply overwhelmed the systems, and so we 

did end up with somewhere around $40 million in damages to conservation practices, such as grassed waterways, terraces, and farm 

ponds. We also need about $8 million in technical assistance to 

help restore the damage. 

28 

There is another $36 million in needs to repair stream bank erosion to help protect transportation facilities and cropland. The 

greatest need comes from the Emergency Watershed Program 

floodplain easements, with applications to date exceeding over $150 

million. Just as homeowners often opt for a buyout through FEMA 

for the houses, we see farmers wanting that same program. The 

policy was changed following the 1993 floods and worked very effectively. It is very good public policy. Today we have over 400 

farmers and about 35,000 acres that are attempting to enroll land 

in the easement program. 

This follows even record commodity price and land values, and 

it is an indication of how serious the damage is to that land. There 

is virtually no alternative that is economically viable for them to 

restore that to productive ag land. 

There are two provisions in the farm bill that, if applied to EWP, 

could be detrimental, and these are both pertaining to the Wetland 

Reserve Program. The first is a requirement that land be owned for 

7 years before it is eligible to be enrolled in the program. Iowa 

State University’s data shows that most of the last in Iowa is 

bought by existing farmers, so if you bought land 6 years ago, fully 

intending to have it in a farming operation, you are now going to 

find yourself carrying a debt and not being eligible for a program 

that is intended to buy out in such situations. We would suggest 

looking at this rule. 

The other one involved governmental agencies not being able to 

receive restoration assistance through the program. In Iowa, we 

work very effectively with farmers, and they are good business people. They understand that the easement will provide most but not 

all of the value of that property. They also understand that if they 

retain ownership, they are responsible for paying property taxes 

when there is not a source of income, and it will be managed for 

wildlife when their interests and their livelihood comes from managing crops and livestock. Let’s let farmers do what they do best. 

Let’s let others do what they do best. 

Time is critical. They have to be making decisions very soon on 

what to do with this land. Most of this land did not produce a crop 

in 2008. They cannot wait another season without knowing what 

to do with that land. They want to take that funding and move it 

out of a high-risk venture and put it into a low-risk venture. We 

want to help them do that. 

The other program is the ECP. They have requested $24 million, 

received about $12 million. That has been disbursed predominantly 

to clear sand off of floodplains. there is a need for additional funding there. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Asell can be found on page 47 

in the appendix.] 

Chairman HARKIN. Thank you very much, Mr. Asell, and thank 

you for all the work you do on the Rebuild Iowa board there. 

Next we go to Wallace Ellender from Bourg, Louisiana. He has 

already been introduced by Senator Landrieu, but I was just told 

that your great uncle was Allen Ellender. 

Mr. ELLENDER. Correct. 

Chairman HARKIN. Chair of this Committee. 

29 

Mr. ELLENDER. Correct. I remember visiting this room when I 

was 15 years old. 

Chairman HARKIN. Oh, my gosh. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Well, welcome back. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. ELLENDER. I wish it was under different circumstances. 

Chairman HARKIN. Good to have you back, Mr. Ellender. 

STATEMENT OF WALLACE ‘‘DICKIE’’ ELLENDER IV, SOUTHWEST LOUISIANA SUGAR CANE FARMER, BOURG, LOUISIANA, AND CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE, AMERICAN SUGAR CANE LEAGUE 

Mr. ELLENDER. Thank you. Again, my brother and I formed 

Sugar Cane in Southeastern Louisiana on two farms in the 

Raceland and Bourg, Louisiana, area, which was at ground zero for 

Gustav. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Would you pull the mic a little closer, please. 

Mr. ELLENDER. Including the land that my ancestors settled in 

1853. We are the only people ever to farm the land that we currently farm. As a child, I remember asking my grandfather for one 

of his earliest memories, and one of the stories he told me was a 

story about a stubborn dog when he was a kid that wanted to go 

on this boat ride to the barrier islands with the family. On one occasion they loaded up everything but the dog on the sailboat and 

sailed down to the coast, which is about 30 or 40 miles away. The 

dog trotted down the side of the bayou all the way to the coast with 

them, having to ford a few streams, but made it to the island. 

Today that dog would have to swim 30 miles to get to the same 

location across open water. Coastal problems we are having. 

Gone are some of the barrier islands and most of the wetlands 

that served as a natural buffer from the worst storms that came 

from the Gulf of Mexico. We are losing coastal wetlands at a rate 

of 40 square miles each year. Some experts predict that the shoreline may move inland over 30 miles in the next 30 years. I hope 

this gives you some perspective of the breadth of the long-term 

problem our communities are facing when we look to the south. 

The ominous power of the sea when it surges 20 to 30 miles inland 

is something to behold. What the sea leaves behind when it retreats can be bad, but what it leaves behind when it stays in the 

fields is worse. Once breached, levees that held back the tide will 

hold back the ebbing waters. We tear holes in those levees to get 

the water recede, but with sea of the magnitude of Rita and Ike 

of 2008 flow over the levees vast volumes of water into the lowest 

field, making our cane fields salt fields. 

But sugar cane is a hearty plant, and with good weather and 

time, the cane can rebound and produce a decent crop. Harvesting 

it will be more difficult and costly, but we can still hope for a mild 

autumn and a good price to help offset some of the additional costs 

we will incur in harvesting a bent and broken crop. On the other 

hand, we may not have enough time to finish planting and harvesting before winter frosts and freeze become a concern. Further 

complicating the matter, sugar cane is a perennial crop, and time 

will be needed to determine whether fields holding surge water for 

extended periods will recover for next year’s crops. 

30 

The worst damage that occurred to the sugar cane fields from 

Gustav occurred in Terrebonne, Assumption, Lafourche, Ascension, 

Iberville, West Baton Rouge, and Point Coupee parishes. The 

northeastern corner of the eye of the hurricane caused the worst 

stalk breakage, but this damage occurred virtually everywhere in 

the belt. The cane varieties that tend to produce higher tonnage 

suffered more breakage than lower-yielding varieties, and the brittleness of the higher-yielding varieties will make cutting the cane 

very problematic. 

Hurricane Ike’s eye stayed to our south as it moved into Texas, 

but this meant that the counterclockwise winds drove the sea surge 

deep into the Louisiana cane belt in a manner eerily familiar to 

those of us who experienced Hurricane Rita in 2005. In some areas, 

the damage was worse than Rita. From my farm in Bourg, across 

Terrebonne, St. Mary’s, Iberville, and Vermillion parishes, levees 

were topped, and standing water still remains to this day. 

As a general rule, we keep a field in production, using the existing root systems, for 3 years and, after harvesting the third crop, 

let that ground stay fallow for nearly a year before replanting. This 

generally occurs in August and September. But the rainy weeks before Gustav came left us way behind in our planting, so there is 

less newly planted cane to be lost to the surge. This may sound like 

good news, but the delay in planting increases our risk of not being 

able to plant some of the fields before winter sets in. These fields 

are planted this fall for next year’s crop. This delay also has the 

potential of pushing harvest deeper into the winter months, when 

a heavy frost or freeze damage can destroy whatever cane is left 

in the fields. 

In order to increase our chances of getting new growth from the 

damaged cane we will be planting over the next few weeks, we will 

use more acres of our mature cane as seed for the fallow ground. 

In my case, this means I will use 260 total acres to plant the 800 

acres necessary for my farm. I typically use only 160 acres. This 

means that I have 100 acres that will not go to the process that 

I will be planting in the ground for next year. 

You have asked about my experience with crop insurance as a 

disaster assistance tool. Our growers have traditionally had access 

to only one type of crop insurance policy, the Actual Production 

History program. The costs of the APH buy-up coverage have been 

prohibitively high, as USDA’s Risk Management Agency acknowledged this past year when it lowered APH rates in response to potential competition from farmer-developed GRP policies. While the 

rates are lower, the buy-up coverage has not been seen as reducing 

our actual risks by a sufficient amount to make the added expense 

worthwhile for most of our farmers. 

Despite the destructive natural forces that are sometimes unleashed against it, the sugar cane plant is a hearty survivor, and 

catastrophic production losses, meaning losses of greater than 50 

percent, are rare. Since 1995, when Louisiana sugar cane participation in crop insurance went from $2 million in liability to over $61 

million, the cumulative loss ratio has been approximately 0.17. 

Since 90 percent of our policies are the basic catastrophic coverage, 

which has been a prerequisite for disaster assistance eligibility in 

31 

the past, this loss ratio can conceal significant losses to a farmer’s 

bottom-line. 

The new permanent disaster assistance program included in the 

2008 farm bill has not been implemented and regulations explaining how the Department will administer the program are still 

under development. As I understand the Supplemental Revenue 

Assistance Program, SURE, it provides payments to producers in 

disaster counties based on the crop insurance program. Regrettably, we have been unable to find an accurate SURE calculator for 

sugar cane to gain a better understanding of the actual assistance 

that might be available to farmers, but the poorly performing crop 

insurance program it will be built upon would seem to reduce its 

effectiveness as a hurricane assistance program. 

Congress, though, has developed a disaster assistance mechanism that works. In response to the 2002 and 2005 hurricanes, 

Congress developed a delivery mechanism for ad hoc assistance to 

sugar cane growers in Louisiana that is tailored to the types and 

levels of damage associated with hurricanes and cane fields. This 

mechanism targeted a portion of the overall package to address 

losses and costs from planted cane that was lost to the hurricanes. 

Another portion of the package was designated to offset some of the 

increased planting costs and harvesting costs that we incurred. A 

final portion was allocated to address yield losses and other sectorwide losses. 

Congress was able to link the bulk of the assistance directly to 

the specific losses or costs of the hardest-hit producers in our area, 

while reserving a portion to address the yield losses that virtually 

every producer absorbed. 

I will try to conclude here. 

In conclusion, Louisiana has been growing sugar cane commercially for well over 200 years and has received agriculture disaster 

assistance twice over more than 200 years of production. The fact 

that both of those assistance packages were made necessary by intense hurricanes in this decade is a direct result of the rampant 

coastal erosion. Unless we invest in energetic coastal efforts soon, 

my farm may be beachfront property in a few short years before 

slipping quietly beneath the waves. 

Thank you, and I am sorry I went over my time. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Ellender can be found on page 

59 in the appendix.] 

Chairman HARKIN. Thank you very much. Thanks for the pictures you applied, too. It kind of brings it home as to what you are 

talking about. 

Mr. ELLENDER. Yes. 

Chairman HARKIN. Thank you very much, Mr. Ellender. 

And now we will go to Natalie Jayroe, joined Second Harvest 

Food Bank of New Orleans as President and CEO in January of 

2006. Currently, Natalie is a founding member of the Louisiana 

Food Bank Association and co-chair of the Food Policy Advisory 

Committee of New Orleans City Council. 

Again, welcome again to the Committee, Ms. Jayroe, and please 

proceed. 

32 

STATEMENT OF NATALIE JAYROE, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK OF 

GREATER NEW ORLEANS AND ACADIANA, NEW ORLEANS, 

LOUISIANA 

Ms. JAYROE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I really appreciate the 

opportunity to address you today. I just wanted to mention that we 

are the Food Bank of Greater New Orleans and Acadiana, covering 

all 23 parishes of the southern part of the State. 

Disaster preparedness and response have always been a part of 

the mission that we plan for and train for while we are responsible 

on a daily basis for the distribution of USDA TEFAP commodities. 

In Louisiana, over the last 2 years, the five food banks of the Louisiana Food Bank Association have strengthened their relationship 

with the Governor, the Louisiana Commissioner of Agriculture, and 

the State legislature. Together we have developed a model for public/private partnership that in fiscal year 2008 allowed food banks 

to purchase almost 10 million pounds of food from Louisiana farmers, fishermen, and vendors to distribute to people in need throughout all 64 parishes. We enjoy a very good working relationship with 

USDA and FEMA regionally and nationally. 

During the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, TEFAP 

commodities were released for disaster distribution. In my opinion, 

many lives were saved as a result. Second Harvest Food Bank became the largest food bank in history overnight, distributing 8 million pounds of food in September 2005 alone. Since that time, Second Harvest has distributed more than 90 million pounds of food 

to more than a quarter of a million individuals throughout our 23– 

parish service area. 

Last year, the increase in food and fuel costs along with the decrease in USDA commodities available to food banks left many of 

us seriously short of food. For instance, the 7 million pounds of 

USDA commodities distributed by Second Harvest in 2004 dropped 

to 2.7 million in fiscal year 2008. The successful passage of the 

farm bill last year has greatly improved the supply of TEFAP commodities to food banks, and I would like to thank Senators Harkin, 

Landrieu, and other members of the House and Senate Agriculture 

Committees for your leadership of that effort. 

Prior to Hurricane Gustav making landfall and in the immediate 

aftermath, we sought to preposition disaster foods and later order 

replacements for our depleted warehouses. Finally, after working 

through a number of procedural glitches with the help of the Governor, FNS regional office, and State agencies, we were able to 

order food for disaster distribution. We were very grateful for the 

supplies that we received. However, with the implementation of the 

emergency food stamp program, further orders were not processed. 

The system set up to distribute emergency food stamps was immediately overwhelmed by the number of people who needed relief. 

Governor Jindal has taken quick and effective action to correct the 

deficiencies in this system. However, as of this date, people are still 

lining up to receive benefits. We need to be able to provide Federal 

commodities along with privately donated foods to hungry people to 

tide them over until their food stamp benefits become available. 

Hurricane Ike passed through the Gulf of Mexico on its way to 

landfall in Texas on September 13. Parish presidents, such as 

33 

Aaron Broussard of Jefferson Parish, called Second Harvest for 

help as communities all along the south coast of Louisiana had no 

power, no food, no Red Cross feeding sites, and overwhelmed PODs. 

Second Harvest’s trucks were actually stopped by the National 

Guard outside of Morgan City because the Guard did not feel it 

was safe for nonprofits to distribute food. Second Harvest was the 

first nonprofit to bring food to these parishes, followed by and in 

close collaboration with the Salvation Army. And the food is still 

needed. 

Of the 1.9 million pounds of food that Second Harvest Food Bank 

has distributed from September 1st through September 22nd, 

175,000 pounds have come from the DSS/FEMA/USDA pipeline. 

Additional commodities would enable us to maintain our distribution rate of over 100,000 pounds per day during the next 4 weeks 

of immediate recovery. 

In a major disaster, food banks do not have the capacity to replace Government response. The removal of the restrictions that 

current limit and slow the distribution of USDA commodities to 

food banks and other emergency feeding organizations would significantly improve the availability of critically needed food and 

water in the days immediately following a catastrophic event. Assistance to build infrastructure and funding to help defray the rising costs of fuel would make the Feeding America network an even 

stronger partner to USDA and FEMA. 

I have some recommendations that I would respectfully like the 

Committee to consider. 

No. 1, provide the resources and authority needed by USDA and 

FEMA to purchase foods needed in disaster response. 

Second, eliminate legal barriers to prestaging food. 

Third, ensure that there is enough logistical support to get the 

food into areas cutoff by water. 

Fourthly, improve the process to bring more flexibility to the 

types of products that are made available and the number of nonprofits that distribute them. 

Most importantly, let’s work to make sure that the emergency 

food response system has as its primary focus getting assistance to 

people as efficiently and effectively as possible, and making concerns about avoiding duplication a secondary consideration. 

Thank you for allowing me to speak before you today. Second 

Harvest Food Bank of Greater New Orleans and Acadiana and the 

food banks of the Feeding America network are privileged to be 

partners with the USDA and FEMA in disaster response and in the 

everyday economic emergencies that people are currently facing. I 

firmly believe that by working together we can continue to make 

progress in ensuring that all people have access to nutritious food. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Jayroe can be found on page 75 

in the appendix.] 

Chairman HARKIN. Thank you very much, Ms. Jayroe. 

Now we turn to Mr. Jon W. ‘‘Jay’’ Hardwick, who produces 7,300 

acres of cotton, corn, grain sorghum, peanuts, soybeans, and wheat. 

I am told emphasis is placed on conservation crop production methods, including no-till, crop rotation, residue maintenance, erosion 

control, and precision technologies to apply and reduce pesticides 

34 

and nutrient resources. Maybe it is that GPS. I do not know whether you—— 

Mr. HARDWICK. Yes, sir. 

Chairman HARKIN. Oh, you are doing that—to help restore and 

improve water, air, soil, wildlife habitat, and crop production economics. Jay currently serves as Vice Chairman of the National Cotton Council, also is a Director on the National Peanut Board, Director of Farm and Livestock Credit, Cotton Incorporated, and also a 

Director of the Tensas-Concordia Soil and Water Conservation District. 

So, Mr. Hardwick, thank you very much for being here. Please 

proceed. 

STATEMENT OF JON W. ‘‘JAY’’ HARDWICK, NORTHEAST LOUISIANA COTTON FARMER, NEWELLTON, LOUISIANA, AND 

VICE CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL COTTON COUNCIL 

Mr. HARDWICK. Well, Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding today’s hearing and for allowing me to describe some of the devastating effects of Hurricanes Gustav and Ike on our farming operations and rural businesses in Louisiana. And, Senator Landrieu, 

we appreciate you taking time last weekend to visit and tour some 

of the areas affected. 

I am Jay Hardwick from Newellton, Louisiana, and I am currently serving as Vice Chairman of the National Cotton Council, as 

you mentioned. Our family operated farm is highly diversified. We 

produce cotton, corn, grain sorghum, soybeans, wheat, specialty 

crops, and timber in northeast Louisiana. We are also very proud 

of our conservation and wildlife preservation programs. My comments will focus on cotton, but I wanted to emphasize that no crop 

was spared in Louisiana. 

Louisiana State University cotton specialists estimate that over 

80,000 cotton acres will not be harvested. Many of the harvested 

acres’ yield losses will be high and the quality will be low. The 

value of the Louisiana cotton crop will be reduced by approximately 

$137 million. 

The hurricanes also impacted our infrastructure. Cotton gins, 

warehouses, and grain elevators rely heavily on volume to cover 

fixed costs and provide jobs. Many gins and warehouses will operate at reduced capacity or not at all in 2008. This means fewer jobs 

and lower revenues for our rural communities. 

Water is not generally a limiting factor in Louisiana agricultural 

production. The abundance can be. Our annual rainfall is about 58 

inches. We received an additional 50 percent over the course of 30 

days during August and September. Over the years, we have adopted crop practices and management skills to accommodate short periods of excessive rainfall using best management practices, such 

as conservation tillage, enhanced field drainage, erosion control 

structures, elevated planting beds, diversified crop mixes, and marketing strategies. 

However, successive tropical storms Faye, Gustav, and Ike, and 

catastrophic rainfall accumulation simply overwhelmed our crops, 

landscape, and management. Even though I live 200 miles north of 

the Louisiana Gulf Coast, these systems have no boundaries, spare 

few, and have an extensive reach. The five-parish area in which I 

35 

live was impacted 100 percent. Above average to total crop destruction occurred, which you have seen, and harvested crops have been 

of extremely poor quality. 

Neighbors and friends who produce rice, sugar cane, sweet potatoes, peanuts, and pecans have suffered incredible losses as well. 

No such weather event in memory has had greater impact on our 

crops throughout Louisiana. 

I harvest my crops from late July through October. It spreads my 

risk, cash-flow, labor, machinery, conservation efforts, marketing 

and field preparations for the upcoming year. Faye, Gustav, and 

Ike came at the worst possible time. I simply could not absorb all 

three of these storms. Neither could my friends and neighbors. 

Now we are faced with additional expenses to restore land from 

wet harvest and repair on erosion measures in preparation for 

2009. Large domestic and international grain buyers in our area no 

longer purchase or accept any damaged grain against producer contracts. These companies are expecting us to meet those contracts. 

Farmers are asking how to satisfy these contracts and determine 

ways to meet other financial obligations. So one can only imagine 

the shock and awe of what has happened in our area. Having no 

crop to sell or damaged crop to apply to contracts may initiate an 

economic disaster perhaps far greater than the weather events 

alone in Louisiana. 

Some expect crop insurance to provide most of the necessary financial assistance. While almost all on acres are covered by insurance, over 50 percent have the minimum coverage known as Catastrophic or CAT coverage, which provides minimal benefits, only if 

the area is a catastrophic loss. Neighboring Catahoula and 

Concordia Parishes were some of the hardest hit. They had only 

CAT level policies on over 37,000 acres of cotton. I have the same 

coverage. 

I encourage Congress to develop a plan that will deliver financial 

assistance to producers in a timely manner. Enhanced crop insurance coverage, timely ad hoc disaster relief, supplemental payments delivered in the same manner as direct payments, and enhancements to the provisions of the permanent disaster programs 

should all be considered in order to expedite assistance that is commensurate with the losses that have been incurred. 

Additional funding for existing cost-share conservation programs 

would help to speed restoration of damaged fields. Also, I ask you 

to consider providing some form of financial assistance to gins, 

warehouses, and other key components of our infrastructure that 

will experience significant financial losses due to sharply reduced 

volumes. 

Mr. Chairman, the economic losses caused by the hurricanes are 

dramatic and severe. Timely assistance is needed. Most farmers 

simply do not have the financial resources to wait until 2009. 

Thank you for your consideration of the views and recommendations presented and giving me the opportunity to present testimony. I would be pleased to respond to your questions at the appropriate time. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hardwick can be found on page 

71 in the appendix.] 

36 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you very much. It was really an excellent panel, and Senator Harkin I know may have to leave in a moment. Do you have another question? 

Chairman HARKIN. No, I do not. I do have to leave. I thank everyone for their testimonies. I especially want to thank the two 

Iowans who are here and also Ms. Jayroe, all of you involved in the 

food bank effort. Ms. Prather and Ms. Jayroe were involved in the 

food bank operations. They did a great job in Iowa, and I take it 

they did a great job in Louisiana, too. 

I do have some other questions. I may submit them to you in 

writing. But I anticipate that maybe Senator Landrieu might ask 

those questions that I was going to ask anyway. 

So if you will excuse me, I do have to go, and I thank you again 

very much, Senator Landrieu, for chairing this. Thank you. 

Senator LANDRIEU. [Presiding.] Thank you, Senator Harkin. 

If I could just address a few questions—and I know our time is 

somewhat limited, but starting with you, Mr. Commissioner, you 

visited not only with our cotton farmers and our sugar cane farmers, but our sweet potato farmers, et cetera. Would you repeat for 

the record what help you need or on behalf of Louisiana needs from 

this Congress? How quickly do you need the help? If you could give 

us a general outline of what you think would be helpful. Mr. Hardwick outlined some things specifically in his testimony. Of course, 

so did Mr. Ellender. But if you could recap that, it would be helpful. 

Mr. STRAIN. When you specifically look at the needs, we have be- tween agriculture and our fisheries $750 million in damages that 

we know of. The SURE Program and these other programs, the 

rules have not been written, and any help that would be forthcoming would be October or November of next year. 

When you look at specific examples of how you have crop insurance and how you have the SURE Program after that, you find in 

many instances, since we were at harvest and have harvested a 

portion of our crops, if you take the sheet example of a soybean 

farmer that has harvested 50 percent of his crop, he probably by 

our calculations will be eligible for zero benefits because he has already met those thresholds. When you are talking about these programs, you are talking about on average, when you look at the crop 

insurance, 50 percent coverage of 55 percent price. And then when 

you look and say, well, why didn’t—and the cost of the buy-up— 

and I will give you this, and I think we really need to put this into 

the record. When you talk about cost and coverage—and this is for 

a soybean farmer with an average per acre yield in his county, in 

Richland Parish, will pay $18.62 an acre to insure an APH of 45 

bushels at 65–100. The same type of producer in Adams County, 

Iowa, will pay $4.93 to insure a yield of 52 bushels. So we have 

to pay four times the cost for an insurability that is seven bushels 

lower. Corn and other rates are as well. 

And if I give you just a specific example—and these have been 

submitted to the record. When you look at this particular farm, 600 

acres of rice, 400 acres of beans, and when you look at that under 

the particular coverages, so the cost of the 60–100 was approximately $10,800 and the 75–100 approximately $21,800. And then 

the premiums double between 60 and 75 percent. 

37 

When you look at that—and this person has had loss, total loss 

on his rice, total loss on that 600 acres of rice, and the soybean 

yield was reduced to 15 bushels per acre, when you boil it all down 

from he will receive for what he had to pay for his insurance, his 

net return on these policies is $6,000 on 1,000 acres. Many farmers 

did not buy enough. 

The bottom line is the coverages that are there are inadequate, 

and the timing is too late. We need an infusion—and we have 

asked for approximately $700 million. The programs—before, there 

was a program in sugar where $40 million came in, and it was divided up based on the needs to stand our farmers back up. If we 

cannot do this, our economy will collapse. After the floor of 1929, 

it devastated Louisiana’s economy for many years. It changed and 

devastated the farms throughout the delta and the heartland of 

Louisiana. We cannot allow this to happen again, and we are asking for dollars. We are asking for them now because we have to get 

ready to replant to save our entire economy. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. 

Let me ask you, Mr. Asell, did you say—and I think I heard you 

say this—that in the 200–year history of the Sugar Program, we 

have only—or the sugar industry has only asked twice in 200 years 

for special payments related to disasters? 

Mr. ELLENDER. That is correct. But on those 200 years, we often 

hear in South Louisiana this is the one in 100–year storm. Well, 

in the last 3 years, we received four of them. You know, so it has 

been a tough situation. 

Senator LANDRIEU. OK. I really cannot overstate how shocking 

that statement is to me. I thought I knew a lot about coastal restoration, and I do. And I thought I knew a lot about agriculture. 

But I am absolute shocked to hear that in 200 years of the sugar 

cane industry, we have only asked twice for the Federal Government for special help. 

I am going to speak about that on the floor of the Senate because 

I think people have an idea that farmers come here every year asking for special help. And I want this Congress to understand that 

our sugar cane farmers have only come twice in 200 years. And I 

would hope that that in itself would be enough motivation for this 

Congress to understand the extraordinary circumstances in which 

we come and would respond accordingly, not just, of course, to you 

all but to all of our many farmers who do not come unless the need 

is truly there. And I think you all have demonstrated that. 

One more question to you, Ms. Jayroe, and then also, Ms. 

Prather, if you want to comment. Help us understand what you 

have both said in your testimony about the emergency program 

that works for the first, I think, 0 to 14 days as the rains are pouring in and there is still flooding; people are hungry; grocery stores 

are closed; the restaurants are closed. There is very little mobility; 

the lights are off; a lot of people are in darkness. They might have 

packed a few days of food, but they did not realize their electricity 

would not be on for a month or so. OK? So that is the first 14 days 

that we are now way too familiar with in Louisiana. 

In that time period, can anybody receive food? Or do you have 

to have a certain income level? 

38 

Ms. JAYROE. No, at that time period, anyone can receive food 

from food banks. We go into a disaster declaration ourselves and 

open the doors. 

Senator LANDRIEU. So even people who are at a higher income 

level, they can get help with food. What happens after that period, 

though? And is that what happened to us in Louisiana, that that 

period came, what you are testifying, too quickly to an end, and 

then the Food Stamp Program started, and there is a prohibition 

in the law which I have been trying to repeal—I want the record 

to show this—for 3–1/2 years and have not been successful yet. But 

there is the duplication of benefit provision that is preventing you 

from feeding people that are hungry. 

Ms. JAYROE. Right. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Because the Federal law says they cannot get 

the duplicate benefit. Is that what you are testifying today to? 

Ms. JAYROE. Senator Landrieu, that is exactly what our biggest 

issue was, that policy. After Katrina, the USDA TEFAP commodities were released into our system for disaster response, and then 

the determination was made that the law did not allow that. So, 

in fact, this time we had USDA commodities in our warehouses we 

could not distribute because of the way the laws are currently written. 

And you know the story of the Emergency Food Stamp Program. 

People came back having spent a lot of money on evacuation, came 

back to empty and dark grocery stores, and were unable to get the 

benefits they needed. And we were called on to provide immediate 

help. And I will say the USDA and our State Department of Agriculture did everything they could within the law to get us the commodities that we needed—in our case, 175,000 pounds of commodities. But you are exactly right in terms of what the issue was for 

us. 

Senator LANDRIEU. And, Ms. Prather, do you have anything to 

add to that? Did the same thing happen to you all? 

Ms. PRATHER. Yes, I agree. What happened in our case is we 

were offered—we get shipments every month. We were offered our 

July allocation in June, and at that point I had gotten privately donated food, so I went ahead and used that because I knew I needed 

the food down the road in July. So I could have taken my July 

shipment early. It would have just counted against me, and I would 

not have gotten that replenished. 

Senator LANDRIEU. But you are testifying that in Iowa, though, 

when people receive in the first early days, there is no income 

limit. 

Ms. PRATHER. Correct. 

Senator LANDRIEU. But the minute you all start issuing food 

stamps, there becomes a fairly tight income limit for people that 

are eligible. 

Ms. JAYROE. That is the case for the emergency food stamps. It 

is not the case for our system. We can actually continue with disaster response longer, and after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, it 

was more than a year later, and we were still taking care of people, 

St. Bernard Parish, Plaquemines Parish, Cameron Parish, people 

that were rebuilding their entire lives. 

Senator LANDRIEU. And is that available to you now? 

39 

Ms. JAYROE. Food is the problem. If we had the food to distribute, then, yes, we would be able to continue with disaster response as long as we had the resources to do it. And as Barb mentioned, the infrastructure and the fuel and the kind of operating 

revenue that we need to make it happen. 

Senator LANDRIEU. And where do you normally get your food 

from? 

Ms. JAYROE. Well, we are both part of a national network, Feeding America, and we have a system of donations from corporations 

at a national level and from our local retailers—Wal-Marts, WinnDixies, the hospitality—— 

Senator LANDRIEU. But from the Government, where do you get 

your food from, from the Government? 

Ms. JAYROE. We have for many years distributed the TEFAP 

commodities for household distribution. Those were the ones that 

were not released, at least without having them leave our—or not 

being replaced. But there are special disaster commodities that, 

with a request from FEMA, USDA can make available to us. 

Senator LANDRIEU. OK. But I am trying to get to the point where 

if you said if you had the food, you could distribute it, but you cannot get the food. So my question is: Who can’t you get the food 

from? Is it the Government? 

Ms. JAYROE. It is difficult to work the system the way that it currently is with Government sources, yes. And there is just not 

enough food available in our private donation system to take care 

of the need. 

Ms. PRATHER. Yes. 

Senator LANDRIEU. OK. I am going to have to close the hearing. 

Is there any other comment, briefly, that any of you want to make 

that you think we did not get into the record? 

[No response.] 

Senator LANDRIEU. OK. I think your testimony has been very 

complete, but let me end with this, and we are going to try to do 

this relief package in a bipartisan basis. But I would hope that this 

Congress would act very quickly to provide, instead of the slow 

process that has been testified to that is available to our farmers, 

when this Congress is seemingly providing an expedited process for 

Wall Street, I would hope that this Congress would think about the 

fact that we seem to have very tight regulations for food banks and 

very loose regulations for hedge funds. Something is very wrong 

with this picture, and I hope that this hearing served at least some 

effort to make more available food for hungry people in the midst 

of these storms and to help our farmers who do not come here often 

to ask for help. But because this country has turned its back, in 

my view, time and time again on restoring the coast, particularly, 

and also turned its back on real risk management policies that 

would really help farmers in Louisiana, we find ourselves in this 

predicament. 

So I am going to do everything I can with my colleagues to find 

a solution, but we have got a lot of work ahead of us. 

Thank you so much, and the meeting is adjourned. 

Mr. STRAIN. Thank you. 

40 

Senator LANDRIEU. And any written questions or comments, we 

will have until the end of the day tomorrow to submit them for the 

record. 

[Whereupon, at 12:22 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(41) 

A P P E N D I X 

SEPTEMBER 24, 2008 

42 


46170.001
43 


46170.002
44 


46170.003
45 


46170.004
46 


46170.005
47 


46170.006
48 


46170.007
49 


46170.008
50 


46170.009
51 


46170.010
52 


46170.011
53 


46170.012
54 


46170.013
55 


46170.014
56 


46170.015
57 


46170.016
58 


46170.017
59 


46170.018
60 


46170.019
61 


46170.020
62 


46170.021
63 


46170.022
64 


46170.023
65 


46170.024
66 


46170.025
67 


46170.026
68 


46170.027
69 


46170.028
70 


46170.029
71 


46170.030
72 


46170.031
73 


46170.032
74 


46170.033
75 


46170.034
76 


46170.035
77 


46170.036
78 


46170.037
79 


46170.038
80 


46170.039
81 


46170.040
82 


46170.041
83 


46170.042
84 


46170.043
85 


46170.044
(87) 

DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD 

SEPTEMBER 24, 2008 

88 


46170.045
89 


46170.046
90 


46170.047
91 


46170.048
92 


46170.049
93 


46170.050
94 


46170.051
95 


46170.052
96 


46170.053
97 


46170.054
98 


46170.055
99 


46170.056
100 


46170.057
101 


46170.058
102 


46170.059
103 


46170.060
104 


46170.061
105 


46170.062
106 


46170.063
107 


46170.064
108 


46170.065
109 


46170.066
110 


46170.067
111 


46170.068
112 


46170.069
113 


46170.070
114 


46170.071
115 


46170.072
116 


46170.073
117 


46170.074
118 


46170.075
119 


46170.076
120 


46170.077
121 


46170.078
122 


46170.079
123 


46170.080
124 


46170.081
125 


46170.082
126 


46170.083
(127) 

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 

SEPTEMBER 24, 2008 

128 


46170.084
129 


46170.085
130 


46170.086
131 


46170.087
132 


46170.088
133 


46170.089
134 


46170.090
135 


46170.091
136 


46170.092
137 


46170.093
138 


46170.094
139 


46170.095
140 


46170.096
141 


46170.097
142 


46170.098
143 


46170.099
144 


46170.100
145 


46170.101
146 


46170.102
147 


46170.103
148 


46170.104
149 


46170.105