Date: 1982-08-17
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of the conference report on the bill. H.R. 6955. We are informed that the cuts that we made for the next 3 years are estimated by CBO to total $7 billion. Mr. Speaker. These cuts add up to $3.7 bilion more than the $3.29 billion in cuts allocated to the Committee on Agriculture by the first concurrent budget resolution. The amendments to the commodity programs attack the two principal problems affecting our depressed farm economy. a surplus of dairy products and a surplus of grains. I want to express my appreciation to all of the members of the conference. the Budget Committee members. the members of my committee. and the subcommittee chairmen who worked with me. the chairman of the Senate conference. Senator HELms. and his counterpart. the ranking minority member . Senator HUDDLESTON. H.R. 6955 passed the House just a week ago and the conference began last Thursday. Because of the assiduous work of the conferees and their willingness to compromise on a number of controversial issues. we were able to complete our work early yesterday. Mr. Speaker. let me say that in the dairy area we reached a compromise which keeps the parity price concept as was requested by the industry. It keeps the level of price support at 13.10 percent for the first 2 years and then adjusts the level for the third year to a level that represents the per* centage of parity represented by $13.10 percent. as of October 1. 1984. Then it has provisions whereby the Government can recoup a portion of the cost of the price support program. This is not. in my estimation. or in the estimation of any member of out committee. the perfect solution. But it is the one that we could arrive at at this time. We think that it will afford some reduction. hopefully as much as is needed. to bring us to an even keel in the dairy area. In wheat. in cotton. and rice may I say that that a compromise was reached under which incentives are provided to producers to reduce production. Mr. Speaker. let me say no one is satisfied and. probably this is what I would like to emphasize to my colleagues. that no one. including myself. is satisfied with the provisions of the agricultural conference. But yet. dealing with the art of the possible. this is the only thing that we could arrive at that could achieve a consensus and pass the conference. The important thing is that our directive was to reduce expenditures. Let me remind you that the conference report cuts $2.42 billion more over 3 years than H.R. 6892 as originally reported by the committee. This is what we did in the conference. Last year the committee cut $11.624 billion from the deficit. $5 billion for food stamps alone. The committee has cut .a total of $18.640 billion. $18.640 billion in the last two reconciliation bills. more than almost any other committee. I might add. At the same time we revised the structure of the program so that we -can give some degree of assistance to dairy. to wheat and feed grains. to cotton and rice. in a period when they are having a very difficult time. The most important thing. though. is that every time that we speak with any of the producers. interest rates and inflation are what impact them more than anything else. according to what they tell us. This is our contribution. hopefully. to reduce inflation more and to reduce the deficit. and hopefully ieduce interest rates for the benefit of all of society. including the producers. I say that this is a compromise. As all compromises are. it is not satisfactory to many of us. Some of the things in here could conceivably even be wrong. But as a package it is balanced. Let me say to all of my colleagues. especially those from the affected areas. that I more than anyone else want to give the producer everything he asks for. That. however. is not possible. There are some who would hold out still for 90 percent of parity. That is not in the books at this time. There are those who still would hold out for higher target prices or higher loan prices. That just is not in the books and I would hope that you would support this compromise because it is the best thing that we can bring you. With all of the pain and tears and suffering that go. into a conference committee it is the best thing that we could bring before the House and the other body. Your vote would be supportive of those of us who tried to help the pro-.ducer. to help the general economy under the art of the possible. If there is any secret to legislation it is the art of the possible. I do not want to be knocking my head into a wall and telling the folks at home that I worked hard for them but I did not get them anything. That is not my way of working. I think you can vote for this legislation. Then you can tell your constituents how you ashisted them. maybe not as much as they needed or wanted. but under the art of the possible this bill was the ultimate that you could do. I would hope that my colleagues would support the overall reconciliation bill. At this Juncture. I would like to summarize for the Members the provisions relating to food and agriculture contained in the conference report. DAIRY The price support level for manufacturinggrade milk. which is used for making cheese. butter. and similar products. would be continued at the current level of $13.10 per hundred pounds for the 1983 and 1984 fiscal years. ending September 30. 1984. For fiscal year 1985. beginning October 1. 1984. the support would be set at the percentage of pirity which $13.10 represented on October 1. 1983. In order to further encourage reduction of the dairy surplus. the Secretary of Agriculture would be authorized. beginning October 1. 1982. though September 30. 1985. to provide for a deduction of 50 cents per hundred pounds from the proceeds of all milk sold by farmers. with the funds paid to the USDA to offset the cost of the dairy support program. Authority for the deduction would be suspended. however. when projected annual Government surplus purchases for the fiscal year fall below 5 billion pounds milk equivalent. Further. the Secretary would be authorized to provide for an additional 50 cent assessment. beginning April 1. 1983. if projected Government surplus purchases are above 7.5 billion pounds (but this second assessment would be suspefided whenever projected purchases fall below 7.5 billion pounds). If this second assessment is levied. however. the Secretary must also provide a system under which individual farmers can get refundsthus escaping part or all of the additional assessmentif they reduce commercial marketings. (In removing either of the assessments. the Secretary could act at any time during a fiscal year that projections of surpluses fall below the trigger levels.) The compromise bill eliminates a House proposal for a referendum among farmers on a checkoff to be used to finance milk promotion. and also eliminates a Houseproposed Dairy Board which would have administered price supports and surplus disposal.