Date: 1985-12-18
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

and the ranking minority member. Mr. MADIGAN. in insisting that a farm bill must be completed and acted upon before adjournment. Even the dairy provisiofis. which I strongly opposed when the House considered the bill. are now improved. Gone is the mandatory diversion program which would have paid farmers for not producing milk. Gone is the costofproduction formula which would have pushed up milk support prices and further encouraged production. The wholeherd buyout provisions. which I initially opposed. now seem to offer the best opportunity to make an immediateand economicalimpact on the soaring increases in mik production. Support price cuts alone would have taken too long to achieve the results we must have. The combinationwholeherd buy out for a limited period of time coupled with scheduled decreases in the support price as long as there are immense surplusesis an acceptable plan. It starts us in the right direction. It is budget responsive. It provides the longterm policy statement our dairymen need and deserve. I do continue to have some reservations. however. I was surprised arid disappointed to learn that the conference recommended discretionary authority for the Secretary of Agriculture to impose a diversion program or extend the wholeherd buyout if the initial 18month buyout does not achieve the necessary decrease in production. It is imperative that the initial 18month buyout achieve its goalsthe reduction of our national dairy herd by an estimated 935.000 cows and a reasonable balance between milk production and consumption. If we achieve that balance. the reduction of price supports established in the bill will be adequate to maintain an equilibrium. The Agriculture Committee must monitor the buyout closely to be sure it achieves the necessary reductions and be prepared to take corrective legislative action if it does not. Neither another diversion program nor an extension of the wholeherd buyout will be a satisfactory response if this experiment fails. It must be a onetime action. it must get the surplus down to about 5 billion pounds. We can accept no other answer. I also am disappointed that an assessment will be imposed on all dairy farmers. I had hoped it would not be necessary. but I now recognize that the fiscal realities of meeting a budget target mandate the assessment. Another note of caution. however. The initial 40cent assessment. followed by a 25cent assessment. may not be sufficient to pay for the buyout that will be needed. Careful scrutiny of the costs and revenue of the program will be required of the Agriculture Committee. Retaining the legislated class I differentials is unfortunate. Some States will benefit. others may be penalized. Assuming legislative control of the differentials was politically inspired. and the levels set do not necessarily relate to the actual cost of transporting and handling of milk. I fear that regional imbalances may result because of this action and ask that the Agriculture Committee be prepared to offer a prompt remedy before the imbalances severely impair regional milk production. Although the dairy title is not perfect. it is an acceptable improvement. and one of many parts of H.R. 2100 now worthy of our support. I strongly support the emphasis on conservation that is included in the bill. The recent floods in western Virginia. invading the full length of the congressional district I represent. impresses even further the need for scrupulous care of the soil. We can no longer ignore the damageand the potential tragedyof the abuse of our resources. H.R. 2100 goes a long way in enforcing the necessary stewardship of our farmland. I also joined in the effort by the gentleman from Texas and others in removing the double standard that has been in effect for buyers of farm products. The inclusion of clear title provisions in the farm bill is a necessary improvement in agricultural business transactions. The bill continues to recognize the wisdom of investment in research. it continues support of our landgrant colleges. It boosts our commitment to both domestic and international nutrition programs. It provides the goundwork for an improvement in tradea vital issue if our immensely productive and efficient farm community is going to regain its role as an active exporter of quality food and fiber. Just as importantly. H.R. 2100 recognizes. the necessity that any farm bill we pass must be sensitive to the overall economy of this country. We are trying to control the deficit. We simply cannot afford to provide all of the income support needed to guarantee the profitability of every farmer. H.R. 2100 offers the assurance of a reasonable. marketoriented floor under farm prices. It is a healthy. feasible. economical plan. Unless we subdue the raging deficits. no farm policy can by itself be the salvation of American agriculture. Mr. Speaker. the work. of the last year has been intense. The House Agriculture Committee labored over. this bill. we debated. we discussed. we may even have argued at times. But each of us wanted the best possible longterm policy for our countrys farmers. The conference report on H.R. 2100 Is the best effort for these times. I urge my colleagues support.