Date: 1981-05-04
Speaker: BE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I thank the gentleman from California. and I also would like to commend him. as a member of the Agriculture Committee. for expressing his concern to the members of that committee as to the thing that we are doing today as we are marking up farm legislation and the possibility that what we do may have to beor will beimpacted. whichever route we take here. Mr. Chairman. the day of decision on the first concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 1982 fast approaches. It seems to me that nothing is more Important to the decision of each Member than an understanding of the impact of each of the two major proposalsthe Budget Committee resolution and the socalled Latta substitute. I want you to be aware. therefore. of the effect that each of these proposals would have on the programs within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Agriculture. which I am privileged to chair. We must keep In mind. as we consider these matters. that while the approach differs. each of the proposals contemplates a reconciliation process which will make binding the figures contained In whichever budget resolution we adlopt. Under either proposal. the result on agriculatural programs will be direct and substantial. The Budget Committee resolution would direct the Agriculture Committee to report legislation saving $48 million in budget authority and $374 million In outlays for fiscal year 1982. The Budget Committee recommends that the savings In budget authority be accomplishied by legislation imposIng fees upon the users of grain. cotton. tobacco. and warehouse inspection services which have heretofore been furnished by the Department of Agriculture through appropriated funds. The Budget Committee recommends that the savings In outlays be accomplished by legislation Imposing user fees. as discussed above. $48 million. elinminating a waiver of interest for the first year on loans on grain In the producer owned reserve. $165 million-. eliminating the emergency feed and the farm storage facility !oan programs. $160 million. and eliminating Interest subsidies on certain loans of the Farmers Home Administration. $1 million. While the Agriculture Committee could achieve the directives prescribed by the Budget Committee through reductions in other programs. it is obvious that the reconciliation process would have a serious effect upon agricultural programs and producers. It should be noted that. earlier this year. the Committee on Agriculture reported out and the Congress adopted legislation repealing a scheduled April Increase in the dairy price support level which resulted in savings estimated by the Congressional Budget Office to be $160 million In fiscal year 1981. and $88 million in fiscal year The Latta substitute would direct the Agriculture Committee to report savings of a much greater magnitude for fiscal year 1982. namely. a total of $2.181 billion in spending and appropriation authority and $2.487 billion In outlays. As has been explained. the approach of the Latta substitute on reconciliation. Is different from that in the Budget Committee resolution In that Latta mandates reductions In authorizations as well as in entitlements. reductions not merely for fiscal year 1982 but for out years. It mandates changes In permanent legislation. usurping the authority of the authorizing committees. We believe that any reductions of this nature should be. accomplished through the appropriation process and not through a reconciliation process which effectively ousts the authorizing committees from their proper role. The Latta substitute furnishes no guidance with respect to Its directives. However. assuming that it reflects proposals which have been made by the administration. we believe that It must contemplate legislative action affecting the following programs. The Latta substitute would require reductions In spending authority of $255 million and in related outlays of $709 million in fiscal year 1982. Since. as we understand the term. direct spending programs within the authority of the Agriculture Committee are those carried out through the Commodity Credit Corporation. the only savings in this area which we are able to Identify would be reductions In restoration of the borrowing authority of the Corporation which would result in reductions in the amount of borrowing authority available with which to carry out the Corporations programs. Achievement of savings of this nature for fiscal year 1982 would. In ouropinIon. require legislation reducing the levels of price support for a number of crops. Including wheat and feed grains. which have already been announced by the Secretary of Agriculuture and upon which the farmers of America have relied In conducting their 1981 production operations. Much of these crops Would not come under the prograin until fiscal year 1982. The reduction In outlays could be achieved by action such as reduction In dairy price supports to a level somewhere between 65 and 68 percent of paritywith savings estimates ranging from $286 to $743 millionand legislation terminating the emergency feed program. $60 million. The Latta substitute also contemplates action to achieve savings in budget authority of $1.926 billion and in related outlays of $1.778 billion. These figures relate primarily. ais we understand it. to the food stamp program. Savings of $1.8 billion in budget authority and a somewhat similar amount of outlays would result from primarily legislative and some administrative program changes proposed by the administration. The food stamp bill expires September 30. 1981. Our committee now has under consideration as part of the farm bill. extension of the food stamp program. The subcommittee has reported a bill to the full committee with proposals which would make considerable savings in the program. The Latta proposal goes beyond that and would make additional changes that would fall heavily on the needy. The balance In reduction in both budget authority and outlays would have to be found In ch anges in other programs wiithin the committees Jurisdiction. such as Imposition of user fees and cutbacks in other USDA programs which operate with appropriated funds. It Is obvious that the Latta substitute would impact much more sharply than would the Budget Committee resolution on American agriculture. as well as upon lowincome households in need of food assistance. I must also point out that. to the extent the proposals under consideration apply to binding figures for the out years. our committee forecasts an acute problem. It Is extremely difficult for the committee to make meaningful and accurate estimates of the fiscal needs of agricultural programs within its Jurisdiction even with respect to the current or the forthcoming fiscal year. The same is true with respect to the food stamp program. inasmuch as program cost is heavily affected by factors not susceptible to accurate longrange estimation. such as the rate of unemployment and the rate of inflation as reflected In the cost of food. It is. In short. literally Impossible for the committee to make meaningful estimates for these programs with respect to the out years. A process which would Impose ceilings or limitations for the out years upon these programs could have disastrous results. It could well make it impossible for the committee to provide for the kinds of programs which are essentilW to insure a healthy and productive agricultural sector capable of supplying the food and fiber needs not only of this Nation but of much of the world.