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) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

85–326 PDF 2003

S. HRG. 107–878

THE NEW FEDERAL FARM BILL

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE,

NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

AUGUST 20, 2001

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

THOMAS A. DASCHLE, South Dakota

MAX BAUCUS, Montana

BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas

ZELL MILLER, Georgia

DEBBIE A. STABENOW, Michigan

BEN NELSON, Nebraska

MARK DAYTON, Minnesota

PAUL DAVID WELLSTONE, Minnesota

RICHARD G. LUGAR, Indiana

JESSE HELMS, North Carolina

THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi

MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky

PAT ROBERTS, Kansas

PETER G. FITZGERALD, Illinois

CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming

WAYNE ALLARD, Colorado

TIM HUTCHINSON, Arkansas

MICHEAL D. CRAPO, Idaho

MARK HALVERSON, Staff Director/Chief Counsel

DAVID L. JOHNSON, Chief Counsel for the Minority

ROBERT E. STURM, Chief Clerk

KEITH LUSE, Staff Director for the Minority

(II)

(III)

C O N T E N T S

Page

HEARING(S):

The New Federal Farm Bill .................................................................................... 01

Monday, August 20, 2001

STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY SENATORS

Dayton, Hon. Mark, a U.S. Senator from Minnesota ........................................... 01

Gutknecht, Hon. Gil, a Representative in Congress from Minnesota ................. 01

Wellstone, Hon. Paul, a U.S. Senator from Minnesota ........................................ 02

WITNESSES

Adams, Nancy, Le Roy, Minnesota ........................................................................ 24

Ault, Dwight, Austin, Minnesota ............................................................................ 42

Austin, Robert M., New Prague, Minnesota .......................................................... 43

Behounek, Ronald, Hayfield, Minnesota ................................................................ 40

Biederman, Bruce, Grafton, Iowa ........................................................................... 49

Biel, Eunice, Dairy Farmer, Harmony, Minnesota ............................................... 22

Bowman, Bert, Eden Prairie, Minnesota ............................................................... 48

Collins, Barbara J., Legal Services Advocacy Project, St. Paul, Minnesota ....... 19

Dale, Roger, Hanley Falls, Minnesota ................................................................... 44

Daley, Janice, Grain Farmer, Lewiston, Minnesota ............................................. 28

Durst, Ron, on behalf of Associated Milk Producers, Inc. .................................... 32

Everett, Les, Water Resources Center, University of Minnesota ........................ 37

Green, Larry, Fulda, Minnesota ............................................................................. 43

Hansen, Rick, Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota .................................................... 39

Hanson, Amber, Racine, Minnesota ....................................................................... 18

Hanson, Brian, Racine, Minnesota ......................................................................... 50

Harrington, Bishop Bernard J., .............................................................................. 03

Henning, Tim, Lismore, Minnesota ........................................................................ 49

Hoscheit, Tom, Caledonia, Minnesota .................................................................... 34

Joachim, Gary, Claremont, Minnesota, on behalf of Minnesota Soybean

Growers Association ............................................................................................. 47

Ladd, David, on behalf of Farm Credit Services ................................................... 04

Landkamer, Colleen, Blue Earth County Commissioner, Mankato, Minnesota 18

Larson, Larry, Sargeant, Minnesota ...................................................................... 38

Mandelko, Delbert, President, Minnesota Milk Producers Association .............. 06

Meter, Ken, Crossroads Resource Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota .................... 10

McGrath, Mike, on behalf of the Minnesota Project ............................................. 07

McLaughlin, Marcie, on behalf of America’s State Rural Development Council 08

McMillin, Bill, Dairy Farmer, Kellog, Minnesota ................................................. 51

Monson, John, State Executive Director, Minnesota Farm Service Agency,

St. Paul, Minnesota .............................................................................................. 14

Mueller, Mike, Winthrop, Minnesota ..................................................................... 40

Nelson, Rod, Chatfield, Minnesota ......................................................................... 53

Noble, Linda, Organic Dairy Farmer, Kenyon, Minnesota .................................. 21

Noble, Mike, Crop and Livestock Producer, Kenyon, Minnesota ......................... 31

Ormsby, Victor, Winona, Minnesota ...................................................................... 33

Otremba, Mary Ellen, State Representative, State of Minnesota ....................... 15

Paul, Gene, Faribault County, Delavan, Minnesota ............................................. 20

Page

IV

Petersen, Chris C., Vice President, Iowa Farmers Union, Clear Lake, Iowa ..... 45

Peterson, Sever, Eden Prairie, Minnesota ............................................................. 11

Predmore, Larry, Rochester, Minnesota ................................................................ 50

Prigge, Walt, Byron, Minnesota ............................................................................. 45

Purdhim, Rev. Chuck, (retired), United Methodist Church, Brooklyn Center,

Minnesota ............................................................................................................. 25

Redig, Lorraine, Winona, Minnesota ..................................................................... 34

Reiman, Lewis, Utica, Minnesota ........................................................................... 27

Riddle, Jim, Winona, Minnesota ............................................................................ 23

Ristau, Kevin, Jobs Now Coalition, St. Paul, Minnesota ..................................... 26

Ritchie, Niel, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, Minneapolis,

Minnesota ............................................................................................................. 27

Schacht, Al, Zumbro Falls, Minnesota ................................................................... 52

Scheevel, Kenric, State Senator, State of Minnesota ........................................... 16

Scheidecker, Kevin, Fillmore Soil and Water Conservation District, Preston,

Minnesota ............................................................................................................. 30

Specht, Phil, Dairy Farmer, McGregor, Iowa ........................................................ 25

Speltz, Keith, Dairy Farmer, Southeast Minnesota .............................................. 36

Storm, Sister Kathleen, Mankato, Minnesota ....................................................... 29

Strom, Donovan, Fountain, Minnesota .................................................................. 48

Tumbleson, Gerald, Sherburn, Minnesota ............................................................. 37

Upton, Barbara, Fountain, Minnesota ................................................................... 41

Winter, Ted, State Representative, State of Minnesota ....................................... 14

Zimmerman, Margaret, Waseca, Minnesota .......................................................... 36

APPENDIX

PREPARED STATEMENTS:

Collins, Barbara J. ........................................................................................... 81

Daley, Janice ..................................................................................................... 96

Everett, Les ....................................................................................................... 111

Hansen, Rick ..................................................................................................... 118

Hanson, Amber ................................................................................................. 80

Harrington, Bishop Bernard J. ........................................................................ 58

Joachim, Gary ................................................................................................... 135

Ladd, David ....................................................................................................... 61

Mandelko, Delbert ............................................................................................ 64

McGrath, Mike .................................................................................................. 66

McLaughlin, Marcie ......................................................................................... 70

McMillin, Bill .................................................................................................... 140

Meter, Ken ........................................................................................................ 74

Mueller, Mike .................................................................................................... 124

Noble, Linda ...................................................................................................... 84

Noble, Mike ....................................................................................................... 105

Petersen, Chris C. ............................................................................................ 127

Peterson, Sever ................................................................................................. 78

Redig, Lorraine ................................................................................................. 109

Riddle, Jim ........................................................................................................ 86

Ristau, Kevin .................................................................................................... 91

Ritchie, Niel, ..................................................................................................... 93

Schacht, Al ........................................................................................................ 141

Scheidecker, Kevin ........................................................................................... 100

Storm, Sister Kathleen .................................................................................... 99

Zimmerman, Margaret ..................................................................................... 110

DOCUMENT(S) SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD:

AgStar Financial Services, ACA ...................................................................... 173

Beckel, John F. ................................................................................................. 172

Carnes, Marilyn ................................................................................................ 151

Children’s Defense Fund - Minnesota; Jim Koppel ....................................... 182

Encouraging Family Farms: a Policy Proposal; Joe Malacek ....................... 164

Letter to Senator Mark Dayton by Gyles W. Randall ................................... 176

Levins, Dick ...................................................................................................... 154

Minnesota Association of Soil and Water Conservation Districts; Richard

Zupp ............................................................................................................... 155

Minnesota Food Share; Barbara Thell ............................................................ 162

Petition Supporting a New Farm Bill ............................................................. 148

Page

V

DOCUMENT(S) SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD—CONTINUED

Present-Day Agriculture in Southern Minnesota -- Is it Sustainable? by

Gyles W. Randall .......................................................................................... 178

Oestreich, Clifford ............................................................................................ 161

Wood, Bob and Eloda ....................................................................................... 159

(1)

THE NEW FEDERAL FARM BILL FIELD

HEARING FROM STEWARTVILLE, MINNESOTA

MONDAY, AUGUST 20, 2001

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY, Washington, DC.

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 1 p.m., at the American Legion, 1100 Second Avenue, N.W., Stewartville, Minnesota,

Hon. Mark Dayton, presiding.

Present or submitting a statement: Senators Dayton and

Wellstone.

STATEMENT OF HON. MARK DAYTON, A U.S. SENATOR FROM

MINNESOTA

Senator DAYTON. I am going to gavel the hearing of the Senate

Agriculture Committee officially to order. I am Mark Dayton, Senator, and I am chairing this hearing. Our format is we have Congressman Gutknecht, Senator Wellstone, and myself here. We have

some distinguished members of the Minnesota Legislature. I would

like them to introduce each other in a little bit.

We will give a couple of minutes for those who may still be arriving to come in. We have a very distinguished panel of seven individuals whom we are going to take formal testimony from. We have

asked them to limit their remarks to approximately 3 minutes

apiece and submit any additional testimony for the record, which

they will be able to do. Then we will open it right up to any of you

who wish to testify or speak for up to 2 minutes apiece. In Worthington a week ago, we had 45 individuals to testify. We stayed

a half-hour longer. We were happy to do so, but we really need everybody to stick to that kind of time limit so we can have everybody who wants to be heard have the opportunity to speak today.

With that I am going to forego my opening remarks and turn it

over in the spirit of bipartisanship and bicameralism to Representative Gil Gutknecht. We are really, really glad you are here today.

Thank you very much.

Mark Kennedy joined us in Worthington, and these are issue

where we all worked together and agreed to have the Minnesota

delegation on the House and Senate Agricultural Committee, and

our job is to work for all of you.

STATEMENT OF HON. GIL GUTKNECHT, A REPRESENTATIVE

IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MINNESOTA

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Thank you. Well, I am going to be very brief.

I want to thank Senators Wellstone and Dayton for putting this

2

meeting together. It is the first time I have actually sat on the

same side of the table at a Senate hearing. This is an official hearing. We have a stenographer here. It is easy sometimes for people

who live in cities or even in suburbs to forget how important agriculture is to our Minnesota economy. It really is the backbone of

Minnesota’s economy, and the last 3 or 4 years have been very,

very difficult. We have recognized that in Washington with emergency payments. Most of us recognize that that is not the real answer. What most of you want is a decent price from the marketplace. We need to work together in Washington to come up with

the next Farm bill that allows farmers to prosper during good

times and survive during some of those difficult times. We are

going to have some disagreements in Washington between Republicans and Democrats and between the House and the Senate, but

the one thing we do agree on is the overall goal, and that is, we

want an agricultural economy that allows young people to do something that we sometimes take for granted, and that is, to go out

there and take a chance at it. We simply can’t afford to lose an entire generation of young farmers.

I thank you for holding this hearing. Looking at the distinguished list of people who are going to be testifying, I look forward

to the testimony today to begin. Thank you for coming.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you, Congressman. Now Senator

Wellstone is joined with me on the Senate agriculture committee.

STATEMENT OF HON. PAUL WELLSTONE, A U.S. SENATOR

FROM MINNESOTA

Senator WELLSTONE. Thank you, Mark. I too will be very brief.

I want to say three things. First of all, I want to thank all of you

for being here. I see a lot of people that I have known over the

years. Quite often we have known each other through farm struggles. I thank you for being here today because we are going to be

writing the bill this fall. I believe all the way from my head to my

toe but, most importantly of all, Bishop, in my heart and my soul

that we need a new farm bill. We need a decent price for our independent producers. We need to focus on land conservation and the

land stewardship and the environment. We need to have antitrust

action. We need to go after these conglomerates. We need to have

some competition. We need to have an energy section that focuses

on renewables and biodiesel and clean fuels, small technology and

clean technology and small business. We need to do it all now. We

don’t have that much time left if we want to have a family farm

structure of agriculture.

We have been through shakeouts before. It is time to change the

course of policy. Your testimony today at this official hearing is not

symbolic. Nobody is here just to make it symbolic. It is very important.

Finally, when I saw Bishop Harrington walk in, I wanted to say

this, that it is OK. The other day I had a chance to visit with

Bishop Locker, Raymond Locker, who is a real hero to me. I have

loved this man for a long, long time. He is struggling with cancer.

Talk about a bishop who has always been there for farmers and always been there for justice. Since I consider this to be a justice

gathering, I would like everyone, just for 20 seconds, just to say a

3

prayer for Bishop Locker because he has always, in a very prayerful religious way, always been there for us. If we could do that.

(Whereupon a silent prayer was held.)

Senator DAYTON. Thank you, Paul.

Format again, we will start, Bishop, if we may, with you and ask

you—first we will move right around the panel sequentially this

way, and then we have a few members of the Minnesota Legislature here. After the panel has spoken, I would like to invite each

one of you to speak first at the microphones, if you would, and then

we will just ask you to line up if that works, and everybody is going

to speak. We will make other arrangements; we will take comments of each side. One caution I would make based on the hearing

we had in Worthington—which was excellent—it was different

points of view, as it should be, and that everybody in the audience

should treat the presenter respectfully. If you don’t agree, you can

withhold the applause. Please, no expressions of personal attacks

of any kind. Thank you very much.

Bishop, thank you for joining us.

STATEMENT OF BISHOP BERNARD J. HARRINGTON

Bishop HARRINGTON. Good afternoon. I am Bishop Bernard J.

Harrington of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Winona. This diocese covers the 27 counties of Minnesota. I am pleased to have this

opportunity to submit my comments on behalf of the Minnesota

Catholic Conference and in the name of the Catholic bishops of the

Archdiocese of Minnesota. I want to thank you, Senator Wellstone,

for your very kind words about Bishop Locker in these very difficult times for him. I appreciate that.

Our perspective is based on our belief that in the dignity of all

people as they are created in God’s image, for people to live a dignified life they must have an adequate and safe food supply. For

us food is just not another commodity in the grand economic

scheme. It is essential for life itself and as such should be viewed

as the common good and not to be controlled by a few corporations

or by the Government. For us food is a moral statement. How food

is produced is also important since we need not only a bountiful

harvest but a safe and sustainable one as well.

Care for the land. It is as critical as what it produces. These underlying principles, human dignity, human rights, the search for a

common good, are what drive our policy priorities. In our view, the

basic goal of a food system is to ensure an adequate supply of nutritious food in an environmentally responsible way to meet domestic and international needs and to ensure the social health of our

rural communities. The bishops believe that such a farm system

will generate Government policies that will give priority to small

and moderate-size family farms and a widespread ownership of

farmland.

In past years we have heard politicians speak about aiding the

small and moderate-size family farms. Each time the Federal Farm

bill will favor large farms and discriminate against the small family farm. As you formulate the Farm bill from your hearings on this

issue, we urge you to be guided by principles drawn by the United

States Catholic Conference of Bishops 1986 statement: Economic

4

justice for all. I won’t read that statement; I will just submit it for

our perusal later on.

We are concerned that the U.S. agricultural policy does not adequately promote widespread ownership of farmland. In our judgment, current policies have resulted in a concentration of farmland

which is detrimental to the interest of farming, to the vitality of

the rural communities, and to the environment. This is a matter

of policy choice, not economic inevitability. We believe that this

concentration is a result of a farm policy that rewards high yields

achieved by heavy use of chemical input over land stewardship and

channels scarce research funds toward chemically and more recently biotechnologically based agriculture and away from sustainable and organic farm techniques.

The current system leads to a highly capitalizing farming operation and the concentration of farmland and ownership eliminating

smaller yet still highly efficient producers. Furthermore, the phenomenon of vertical integration has siphoned off profits from the

farmer and given them to companies that control the other link to

the food systems, processors, packagers, marketers, and realtors. In

fact, over the last couple of decades, the farmers’ share of the agricultural dollar has remained flat while the cost of the production

and the marketing share have increased.

Toward this end we offer you several general recommendations:

create more mechanisms for beginning farmers to secure loans;

shift a substantial portion of research funds away from the conventional chemically based and more modern biotechnic-based agricultural systems to research that uncovered sustainable farming practices; continue to analyze the current market system that appears

to be vulnerable to manipulation by giant agribusiness companies.

In summary, these issues involve tremendous moral considerations. The ability to feed a nation and the world safely and sustainable, the long-term health of productive land and the survival

of our rural social fabric all depend on this farm bill. I thank you

for the opportunity of presenting the views of the Catholic bishops

of Minnesota on these issues.

[The prepared statement of Bishop Harrington can be found in

the appendix on page 58.]

Senator DAYTON. Thank you, Bishop. Thank you for your involvement and the involvement of the Catholic Bishops on this and

other important economic justice issues. I would just say to you

and any of our panelists that you are welcome to stay for the entire

proceeding. We also understand if you have other commitments. If

anyone needs to leave at any time, please do so with our gratitude.

Our next presenter is Mr. David Ladd, who is the manager of

government relations for Agribank. Welcome, Mr. Ladd.

STATEMENT OF DAVID LADD, ON BEHALF OF FARM CREDIT

SERVICES

Mr. LADD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee.

My name is Dave Ladd, and I currently work for the Farm Credit

bank that is known as Agribank. The Farm Credit Services would

like to thank you for bringing the Senate Agriculture Committee to

Minnesota. We appreciate you recognize the important role lenders

play in rural America and welcome the opportunity to provide testiVerDate 11-MAY-2000 13:56 Mar 27, 2003 Jkt 085326 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 85326.TXT SAG1 PsN: SAG1
5

mony regarding the credit title of the upcoming Farm bill. A more

detailed statement has been submitted for the record.

Over the past few months, you have heard from countless individuals and farm organizations with suggestions and recommendations for the next Farm bill. Although the Farm Credit System has

a key interest in the entire Farm bill, we have today chosen to

focus on proposals to strengthen the credit title. You cannot separate the important issue of affordable and accessible credit from

the broader issues of commodity programs, conservation, and trade

and rural development.

As you know, the Farm Credit System is a nationwide financial

cooperative that lends to agriculture and rural America. Congress

created the system in 1916 to provide American agriculture with

a dependable source of credit. We are a privately held farmerowned cooperative which serves a public good. Access to affordable

credit is one of the primary issues facing agriculture. It is also an

issue the Farm Credit System is uniquely qualified to address. For

example, in a 2000 study release by the Minnesota Legislature to

assess the dairy climate in that State, the issue of access to capital

is identified as one of the most core challenges facing the dairy industry. Although dairy is a capital-intensive business, such concerns are indicative of the need for capital and rural America. This

is particularly true among young beginning and minority farmers

and ranchers as well as those seeking to modernize their operations.

What follows are several recommendations we believe Congress

should consider in writing the credit title:

Increase the limit on Farm Service Agency guaranteed loans for

any one individual from $750,000 to $1.5 million. The current limit

is restrictive on many family farm operations, especially dairy and

pork producers.

Increase FSA funding for interest rate buydowns on guaranteed

loans to small, young, and beginning farmers. Raise the ceiling on

low documentation FSA guaranteed loan applications from $50,000

to $150,000. In addition to the existing direct loan program, authorize a guaranteed lending program for on-farm storage.

Reduce the paperwork burden now associated with the assignment of USDA benefits and include the pork language to express

the intent of Congress and designed to assist small, young, beginning farmers fully funded to meet the needs of all who fulfill eligibility criteria.

Mr. Chairman, it is critical that credit issues be addressed when

Congress considers the next Farm bill. As a primary source of credit to farmers, the Farm Credit System is an integral part of our

rural communities. However, far too often lenders are left out of

the equation when issues affecting rural America are debated in

the halls of Congress.

That is why we commend you for listening to the lender perspective and thank you for holding this hearing in Minnesota to discuss

the issues facing our farmers in our rural communities. I would be

happy to answer any questions.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Ladd can be found in the appendix on page 61.]

6

Senator DAYTON. Thank you, Mr. Ladd. That was excellent and

succinct testimony. Thank you very much.

Next is Mr. Delbert Mandelko. He is president of the Minnesota

Milk Producers. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF DELBERT MANDELKO, PRESIDENT,

MINNESOTA MILK PRODUCERS ASSOCIATION

Mr. MANDELKO. Senator Wellstone, Senator Dayton, and fellow

producers, my name is Delbert Mandelko. I am a dairy producer

from nearby Preston and the president of Minnesota Milk Producers Association. MMPA is the only statewide organization that exclusively represents dairy farmers. We have a membership of approximately 3,000 dairy producers. On behalf of our members, I

wish to point out several issues that are crucial to producers.

First, we ask that Congress close the loopholes of import of products and restrict imports through quotas and tariffs on products

such as milk protein concentrates and casein.

This is not a regional issue. Six years after the implementation

of GATT, U.S. imports of MPC have risen more than 600 percent.

In the year 2000, U.S. imports of MPCs were equal to about 350

million pounds of U.S.-produced nonfat dry milk. In addition, imports of casein were equal to about 745 million pounds of U.S.-produced nonfat dry milk. The importation of these products displaces

our domestic supply of milk.

It is the most serious problem facing U.S. dairy producers.

The major force driving down cheese prices in 2000 was illegal

use of imported milk protein concentrate in many standard and

processed cheese products.

On page 19 of the General Accounting Office for Dairy Products,

it states that if milk protein concentrates are used in a cheese

product, the product cannot bear the name of standardized product,

for example, pasteurized process cheese slices, but if you look at

the list of ingredients on the label of any processed cheese product,

milk protein concentrate is an ingredient.

Milk protein concentrate has not been deemed a safe, legal food

ingredient by the Federal Food and Drug Administration.

If it is being used illegally, why can’t we put a stop to it?

Second, increase the enforcement of Federal standards for butterfat and solids nonfat content in fluid milk.

Congress should consider taking it a step further and raise the

solids nonfat standards in fluid milk. This policy would provide a

more nutritious, better-tasting fluid product to the customer.

Third, MMPA supports the continuation of a true milk price support program, where the price is set at today’s level. The support

price helps stabilize dairy prices and secures a reliable domestic

supply of milk and dairy products for consumers. Any price support

program should include a supply management program that treats

all regions of the U.S. fairly.

Fourth, we ask that Congress consider the implementation of a

national Johne’s Program. We need to do more than just research

and control the disease. We need a program that will help us eliminate this disease from the farms.

Last, MMPA is willing to openly debate and consider any specific

proposal that may come forward as the Farm bill debate continues.

7

We believe it is important to treat all producers from all regions

fairly. We do not want a system that helps producers in one region

when it is at the expense of producers in another region.

Thank you for the opportunity to briefly express Minnesota Milk

Producers’ position toward Federal dairy policy.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Mandelko can be found in the

appendix on page 64.]

Senator DAYTON. Thank you, Mr. Mandelko. As you know, I have

introduced legislation regarding milk protein concentrate. We will

be trying to attach that to the Senate agriculture bill which will

be taken up this fall.

Senator DAYTON. Next we have Mr. Mike McGrath from the Minnesota Project in Lanesboro. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF MIKE McGRATH, ON BEHALF OF MINNESOTA

PROJECT

Mr. MCGRATH. Thank you, Senator. Senator Wellstone, Senator

Dayton, Representative Gutknecht, I am here today to speak and

to testify on behalf of the Minnesota Project, which is a member

of the Sustainable Agriculture Coalition and the National Campaign for Sustainable Agriculture. I am here to testify in support

of the Conservation Security Act which Senator Harkin and Senator Smith have before you in the Senate Ag Committee. The Conservation Security Act offers a fresh new approach to farm assistance that provides incentives to diversify a farm’s land-use practices to enhance conservation benefits, and it does not provide incentives or disincentives to production. We realize that the Federal

Government plays a very important role in assisting farmers

through these continued times of low prices. Many believe that

Government payments to farmers must be held accountable for the

incentives or the disincentives that they provide. Many believe that

a farm policy that provides billions of dollars in assistance must

not serve to just enhance the growth of an industrial agriculture

that ignores rural communities and the environment. It must offer

a constructive return on investments to the taxpayers who foot the

bill.

In the area where I live, I have a farm in the Root River Valley

near Lanesboro. Last summer we had a 100-year flood. We watched

millions of tons of soil wash down the Root River Valley and on

down the Mississippi River. This year we witnessed—many of the

fields that were completely destroyed and washed away have been

rebuilt, and they are back in corn and beans, soybeans. We think

that the incentives to plant these crops are so great that we are

actually building fields to grow these crops in so that we can harvest the subsidy that the Government has provided.

We believe it is time for Federal farm assistance to provide stewardship incentives to working lands. The Conservation Security Act

provides stewardship incentives that promote on-farm conservation

practices that will enhance and protect soil and water and enhance

and protect soil and water resources and wildlife habitat. We believe that is good for all Minnesotans regardless of your political

beliefs.

Current conservation programs provide incentives to install practices, but there is little money to maintain these practices. CostVerDate 11-MAY-2000 13:56 Mar 27, 2003 Jkt 085326 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 85326.TXT SAG1 PsN: SAG1
8

share funding programs like EQIP are very critical to helping

farmers establish these practices, protect resources, but the added

costs of maintaining these practices sometimes offer disincentives

for financially strapped family farm operations. The Conservation

Security Offer will allow farmers to voluntarily enroll their working

land in conservation plans that provide for 5- and 10-year renewable contracts. These contracts will pay the farmer for environmental benefits generated from the practices that are installed,

compensating him for the maintenance time and helping with any

foregone revenues from the implementation of those practices.

We believe it is time to level the playing field here so that farm

assistance is spread more equally among all farmers, not just those

who produce specific commodity crops.

Finally, we believe that the new Farm bill should reward farmers

who are already doing a good job. Many farmers already are practicing conservation on their farms, but there is no subsidy for them.

The Conservation Security Act allows these farmers to enroll their

existing conservation practices into a security plan. We believe that

now is a historic opportunity for the Senate to pass a farm bill that

is based on sensitive goals and realistic outcomes. As members of

the Senate Ag Committee, you can show extraordinary leadership

in making conservation the centerpiece of the next Farm bill. The

Conservation Security Act is a good bill for Minnesota farmers, and

it is a good bill for Minnesota’s environment.

Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Mr. McGrath can be found in the appendix on page 66.]

Senator DAYTON. Thank you. We will be sure that it will be part

of the Senate bill. I might just also quickly say in terms of our panelists, the selection process, we try to get a good cross-section of

representation throughout the State. Many of the major farm organizations, representatives, and presidents testified at our Worthington hearing, the Farm Bureau, Farmer’s Union, NFO, Pork

Producers, Corn Growers, Soybean Association. We try to get a diversity of panelists through the two hearings. That is a brief explanation of our selection process.

Marcie McLaughlin, we are glad to have you here from Redwood

Falls and from Rural Partners.

STATEMENT OF MARCIE McLAUGHLIN, ON BEHALF OF

AMERICA’S STATE RURAL DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL

Ms. MCLAUGHLIN. Senator Dayton, Senator Wellstone, Representative Gutknecht, members of the committee. I am pleased to

be here today representing America’s State Rural Development

Council to provide you with some of our thoughts related to the

Farm bill and other items related to rural America and Minnesota.

The first State Rural Development Council was accomplished

over a decade ago to help the U.S. Department of Agriculture and

Federal Government advance provisions of the Rural Development

Policy Act of 1980 which called for greater coordination and the formulation and administration of rural development policies and programs. Today the State Rural Development Council operates in 40

States, and with the Washington-based National Rural DevelopVerDate 11-MAY-2000 13:56 Mar 27, 2003 Jkt 085326 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 85326.TXT SAG1 PsN: SAG1
9

ment Council comprised of the National Rural Development Partnership.

Thank you both, and Representative Gutknecht, for the support

of Minnesota Rural Partners and the National Rural Development

of Partnership by cosponsoring the National Rural Development

Act in the Senate. Thank you also for your continuing support to

include NRDT in the appropriations bill and the rural development

title for this Senate farm bill language. Minnesota has been involved in many areas that impact rural Minnesota. In our most recent event, Joint International Summit on Community and Rural

Development and many areas that impact rural Minnesota and

were held last month in Duluth. It is an example of how we can

convene and stimulate discussions and actions.

We appreciate the presence of both staff members at this important event. Over 1,200 people from all over Minnesota, from 47

States, and 15 foreign countries were there, and many of those

folks participated in an unscientific online survey regarding rural

policy.

Three statements with the highest agreement in order are

rural—from a survey rural areas must diversify economically if

they are to survive in the long run; that agricultural policy must

more fully recognize its linkages to rural development issues; and

that Federal and State government must help local leadership

build a community infrastructure that is needed for successful

rural development.

As the Farm bill is rewritten, we encourage inclusion of each of

these points. These can occur as we focus on what Minnesota Rural

Partners is calling the five north stars. Energizing entrepreneurs.

How do we stimulate new growth within rural areas? Managing

the new agriculture. How do we not only take advantage of new

ways of doing business within agriculture but also provide markets

for those at our joint marketing to doing something sustainably—

is a digital divide, and you are all aware of that need. Sustaining

the landscape with the pressures that are put on land issues. Then

boosting human capital. Providing that critical visible and invisible

infrastructure within communities.

As Federal agencies work together for rural places, we will see

coordination of programs authorized in several communities including the ag community.

Senator Wellstone, as you stated at the Farmfest last week, we

are at the point where we need new rules. Who holds the center

of communities? Where are those decisions made? Are they close to

home or far from home? The past Farm bills were written for the

reality of the time. Like many new realities for rural places in the

United States, we need a new approach. No one congressional committee or administrative department has overall responsibilities for

rural policy and rural programs’ integration reinforce the needs for

these new rules and policies.

Thank you for your time today.

[The prepared statement of Ms. McLaughlin can be found in the

appendix on page 70.]

Senator DAYTON. Next we have Mr. Ken Meter with the Crossroads Resource Center in Minneapolis. Welcome, Ken.

10

STATEMENT OF KEN METER, CROSSROADS RESOURCE

CENTER, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA

Mr. METER. Senator Dayton, Senator Wellstone, and Representative Gutknecht, I really thank you for your invitation to speak

today. The Crossroads Resource Center has worked alongside community-based groups since 1972. This winter we were asked by the

Hiawatha Statute Project in Lanesboro to study the farm and food

economy of southeast Minnesota. Our study began with a few simple questions. We wondered why in this region that produces $1

billion worth of food each year, the town of Houston recently spent

2 years without a grocery store. We wondered why when 8,400

local farmers are struggling to make a living, local residents spend

half a billion dollars each year buying food from outside the region.

We wondered why farm families work two to three outside jobs to

cover the costs of producing commodities.

After looking at the numbers, we discovered the local families lose $800 million each year as they grow and buy food. It is a very

conservative figure but a staggering total equal to 20 times the

amount of the Federal farm subsidy that comes into the region

each year. The fact that this region subsidized by the national

economy will not be used by most farmers in this room. Nobody in

America, to our knowledge, has measured such losses before at a

regional level.

It would not have to be this way. The reasons food consumers are

a formidable market—if local residents purchased only 15 percent

of their food from local growers, that would generate as much income for farmers as all farm subsidies combined. Moreover, southeast Minnesota is not unusual. Similar stories could be told about

most any rural region in the country. In many regions, in fact, the

numbers might look even worse because southeast Minnesota’s

farmers have been and the farming with high years of soil conservation in the economy is more diverse here than many rural

local, but it is humbling to realize how vast these issues are.

Our study was written with the understanding that we can only

reverse these losses once we know what causes them. This is terribly important to have. Further, we can use these findings from

one region to recast the farm debate in Washington. Policies should

focus on rural communities as a whole, not simply on farmers. Policies should start with the premise that rural regions should subsidize the U.S. rather than the other way around.

Farmers go to the Federal level because there is water there.

Having some weather with severe economic drought has faced farm

families for 30 years. It is not enough to give farmers more water.

We must also fix the buckets farmers use. We must build new economic structures that stop these leaks once and for all. This is not

a time to quibble about whether farmers receive too much water.

It is a time to ask is the water safe to drink, who ultimately gets

the water, and how do we build buckets that do not leak.

I was extremely pleased to learn when I attended the farm hearing in Worthington on August 4 that farms are asking for the

choice to leave the capital-intensive economy. I am also pleased to

hear farmers in southeast Minnesota asking for a chance to build

a parallel food economy, one that feeds people, one that protects

soil and water, and one that builds wealth for rural residents.

11

These farmers are not asking for an income stream from the Federal well. They are asking for investments in rural communities.

Further, they are asking the Federal Government to stop subsidizing economic systems that extract wealth. Once we make new investments, we will also need to evaluate results.

Tragically there is very little data available that shows rural

communities how their local economies rise and fall. Given the

massive unintended consequences of the Farm bill in 1996, including, of course, the $30 billion that was required to support farms

in 2000, it is the responsibility of the Federal Government not only

to pass solid rural legislation but also to provide excellent data that

allows rural communities to assess the impact of the next Farm bill

on their communities.

Crossroads stands ready to help the Senate Agriculture Committee in any way to advance these goals.

Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you. Could you submit a copy of your

study for the record? Thank you very much.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Meter can be found in the appendix on page 74.]

Senator DAYTON. Mr. Peterson, I see your display behind us. Enlighten us. Thank you for coming.

STATEMENT OF SEVER PETERSON, EDEN PRAIRIE,

MINNESOTA

Mr. PETERSON. Thank you. Senator Wellstone, Senator Dayton,

Representative Gutknecht. They say a picture is worth 1,000

words. We will get to that in a moment. Honored guests and fellow

farmers, it is my pleasure to be here today. I would like to speak

from my heart. I have submitted testimony, and I would like to

summarize that, if I may.

I am a farmer in Eden Prairie, Minnesota. My family started

farming there in 1984. We have raised vegetables. As you see, one

of our markets is here behind us. We also market vegetables and

export them to Canada from our farm. We have done that since

that time a little over 100 years. We also raise corn and soybeans,

and we have been livestock farmers.

I am of Vietnam vintage. When I left for Vietnam, my Dad

wasn’t well. We sold the livestock just 2 days before I left for Vietnam. I tell you, not a Christmas goes by that I don’t think of that

livestock. We bagged them on Christmas Eve.

I see some problems in production agriculture. The problem I feel

that is huge for me is that I feel we are misguided. We farmers are

misguided. Many of us are misguided. An example I would like to

say is that when ethanol—when I speak to people who are producing ethanol and they feel that the raw product corn has to be a low

price for them to make a profit in their ethanol, I feel that that

may be misguided. Or when hog farmers are asking for lower soybean prices in order for them to make money on their hogs, that

is misguided.

Wholesale and retail, we do wholesale and retail business on our

farm. The corn that you see behind you on that stand, if I bought

that from my farm and it is a separate business, it is called one

of those niche markets or value added in the words of today, if you

12

will. I am here to tell you that there is a problem. If this market

here would beat the price down to me at the farm level of the raw

product, what for? What is the purpose? We need profits at the

farm gate. Every farm does. I feel that we have been missing that.

We need something dramatic that gives us profit for the raw product at the farm gate.

I feel there have been some failed solutions. I have used them

as examples in my own life. I grew up, as I said, a livestock farmer.

I am a member of the Pork Producers, I am a member of the Corn

Growers, I am a member of the Soybean Growers, and probably all

of them. I have never been a member of the Milk Producers. I have

only helped my neighbors milk. One of the things I have heard is

get rid of the inefficient and those that remain will be better off.

Well, I don’t believe that for a moment, get rid of the inefficient

and the rest will be better off. I don’t believe that for a moment.

How about exporting our way to prosperity? Today I am here with

three exchange students. One of them is now my farm manager. He

is of European descent, Dutch, family immigrated to Brazil, and we

are not going to introduce them. Another one of them here today

is from Germany, another one is from Sweden. They have the same

problem there. They also want to export. Am I going to export into

their market? Are they going to take my market? We need some

cooperation. Not competition, not consolidation, not monopolization,

we need some cooperation. Talk about free markets. We talk about

level playing field. The men here from Brazil—and you can speak

with them afterwards—they got $3-a-day wages. I pay more than

$3 an hour and benefits on my farm. This is not a level playing

field. It is a highly disparate world. I believe we have to deal with

those issues.

I am sorry here that it is taking me so long, but we farmers cannot help ourselves. It seems I am 57 years old. In over 50 years

of history of agriculture, we farmers have not been able to help

ourselves. We have lost our economic power. We need you Senators

and Congress, we need you to help us regain this economic power.

I feel like we are trying to put air into a blowout. We don’t have

a low tire. We have a blowout. We can hook up the hose, and we

can let the air run all we want to with value added and niche markets and everything else, all we want to. Unless we have a tire

there that will hold air, we have nothing.

I would just like to show you here if I can on these pictures. This

is a maze that we did last year. You see in the maze is the Nation’s

capital. I feel that we farmers are lost in this maze. I feel that agribusiness is somewhere in this maze. We farmers have absolutely

no economic power to get out of this maze. In the center of this

maze is the United States Capitol. We need you. Now is the time.

We need you to help get out of the maze. We need you now. This

year’s maze—and it is symbolic—is the United States. I believe this

effort has got to start with the United States. We are supposedly

the center of the free world, or certainly part of the free world.

Well, let’s stand up and do something. Let’s speak for ourselves.

Let’s get our economic power. We need it. We all know that we are

going backward and we are failing. No farmers made money last

year without our subsidy. I don’t like subsidies, but I certainly

13

can’t even buy groceries without them. What a travesty. What a

travesty.

Thank you very much.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Peterson can be found in the appendix on page 78.]

Senator DAYTON. I am just curious, did you build a solution into

your maze?

Mr. PETERSON. We need cooperation.

Senator DAYTON. I wanted to see if Congressman Gutknecht or

Senator Wellstone have any comments to make to the panelists or

questions of them.

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Well, I would like to introduce a couple of people. First of all, thank you. The testimony has been excellent, all

of you. Very thoughtful. Having been out on some of the rotational

farms, I honestly believe that for large chunks as part of the State,

that has got to be a big part of the answer. I do want to introduce

a couple of very important people in the back of the room. I

thought I saw Bill Hunt. Bill, wave your hat back there. He is our

State NRCS director. Then we have John Monson. Wave your tie,

John. They are going to be around later. If you have any questions

or comments for either one of them, John is the new head of the

Farm Service Agency. Probably between the two of them—and I

suspect I speak for the Senators as well—they are a very, very valuable resource for us. When there are questions that we can’t answer, we often call them, and they have been tremendous advisors

to us. I did want to make sure they were introduced.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you.

Paul.

Senator WELLSTONE. Well, the only thing I want to do—I did it

at the beginning, Senator Dayton—is I want to thank the recorder

for helping us with this hearing, because this means that everything that is said is a part of the official record. Everything that

will be said today will be very important. I also want to thank our

signer. I don’t think we could have a hearing without having a

signer, and I appreciate your work as well. Give them some applause.

I know that Mark is going to have people introduce themselves,

and we are going to get right to discussion. Since I drove part of

the way down with Dave Frederick, I want to make sure I introduce him as president of the Minnesota Farmers Union. Where is

Dave? In the back of the room, I am sure. I want you to know,

Sever, that following up on what you said, the hardest thing for me

to do now is to be quiet. Because you are absolutely right.

Senator DAYTON. We will turn to the next part of our hearing.

Again, to our panelists, thank you very much. That was excellent

testimony. You stuck within the timeframe. Thank you very much.

You are welcome to stay where you are for the rest of the hearing.

If anyone needs to leave, go so with our gratitude. Thank you. I

would like to give an opportunity—I am always afraid to start introductions—but I don’t know who is in the room, and I don’t want

to leave somebody out. We have members of our State legislature

here. I would like to invite you to come up and introduce yourselves. If you have comments within the few-minute time limit you

would like to make during this hearing, please do so. Also, Mr.

14

Monson and Mr. Hunt, if you would also—I appreciate Congressman Gutknecht’s introduction. If any of you would like to say

something for the record as well. I will give you the opportunity to

do so now. I see Representative Winter is coming forward. Mr.

Monson, welcome. Anyone else?

STATEMENT OF JOHN MONSON, STATE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,

MINNESOTA FARM SERVICE AGENCY, ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA

Mr. MONSON. I want to say thank you, Senators and Congressmen Gutknecht, for coming here to my part of the State. Dodge

County is where I hail from. We have Dodge County farmers sitting here in the group. If they get a little raucous, be careful with

them.

I just wanted to make one announcement if I could. The Farm

Service Agency has made, as a result of these folks here at the

table, an emergency assistance package. We have in your accounts

without your knowledge put money in there. We didn’t take any

out; we put money in there. Market loss assistance payments. The

bonus payments, they are there, probably in most every county.

Right now they are out. Payments for soybeans will be going out

this week. We have basically taken everybody off of everything else

to make those payments as quickly as we can. That is really all I

have. Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you very much.

STATEMENT OF TED WINTER, STATE REPRESENTATIVE,

STATE OF MINNESOTA

Mr. WINTER. It is my pleasure to be here. I want to thank the

Senators and Representative Gutknecht. My name is Representative Ted Winter. I live on a farm by Fulda. I have actively been

farming for 37 years. I have served in the legislature for 16 years

now and went through the 1980’s and went through times and

troubles and people and personal problems that they had at that

point. We are right back in the same boat today because we can’t

get a decent price for what we do in the marketplace. That is our

problem.

We can talk about more credit. I don’t know anybody in this

room or any farmers that I have in my neighborhood that actually

is willing to take on more credit. They already got too much debt.

They want to have some money for what they do. If we do anything

in the Federal Farm bill changes that doesn’t allow more price help

for our farmers, anyone that wants to reduce the loan rates for any

farmers in any kind of bill or any kind of form from any kind of

commodity group should be willing to take a 15-, 20-percent reduction in their paychecks and their budgets for their businesses. Because right now with the way it is happening, there is not enough

money. We need the extra oil seed payments. We need the extra

emergency payments from the Federal agencies so we can actually

pay our bills and be out there. It is not fun. Our children and our

grandchildren aren’t going to be out there. That is the worst fear

I have that I hear in the minds and the hearts of many farmers

that I talk to that are 50 to 60 years old. Well, this is it. I am the

last one. I am the last generation. We are the last generation if we

don’t fix this that are going to be out here. Then we will turn it

15

over to the industrial corporate structure, and then they will take

over, and they will farm it, and the Fuldas and the Springfields

and the Stewartvilles, you might survive because you are close

enough to Rochester where you get some bedroom community stuff.

That is what is going to happen. We have to fix the price. We don’t

need more debt. We need higher loan rates. We need managing inventories. There is not a business in the world that doesn’t manage

its inventories. One, farmers are told to produce all you can. If you

produce all you can, maybe we can sell to another world, and

maybe some other world will buy it, and maybe if you do it often

enough and long enough, maybe then you will drive somebody else

out of business, and maybe then you will be productive and profitable. Don’t work. Never worked. Never will work.

Senators, congressional members, fight for price. Make the total

contest of your farm bill determine that the price is better; the

farmers don’t get less. We have been doing more for less for so long

that we can’t do any more.

Senator DAYTON. Well said, Ted. Thank you very much. Thank

you for attending both hearings, the one in Worthington and here.

I see also who was also at our Worthington hearing, Representative

Mary Ellen Otremba. Welcome, Mary Ellen.

STATEMENT OF MARY ELLEN OTREMBA, STATE

REPRESENTATIVE, STATE OF MINNESOTA

Ms. OTREMBA. Thank you, Senator Wellstone, Senator Dayton,

and Congressman Gutknecht. I also grew up on a farm and went

away to college and climbed the corporate ladder and then met a

farmer and came back to the farm and have passionately enjoyed

it. I actively farmed until 1997 when my husband died, and now

I still live on the farm and do some farming.

I just want to touch on just a couple of issues that pertain to one

of my biggest interests, and that is dairy, of course, on the Federal

level. I have read in the papers and heard that some of you are not

supporting the Northeast Compact. My feeling about that is when

some farmers are getting a fair price, instead of punishing them

and taking that away from them, why don’t we let the southeast

and the Midwest and whatever part of the country that wants to

do a compact, do a compact. Or better yet, do it at the Federal

level. I am really tired of us competing against other farmers who

are all in the same mode as to produce healthy food.

Second, in that whole dairy problem, one of the major problems

we have is that California farmers, dairy farmers, are—they receive about the same that we do for our milk per hundred, but the

Federal Government purchases all their surplus milk, and then

that surplus milk gets dumped on the Wisconsin cheese market. It

is time for that Federal law to go out the window.

Another thing that I have a hard time with in the whole dairy

problem is in the 1999 Farm bill, all the processors were allowed—

so that their cheese plant would never fail. Well, in my district

alone, because my farmers are around under 100 cows, each of

those dairy farmers are giving $10,00 to $40,000 a year to those

processors involuntarily because of the 1999 Federal Farm bill.

Multiply that out in my community, which is the poorest community in the State, this is a lot of money leaving just for that amount

16

alone. The Federal Milk Marketing Order deducts 3 cents per hundredweight for their milk marketing order. In Minnesota alone that

is $2.5 million to punish us because we don’t happen to be the right

distance from Wisconsin.

My third and final—and maybe one of my most important messages—is that NAFTA has done some good things, but we need to

seriously, seriously, seriously take a look at Chapter 11. There are

23 chapters in NAFTA, and we are seeing some serious lawsuits

against our Government from foreign companies because of the way

those NAFTA laws are written.

We are in the process of writing the Free America Trade Act.

Please look at that area of NAFTA before you finish writing that

agreement because the agreement as it is written now is exactly

like the NAFTA. The Chapter 11 absolutely needs to be looked at,

our clean water, all of those things will be gone. Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you.

Senator Scheevel, Congressman Gutknecht indicates that since

we are in your district, we should have asked you to welcome us,

but welcome to you. Thank you for being here.

STATEMENT OF KENRIC SCHEEVEL, STATE SENATOR, STATE

OF MINNESOTA

Mr. SCHEEVEL. Senator Dayton, Senator Wellstone, Congressman

Gutknecht, we would like to welcome you to our back yard. This

is referred to as God’s country. This is probably some of the most

beautiful landscape and some of the most fertile farmland you will

find in the Midwest. Frankly, we are in a time of transition. This

is the country, and this is an area that was settled. One of the reasons we have livestock here is because it is a lot easier for the cattle to walk out to the fields and harvest those hillsides than it is

to do it with machinery.

We are in a time of transition now because the small traditional

producers are essentially leaving the land. That means either you

have some midsized producers that take up their slack, or you have

corn and beans. One of my concerns is that the agriculture industry itself is fighting, saying it has got to be our way or no way. If

there is one point to the Farm bill I would like to emphasize, it is

that we have to have opportunity for farmers of all sizes, all philosophies, all styles, to be able to compete and exist in the future.

I too have seen the erosion of the past couple of years. We can very

easily find where every waterway should have been in place in the

last 2 years because they were gullies last fall. We need to have

those kinds of environmental incentives. There used to be. It used

to be that if you wanted to have a Government payment, you had

to have the erosion plan in place. There isn’t that tie-in together

today. There should be. We have to provide incentives and rewards

to be good stewards. Because without it, if you have 4,000 acres to

run and the rain is coming, sometimes you don’t stop for that waterway. We need the incentives. About most of all, we need opportunity. We need opportunity for everybody if they want to make

their living on the land, that they have that opportunity whether

it is a small producer with 2 acres of vegetables or whether it is

2,000 acres or 2,000 cattle and anywhere in between. Opportunity

for anyone to pursue their dream in this country. We hope that you

17

will have the wisdom and insight to make those kinds of dreams

possible. Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Well said, Senator. Thank you very much for

the welcome as well.

Unidentified Speaker. Never follow somebody that is always taller than you are. Senator Wellstone and I have something in common. We both are true wrestlers. I sometimes forget that in this

State where we are represented by a fake wrestler, we can kind of

point that out once in a while. First of all, I want to welcome you.

The mayor was gracious enough to say that this is Queezley’s

Gable country. Honestly we have the honor of representing this in

the State legislature. This is a great area to run. These are great

people, and they will be warm-hearted and welcoming wagon

whether Republican or Democrat today. This is a great area to recognize.

I just want to quickly touch—first of all, to thank the Congress

for passing some unique tax legislation. I work on taxes and transportation in this State. One of those was the inheritance tax and

making that so it is better so people can give their farms to their

children and make sure that we can pass the farm on. In the past

it has been almost impossible to do that, whether it is a capital

gains tax or the inheritance tax. The things that were done this

year in Congress really does help the situation in the future. Hopefully we can make sure that that happens.

This past 2 weeks I was able to go up and take a tour from the

St. Paul Harbor down to Hastings U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

They invited me up because of my work on transportation in the

Minnesota House. I want to say one thing. We do need to upgrade

the transportation system in this Nation. Our locks and dams are

way behind. They were designed in the system where horses and

a John Deere B were used to till the land. These locks and dams

are out of date. They need to be updated. We need to find ways for

railroads to go through cities without disrupting cities. We need to

find ways to improve our highways for the truck traffic and so

forth. We are not only just shipping products out. We are shipping

things in that the farmers need for supplies and other things. We

need to make sure that that transportation system is in place. We

have tried in the Minnesota House and the Senate and with the

Governor to make sure that we get that done in Minnesota, but we

do need Federal help in that area. Again, thank you for coming to

Stewartville. It is a great place to be.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you very much. Everybody can tune in

to the Governor’s radio show on Friday for his response.

Now we are going to open it up for anyone in the audience who

wishes to comment for a period again of, I believe, 2 minutes. I ask

if you have additional comments or testimony to make, or you can

submit it for the record. We will go from one side to the other.

Please state your name at the outset for the record, and we will

start then.

There was a young woman who was here. We haven’t had an

eighth-grader testify as yet at either of our hearings, but since

Amber here represents the future of Minnesota agriculture, it

would be appropriate, Amber, we will start with you. State your

name for the record, please, and then we will hear your testimony.

18

STATEMENT OF AMBER HANSON, RACINE, MINNESOTA

Ms. HANSON. My name is Amber Hanson. I am 13 years old. I

live on a farm with my family in rural Grand Meadow. We raise

corn and soybeans on our farm. My dad is very interested in biodiesel. He feels that this will help us continue to farm by creating

more markets for our soybeans. Biodiesel has proven to be a much

cleaner-burning fuel. This especially helps kids because of the fact

that school buses use diesel fuel.

Biodiesel is the first and only alternative diesel fuel to complete

all health-effect testing. Right now when we are standing in line

waiting for the bus after school or riding the bus for 2 hours, as

many of us do, we were inhaling all the harmful emissions coming

from the bus. Biodiesel reduces harmful emissions coming from the

bus. Biodiesel reduces its harmful emissions, and it even extends

engine life so our schools can save a lot of money each year by not

having to buy or fix as many buses. There are no equipment costs

for buses.

There are no equipment costs for buses to change over to the biodiesel. Schools don’t have a lot of money to work with, so this is

the means by which protect students’ health with cleaner air. It is

the proven fact that everyone in this room breathes air. Why not

clean it up by using biodiesel? Even riding a diesel-powered bus

could be harmful to your health. Do you really want to be sick just

from breathing? I know I don’t.

It takes the Earth 250 million years to replace the oil supply.

Why take that from the Middle East when my dad and other soybean farmers are growing oil in their fields right here on a yearly

basis. You make the decision.

Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Hanson can be found in the appendix on page 80.]

Senator DAYTON. Amber, thank you very much. I have introduced legislation in the Senate for biodiesel incentives. If you and

your father could come out to Washington and testify on behalf of

my legislation this fall, I would love to hear from you. I will followup with you.

Congressman Gutknecht wants to make a comment.

Mr. GUTKNECHT. First of all, Amber, I want to say that was

great testimony. Second, one of the provisions that was included in

the House-passed energy bill is something called the ‘‘green school

bus.’’ It is something I have been pushing for a long time. That is

at least let’s show that biodiesel works by putting it in school

buses. If we can get it in every school bus in the United States, it

would go a long way to reducing the surplus we have in soybeans,

but more importantly, you are exactly right. It will clean up our

air. I am absolutely with you.

STATEMENT OF COLLEEN LANDKAMER, LEWIS COUNTY

COMMISSIONER, MANKATO, MINNESOTA

Ms. LANDKAMER. I am Colleen Landkamer. I am a Blue Earth

County Commissioner. Previous to my becoming a county commissioner, I worked for Congressman Tim Penney. My first farm bill

was the 1996 Farm bill, and I have been working on them ever

since. I am also the chairman of the National Association of CounVerDate 11-MAY-2000 13:56 Mar 27, 2003 Jkt 085326 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 85326.TXT SAG1 PsN: SAG1
19

ties Rural Action Caucus. The Rural Action Caucus at the National

Association of Counties is 1,000 members strong. I am really looking forward to working with all of you on this farm bill because it

is so critical to our future in this Nation. I want to thank you for

taking time during the recess to hold these hearings and to come

out and meet with the people whose lives will be impacted by this

farm bill, the people who really do the work and who put their jobs,

their lives, on the line with the legislation that you will pass.

Thank you very much for hearing from the people that it impacts

the most.

I also want you to know that—and you know this—across the

Nation there’s been great economic prosperity, but it has been uneven, and it hasn’t hit many of our rural areas. We are seeing people who are being challenged more and more each day. I ask you

to think about that in the rewrite of the Farm bill.

Now, I know there’s a lot of people that want to talk, and I don’t

want to take their time, so I will submit my formal testimony to

the record. Thank you very much.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you, Colleen.

Welcome.

STATEMENT OF BARBARA J. COLLINS, LEGAL SERVICES

ADVOCACY PROJECT, ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA

Ms. COLLINS. Thank you, Senator Dayton, Senator Wellstone,

and Congressman Gutknecht, for the opportunity to speak today on

a subject that is very important to low-income Minnesotans and indeed to millions of Americans. My name is Barbara J. Collins. I am

with Legal Services Advocacy Project.

I want to talk about the re-authorization of the Federal food

stamp program which Congress must act upon this year. Since the

passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, commonly referred to as welfare reform, in 1996,

Minnesota has been an innovator in trying to maintain an adequate food and nutrition safety net for families trying to make the

transition from welfare to work. We have combined the cash assistance and food programs with the Federal waiver. We have expanded eligibility so that as families move from welfare to work,

they can continue to receive support in the form of food stamps. We

have recently simplified our food stamp application, and I copied a

number of pages, and I have them all tabbed so that it is less of

a burden for families trying to obtain this benefit. Because we have

done such a good job in Minnesota, we have received Federal bonuses for maintaining a high level of accuracy in our food stamp

program, 6.6 million in 2000 and 4.5 million in 1999. Despite our

efforts to eliminate barriers in the food stamp program, we have

seen a pattern of underutilization of food stamps, which other

States have seen as well.

Since 1994 our usage has declined by approximately 34.7 percent. Unfortunately, we don’t have reason to believe that this represents a decrease in need. I brought a letter to the committee

today from the Minnesota Food Share Association which represents

the food shelves. They explain that their efforts to supply emergency food have been even more challenged than ever to continue

to provide emergency food. We ask that in re-authorization several

20

key steps be taken to try to improve this program. I have submitted a copy of my statement—but those include restoring benefits to

legal immigrants, improving the level of benefits, making the food

stamp program more supportive of working families, and allowing

better consistency between the medicative food stamp program.

I urge you as you consider re-authorization to make this program

simple, understandable, adequate, and accessible.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you very much. Your full testimony will

be submitted for the record. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Collins can be found in the appendix on page 81.]

Senator WELLSTONE. All of us should be very disciplined because

there are so many people that want to testify. Barb, I have to followup because I fear that your testimony may not otherwise be followed up on because there is going to be so much else that is going

to be said that is important. You are absolutely right. We cut the

benefit for legal immigrants, and their children also aren’t receiving it because if they don’t receive it, they don’t get it to their children, the cutback on the actual financial part of the actual value

of the food stamp benefits. There has been over a 30-percent decline, and around the country quite often people don’t even know

they are eligible. What is so important about your testimony—and

I believe people will agree on this—is that the food stamp program

is the most important safety net child nutrition program in the

United States of America. Most of the people who benefit are the

people who are working. They are working full-time. They are still

poor. We take your testimony to heart, and we will change it. We

are going to change it.

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Let me just say that in the bill that we passed

in the House, we did provide an additional $40 million for emergency food assistance programs, and we also simplified the application process and provided a 6-month transition program for those

people who were leaving welfare. We do understand that there still

are problems, and I speak for just about everybody in this room.

In this country especially, no one should go hungry.

Senator DAYTON. Sir?

STATEMENT OF GENE PAUL, FARIBAULT COUNTY,

MINNESOTA, DELAVAN, MINNESOTA

Mr. PAUL. My name is Gene Paul. I am a farmer from Faribault

County, Minnesota. Thank you for being here, Senators and Congressman. When we talk about agriculture, there are two important elements in agriculture, that is, food and people. Any policies

we have should be judged in terms of how they affect food and people. The Farm bill that we are going to be working on this year is

going to affect or does affect far more than just the rural areas because it is consumer issues as well. We must have something done

as far as competition. The competition is vital in the Farm bill.

Senator WELLSTONE. Yes. Yes.

Mr. PAUL. The trend that we are seeing—or what we are seeing

is not just a trend, but rather it is a cold, calculated effort to control the production, the processing, and the distribution of food in

this country, in the world as well. As far as our trade agreements,

they need to be rewritten. Trade should benefit the producer, the

21

consumer, as well as those people handling the trade. We need to

have those rewritten to protect the environment and labor as well.

Those are all very important issues. We need to establish a food

reserve and an inventory management system. I would concur with

Mr. Mandelko on the dairy policies along with the fact that we do

support continuation, expansion, and the establishment of other

Dairy Compacts.

The Dairy Compact they have in the Northeast does not prevent

shipments of milk from this country. It does have a supply management program in it, and I fail to see how taking that price away

from them can hurt the producers in this country or in this part

of the State. We do need to continue the Dairy Compact.

One last point. Farmers need a price, but I recognize that there

are going to be payments from the Government. We have talked

about targeting payments. I just want to remind you that we have

established a precedent as far as targeting payments in the emergency money that was sent out to dairy farmers because there was

a limit put on the amount of money that would be paid to a dairy

farmer based on the production they had. It was not paid on every

pound of milk that they produced. We need to build on that as far

as targeting payments.

Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you. Thank you for all your years of

dedicated leadership.

Welcome.

STATEMENT OF LINDA NOBLE, ORGANIC DAIRY FARMER,

KENYON, MINNESOTA

Ms. NOBLE. Hi. I am Linda Noble. I am an organic dairy farmer

from Kenyon, Minnesota. I am here today to stand up for democracy, and I would like to have my vote in the vote of over 15,000

hog producers reinstated that the pork checkoff end today. We need

to change policies and reject the self-appointed leadership of these

commodity groups. I produce red pork from our farm which goes for

the highest export prices. I am forced to pay the pork checkoff tax

and pay for ads that promote white pork and factory farms. These

commodity groups don’t represent me.

The loss of the family independent farm is something that they

understand. It is important to have a local food system. We are losing too many farmers each day. We need to support the sustainable

farmers. They are good for local communities, environment, and

animal welfare and economy. The new Farm bill should reflect this.

On the news and in the papers, I read about spills and fish and

pollution of the ground water and surface water and air. A new report that is out is called ‘‘Cesspools of Shame: How Factory Farm

Lagoons and Sprayfields Threaten Environmental and Public

Health.’’ This witch’s brew of toxins from lagoons and sprayfields

is polluting our air, lakes, rivers, streams, and drinking water.

Robin Marks, who authored the report, he is quoted as saying, ‘‘It

threatens the health of farm workers, neighbors, and even communities located far away from factory farms as well as fish, wildlife,

and aquatic ecosystems.’’ Read the complete report at the NRDC

web site at www.nrdc.org. How many reports has there to be before

something is done? How many people need to get sick? How many

22

rivers need to be polluted? The lagoons of Smithfield have broken,

failed, and overflowed and killed fish and contaminated our water

and aquifers from the hydrogen sulfide issues, and it pollutes our

air.

Under the proposed technology at the EPA, the Agency allows

thousands of voluntary factories with lagoons the size of football

fields. Waste contains viruses, bacteria, and antibiotics, metals, oxygen-depleting substances and other substances that run on our

land, the ground water, that ruins the atmosphere.

We need to support more sustainable farmers so we don’t have

to clean up the environment put back in farms. The administration

needs to see more interest in protecting public health and the protecting the—of corporate agribusiness. We need a conservationbased farm bill instead of a production-based farm bill. I will submit my testimony as well.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Noble can be found in the appendix on page 84.]

Senator DAYTON. Thank you very much. I will submit a copy of

the report that Julie Janssen gave me last Friday for the record of

the hearing as well. Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF EUNICE BIEL, DAIRY FARMER, HARMONY,

MINNESOTA

Ms. BIEL. Senator Wellstone, Senator Dayton, and Representative Gutknecht, members of the panel, my name is Eunice Biel,

and I am a dairy farmer from Harmony, Minnesota, in Fillmore

County. My husband Robert and I are dairy farmers, along with

our son Kevin and his wife Kelly. We are members of the Minnesota Milk Producers, and also I am on the executive board of the

Minnesota Farmers Union. I would like to talk about two important issues.

First of all, the fighting compact is taking away attention from

the real problems. We should be spending more time working on

our cheese prices here in the Midwest and dealing with the MPC

problem. Fighting other dairy producers is a losing battle. We do

not have the luxury to fight amongst ourselves. No dairy producer

has ever profited at the expense of another dairy producer going

out of business. Why are we fighting farmers with higher production costs? Land is not as productive as ours, and we are short of

class one milk. Our surplus does not come to the Northeast or the

Southern States. On the contrary, our surplus comes from the

Western States. I propose that instead of fighting against other regions, we look at possibly forming our own Midwest compact to

ship out to the areas that need it.

The benefit from compacts is not the financial benefit, but rather

it brings everyone together to evaluate what is a fair price for milk,

and it empowers the producer. The reasons the compacts were

formed in the first place is the Federal system failed those farmers,

and they took it into their own hands to give themselves a better

price.

Second, conservation needs to be an integral part of every agricultural practice rather than an afterthought tacked on to mitigate

damage. Which is why the conservation land impact and changes

23

in the next Farm bill are so important. The Conservation Reserve

Act provides rewards for conservation practices on working lands

to strengthen both the farmer and the land and win support of all

citizens who want a clean environment.

I would also like to say that Minnesota Farmers Union along

with Minnesota Milk Producers have joined in a dialog with other

dairy producers, and we call ourselves the U.S. Dairy Producers Alliance. We need and have dialog with dairy producers from the

Western States, the Southern States, the East Coast States, Louisiana, Alabama, Pennsylvania, and the Midwest and to talk about

common interests and so that we can all share our problems.

Thank you very much for coming to the southeast part of the

State.

Senator DAYTON. Well said. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Welcome.

STATEMENT OF JIM RIDDLE, WINONA, MINNESOTA

Mr. RIDDLE. Thanks for holding this hearing and the opportunity

to speak. My name is Jim Riddle from Winona. I am chair of the

Minnesota Department of Ag’s Organic Advisory Task Force, secretary of the National Organic Standards Board, and I am here

representing the Organic Committee of the National Campaign for

Sustainable Agriculture. I would like to discuss three issues that

I see that the Congress must address coming up.

One is the Conservation Security Act which has already been discussed. You must reward farmers who conserve and protect rather

than those who deplete and pollute and deal with problems such

as the dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico the size of West Virginia

that is caused directly by our upland practices.

Second, I would like to talk about organic program needs and

thank you and the Senate for attempting to get an organic certification cost share, and we want to make sure that that is passed

through the House version of the Farm bill this time. Our model

here in Minnesota has been working for 3 years providing some

regulatory relief to organic farmers who have to pay their own regulatory costs to prove that they are not polluting the Earth. We

need some relief, and we need more than that. We need research

funds. I submitted the written comments which have extensive description of various research needs coming up. Because farming

and harming the earth is true sound science at its cutting edge.

I just want to tell you about last week I was at Lambert and the

University of Minnesota. It has 120 acres of certified organic research farm. Largest in the country. One of only three in the entire

country. Interesting results coming out there after 10 years showing that the organic 4-year rotation is comparable yields, better soil

quality, no nitrates, and significantly higher profits.

The final thing I would like to touch on is genetic trespass. This

is a huge issue that must be dealt with. Transgenic pollution is

harming both conventional and organic farmers. We have lost billions of dollars of exports because the world doesn’t want these

crops. We have to grow what the markets demand. It is time to implement that and hold the companies accountable for the genetic

pollution they are causing.

Thank you very much.

24

[The prepared statement of Mr. Riddle can be found in the appendix on page 86.]

Senator DAYTON. Thank you for covering a great deal of important issues in a very short time. Thank you very much.

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF NANCY ADAMS, LE ROY, MINNESOTA

Ms. ADAMS. Thank you for coming out and hearing what the

farmers have to say. My name is Nancy Adams. A friend and I

have a 120-acre farm south of here near Le Roy, Minnesota, which

we bought 3 years ago. My friends and family think I am crazy.

I am a well-educated, single, middle-aged woman from the Cities

who has worked and traveled all over the world. When people ask

me what I do, I say I am a farmer, but I am much more than that.

I am an environmentalist and a futurist.

Because I am an environmentalist and a futurist, I have become

a farmer. Because I believe my future and the future of our country

lie with sustainable agriculture. There are a lot of things that I

could say about this, but I will limit my comments to a few main

points. First, we are approaching the end of the petroleum era.

Some analysts say this will happen in 50 years, so many of our

children and grandchildren will be living in a world with no petroleum.

One of the major questions we need to be asking ourselves and

addressing is what we are going to use in the future to replace petroleum and all of the ways it is currently being used. There is no

doubt in my mind that in the future the carbohydrates of plant material will replace the hydrocarbons of the petroleum in providing

fuel, raw materials for industry, and food for populations that are

growing exponentially. We will need huge quantities of plant materials in the future to replace petroleum, and we need to ask ourselves now how we will grow all of this plant material and work

to ensure that we will have what we need to provide it.

To grow the large quantities of plant material we will need in the

future, we need several things: good agricultural land, reliable rain

and weather patterns, farmers, seeds that respond to varying conditions, and production methods that are substantially different

than those we now have. Living in the Midwest, we take farmers,

good agriculture land, and reliable rainfall patterns for granted

and assume that they will be there in the future. However, the continuation of all these things are in serious jeopardy and no longer

can be taken for granted. It should be the major component of the

new arm bill to ensure that all the components are in place to provide the large amounts of plant material we will need in the future.

My time is up, but I really would like to just plod on, if I

may——

Senator DAYTON. I have to ask you, as I have asked everybody

else, just to sum it up in 30 seconds, please.

Ms. ADAMS. All right. The main point I want to make is productivity and viability of millions of acres of land in the Midwest are

currently being threatened. David Tillman is a professor from the

university. He looked at the environmental disaster that is happening in the Red River Valley because of a modern cultural cropping

system. He found that the disease and pest buildup made the land

25

up there so that it could no longer be used for agriculture. He said

that the same thing was happening in the corn/soybean rotation.

The rotation has broken down, and it is just going to be within a

decade that all of these millions of acres will no longer be able to

produce corn and soybeans.

I have a long statement here which I really would appreciate you

reading.

Senator DAYTON. I will read it, and we will submit it to the

record. We can assure you of that. Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF REV. CHUCK PURDHIM, (RETIRED), UNITED

METHODIST CHURCH, BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA

Rev. PURDHIM. I am Chuck Purdhim, United Methodist Minister,

retired. I can’t speak officially for the United Methodist Church,

only as general conferencing to that, but in a recent session the

general conference adopted a social principle statement entitled

‘‘U.S. Agriculture in Rural Community in Crisis.’’ One of the things

that calls our churches to do, was to give serious research, aggressive research, to corporate ownership of agriculture and its effects

upon life and rural areas and advocacy necessary, and responses

based upon the finding of that research. The research not been

completed as yet. They are still in the process. While not waiting

for that to be done, our own Bishop here in Minnesota conducted

a series of hearings among the farmers of our State beginning with

up at the Red River Valley moving down through the western part

of our State and down south through Dexter and Pine Island.

Out of those hearings, several things became fairly clear. Out of

the growing concern about the large conglomerates, big mergers

are the source of our problem, as some of them put it. Paralleling

that, a concern about ecology, stewardship, conservation. Because

of U.S. Government trade sanctions, our products cannot be sold in

certain countries. It will be that they be taken in the international

dimensions of this whole issue as well.

This is not just a farm crisis but a rural crisis. To keep in a larger setting, what happens to farmers happens to rural communities

as a whole. We are not just listening to the farmers. We as a

church are trying to listen also to a God, a God of justice, and a

God of hope. The gentleman over here said something about this

is God’s country. That is more true than he realized. We and you

are God’s people. God will be seeking to work through you in terms

of justice and hope as you work on this legislation. I would urge

you to remember the task ahead of you is never as big as the powers behind you. Our prayers will be with you.

Senator DAYTON. Well said. Thank you very much.

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF PHIL SPECHT, DAIRY FARMER, McGREGOR,

IOWA

Mr. SPECHT. I am Phil Specht. I am a dairy farmer from

McGregor, Iowa. I would like to add my 37 separate recommendations that were formulated through a process that included all 99

counties in Iowa, and this is as my capacity as Chair of the Ag

Subcommittee of the Democratic Party Platform of Iowa. We came

26

up with 37 separate recommendations, so I would like to enter this

in the record and speak as a farmer.

I came up here to thank Senator Wellstone for coming down to

Iowa and lending the support in the depths of the hog price crisis

and to stand up and speak against the lack of competition in the

market. I want to ask you to include in your legislation a competition title. Make sure it is in there. I am all for conservation, the

conservation security. Tom Harkin got it right. I second that. That

is in here.

I would like to thank Representative Gutknecht for his support

in rotational grazing. That is how I farm. Nice to meet you, Senator Dayton. Thank you very much again, Paul. Keep fighting for

justice.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you very much. We welcome our neighbors from Iowa. We have had good relations with both Senator Tom

Harkin and Senator Chuck Grassley. Thank you for joining with

us.

Welcome.

STATEMENT OF KEVIN RISTAU, JOBS NOW COALITION, ST.

PAUL, MINNESOTA

Mr. RISTAU. Thank you, members of the committee. My name is

Kevin Ristau. I am an ex-farmer, and I am presently education director of the Jobs Now Coalition. Jobs Now consists of more than

100 organizational members who have ignored their differences so

they can focus on what they have in common and their belief that

the opportunity to attain self-sufficiency through one’s work is a

fundamental community standard.

Jobs Now’s most recent attempt to define self-sufficiency is a report of the cost of living in Minnesota which figures the cost of

basic needs for families of different sizes in each of the States, 13

economic developmental regions. In this report, if we look at the

Minnesota counties, they are still especially dependent upon the

farm economy. We find that living costs are 20 percent lower than

the seven-county metro area. However, average wages in these

farm counties are 44 percent lower.

Like the Federal minimum wage floor, the farm price support

program is a legacy of a new deal. Just as the purpose of the minimum wage was to put a floor under wages, so the purpose of the

Federal farm program was to set a floor under farm prices. With

the new deal programs, Government intervened in the marketplace

to make the balance of power more equitable. As a result of this

intervention, farmers received better prices and workers received

better wages.

Opponents of these new deal programs have always argued that

this form of government intervention in the marketplace is counterproductive to low-wage workers and family farmers who would both

somehow be better off without it. To suggest, however, that either

low-wage workers or family farmers can flourish without market

intervention is to imply that they have just as much market power

as employers in agribusiness corporations. It is like refusing to install traffic lights at a busy intersection and then insisting that pedestrians or compact cars can get through it as easily as semi trailer trucks.

27

We need to remember that neither farmers nor low-wage workers

would ever have won anything if they had believed the market was

an immutable law like the law of gravity. Ordinary citizens attained their victories only because they knew the market was a

human construction that could be shaped for the good of their communities.

If the market is a human construction and not a force of nature,

then the implication is clear. The market can serve our human purposes. It should be used to create the kind of society in which we

want to live.

Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you. If you will submit a copy of the

study for the record. We would welcome that.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Ristau can be found in the appendix on page 91.]

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF LEWIS REIMAN, UTICA, MINNESOTA

MR. REIMAN: My name is Lewis Reiman. I am from Winona

County. Thank you, Senator Wellstone, Mr. Dayton, and Mr. Gutknecht. I am here to speak—probably one of the minority. I am

here too for the elimination program. I believe I have seen firsthand the destruction of both the family farm and the soils that the

programs have provided. The result of the current program is that

the hay is gone. There is no hay left there to hold the soil. It is

flushing it out. Civilizations have fallen because their soils have

been gone. In our own hemisphere the example would be the Incas

in Central America. What the Government does essentially is effectively paying only for row crops.

What I would like to give you is a method to eliminate by paying

a set amount per all tillable acres on the farm. Let the program

run from 5 to 10 years or whatever is in between, and reduce each

payment by that percentage each year and make the maximum

payment only to $35,000 and reduce that payment by the reciprocal

of that year.

Another article I would like to speak to is the clause—I want to

be watched for dumping on our markets. Our agriculture department has pricing mechanisms in place that they could watch for

this when it is happening, and it could run a trigger in there that

we could stop this dumping from happening quicker. I define

dumping as a significant price below the whole market.

Thank you, sir.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF NIEL RITCHIE, INSTITUTE FOR AGRICULTURE

AND TRADE POLICY, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA

Mr. RITCHIE. Senators, Congressman, I am Niel Ritchie. I am

with the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy in Minneapolis.

On behalf of the National Family Farm Coalition and the National

Farm Action Campaign, I will submit a farm policy agenda which

is embodied into something called the family farm, which we would

like you to consider as well.

28

In terms of remarks, I would just say that people here have done

an amazing job of covering the waterfront in terms of the challenges we face. We know the state of the rural economy is driven

by local incomes that are derived from the land, and they are

earned by farmers and ranchers. We know the Government has a

role to play, a really critical role to play in leveling the playing

field. We would call on Congress to consider a reinstatement of

tried and true proven Government policies that work for farmers

and consumers and taxpayers that include a mandatory farmerowned reserve program, support prices that are set at a fair level,

and a way to manage their inventories.

Grain prices are adjusted for inflation, we know, and soybeans

went down another 16 cents today because China is not the market

we were promised. It is the lowest in three decades. Farm policy,

Federal farm policy, has abandoned independent farmers in favor

of a food production system that is controlled by large multinational agribusinesses. Issues affecting farm prices are felt locally,

but the impacts are often the result of international trade agreements that are negotiated without assessing or balancing the true

cost of and the impacts on our rural economies. We strongly believe

that trade agreements should respect each country’s needs and traditions for food security, for conservation of natural resources, and

for the distribution of economic opportunity.

We don’t support fast-track process for negotiating international

policies, and we call for a full debate in consideration of the issues

that will provide a secure future for our nation’s farmers and consumers.

Finally, I would just say that programs that are dependent upon

expanding export markets is the solution to the farm income without addressing the need for fair prices or predicated on flawed assumptions and only foster the vicious cycle. Our export-dependent

policies failed miserably and must be replaced. The proof is in the

numbers. It is time for Congress to look at home on the ground at

the results and not at the flawed economic projections that they get

from economic research services.

Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Ritchie can be found in the appendix on page 93.]

Senator DAYTON. Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF JANICE DALEY, GRAIN FARMER, LEWISTON,

MINNESOTA

Ms. DALEY. My name is Janice Daley. My husband, John, and I

are grain farmers from Winona County, Lewiston, southeastern

Minnesota. Thank you, Senators Wellstone, Dayton, and Congressman Gutknecht. I too am here to enter into the record the National

Family Farm Coalition bill, the Food from Family Farm Act. I am

just going to summarize a few things. As grain farmers, of course,

the grain part of the bill is one of the most important parts. We

call on Congress to pass a farm bill that will establish support

prices at the full cost of production plus a profit and to get that

profit out of the marketplace. Nothing bothers my husband more

than Government payment checks so we can keep going and surVerDate 11-MAY-2000 13:56 Mar 27, 2003 Jkt 085326 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 85326.TXT SAG1 PsN: SAG1
29

viving. I mean, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to sit down, do our

income tax every year, and see if we didn’t have the Government

payments where we would be. We would not be there.

In this act they want to maintain the flexible planning options

and establish short-term conservation methods to avoid overproduction, require labeling of meat and all imported foods, restore

competition to the food, the farming food sector, negotiate fair

trade agreements, and hold the USDA accountable whether it is on

checkoffs or equal access to farm programs or farm credit programs.

If we truly believe that the young must take over and must survive and be active farmers in the next generation, and that restoring farm income is the primary focus in getting it out of the marketplace, this is what the food from the family farm manager proposes. Targeting corn at loan rates at $3.45 a bushel on 125,000

bushels. Targeting soybeans at $8.63 a bushel on 35,000 bushels.

Targeting wheat, $5.12 a bushel on 65,000 bushels. This is for all

of you a little more than 50 percent of cost of production. I will

enter into the record some materials that I have to back that up.

Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you. Please do submit your report for

the record. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Daley can be found in the appendix on page 96.]

STATEMENT OF SISTER KATHLEEN STORM, MANKATO,

MINNESOTA

Sister STORM. I am Sister Kathleen Storm from School Sisters of

Notre Dame from the Center for Earth Spirituality and Rural Ministry in Mankato. I am not a farmer, but I grew up on a Minnesota

farm, and I feel passionately about what is going on on a day-today basis with our farmers and our rural communities. I feel their

passion and their pain as they try to find hope and meaning for

themselves and their families.

This is the kind of farm bill that the School Sisters of Notre

Dame would like to support. We would like you to reward farmers

for conservation practices that they already are doing even on a

small part of their farm while they learn the benefits of protecting

soil, water, and air. It takes a courageous farmer to find alternative

ways to farm and protect the soil from water runoff, keep our

water and rivers free from chemicals, raise animals humanely on

grass, and keep the air clean. Give farmers incentives on how they

farm. They suffer proposals for payments for conservation practices. I laud the intent of those proposals. I know several conservation proposals place caps on these payments. I urge you also to put

caps on commodity payments as well. Close the loopholes that

allow farmers to plant more and more acres because they know

Government payments will support them even though it is causing

escalating rental rates, increasing land values, and low grain prices

and doing little or nothing to reduce erosion.

I would ask you too to provide incentives through small grocery

stores and institutions like ours in Mankato or colleges, hospitals,

and restaurants to purchase locally grown foods. Why? Because

they keep the food dollars in the local community which strengthVerDate 11-MAY-2000 13:56 Mar 27, 2003 Jkt 085326 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 85326.TXT SAG1 PsN: SAG1
30

ens that community. This summer through a Bremmer Foundation

grant we hired an intern who is helping us to buy vegetables and

meats locally. We have found it a complex and confusing process

as we try to work within the USDA regulations and rules.

Last, I urge you to do what you can to turn around our chief food

policy that is very costly for the environment and for family farms.

Current public policy continues to move farmers off the land. When

we have healthy food and healthy animals, we will have a healthy

farmland and rural communities.

Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you, Sister. Very well said.

[The prepared statement of Sister Storm can be found in the appendix on page 99.]

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF KEVIN SCHEIDECKER, FILLMORE SOIL AND

WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT, PRESTON, MINNESOTA

Mr. SCHEIDECKER. Thank you. My name is Kevin Scheidecker. I

am the manager of the Fillmore County Soil and Water Conservation District. I am passionate about conservation. I am also currently the Chair for the Basin Alliance for the Lower Mississippi

in Minnesota. The alliance is a local coalition of Government agencies, environmental groups, agriculture groups, and other organizations concerned with natural resource management and water

quality in the Lower Mississippi Basin in Minnesota.

One of our main strategies is to increase the amount of perennial

vegetation in the basin such as hay, pasture land, and vegetative

buffer strips in an effort to improve water quality in the Mississippi River Basin. The current trend of less livestock on the land

has led to a dramatic shift from conserving land uses such as perennial pasture and hay toward attentive row-crop farming that

addresses agriculture and water quality due to its impact on soil

erosion.

Livestock producers and conservation professionals need to

spread the word that without a livestock presence in southeastern

Minnesota, we are fighting a losing battle to save the soil. We need

to have recognition that hay, pasture, and even livestock manure

plays a large role in protecting agriculture by keeping soil in place

while ensuring that the fertility is maintained.

Therefore, the Basin Alliance is proposing a pilot project in the

Greater Blufflands Region of southwestern Wisconsin, northeastern

Iowa, and southeastern Minnesota that would recognize the importance of hay and offset the current biases toward row crops by designating hay a program crop eligible for benefits under the Federal

Farm Program. This will put hay on a level playing field with the

other commodity crops such as corn and soybeans and will allow

hay production to be more profitable while giving a boost to livestock producers for their efforts without penalizing them for raising

hay and maintaining pastures. I have submitted a copy of that proposal into the record.

Thank you for your time.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Scheidecker can be found in the

appendix on page 100.]

Senator DAYTON. Thank you.

31

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Let me just say just to my Senate colleagues,

that is a great idea. We did get quite a bit done in the Housepassed version, but we didn’t get to that point. A pilot program in

this region for hay would be something. If you could possibly get

that done in the Senate bill where you can get the language, we

will try to negotiate with you in the Congress community.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you. I haven’t heard that before. Thank

you, sir.

Welcome.

STATEMENT OF MIKE NOBLE, CROP AND LIVESTOCK

PRODUCER, KENYON, MINNESOTA

Mr. NOBLE. Thank you. My name is Mike Noble, Dodge County

crop and livestock producer. Years ago I came to meetings to support freedom to farm. At the time I was changing the farm to meet

market ideas. I was losing base acres because I was planting less

corn. I was shocked to discover that a group of vegetable giants

prevented me from growing vegetables on base acres. This caused

many Midwest vegetable companies to close making freedom to

farm alive. Ann was one of the folks to lobby for this. She since has

taken my mode away with a checkoff issue.

Last year I produced under contract organic soybeans. The buyer

provided seeds. I grew and delivered the crop. The buyer refused

to pay. Contaminated with GMOs. My local attorney said I had no

chance because the contract was clear. Then listening to the skeptics of the judicial system in the country, you say that justice belongs to those who pay for it. I hired the law firm who did the

Hormel turkey store merger. Hormel recently terrorized Austin

into lowering property values from 32 million to 15 million. Broke

their union by selling to ConAgra, making Hormel a captive independent instead of succumbing to a major merger mania.

In days I received full payment of the soybeans. Not because the

law protected me but because the buyer could not afford to fight

the attorney I had hired.

If I get a woman pregnant, I would be responsible for raising the

child. If the sport of crops adultered by Monsanto destroy my crop,

my reputation, and my income, Monsanto can sue me for stealing

their technology. This is terrorism. Thousands of farmers and businesses have been sued out of business, quit, or sold out for fear of

being ruined. Survivors have had to make partnerships with Monsanto.

Monsanto has used outdated patents to bring disaster to America’s ag entrepreneurs and acquires vast portions of agriculture’s

value-added seed industry from family and rural community to add

to centralized corporate ownership.

Today I sell nothing to these corporations that manipulate agriculture, but they all want my crops, my brands, my name, and my

product. I do not fear fire, hail, and flood but face everyday contamination, corporate preditation, corporate tax, and set-asides. I

received $11,000 in welfare from the Farm bill, but I could have

lost $40,000 to this one Monsanto event.

Senator DAYTON. Very powerful statement. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Noble can be found in the appendix on page 105.]

32

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF RON DURST, ON BEHALF OF ASSOCIATED

MILK PRODUCERS INC.

Mr. DURST. My name is Ron Durst. I am a dairy producer from

Dodge County. I am here today representing Associated Milk Producers Incorporated, New Ulm, Minnesota. On behalf of the dairy

producers of Associated Milk Producers, I want to thank the members of the U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee for conducting a

hearing in the heart of both dairy and AMPI country. As Senators

Wellstone and Dayton as well as Representative Gutknecht know,

dairy is synonymous with Upper Midwest agriculture.

I come to you as both the member of the AMPI Board of Directors and a Minnesota dairy producer. For more than 100 years, the

Durst family has farmed in Dodge County near Mantorville, Minnesota. I currently operate a dairy and grain farm in partnership

with my two brothers.

In addition, I have been a member of the AMPI Board of Directors for 1 year. AMPI is the largest milk marketing organization

in Minnesota and the cooperative’s seven-State membership area.

Together, 5,000 dairy farms move milk from the farm to the market. With 14 manufacturing plants located throughout the Upper

Midwest, we manufacture more than 5 billion pounds of milk into

a complete line of dairy products.

When deciding what constitutes an effective farm bill, please consider the need for a stronger milk price safety net, funding an effort to clean up the Johne’s disease, and eliminate regionally based

dairy policies.

First, let’s look at the need for a stronger safety net. This indus- try has been operating under a dairy price support of $9.90 per

hundredweight throughout the 1990’s, the same level included in

the farm bill legislation passed by the U.S. House.

I am confident that any dairy producer in the room will agree that $9.90 is not an adequate safety net. We had a full dose of

$9.90 last year and only survived with cheap grain, LDPs, and supplemental payments totaling nearly $1 per hundredweight. It simply does not make sense to write a long-term farm bill based on

prices we know are too low.

In this farm bill we must do better. Dairy producers need a

meaningful price support program or supplemental payments when

dairy prices fall below specified levels. There are credible legislative proposals that seek to supplement the Class III milk price

when market prices fall. The benefits of these programs could be

effectively targeted to our producers or our need, without causing

major market distortion.

To be effective, both price supports and supplemental payments

must be coupled with inventory management and consistent dairy

import policies.

Inventory management is an everyday occurrence in every other

business. Why not agriculture? We can argue the details and mechanisms for implementing inventory management, but it is difficult

to argue the logic.

The second request I have is to finance an effort to clean up

Johne’s disease. It is a contagious, chronic, and usually fatal infecVerDate 11-MAY-2000 13:56 Mar 27, 2003 Jkt 085326 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 85326.TXT SAG1 PsN: SAG1
33

tion that can affect all ruminant animals. A national coordinated

effort, in conjunction with the States and cattle industries, must be

implemented and funded.

Finally, I must ask you to eliminate regionally based dairy policies such as dairy compacts. Compacts benefit some groups of producers at the expense of others.

Reliable economic studies by the likes of USDA and others show

that relatively high prices for some dairy producers actually lower

prices for others.

Though I realize dairy compacts are not within this committee’s

jurisdiction, they are part of today’s overall dairy policy mix, and

you should oppose their continuation.

Committee members, thank you for this opportunity to testify

only 30 miles from my farm. Strengthening our country’s milk price

safety net, funding an effort to clean up Johne’s disease, and the

elimination of regionally based dairy policies will ensure the next

generation of the Durst family can milk cows.

Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you, Ron.

Welcome.

STATEMENT OF VICTOR ORMSBY, WINONA, MINNESOTA

Mr. ORMSBY. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you.

My name is Victor Ormsby. I have been a long-time organic vegetable grower and wildflower grower from Winona County. I am a soil

and water supervisor from Winona County and a recent appointee

to the Board of Water and Soil Resources in the State of Minnesota. The State agency is in the process of drafting a policy statement on the Farm bill, which you will be receiving down the road,

I am sure. I am here today as a member of the Land Stewardship

Project, and I would like to speak specifically to the EQIP program.

We feel that the EQIP program must be adequately funded. It

was proposed that we fund it at a level of about $1.8 billion a year

and that there be adequate resources for technical support. We also

feel we ought to have revised standards to allow for reduced-cost

conservation options. A lot of times in the soil and water conservation district office, we will use State and county funds to cost-share

on the lesser-cost practices because NRCS standards are pretty

strict and would only fund high-priority practices or high-cost practices.

We also feel that there should be transition payments to encourage crop biodiversity for annual cropping and intensive rotation of

grazing systems as a part of EQIP. We feel that feedlot money

should not be used to fund new or expanded feedlot operations. In

Minnesota we limit cost-share funding for feedlots to existing

feedlots with serious environmental problems. It is designed to

bring existing feedlots into compliance with clean air and clean

water standards. I feel cost-share and feedlot should be limited to

existing feedlots with the environmental problems. Funding for

EQIP should not be taken from the Conservation Reserve Program.

It should not be taken from the Wetland Restoration Program. It

should not be taken from wildlife habitat incentive programs nor

from any of the forest conservation programs. The management of

EQIP must stay with NRCS.

34

Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you, Victor. Thank you very much. Very

well said.

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF TOM HOSCHEIT, CALEDONIA, MINNESOTA

Mr. HOSCHEIT. Thank you, Mr. Wellstone and Mr. Dayton and

Congressman Gutknecht. My name is Tom Hoscheit. I am from

Caledonia, Minnesota, the very southeastern corner. Thank you for

giving me this chance to talk to you and express our concerns.

I farm in southeastern Minnesota with my dad and my brother.

My dad gave me an opportunity to join his farming operation over

25 years ago, and I am very thankful to him for that opportunity.

Unfortunately, I don’t know if I can do the same for any one of my

four sons or daughter. Not that I can’t do it, but don’t know if it

is fair to them to do it. How can I start them out farming and not

be able to compensate them for the amount of time and work that

it takes just to get by, let alone make any money when they can

do so much better away from the farm?

The hardest thing I had to do a year ago was to say no to my

oldest son about coming into my operation. What is even harder is

realizing how good he would be for our business, but it is not fair

to him. I don’t want to see my kids in 25 years having to come here

like I am today begging you to help and continue to hope the Government will keep coming up with enough money to keep us operating for another year. It is unfair to see the big co-ops that were

once Midwest co-ops merge with the co-ops in the West and the

South and now the East. They are able to take advantage of the

Northeast Compact and California markets and, in turn, hurt our

prices here in the Midwest.

We as dairy farmers need better prices. The price support needs

to be raised. We need to get rid of all the different regional price

structures, and all the milk should be priced the same. Products

and imports from other countries need to be controlled, especially

when they are not real dairy products but are able to be labeled

as real dairy products such as MPC. We need better prices to stay

in business so that we can in good conscience secure the future of

the family farm so that some of my sons or daughter and other

young people can look forward to a dream of joining in the family

business.

Thank you for your time. We hope that you will do your best to

secure a bright future for the next generation of farmers.

Senator DAYTON. Very powerful statement, Tom.

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF LORRAINE REDIG, WINONA, MINNESOTA

Ms. REDIG. My name is Lorraine Redig. We farm here near Winona, Minnesota. Our family has been on a century farm for quite

a while, and our sons that are farming there have to have other

work to support their farming habit, which is not fair.

After farm production leaves the farm, everyone else who handles it markets it as the demand arises at a profit. Justice demands

that producers of raw farm production are also able to follow the

same business rules. Before it leaves the farm, they should have

35

the same business rules. Justice demands that farmers and laborers who produce the food receive a fair share of what consumers

spend for food. Farmers don’t have the structure to enable us to

market our production as the demand arises at a profit. The buyer

traders have filled that vacuum. They discriminate against those

who enter raw production from a certain economic stream. The

supply and demand economic system is called a law of nature, but

it is not. It is man-made policy, and it is unjust policy.

The buyer/trader set prices on both ends of their business at

great profit to themselves. That is the injustice that we face. We

ask you to form a farmer-run democratic board of trade to replace

the Chicago Board of Trade and every other structure that enables

the buyers to put production they don’t yet own up for sale at auctions that they control to find out how little they have to pay for

what they want to get. The only trade that a just nation can afford

is trade that profits everyone involved. The farmers’ board of trade

would market the supply for which there is a demand at a profit

to the producers. This supply would come equally from all producers, large or small. When the supply of small producers is exhausted, the large producers would have an equal opportunity to

sell as demand arises. If there isn’t a market for something, it

would be held until there is a market as the same with other businesses do. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Redig can be found in the appendix on page 109.]

Senator DAYTON. Thank you, Lorraine.

Senator WELLSTONE. Again, to be very brief, when Lorraine said ‘‘democratic board of trade,’’ that was with a small ‘‘d,’’ which is the

most important of all. The second thing is I would like to, as a

point of privilege, Senator Dayton and Congressman Gutknecht, I

would like to thank Lorraine and Art for your—when I hear you

speak of the Bishop, because you put together your values and your

deep religious faith with why we are all here and how important

family farmers are to this country. I would like to thank you for

years and years and years of having such a strong voice. I would

like to thank Tom earlier who preceded you. You were walking

back as Senator Dayton was saying ‘‘very powerful.’’ Everybody has

been, but I want you to know that the way you put things and you

talked about your son connected with everybody in this room.

Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. To extend the hearing until 3:30, we have

about 20 more witnesses that are in line here. That is going to be

close to 40 minutes. If anybody else wants to speak, if you would

join the ranks now. I am going to ask after this next speaker, I am

going to close it off at that point so we can continue. Welcome.

Thank you.

STATEMENT OF KEITH SPELTZ, DAIRY FARMER, SOUTHEAST

MINNESOTA

Mr. SPELTZ. My name is Keith Speltz. I am a dairy farmer from

southeast Minnesota here. Just a few comments on the reports that

the Government sends out every month. You are telling the whole

world what our production is for corn, soybeans, milk, and cheese,

so they all know what we are producing, how much we have, and

36

then we expect to get a fair price. It is like playing poker and showing your cards before you bet. Everybody knows what we have, and

that is not fair. The Government is doing this, and agriculture, I

believe, is the only industry they do it for. It is just not fair to the

people in agriculture. I don’t know what the answer is, but we need

supply management of some sort, and we need free trade. I don’t

think there’s free trade in the world the way the Government handles things now.

Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. There are outputs for production imports in almost every commodity and product. However, your point is well

taken. Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF MARGARET ZIMMERMAN, WASECA,

MINNESOTA

Ms. ZIMMERMAN. Senators Dayton and Wellstone, and Bishop

Harrington—we have to go to the top here—I am Margaret Zimmerman from Waseca, Minnesota. I am bringing this issue to you

today because we have gone—in the past 2 years, we have gone to

our local township officials, our county officials, our State officials,

and we are still in the midst of the whole battle regarding feedlots.

A large feedlot is being proposed for our community in Waseca

County. It would be a contract operation with Wakefield Pork,

which already has several operations in our area that are poorly

managed. We are working with the Land Stewardship Project and

have formed a group called Citizens’ Concern for Waseca County to

work on this issue and other feedlot issues in our State. This proposed operation is 2,400 sows or 960 units, under the mandatory

threshold, just under the mandatory threshold of 1,000 animal

units that require an AEW review or NPDS permit. This feedlot is

being proposed in a drained wetland, and the manure will be

spread on this drained wetland. It is also known as the famous

Moonan Marsh Federal wildlife area, just less than a mile from me.

The creek is officially listed as impaired—Crane Creek is officially listed as impaired with MPCA because of the elevated levels

of fecal coliform. This watershed ultimately leads to the Mississippi

River. Our group met with members of MPCA on Thursday, August

16th, and we were not able to get a satisfactory answer to our request for an NPDS. We request that you send a letter to the EPA

and the MPCA urging them to follow the existing Federal law by

requiring an NPDS permit. Urgency is required as the MPCA will

rule on this permit issue as early as yesterday, and construction of

the project could begin at any time.

Senator DAYTON. Could you give us the information after the

hearing? I will be glad to followup with you on it. This came up

as Friday as well.

Ms. ZIMMERMAN. I do have one of these sheets for each of you.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Zimmerman can be found in the

appendix on page 110.]

Senator DAYTON. Thank you. I am going to close the witness list

with the two gentlemen who are standing there. However, there

are 22 witnesses still remaining. At 2 minutes apiece, that is 44

37

minutes. I am going to ask you to strictly observe the 2-minute

limit, please, and we will conclude. Thank you.

STATEMENT OF LES EVERETT, WATER RESOURCES CENTER,

UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA

Mr. EVERETT. I am Les Everett with the University of Minnesota

with the Water Resources Center. We have to look at what is it the

taxpayer can be justifiably constituted by. The first one would be

conservation, and that has been addressed. The second one would

be the income stabilization. Not income guarantees but income stabilization in the farm community. Then we have to ask if proposed

solutions actually make the problem better or worse.

With regard to conservation, that the Conservation Security Act,

the standard EQIP program, a return to conservation compliance,

and the conservation education can all assist with that. With regard to income stabilization, the main factor seemed to be commodity supports. I doubt that those will actually reach the objective of

income stabilization. They do more harm than good. They tend to

increase surpluses because they encourage more production and

drag down commodity prices. They drag up rents and land prices

and reduces, therefore, the ability to survive in poor times. This

tracking of the total price, that is, the commodity price plus the

support, that relation to rents and income have been documented

in the University of Minnesota research.

Those commodities support and reduces flexibility, respond to the

market and to diversify into areas like land, alternative uses, and

it increases soil erosion and water pollution, as we have seen this

year in southeast Minnesota and southern Iowa for our family

farms. We need to, in terms of income stabilization, look at more

solutions along the line of tax and financial incentives for investment of farm—or in alternative, farm enterprises in the good years,

in the good income years, with the option to cash in on farm investments for all farm investments without tax penalty in low-income

years. Let’s do the income stabilization and financial and tax markets not in the commodity markets.

Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF GERALD TUMBLESON, SHERBURN,

MINNESOTA

Mr. TUMBLESON. Hello. Welcome, Senators Dayton, Wellstone, as

well as Congressman Gutknecht. I often wonder if the Congressman’s green bus has anything to do with your bus, Senator

Wellstone. Maybe not. I like the idea that you are looking at this

farm bill with a 10-year destination. That makes a lot of difference

to a lot of us out here. I have two sons farming and simply for

him—when I brought the two sons in farming, I had a lot of problems with the child welfare department since I have done that. I

do think that once you can put it into a 10-year program, farmers

will adapt. This 1996 adjusted from the day it started, and we

didn’t know where we were. What I like about the 10-year is so I

can look forward. I want to compliment the House for putting

theirs together with a voice vote. I don’t know that that has ever

38

been done before. Therefore, we have both sides on this issue coming together. The Senate will be able to do the same thing mainly

because agriculture has become that important in the United

States.

Big business will exist, and if anybody knows about Dupont, they

now have eliminated some of the hydrocarbon industries in their

department. They have produced carbohydrate industry in their department. They are going that track. Now, we as farmers understand that. We are going to move in that direction, but we want

to own it. We want to own it not as farmers but as rural communities. Rural communities are the farmers and the people living out

there. We can do that if we have some tax incentives or some way

to put that together. The reason for that is we can crop this land

because we are efficient in energy when we do that. Our leaves on

our corn plants are taking energy from the sun and convert. We

are making ethanol with 100 Btus to get 135 Btus back. The hydrocarbons use 100 Btus and get 85 Btus back. We in agriculture are

going to be able to do that. We are going to be able to do it with

our root structure, with our holding the soil. New Orleans is built

on our topsoil before we had crops here. We have to understand

where the environment is going and where we are heading. I am

totally confident that you are going to do that. I thank you very

much for having two Senators on the Ag Committee.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you.

Mr. GUTKNECHT. We do have copies of summaries of the Housepassed version. He made a point. It is an important point. That the

ag bill that passed out of the Ag House Committee did pass, I believe, on a unanimous vote. It was a voice vote. If there was a no

vote, we didn’t hear it, which is really revolutionary. We look forward to the Senate bill when it comes out and to negotiate with

them. Anybody who wants a copy of this, if we run out, Dick is

holding up some in his hand up there. Before you leave, grab a

copy and at least take a look at it. It is not perfect, but we were

able to get it passed on a voice vote. When you start looking at the

differences in agriculture around the country, that is a remarkable

thing.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Welcome, sir.

STATEMENT OF LARRY LARSON, SARGEANT, MINNESOTA

Mr. LARSON. Thank you, Senator Wellstone and Senator Dayton

and Congressman Gutknecht, for the opportunity to express our

views here this afternoon. I am Larry Larson from Sargeant, Minnesota. I also represent Mower County Farm Bureau. We farm in

Sargeant family farming with my brother, his two sons, my son,

and my wife. We are in livestock and corn and soybeans. We also

have a commercial grain and feed elevator. I spend most of my

time with the seed end of it since my son came into our business

and also do crop advising with my seed customers. I have about

100 seed customers that I work with each year and get a good opportunity to see and kind of understand how they are doing in

their farming operation. Not only that, how they are doing economically and what they do need. I do have quite a few young

farmers that are quite strong farmers in our community, although

39

the present farm program has given enough dollars to keep this

going, but one of the things that I fear happening is if they lower

the dollars on the commodity programs on these people that there

would be real difficulty in larger farms coming in and taking over.

At the present time it is just about holding its own. The only people I see dropping out in our area are those that are more of an

older age and part-time farmers, and it is just easier to rent out

as compared to that.

I would like to see those dollars keep coming in whatever form

you have to work at to do that. I also think more work needs to

be done in the area of conservation. That is really important. We

haven’t addressed that properly, and there is a lot more we could

do there. One other thing is basic research. More emphasis needs

to be put on basic research. My time is up, but dollars need to be

put there.

Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you for honoring the time limit. Thank

you.

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF RICK HANSEN, INVER GROVE HEIGHTS,

MINNESOTA

Mr. HANSEN. Thank you. Distinguished members of the committee, my name is Rick Hansen, and today I am speaking on behalf

of the Minnesota Association of Soil and Water Conservation District and also the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District. What I would like to say is that conservation is the key to

a broadly publicly supported farm bill. Farm policy needs to have

broad public support. Speaking here for the Minnesota Association

of Soil and Water Conservation directs, we represent 89 districts

with 455 local elected officials, urban, rural, and suburban soil and

water conservation district supervisors. We are here to offer a partnership working with NRCS conservation to implement conservation practices.

I would like to focus just on three general areas and then provide

written testimony for the committee. First we would like to maintain a voluntary incentive-driven approach to help private landowners and managers protect their soil, water, wildlife, and related

resources. Two, we would like to increase local leadership. That involves implementing the programs, setting priorities, developing

policies, and advocating natural resource conservation management. Third, we would like to correlate conservation program funding with implementation funding. Whether it is called technical assistance or implementation dollars, when the programs are there,

there needs to be that assistance to put the projects into the

ground. Often that may not be there when farm programs are developed.

Again, having thought implementation dollars, speaking on behalf of the Dakota County Soil and Water Conservation District, I

want to indicate that we support the Federal Farm Conservation

Security Act that was introduced by Senator Harkin, and that was

also supported by the urban region, area four, of the Minnesota Association of Soil and Water Conservation District, and I have the

resolution for that. Then finally I have the names and addresses

40

of 34 folks who signed a petition who couldn’t be here today to increase the Conservation Reserve Program from its current 36.4 million acres to 45 million acres. I would ask for your support for that.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you. We will submit that to the record,

Rick. Chairman Tom Harkin, that is his area, so you will be sure

he will support your bill. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hansen can be found in the appendix on page 118.]

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF RONALD BEHOUNEK, HAYFIELD, MINNESOTA

Mr. BEHOUNEK. My name is Ron Behounek. I farm in Dodge

County with an 18-year-old son and a 24-year-old son. They told

me I was wasting my time coming here, but I told them I am coming anyway.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you.

Mr. BEHOUNEK. The current Farm bills really aren’t saving the

family farmer, but boy, are we saving agribusiness. Monsanto,

John Deere, Pioneer, the whole lot. Are they going to talk about

conservation? I want to have some input on my own farm. I don’t

want somebody coming and telling me what I have to do and exactly do as they say. I want to be part of that decision.

The next thing, if you want my sons to farm, you are going to

have to close one big tax loophole, and that is using agriculture

land for tax shelters. That has driven up farmland like you

wouldn’t believe. I have seen it done. I have seen guys that get a

huge amount of money for a piece of land that they happen to own

up by the Cities, come down into southern Minnesota here, and pay

whatever they have to because they are going to save taxes. Every

real estate man hears about it, and it is all worth that.

The next thing is I am one of the lucky ones that has a 2-acre

patch of wetland. There are no frogs. There are no crawdads. There

is no water on it. It will raise corn. It is kind of a difficult place

to get to. It really raises ragweeds real nice. This 2 acres is causing

flooding for another 10 acres. The water that washes onto it, it

brings the ragweeds on it, so I have to use more chemicals to kill

them doggone things. Is that what the environmentalists want?

I guess that is all I have to say.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF MIKE MUELLER, WINTHROP, MINNESOTA

Mr. MUELLER. Senator Wellstone, Senator Dayton, and Representative Gutknecht, my name is Mike Mueller. I am from Winthrop, Minnesota. I am the ag loan officer in the State Bank of Gibbon. My wife and I are farmers and landowners in Sibley County.

We participate in the Conservation Reserve Program and have land

in the successful reinvested Minnesota and the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program. Thank you for this opportunity to appear here today to talk to you about the conservation title to the

2002 Farm bill.

I am a strong supporter of the Conservation and Wetland Reserve Program, and they should be reauthorized and expanded in

the next Farm bill. It has been my experience as a loan officer that

41

CRP helps the risk by cash-flow for farmers. Farmers and landowners that have a portion of their farm in the Conservation Reserve Program are simply better off on a cash-flow standpoint. We

all are rewarded from the environmental and wildlife benefits. In

my opinion, the recent changes in the CRP encourages farmers to

plan more diverse cover types that have strengthened the program

and have proven excellent wildlife habitat. In addition to the economics that will be provided by CRP payments, farmers and landowners can address serious water quality problems on a voluntary

incentive base approach to participating in the ongoing CRP buffer

initiative and Minnesota prep program.

Continuing these successful programs should be a top priority in

the next Farm bill conservation title. In my view, conservation programs provide valuable opportunity for family farmers. The ability

to diversify their farming operation through conservation programs

may allow them and future generations to continue the farm legacy.

I see I am out of time. Mr. Chairman, I work in a small ag bank

and in a small rural town, and in my experience conservation programs are one of the most successful agriculture programs. I would

encourage you to reauthorize and expand the programs like CRP

and WRP and to extend opportunity to incorporate these conservation-priced programs on all farms, specific CRP with the wetland

reserve program and the new farmer wetland 100,000-acres programs also.

Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Mueller can be found in the appendix on page 124.]

Senator DAYTON. Thank you, Mike, for speaking from a lending

perspective. That is very helpful. Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF BARBARA UPTON, FOUNTAIN, MINNESOTA

Ms. UPTON. I am Barbara Upton. I am a retired teacher. I live

on 40 acres in Fillmore County. I wrote a letter to the editor, and

I encourage all of you—you all have something important to say.

I hope you are writing to the editor. This is one that I wrote in

March of this year. ‘‘Please, please, Fillmore County residents, stop

and think before you open our area to developers and/or new residents on 10-acre wood lots.’’ Now, I am quoting a previous article

in the Fillmore County Journal. Now, in the year 2001 we have fertile land, plenty of woods, and relatively unpolluted air and water.

This will all change as rapidly as the population increases. Do we

want another suburb here in these very erodible hills? Water

should be the key to our decision. Whether it is either too much,

as in flooding—we have had 2 years in a row experiencing that—

or too little, which is drought. Pollution often takes years to detect,

sometimes only aftereffects, such as fish killed, are observed. Last

spring gave us an example of flood damage when the gravel roads

were washed out needing help from FEMA to pay for repairs.

Now, in late August 1964, I moved into this area, rural southwest Minnesota, from Riceland. I brought my belongings in a big

truck. There was no hay available here. The so-called corn was

about a foot high. It hadn’t rained all that summer. Wells were

42

going dry. Many springs dried up. Neighboring farms had water

hauled in from the Preston creamery using milk trucks for their

livestocks and themselves. Apparently the lowered water table

could not handle the needs of the population that lived here in

1964. What will happen with many more wells using the water?

Senator DAYTON. Thank you. You are able to submit that—if you

want to submit any additional comments for the record, please do.

Ms. UPTON. I do recommend this book, ‘‘Mad Cowboy.’’ This is

from Howard Lyman. He was sued, along with Oprah, for talking

about the potential for mad cow disease, and he is very much involved and hoping to save the family farm. He used to be a corporate beef producer. He is now venturing all over the world.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you, Barbara. Thank you very much.

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF DWIGHT AULT, AUSTIN, MINNESOTA

Mr. AULT. My name is Dwight Ault. I am from Austin. I have

farmed for 40 years, and I appreciate this opportunity. We need a

hell of a lot more dialog in this United States than we have, and

this allows some. I am in general livestock. I am partly organic, not

quite all this year, but anyway, mixed livestock and small crop

farmer. I have been quite sensitive toward the treatment that the

small farms have been given, and they have been talked about by

everybody, when Wendal Barry says the politicians talk about saving the family farm, but nobody does anything about it. These people we have here today are an exception. Pray God I hope you are,

and I wish you luck.

My biggest hang-up or my biggest gripe about the Federal program presently is the LDPs. If I offend somebody—and I probably

will—I don’t know why in tarnation heck we haven’t talked about

it. Because LDPs are the most unjust—and I should read my editorial because I had one in the Des Moines Register yesterday on

LDPs. They are the most asinine attempt for justice. I don’t know

why they were ever born. They play no part in helping the smaller

farmer. I don’t know why people haven’t griped about them before.

I suppose, like me, we get a little bit compared to a lot to the large

farmers or the corporate farms, but we don’t want to complain.

I am going to give—I see I am just about out of time and——

Senator DAYTON. If you want to submit your editorial for the

record——

Mr. AULT. Yeah, I will leave you the editorial. In conclusion, it

is time that we really take to heart where we are going in the

United States. I see Monsanto running the Midwest and running

the East along with Cargill, along with Pioneer and Dupont, and

when are we going to say enough is enough. I mean, we keep going,

and it is time that people raise hell if we don’t get some decent legislation. The monkey is on you three peoples’ back along with a lot

more of your compatriots. I really think that we are due.

Senator DAYTON. We will raise heck anyway. Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF LARRY GREEN, FULDA, MINNESOTA

Mr. GREEN. My name is Larry Green, Senator Wellstone, Senator

Dayton, and Representative Gutknecht. I would also like to thank

43

Mr. Peterson for bringing that famous picture here today. Because,

Senator Dayton, you asked for a solution in that picture. There is

a very big solution in that picture. A little over a year ago, we were

right close to that facility with President Clinton. That was sponsored by all the famous commodity groups that were going to save

us with PNTR with China. Today we get a nice little blow. They

canceled 13.2 million bushels of beans, stuck it in my pocket. This

year now all we are hearing is biodiesel, carbohydrates, and a

whole bunch of other crap. Your solution is very simple. We are down to about $80 billion in a farm bill. We pay in about $16 million a week, $14 to $16 million a week in checkoffs. The national defense budget runs around

$400 billion a year. You people should hire all these commodity

groups. Maybe they could get the national defense down to $200

billion, and we would have some more money around this country.

Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF ROBERT M. AUSTIN, NEW PRAGUE,

MINNESOTA

Mr. AUSTIN. Senators, Congressman, my name is Rob Austin. I

am from New Prague. I am a taxpayer, and what I would like to

see is I would like to see stopping the use of money for the overproduction of the corn and beans and start using this money for

conservation of soil and water and wildlife conservation. I also

would like to see—stop listening to the Soybean Growers Association and the Corn Growers Association—they seem to be the only

two that I see in the newspaper—and start listening to people who

are more in favor of the sustainable organic drink marketing type

of agriculture. The farmer, land stewardship project people, Minnesota Institute of Sustainable Agriculture, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, and the Minnesota project. Above all,

here’s the big one, the taxpayer. There hasn’t been any—we make

up 99 percent of the population, and we have had no input into this

thing.

I know I am being politically incorrect here, but I am a 61-yearold pissed-off taxpayer who is tired of not being able to have his

say in how this money is being spent in our farm program. I would

like to address this to the Senators today. I would like to see, for

no better choice of words, this farm road show—have one in the

Metro area. There should be two of them. There should be one in

the southern part of the Metro area and one in the northern part

of the Metro area. We have one here, 25, 30 miles from the Iowa

border. We need to have something that is more up in the Metro

area where the taxpayer can have his input into this thing, too.

Senator DAYTON. Paul suggested that, too, at the Worthington

hearing. That is an excellent suggestion. We are going to try and

put this together.

Mr. AUSTIN. You are going to do this thing?

Senator WELLSTONE. Absolutely. I will tell you something. This

is exactly the right place today, and it is great of the legion to let

us do it, but first of all, it is a healthy thing that you are a, quote,

63-year-old——

44

Mr. AUSTIN. Sixty-one. Don’t make it any worse.

Senator WELLSTONE. I just wanted to see if I could get you more

pissed off. 61-year-old. You look 31. How am I doing? I will tell you,

I am absolutely convinced—I wrote a note to Mike, and of all the

things I have heard today, I keep hearing conservation. I have

never been at more farm gatherings, Mark and Gil, in the last year

where I have heard more people talk about land stewardship and

more people talk about conservation and more people talk about

the whole question of credits including for doing good practice of

land in production above and beyond CRP. The religious community, Bishop, is going to be key to this. We have to have one of

these gatherings where we have farmers and rural people coming

from all over the State of Minnesota to Metro with total Metro

media focus on the whole—the direct connection between land

stewardship, conservation, decent price, real competition, the quality of food, the affordability of food. The key for this for people that

don’t live in the farm and rural areas, we have to bring them in.

we can, and we are definitely going to have a major, major committee hearing up there.

I just want to say that these articles that you work for the fellows, the ranch bothers down in Cannon Falls, to me that is what

agriculture is all about, and this is what direction we should be

going.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you.

STATEMENT OF ROGER DALE, HANLEY FALLS, MINNESOTA

Mr. DALE. Good afternoon, Senators Wellstone, Dayton, and Congressman Gutknecht. I am Roger Dale. My wife and I have a family farm in Yellow Medicine County. We farmers produce something everybody needs to survive on: wholesome food.

Minnesota is an ag State. I truly believe that policymaking has

made it to grass-roots level, and hopefully today things will get

done here. With the representation in the Ag Committee, we have

a golden opportunity if we can get our thoughts together. I would

like to thank you for the work you have done in the past and hopefully for what will be done in the future. I would like to thank you

for working for the Soybean Growers, ASA, for listening to them,

for the soybean loan rate. If it wasn’t for them, a lot of us wouldn’t

be here. Thank you, folks, for coming out today, and have a good

trip home.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you very much for coming over from Yellow Medicine County. Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF CHRIS C. PETERSEN, VICE PRESIDENT, IOWA

FARMERS UNION, CLEAR LAKE, IOWA

Mr. PETERSEN. Thank you. My name is Chris Peterson. I am vice

president of Iowa Farmers Union.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you for coming.

Mr. PETERSEN. Yeah, they keep letting me come across the border, so I will just keep coming.

We need to get away from a system here, a farm policy that

eliminates independent family farmers. This has been the trend for

years. I want to talk about a couple of points. One of them that

45

hasn’t been brought out today is campaign finance and lobby reform. As a bunch of us out here, we are tired of our family farms

being compromised away by political crop streaming. It is time to

quit this. We have the largest hostile takeover going on in the

world, and it is the corporate takeover of our Government, and we

need campaign finance reform now. We need the vote to count and

not the money. I will add that if we don’t get this changed, corporate greed will be the downfall in this democracy. Jerry told me

that on his way up here, and I believe it came from his heart.

Family farmers are a lonesome and separated bunch these days.

Our voice is not being heard. Farm Bureau and commodity groups

don’t represent us anymore. These are the people that endorse freedom of farms. They gave 80-cent hogs. They can’t even honor a

vote, the MPC, along with Veneman. They gave us cheap grain,

more concentrations, and a lot less family farmers and pork producers. We need a voluntary checkoff program. I will keep that

short. Let’s vote with our money.

Another thing I want to talk about quick is the Quick program.

We need that targeted to family farmers, the corporate animal factories. They can use the record profits to comply within the laws

of this nation and clean up their own messes. We need rural stability and growth along with ample supply of safe quality food raised

by the right people, and that is the family farm. Keep up the fight.

You guys are doing great.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you for joining us.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Petersen can be found in the appendix on page 127.]

STATEMENT OF WALT PRIGGE, BYRON, MINNESOTA

Mr. PRIGGE. Senators Wellstone, Dayton, Representative Gutknecht, ladies and gentlemen, my name is Walt Prigge from Byron,

Minnesota. I did not come here today to comment on the closed

farm bill. I rather came here to pose a question to our United

States Senators, that being: How do you reconcile your support for

agriculture on your shoulders here today with your lack of support

for infrastructure, capital infrastructure building that is obviously

needed for agriculture in rural Minnesota, i.e., the DM&E Railroad

and your lack of support for the infrastructure of the DM&E Railroad?

Senator DAYTON. Well, I don’t oppose the DM&E Railroad. It has

got to be structured so that, first of all, it hauls grain commodities

rather than coal from Western States through our heartland. Second, it has got to be structured in a way that it doesn’t get rammed

down the throat of—whether it is downtown Rochester, which is

the most important economic engine of Olmsted County, and certainly the Mayo Clinic and other operations there, and find some

alternative route that is not going to wreak that kind of hardship

on others. If you want to go up and watch the coal trains progress

through northern Minnesota and bypass communities and spew

coal dust and back up traffic and everything else, if you want to

invite that down here, I wouldn’t support that.

Senator WELLSTONE. We could go back and forth on this. I don’t

disagree. I don’t see anything in contradiction. It is interesting. I

met with the DM&E people and have tried to get some clear lanVerDate 11-MAY-2000 13:56 Mar 27, 2003 Jkt 085326 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 85326.TXT SAG1 PsN: SAG1
46

guage about their transportation of grain. I haven’t seen any clear

language and clear commitments that they are going to provide

that transportation.

I, second of all, think a whole lot of communities—and not just

Rochester—have every reason in the world to worry about where

they are going. Third of all, I will tell you something else. Part of

the case for DM&E—and this is just an honest disagreement we

have above and beyond the point you raised. I am glad you did it

because you had every right to. The other issue is part of this is

based upon the assumption that coal is a big part of our energy future. I see the big part of our energy future not more coal and more

acid rain and more warnings in manuals that we shouldn’t eat fish

if we are small children or women expecting children. I see more

of the future being ethanol, biodiesel, wind renewables. I am not

at all convinced that this is a great project for the country. That

is why I don’t support it.

Mr. PRIGGE. Just one further comment. Surface transportation

has to see that the operation of the public railroad is in the public

interest. Let’s not kill it.

Senator DAYTON. I am not proposing to kill it. I am proposing to

say, first of all, instead of bringing 30-, 40-unit coal trains a day

through downtown Rochester and other places, it would have a

devastating affect on the quality of life and the economy, which is

crucial to this region of the State. They have to find a routing design for it that is going to not only conform to common sense but

also to conform to the way in which these communities are now

structured. Rochester is too big and too important to be a railroad

way station for unit coal trains.

Unknown Speaker. Let’s face it; you are selling out the farmers

for the city of Rochester for their vote.

Senator DAYTON. I don’t have to face anybody’s vote for 5-1/2

years, so I just dictate to my conscience and what is best. It is hard

in these kinds of situations, but you make sure that these projects

serve the rural interests and the agriculture industry. You are not

being able to fill the bill of goods to bring unit coal trains from

Western States right through here and down to La Crosse. Make

sure you are talking about corn operations going through for Minnesota and soybean transport and not just unit coal trains. Whatever the project is.

Mr. GUTKNECHT. We have been debating this for 2 years; we are

not going to resolve it in 2 minutes. Thanks, Walt.

Mr. PRIGGE. One more point.

Senator DAYTON. Last one.

Mr. PRIGGE. Rochester also needs coal for its electrical generating plant. They use somewheres now between 600 and 900 cars of

coal a year, plus whatever we truck in, plus the energy that was

generated elsewhere by coal. That becomes viable lines for the city

of Rochester. Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you.

47

STATEMENT OF GARY JOACHIN, CLAREMONT, MINNESOTA,

AND ON BEHALF OF MINNESOTA SOYBEAN GROWERS

ASSOCIATION

Mr. JOACHIM. Good afternoon. I would like to thank Senator

Wellstone, Senator Dayton, and Representative Gutknecht for the

opportunity to be at this hearing. I am Gary Joachim, a soybean,

corn, and small independent hog farmer in Claremont, Minnesota,

where I farm with my wife. I am here today on behalf of myself

and also the Minnesota Soybean Growers Association. First, the

Soybean Association looks forward to providing input on the Farm

bill and which we have done in written testimony in the commodity

provisions. What I would like to do today is talk about energy and

biodiesel.

As a soybean farmer, I am extremely optimistic about the role

that plant-based annually renewable fuels like biodiesel will play

in the national energy plan. Of course, as we all know, biodiesel

is an environmentally friendly renewable alternative to petroleumbased diesel. It can be made from any vegetable oil, reprocessed

animal fats. Just for that reason it is very environmentally friendly.

Minnesota hopes to lead the way in the promotion of production

of the biodiesel. When our legislature in Minnesota reconvenes next

February, it is going to take up unfinished legislation that would

require the inclusion of 2 percent biodiesel and diesel fuel sold in

the State of Minnesota. On the national level, we strongly support

and appreciate the legislation introduced by Senator Dayton, and

that would encourage and prompt increased use of biodiesel fuels

nationally. We think that Senator Dayton’s bill will compliment

your State effort and positively influence the Minnesota Legislature to adopt the 2-percent mandate. I also want to thank and express appreciation to Senator Wellstone, Representative Gutknecht,

as well as basically the whole Minnesota Congressional contingent

for their commitment to biodiesel. We have a goal of getting more

of our energy from the Midwest and less from the Mideast. I don’t

think we are going to have to send the Navy and the Air Force out

to guard our fuel as it goes from Minnesota to California.

Fighting only decreases our soybean profitability. I don’t think

anyone in the U.S. Senate has done more than Senator Wellstone

did to promote soy-based ink and originally for Government printing. It is now the industry standard. Soybeans wouldn’t exist today

if it wasn’t for the investment farmers initially made in their

checkoff, and the same is true for biodiesel where soybean farmers

through their checkoff have invested millions of dollars.

Incidentally, the soybean checkoff boards are feeling the pinch of

these low soybean prices at least as much as the farmers because

their income is based on farm value before LDPs and any other

kind of payments.

Thank you for this opportunity.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Joachim can be found in the appendix on page 135.]

Senator DAYTON. Thank you, Gary.

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

48

STATEMENT OF DONOVAN STROM, FOUNTAIN, MINNESOTA

MR. STROM: Thank you for speaking here today. My name is

Donovan Strom, and I am from Fillmore County. People have

talked about a fish kill; I am involved in one right now. About a

year ago I got sweet corn from Seneca here out of Rochester, and

the juice went in the creek and killed three fish, and MPCA and

DNR said supposedly 650 minnows, which they don’t even know.

I have been threatened. I have been going through everything. I

have had my name strung through the nut on the Austin Press. I

mean, I don’t see anybody else going through this. I had to sell my

cattle in January in Lanesboro sales barn and on June 16th this

summer. I can’t blame them entirely, but when they come, it

doesn’t help you try to do a business. I had them living in my yard.

They were like a KGB, and I felt like I was in jail for 2 weeks. I

mean, we had to clean up these puddles and stuff. It wasn’t fun.

I don’t want to be polluting; I don’t think anybody else does. What

you go through with these people is terrible. They promise things

to you, and it doesn’t follow through. There is a deal going through

the works right now, and I don’t know if I believe them or not. You

got neighbors turning in neighbors, like with the Reiland deal and

myself. It is a very poor system. I mean, there are other people

that are doing the same things that we were doing, or I was doing.

They were going to expand. I got caught in the fish kill, which is

bogus.

I mean, I did have a problem. I want to get it resolved. That is

when you are a jerk and you are treated like a drug peddler or a

murderer. It is got to be better than this.

Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you.

STATEMENT OF BERT BOWMAN, EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA

Mr. BOWMAN. My name is Bert Bowman. I am pleased to be here

with you, Senator Wellstone and Senator Dayton and Representative Gutknecht. I was born and raised in Brazil. I have a Dutch

background. My grandparents was a farmer in the Netherlands but

not doing too well with the farm economy, moved to Brazil, and I

farmed—my grandfather farmed down there. My parents are still

farming down there. In 1995 my brother decided to join the farm,

and I didn’t feel too comfortable with the situation at that time. I

came to the States in the student program and met Mr. Peterson.

We are still working together. The point is I am a farmer. No matter if you are a farmer in Brazil or here, we all need to make a

profit. I wish for my parents to have a good price, and I wish for

myself here with Mr. Peterson to have a good price. We are all here

for profitability. How to do that?

I am a new farmer. I hope to be a farmer and farming with LDP.

It is a wonderful thing right now, but I don’t wish to live on LDP

the rest of my life. The price of those soybeans can still go down.

How strong is the Government to keep pumping up money? How

much can they give? Should they give my grain to Cargill and go

to the Government and get all the money I need to survive? I don’t

feel comfortable. We need two things. Production management.

How can we do it? I don’t know if it is possible. I believe in production management, and we need to do so. To do so, we need cooperaVerDate 11-MAY-2000 13:56 Mar 27, 2003 Jkt 085326 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 85326.TXT SAG1 PsN: SAG1
49

tion with other countries. Brazil is promising already a 10- to 20-

percent increase in soybeans. That is going to drive our price lower,

and as well, how are we going to be able to have less production

management without their cooperation? Cooperation is throughout

the whole idea.

We have to be aware of the destruction of competition. We need

to worry about how much more land is opening in Brazil and other

countries. They are destroying my dad in Brazil itself and here,

too. Thank you for being here and listening to all of us.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you very much. A Brazilian farmer with

Dutch heritage here in Stewartville. It is a one-world economy.

Thank you.

STATEMENT OF BRUCE BIEDERMAN, GRAFTON, IOWA

Mr. BIEDERMAN. I am Bruce Biederman from Grafton, Iowa. I

have what they call a zero-cost farm program. It is a zero-cost production loan program for all storable commodities. Basically I

would have no specific program crops. Everything would be a program crop. Cotton, wheat, corn, whatever. I have been conferring

with Dr. Neil Harlo down in Iowa State on this over the past year,

and also Friday night I got a hold of former Secretary of Agriculture Bob Birkland, and I kind of model it a little bit after how

he started it, and I tried to kind of fill in the problems that he had

with it. The main thing different is that I would have no LDP; it

would all be loan. After the first 9 months when the loan came due,

the product would be—if it was not at or about loan rate, would

be put into a reserve. The reserve would be used to regulate how

much production would be encouraged the next year.

I call it support and not subsidy, and I would support up to a

certain-size farming operation, and then after you get so much

under loan or in the reserve, you would be on your own, or you

would not be supported anymore. You could switch crops. That is

the main thing I want to try to do, is make every crop equally profitable so no matter what you do, you can either set aside and buildup your land or pick another crop, which would, of course, mean

investment. That is the summation of what I have to say.

Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you. You have to submit a copy to me.

Senator WELLSTONE. You Iowa folks are smarter than I thought

you would be. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF TIM HENNING, LISMORE, MINNESOTA

Mr. HENNING. Senators, Congressman, my name is Tim Henning.

I am from Lismore, Minnesota. I have been farming for 26 years.

I have been through GATT, I have been through NAFTA, and now

I am going through the WTO. Every time one comes up, I get

screwed. Right now NAFTA is going on. I feed cattle. My cattle

buyer came out, and he says, ‘‘We are not going to be bidding for

your cattle now because we can get Canadian cattle.’’ He says,

‘‘Have heart. In about 30 days we will have the Canadian cattle

slaughtered, and we will be in the market for yours.’’

Today the Chinese told us to take our beans. We don’t want

them. Before the meeting I called home; soybeans are down 16

cents. They announced that they will have 3 million metric tons of

50

corn to go on the market. Corn is down 5 cents. My wife and my

mother work off-the-farm jobs. What I lost on my 15,000 bushels

of beans and my 30,000 bushels of corn today I have to go home

and tell my wife that she has to work the next 400 hours for nothing. Please take that into consideration the next time you make a

foreign trade deal.

Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you. Powerful statement. Thank you.

STATEMENT OF LAWRENCE M. PREDMORE, ROCHESTER,

MINNESOTA

Mr. PREDMORE. My name is Larry Predmore. I am not representing anybody. I came to listen. I raise beef cattle, and I am a largeanimal veterinarian. When I started 20-some years ago, if I would

have been at this meeting all afternoon, I would have had a lot of

upset plans because I wasn’t out there doing something. Nowadays—I got three or four calls I am going to have to do after this

meeting, but they are all going to be hobby farmers. I am going to

go over there after they got done working in town. They are supporting their hobbies by having jobs in town. I am not smart

enough to know what the answer is, but I know if I was trying to

make a living on the land we were farming, I would be a lot skinnier than I am. The vet business pays for my farming habit. My

wife has a good job in town, so we are doing OK. It is not from

farming. I am farming about 10 times what my grandfather used

to farm, and I am a hobby farmer. I don’t know what the answer

is, you are going to have to go away from spending all your money

on corn and beans and trying to figure out a way of getting some

of this land out of production and get it into hay and into pasture,

or whatever, and kind of cut down a lot on your erosion. One of

my client’s big worries and that is tangling with the Pollution Control Agency and other Government agency. We spend more time

worrying about that than any of our other projects.

That is basically what I have to say except I live in a little town

south of here, and we have been there since 1853. When the railroad came through Rochester, we were all upset out there because

it went that way instead of coming our way. Now they are mad because they want to improve it through town, and they want to

shoot it out our direction. Again, one or the other would be fine,

but I personally don’t think that it is going to destroy Rochester if

that train goes through right where it is been setting.

Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you, Larry.

Senator DAYTON. Amber’s father.

STATEMENT OF BRIAN HANSON, RACINE, MINNESOTA

Mr. HANSON. That is right. My name is Brian Hanson. I farm 10

miles south of here, and I am Amber’s proud father; that is correct.

I am here to talk about biodiesel. As you have heard today, there

are concerns in rural America, and as Senator Scheevel mentioned,

we need to create opportunities. We can’t just address all the concerns and think backward on some things. We need to be proactive

and create opportunities for all of us, just as Mr. Scheevel said.

51

One of these opportunities is definitely biodiesel. You have heard

my daughter and others talk about biodiesel today, and I wanted

to bring it to my personal experience on the farm with it. For 2

years now I have been blending biodiesel myself. Contrary to what

I was told, it is not going to work. I get methosoy in barrels, so

my economy scale is not very good right now, but I have been

through 3,300 gallons of pure methosoy, which is the technical

name, and I have been blending that with diesel on my farm and

neighbors’ farms and getting the word out. As they said, it isn’t

going to work in the winter. My tractors wouldn’t run. Well, I

plowed snow all winter with it, and I haven’t had a problem yet

if I take normal precautions. It is not easy to blend. That is true.

It is very difficult. I have to pour it in the top of my fuel tank. That

is pretty difficult. It is truly that simple. Energy balance. You

heard mention of ratios earlier today of like 1.34. Biodiesel has an

energy balance of 3.24 to 1. I would challenge any fuel to meet

that. Maybe they can, but it is very good energy balance.

My neighbors want to be a part of that to create a market so that

we don’t export all this oil or beans or do something with it. It is

simple, and it is common sense. I like simple. We need to be

proactive. There is frustration. We are 2 percent of the population.

We fight amongst ourselves, but we need—this is one step. I can’t

cross this room in one step. I have to take steps, go around chairs,

or whatever. That is one step to the answer of cleaner air. I would

like to thank especially you, Senator Dayton, for your legislation to

promote biodiesel, and I would like to offer you my assistance in

any way we can to help you reach the goal of getting biodiesel,

even if you come to my farm and see that my tractors do run.

Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you very much, Brian. I mean what I

said. You and Amber can come out and testify, and you can show

the members of the committee how to mix the stuff. That would be

great. Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF BILL McMILLIN, DAIRY FARMER, KELLOGG,

MINNESOTA

Mr. MCMILLIN. Thank you, Senators and Congressman, for this

opportunity. My name is Bill McMillin, and I am a dairy farmer

with my wife near Kellogg, Minnesota, near the Mississippi River.

I would like to give to you for the record a copy of Present Day Agriculture in Southern Minnesota. It was written by Geils Randall.

He is a soil scientist and professor at the University of Minnesota.

He does an excellent job of identifying the issues facing agriculture

today here in southern Minnesota.

I was going to spend a lot of my presentation on conservation,

but it is been pretty well covered, so I will move on to something

else. Adequate farm income continues to be a major issue. Now,

lately I have been involved in a grass-roots effort to try and bring

collective bargaining into the marketplace. We have been trying to

organize farmers, all the farm groups and farmers themselves, into

looking at what options we have as far as collective bargaining in

the marketplace.

52

It seems as producers we are the first owner of the product, and

we have the right to price it, and we haven’t been exercising that

right. That is something we need to start doing. If that doesn’t

work, I would like to see a cap put on commodity payments in the

next Farm bill. I would like to see this cap probably in the $50,000

to $75,000 range. Maybe if we put this cap on, maybe we can free

up some more money for conservation practices which are badly

needed.

I am in favor of globalization if globalization means that we

could work together as a global community to provide a safe and

abundant food supply for everyone and at the same time protect

our resources for future generations.

Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Mr. McMillin can be found in the appendix on page 140.]

Senator DAYTON. Well said.

Senator DAYTON. Welcome.

STATEMENT OF AL SCHACHT, ZUMBRO FALLS, MINNESOTA

Mr. SCHACHT. Senator Dayton, Senator Wellstone, and Representative Gutknecht, my name is Al Schacht and I live in Hammond, Minnesota, not too far from here. I recently retired—I

shouldn’t say recently—7 years ago from the U.S. Forest Service.

I am interested in talking a little bit about the conservation programs that are in the Farm bill. In 1985 and 1986, when the first

Farm bill was written, it reauthorized and did away with a lot of

the authorities and forced them and put them in the Farm bill.

Those authorizations are extremely important that we continue

them, and some of those are in the Farm Security Act but for stewardship came in a little later—in the 1990’s. The stewardship incentive programs, and forestry incentive programs, which is a fifth

and sixth programs, they were in there. The forest legacy program.

The German forestry program which I chaired the committee that

wrote that in 1968, and also for the stewardship program, I was

very instrumental in writing that and working with Congress to

get the authority put together.

The Farm bill of those conservation programs are working quite

well, most of them. If they are working, don’t throw them out with

the bath water. We need to continue them. We need to enhance

them. We need to add a little bit of authorizing funding authority

to them so that when the Appropriations Committees deal with

them, they do deal.

I have two concerns that I want to bring up real quickly. One is

on CRP. Its acres are expiring. Some expire, and then the re-authorization needs to take that up to 45 million. I would suggest 50

percent of it be put in trees. We have very good reason to do that

because it doesn’t come out of trees when it pulls out.

The other thing is I would like to see a stronger role with conservation districts in the Farm bill.

One quick comment on the House bill. It is silent to some of the

programs that I just mentioned. They need to be included and the

authorization needs to be upped considerably.

Senator DAYTON. Al, time is up.

53

Mr. SCHACHT. One point. I noticed in the House bill, you have

fire, a community fire program. That is good, Representative Gutknecht. I hope the Senate includes that. When I retired from the

foresters, I worked directly with the chief of the Forest Service and

was in charge of fire for the county. I hope you all can sympathize

with what is happening in the West right now.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Schacht can be found in the appendix on page 141.]

Senator DAYTON. Thank you, sir.

Senator DAYTON. You get an award for patience here. You are

the last witness. Thank you.

STATEMENT OF ROD NELSON, CHATFIELD, MINNESOTA

Mr. NELSON. My name is Rod Nelson. I am a family farmer. I

live approximately 10 miles east of here, and I represent America.

We need to keep our family farmers. As we look back, one of the

things that I am afraid is going to happen is that we are just going

to end up with kind of an extension of the old freedom-to-farm program. We are going to get 10 years of this, do a little bit of tweaking, throw a little conservation in there, and then we are going to

have 10 more years. That just isn’t working. Anybody that can look

at freedom to farm and say it has been successful, I just don’t know

where they are coming from. It is the most costly farm program in

history by $10 billion, and yet we have the lowest prices that—well

below the cost of production. I don’t see where the success is in this

program. We need to—there is no other business in the world that

runs a business without some kind of a supply management program.

If General Motors has got cars backed up the wazoo, they don’t

keep making more cars. They shut down for 2 weeks. If John Deere

has factories backed up, they don’t make more tractors. They shut

down. The gentleman from Brazil, he had a good point. We are in

a global marketplace. I know there are a lot of you that say, ‘‘Well,

supply management won’t work.’’ Maybe we have to look at this

from a world perspective. Maybe we have to try to join together

with other major exporters of the world to maybe do something

with this supply.

I see I got 30 seconds. I got a son that is 16 years old, and he

is just the best son a father could have. He is a straight A student,

excellent athlete, and he loves to work with his dad on the farm.

I got to the point where I am not sure that I want to encourage

him to farm anymore. He can do anything and make a much better

living even though the farm life is probably the ideal life in America. We need to make some changes. We need to rewrite this farm

program. We need to get some prices. I thank you for listening to

us. This is grass-roots politics at its best.

Thank you.

Senator DAYTON. Thank you very much. I would like to give time

for some brief concluding remarks. We will go to Senator

Wellstone.

Senator WELLSTONE. I apologize. I am going to speak briefly and

then leave. I want to—somebody I see in the back of the room.

Thank you, Catholic Rural Life. Thank you for being here as well

and for all of your work. Archie Bauman is here. I couldn’t get him

54

to speak, but I want to thank Archie Bauman for years and years

of speaking out for family farmers. Archie, stand up. We are talking about a great, popular man.

I would like to thank my colleagues for being here, Senator Dayton, Congressman Gutknecht. I would like to thank all of you for

being here. I would like to say that I absolutely agree with the last

point that was made, and we all express our own opinion. I have

always believed that freedom to farm is freedom to fail. I want a

new farm bill. I want the focus to be on producers having a leverage to get a price in the marketplace. I don’t want us to continue

to rely on the Government payments. I have heard a lot about conservation. Southeast Minnesota has been the hotbed of land stewardship in Minnesota. I would like to thank so many of you for

leading the way. You have had a prophetic voice—the Bishop was

here earlier—in that 1996 statement. The Catholic Bishop talked

about how we are all strangers, but strangers and guests on this

land, and we should leave it better. That is the direction that we

are heading in.

Finally, I just would like to say to you, I heard it earlier about

the importance. It doesn’t matter what it is, whether it is dairy or

whether we are talking about corn growers or wheat or whether we

are talking about livestock. There has to be a strong—above and

beyond the conservation, above and beyond a loan rate or leverage

for farmers to get a decent price, there has to be some strong antitrust action. There has to be some competition. We have to go after

the conglomerates. I wished I could guarantee success, but the only

thing I can say—I am speaking for myself. Senator Dayton is giving me a chance to finish up. I can certainly say one thing. Somebody used it earlier. I certainly will fight with all of my might with

every way I know how to make sure that this farm bill on the Senate side is as strong a piece of legislation as it can be. Many of us

have been through it before. It has been going on. We can’t afford

another shakeout of family farmers. Then we won’t have any left.

This is the time to do it. We will just give it everything we have.

We are going to need a lot of you all. Before it is all over, I am

hoping that around the country there are going to be a lot of huge

gatherings in a lot of States putting pressure on all reps, all Senators, Democrats, Republicans, and others to be there for Midwest

agriculture. To be there for family farmers, to give us a fair price,

to have the land stewardship, to have the real competition, to have

an energy policy that makes sense for our country. We can do it.

We are just going to have to fight like hell for it.

Thank you, everyone.

Senator DAYTON. Congressman Gutknecht.

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Listen, again, I want to thank the two Senators

for hosting this, particularly you, Senator Dayton. It is always

tough to follow Senator Wellstone because he does a great job of

firing up the crowd. We are going to have some differences as we

try to work this out between the House and the Senate, and there

are going to be differences over how we go on the conservation titles. There are going to be differences whether we are just going

to have a loan rate program in terms of commodity support programs, or we are going to go to the three-piece suit that we have

proposed in the House.

55

I hope you all understand that there are a couple of really important facts as we deal with this at the Federal level. The first is it

takes 218 votes in the House; the second is it takes 51 votes in the

Senate; and, finally, we need a Presidential signature before anything can change. Just listening today, I am sure all of you realize

that while there are some levels of agreements, there are certainly

strong disagreements on some of the things that are going to happen. There is not an absolute consensus among farmers. It is more

than just railroads that we sometimes disagree about. In order to

have any kind of farm policy at all, there are going to have to be

some accommodations.

We are certainly willing to work with the Senate, and I am delighted that we were able, at least on the House side, to work on

very bipartisan basis. Because the future of agriculture is not a Republican issue. It is not a matter of right versus left. It is really

right versus wrong. We really have seen in the past couple years

a breakdown in world markets. When you have overproduction for

4 consecutive years, I really don’t know what we could have done

in terms of farm policy that would have prevented that. We do

share one thing in common, and that is that the future of agriculture is incredibly important to the economy of southeastern Minnesota and, as you have heard today, to the soul of the people of

this country. Because there is something about farmers that are

very special. I hope we never lose it. We will do our best at the

Federal level to try and keep that flame, that flickering flame, of

hope alive in American farmers’ hearts so that next year perhaps

can be a little better than this one.

Thank you so much.

Senator DAYTON. I want to thank Paul and Gil for being part of

this. I want to thank all of you for being here. Thank you for our

patience. I have now been 7 months on the Senate Agriculture

Committee as the Senator, and I had great admiration for farmers

before I joined the committee, and now I must say I am in awe.

I have never seen an array of such complicated, interrelated, interwoven programs that you all have to contend with every day and

every year of your life. Some of these universities that give degrees

for the experience, life experience and so forth. If that were the

case with agriculture, every farmer with 10 years of success or

even survival would have to get a Ph.D. in Government programs

and a master’s degree in applied economics and a bachelor’s degree

in meteorology. Then every year you are asked to take the kind of

financial risks that investment advisors and stockbrokers take, and

for all that you get paid less than minimum wage. I mean, it is just

unbelievable to me how involved all of this stuff is.

Having said that, that is where we are. I am humbled by the fact

that for 60 years, people smarter than I am, more experienced than

I am from both the political parties and all political persuasions,

have tried to get these programs right with good intentions, and

here we are today.

This kind of input, a hearing like this for 3 hours, shows, first

of all, the real expertise with people like yourselves who are the

farmers and producers and those involved. Second, that there are

a lot of outstanding ideas. I hope we can synthesize all that and

work together with the House and come up with something that is

56

going to deal especially with getting prices in the marketplace to

levels where farmers can make a good profit in the marketplace,

which, coming from a business family, I know, is what any businessman or woman needs to survive. Somebody said to benefit the

taxpayers, whatever the shortcomings of the previous programs, we

have to get back to a market-based agricultural economy for this

country and turn you loose to produce as efficiently as anyone in

the world. I look forward to working with you and Gil and Paul as

well.

Thank you very, very much, and we will conclude the hearing.

Thank you. Have a good day.

[Whereupon, at 4:20 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]

(57)

A P P E N D I X

AUGUST 20, 2001

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

(147)

DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

AUGUST 20, 2001

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

180

181

182

183

184

185

186

187

188

189

Æ