[Senate Hearing 117-56]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                                                       S. Hrg. 117-56

                 NOMINATION OF THE HONORABLE THOMAS J.
                   VILSACK, OF IOWA, TO BE SECRETARY,
                     U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                       COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE,
                        NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY

                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                            FEBRUARY 2, 2021

                               __________

                       Printed for the use of the
           Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                  Available on http://www.govinfo.gov/
                  
                               __________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
45-388 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 2022                     
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------                    
                  
           COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY


                            (117th Congress)

                 DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan, Chairwoman
PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont            JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio                  MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky
AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota             JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
MICHAEL BENNET, Colorado             JONI ERNST, Iowa
KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, New York         CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi
ROBERT P. CASEY, Jr., Pennsylvania   MIKE BRAUN, Indiana
TINA SMITH, Minnesota                CHARLES GRASSLEY, Iowa
RICHARD DURBIN, Illinois             JOHN THUNE, South Dakota
                                     DEB FISCHER, Nebraska

               Joseph A. Shultz, Majority Staff Director
               Mary Beth Schultz, Majority Chief Counsel
                    Jessica L. Williams, Chief Clerk
            Martha Scott Poindexter, Minority Staff Director
                 Fred J. Clark, Minority Chief Counsel

                          (116th Congress) \1\

                     PAT ROBERTS, Kansas, Chairman
MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky            DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan
JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas               PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont
JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota            SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
JONI ERNST, Iowa                     AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi        MICHAEL BENNET, Colorado
MIKE BRAUN, Indiana                  KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, New York
CHARLES GRASSLEY, Iowa               ROBERT P. CASEY, Jr., Pennsylvania
JOHN THUNE, South Dakota             TINA SMITH, Minnesota
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska                RICHARD DURBIN, Illinois
KELLY LOEFFLER, Georgia

                                       
                                       
\1\ Official designations of Membership for the 117th Congress were 
passed on February 3, 2021.
                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              

                       Tuesday, February 2, 2021

                                                                   Page

Hearing:

Nomination of the Honorable Thomas J. Vilsack, of Iowa, to be 
  Secretary, U.S. Department of Agriculture......................     1

                              ----------                              

                    STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY SENATORS

Boozman, Hon. John, U.S. Senator from the State of Arkansas......     1
Stabenow, Hon. Debbie, U.S. Senator from the State of Michigan...     3
Grassley, Hon. Charles, U.S. Senator from the State of Iowa......     5

                               WITNESSES

Vilsack, Hon. Thomas J., of Iowa, to be Secretary, U.S. 
  Department of Agriculture......................................     7
                              ----------                              

                                APPENDIX

Prepared Statements:
    Vilsack, Hon. Thomas J.......................................    46
    Leahy, Hon. Patrick..........................................    48

Document(s) Submitted for the Record:
Stabenow, Hon. Debbie:
    U.S. forest products industry, letter of support.............    50
    Forest Sector, letter of support.............................    52
    Housing Assistance Council, letter of support................    54
    Hunting, Fishing, Wildlife, and Outdoor Recreation, letter of 
      support....................................................    56
    Management of Invasive Species Industry, letter of support...    58
    National Association of Conservation Districts, letter of 
      support....................................................    59
    National Association of State Conservation Agencies, letter 
      of support.................................................    61
    National Cattlemen's Beef Association, letter of support.....    62
    National Farmers Union, letter of support....................    63
    National Grocers Association, letter of support..............    64
    Outdoor Recreation Roundtable Association, letter of support.    66
    The Rural Community Assistance Partnership, letter of support    68
    The Fertilizer Institute, letter of support..................    69
    Food and Agriculture Trade Association, letter of support....    71
    Wisconsin Cheese Makers Association, letter of support.......    74
    Association of Equipment Manufactures, letter of support.....    75
    AFSCME, letter of support....................................    76
    American Sugar Alliance, letter of support...................    77
    American Sheep Industry Association, letter of support.......    78
    American Seed Trade Association, letter of support...........    79
    Ducks Unlimited, letter of support...........................    81
    Edesia Nutrition, letter of support..........................    82
    Federal Forest Resource Coalition, letter of support.........    83
Vilsack, Hon. Thomas J.:
    Committee questionnaire, Office of Government Ethics 
      Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosure 
      Report and 5-day letter filed by Hon. Thomas J. Vilsack  .. 

    Addendum to Committee questionnaire filed by Hon. Thomas J. 
      Vilsack  


    Addendum and Supplement to Financial Disclosure Report filed 
      by Hon. Thomas J. Vilsack..................................   141

Question and Answer:
Vilsack, Thomas J.:
    Written response to questions from Hon. Debbie Stabenow......   144
    Written response to questions from Hon. John Boozman.........   152
    Written response to questions from Hon. Patrick Leahy........   174
    Written response to questions from Hon. Amy Klobuchar........   179
    Written response to questions from Hon. Michael Bennet.......   180
    Written response to questions from Hon. Kirsten Gillibrand...   187
    Written response to questions from Hon. Robert P. Casey, Jr..   190
    Written response to questions from Hon. Tina Smith...........   193
    Written response to questions from Hon. Richard Durbin.......   195
    Written response to questions from Hon. John Hoeven..........   203
    Written response to questions from Hon. Joni Ernst...........   207
    Written response to questions from Hon. Mike Braun...........   208
    Written response to questions from Hon. Charles Grassley.....   211
    Written response to questions from Hon. John Thune...........   213
    Written response to questions from Hon. Deb Fischer..........   218

 
     NOMINATION OF THE HONORABLE THOMAS J. VILSACK, OF IOWA, TO BE 
               SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

                              ----------                              


                       TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 2021

                                       U.S. Senate,
         Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:30 a.m., via 
Webex and in room 301, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. 
John Boozman and Hon. Debbie Stabenow, presiding.
    Present: Senators Stabenow, Leahy, Brown, Klobuchar, 
Bennet, Gillibrand, Casey, Smith, Boozman, Hoeven, Ernst, Hyde-
Smith, Grassley, Thune, Fischer, and Braun.

 STATEMENT OF HON. SENATOR JOHN BOOZMAN, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE 
                       STATE OF ARKANSAS

    Senator Boozman. Good morning. The Senate Committee on 
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry will come to order.
    Today, the Committee will be hearing from former Secretary 
Thomas J. Vilsack, President Biden's nominee for the Secretary 
of the United States Department of Agriculture.
    Secretary Vilsack, you are certainly no stranger to this 
Committee or to the Department you have been nominated to lead, 
having served as Secretary of Agriculture from 2009 to 2017 
under the Obama Administration. You have an excellent 
reputation, and we look forward to working with you in the 
future. I have enjoyed working with you in the past and look 
forward to strengthening that relationship as we do good work 
in a very bipartisan nature on this Committee to help our 
agriculture community.
    Before I begin with my opening remarks, though, I would 
like to take a minute to state for the record that this hearing 
is a little bit different than we are used to attending in the 
past. The Senate has not passed--it is on the verge but it has 
not passed a resolution that allows for the Committees of the 
Senate to organize. Thus, the Committee has no official 
Chairman at the moment with the retirement of Senator Pat 
Roberts in 2020, who did an excellent job and we will miss. You 
will see that neither us nor Senator Stabenow are sitting in 
the Chairman's seat. We hold this hearing as equal partners 
today. Senator Stabenow and I, though, have agreed that this is 
an important hearing today so that we need to get moving so 
that we can get the Secretary confirmed quickly to address the 
pressing matters of sending economic relief to those affected 
by the ongoing pandemic.
    This hearing shall not create any precedent as to how 
hearings or markups shall be announced and held when the 
Chairman or Ranking Member are not officially appointed by the 
Senate. Senator Stabenow and I will share in the 
responsibilities of holding this hearing today and later to 
consider the nomination with a vote by the Committee.
    It is my understanding that you have agreed to return to 
the Committee in four to six weeks after arriving at the 
Department to give us more time to discuss your priorities and 
early activities since we are moving your nomination today very 
quickly. We look forward to that discussion.
    With that explanation, Mr. Secretary, I welcome you to the 
Committee.
    I would note that the Committee received a number of 
letters in support of your nomination and ask consent to 
include these letters of support in the hearing record. I 
assume that is without objection.
    Senator Stabenow. Without objection.
    Senator Boozman. Thank you.

    [The letters can be found on pages 50-83 in the appendix.]

    Senator Boozman. During your tenure as President Obama's 
Secretary of Agriculture, the state of agriculture was affected 
by a number of issues and events. These included the Great 
Recession, which left far too many of our fellow Americans 
hungry and in need of USDA food assistance; a U.S. economy 
where agriculture was one of the only bright spots, with strong 
prices and exports and implementation of the 2008 and 2014 Farm 
Bills.
    As your second term came to a close, however, the 
agriculture economy started to dip, which has led to seven 
years of depressed prices and difficult times in farm country. 
Today, we find many more Americans experiencing hunger from the 
effects of the pandemic.
    I was grateful that Congress and the Department responded 
to these situations with trade mitigation assistance, disaster 
assistance, and pandemic assistance programs. Without it, I 
fear we would have seen even more farm bankruptcies, leading to 
less available food for our Nation and the world.
    I am a strong believer that past performance is indicative 
of future performance, Mr. Secretary, and I know you will work 
with us as you did during your previous tenure.
    As everyone in this room knows, agriculture is not 
partisan, but there are regional differences. I was pleased to 
see that in your previous tenure you took the time to learn 
about and understand southern agriculture. I hope that if you 
are confirmed, you will continue this same attitude throughout 
the various regions and commodities in our country.
    With that said, I would like to raise a few issues that 
need to be addressed by the incoming Secretary of Agriculture. 
I am concerned with some ideas being discussed in the 
environmental space. If confirmed, I would expect you to work 
with your colleagues at EPA to educate them on the strides that 
production agriculture has already taken to be more efficient 
and environmentally friendly. As we all know, agriculture ought 
to be part of the solution, not considered the problem.
    The President has announced climate change policy will be a 
priority for the administration. It is important that USDA and 
this Committee keep producers at the forefront of any 
discussion on climate change. Heavy-handed, one-size-fits-all 
regulations simply will not work. Just as in a farm bill 
debate, this issue must be addressed in a fashion that will 
truly benefit all farmers across the country without mandating 
specific farming practices.
    In Arkansas, our farmers have been conserving water by 
implementing innovative irrigation techniques, converting to 
surface water irrigation rather than pumping groundwater from 
the aquifer. Farmers have also improved soil health with cover 
cropping and minimum tillage while our ranchers have taken on 
rotational grazing. These efforts should not be ignored during 
the policy debate on climate change.
    Trade is another active issue where your strong voice is 
needed. I urge you to play an active role in any trade 
discussions. American agriculture has borne the brunt of trade 
disputes in the past few years. Prior to that, our farmers and 
ranchers were competing with foreign governments that did not 
play by the rules then and that often do not play by the rules 
today. Our producers need new markets with more market access, 
and I hope you will continue to be an advocate in this area.
    We are all aware of the impacts the COVID-19 pandemic has 
had on our society. We learned our supply chain is more fragile 
and resilient than we thought. The supply chain did not break, 
but the marketplace was certainly very challenging. We need to 
consider options to make the supply chain even more resilient. 
In the future, we need to have the ability to respond to these 
types of black swan events. Unfortunately, we must assume that 
it is not a question of if another pandemic will occur, but 
rather when.
    With the latest package of COVID relief signed into law in 
December, it is imperative that CFAP assistance gets to those 
most in need. The Biden administration has announced a 60-day 
review of some of this assistance, while advocating for an 
additional $1.9 trillion to be passed by Congress. It seems to 
me that time is of the essence, and the Department should move 
swiftly to deliver that much-needed assistance that has already 
being provided.
    I encourage you to carry out this review quickly, 
consistent with the clear direction in the law. It is 
imperative to deliver this assistance as those who are 
struggling in this pandemic are well served now instead of 
later.
    Again, thank you for joining us today. I look forward to 
hearing from you and working with you if you are confirmed.
    Now I yield to Senator Stabenow for her opening remarks. I 
had the gavel for a little bit, anyway.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Stabenow. I think we each have a gavel today.
    Senator Boozman. Well, the big gavel is going to you very 
shortly.

STATEMENT OF HON. DEBBIE STABENOW, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE 
                          OF MICHIGAN

    Senator Stabenow. [Presiding.] First of all, thank you so 
much, Senator Boozman. I am looking forward to working with you 
as I did with Senator Roberts. We really operated as co-chairs 
on the Committee, and even though the Senate is still 
finalizing the formal organizing of the committees, as Senator 
Boozman indicated, I deeply appreciate your willingness to work 
together to move this hearing forward. We know that we need to 
put the leadership in place for our farmers, ranchers, families 
at the USDA. Once again, we are showcasing the Agriculture 
Committee's strong tradition of bipartisanship. I very much 
appreciate it.
    In the coming year, I am looking forward to learning more 
about rice and timber and all the wonderful things in Arkansas, 
in addition to hearing more about the fortunes of your Arkansas 
Razorbacks. Who knows? Maybe my Spartans and your Razorbacks 
will meet in the NCAA tournament at some point.
    Our strong relationship is really one of the best things 
about our Committee, and it makes it easier to put aside 
partisan politics and get things done. Our first job is to 
consider the nomination of former Secretary Tom Vilsack, who is 
no stranger to the Senate confirmation process or even the role 
that he is nominated for.
    Mr. Vilsack, welcome and thank you for being here virtually 
today. We appreciate it very much. As the former Secretary of 
Agriculture during all eight years of the Obama Administration, 
you presided over the USDA with a steady hand and decisive 
leadership.
    As you know, we share a long history together. My last turn 
as Chair coincided with your first tenure at the USDA, and I am 
so happy we are going to have a chance to confirm you so we 
will be able to work together again.
    When it comes to food and farm policy, we share many of the 
same values; from creating a stable, successful agriculture 
economy to providing food for children and families in need, to 
making our small towns vibrant places to live, to addressing 
the climate crisis.
    Your deep knowledge of the Department and understanding of 
agriculture and rural communities is needed now more than ever. 
I know that you will not only bring experience but also new 
ideas and creative approaches to help us address the wide range 
of challenges facing our farm and food sector.
    Mr. Vilsack, a lot has changed since you were last at the 
Department. The COVID-19 pandemic changed the world before our 
eyes. Many essential food workers were on the front lines 
without adequate protection. Farmers had no choice but to 
destroy the crops they could not sell. Millions of families 
still do not have enough food to eat, and food banks are 
overwhelmed with unprecedented demand.
    In the most recent COVID package, Congress provided a new 
round of investments, including measures to support farmers, 
protect food workers, and boost food assistance. I look forward 
to hearing your plans to implement those new provisions and 
your overall approach to addressing the COVID-19 crisis-
especially hunger.
    The pandemic is not the only challenge we are facing now. 
The climate crisis poses the greatest threat to the long-term 
viability of our economy and our food supply. Farmers and 
foresters are directly affected by climate change. They are 
also uniquely positioned to be a part of the solution, to lead, 
and to benefit from new streams of income. Exploring these 
opportunities will be a major focus of this Committee. I look 
forward to working closely with you and the Biden 
administration on it.
    Both of these immediate challenges come against the 
backdrop of an already struggling farm economy. President 
Trump's chaotic trade policies destroyed markets that took 
decades to build and we have seen staggering levels of farm 
bankruptcies. Luckily, we are beginning to see a rebound in 
prices for many crops, which we will monitor closely as we work 
together and prepare for the next farm bill.
    Unfortunately, not all farmers had the same opportunity for 
prosperity in good times or farm support during bad times. It 
is true that the USDA has a long and sordid history of civil 
rights abuses and systematic racism that has created economic 
disparities for farmers of color across the country. It is 
unacceptable, and it is long past time to address this head-on, 
and I know you agree. I know you have committed to improve 
fairness and equity for farmers. I am anxious to hear more 
about your plans on these issues today as well.
    On top of all of this, the previous administration 
mismanaged USDA's ability to address all of these crises, from 
the destructive relocation of researchers to persistent 
vacancies. There is a lot of work to do to rebuild the 
Department. Without a strong work force, USDA cannot fulfill 
its mission to serve our farmers and our families and rural 
communities.
    Mr. Vilsack, if confirmed, you have a big task ahead. But I 
know you are up to the job. You have a proven track record and 
a deep bench of experience to hit the ground running. I am most 
impressed by your commitment to embrace new ideas and usher in 
a new era for the Department.
    Thank you for being with us today. I look forward to 
hearing more about your plans and your vision for the USDA.
    Now I would yield to my friend, my colleague from Iowa, 
Senator Grassley, to introduce our nominee.

 STATEMENT OF HON. SENATOR CHARLES GRASSLEY, U.S. SENATOR FROM 
                       THE STATE OF IOWA

    Senator Grassley. Thank you, Senator Stabenow. Good morning 
to all my colleagues, and welcome and congratulations to our 
nominee. It is quite an honor to introduce a fellow Iowan, 
Thomas J. Vilsack, former two-term Governor of Iowa and former 
Secretary of Agriculture for eight years in the Obama 
Administration, well-known to everybody on this Committee.
    I have a long relationship with Secretary Vilsack. I cannot 
think of a single quarrel that I have had with Governor 
Vilsack. I know that he knows agriculture very well. He knows 
the importance of maintaining the institution of the family 
farm. We have 88,000 of them in Iowa. He knows that the family 
farm institution is the foundation of success for American 
agriculture. He knows how to faithfully execute the laws of the 
Department of Agriculture, eight years of previous actions 
doing just that.
    Secretary Vilsack became mayor of Mount Pleasant, Iowa, and 
at a time that our Nation was recovering from maybe the second-
worst agriculture depression we have had caused by the farm 
credit crisis of the 1980's. Much like in the 1980's 
agriculture depression, the Nation is continuing to recover 
from the impact of the coronavirus and the economic impact that 
has.
    We have seen higher rates of food insecurity, continued 
food supply chain disruptions, and family farms struggling to 
balance their books. Should he be confirmed--and I think he 
will be--the experience from the 1980's farm crisis will serve 
him well at this time of other family farms being under duress.
    I remember my first discussion with then-to-be Secretary of 
Agriculture Vilsack in 2009. I brought up with him my work and 
involvement in the Pigford operations. That was to get civil 
rights and equal rights for black farmers of America. At the 
time he was going into office, there was still some carryover 
that was not being done in the right way by the people who had 
won their civil rights through the Pigford cases, and he very 
definitely worked hard to see that those people got their 
rights delivered to them. It was one of my requests of him at 
that time because I was involved in the 1990's in getting 
justice for those farmers.
    Secretary Vilsack also has a very strong history of 
promoting agricultural products both here and abroad, and as a 
Governor, Secretary Vilsack expanded opportunities for green 
energy, including biofuels, so very, very important for the 
43,000 jobs in Iowa. As Secretary, he made investments in the 
Commodity Credit Corporation to increase the amount of fueling 
pumps that carry E15 and E85 ethanol.
    If confirmed, I am looking to him to be a voice of reason 
within the administration on the future of biofuels as he was 
in the eight years that he was a member of the Obama Cabinet.
    Finally, as Governor, Secretary, and most recently as CEO 
of the U.S. Dairy Export Council, he knows well U.S. 
agriculture is dependent upon access to our foreign markets. As 
former Chairman of the Finance Committee, I am committed to 
taking down barriers that limit this access and give U.S. 
agriculture a level playing field. Any U.S. Secretary of 
Agriculture plays a very important role in that, and Secretary 
Vilsack in those eight years did that well, too.
    I am very encouraged by the success of the China Phase One 
agreement and glad that the USMCA helped achieve historic gains 
for agriculture. This work is reflected in the fact that corn 
and soybeans are the highest they have been since 1913.
    By the way, Secretary Vilsack in his position as CEO of the 
U.S. Dairy Export Council had a news conference with me in Des 
Moines, Iowa, on the necessity of getting USMCA passed. Even as 
a private citizen, he was working very strongly for export of 
our products.
    I am looking forward to working with Secretary Vilsack to 
increase foreign market access so that our high-quality crops 
and livestock can be sold across the world. I often say that 
only two percent of Americans that farm provide for the other 
98 percent of Americans, and they do it without a lot of 
appreciation. If confirmed, I know that Secretary Vilsack will 
continue to work for the family farmer and spotlight their 
contributions to agriculture and society. As an Iowan, that is 
part of his nature just naturally, going way back to him being 
a lawyer in the small county seat town of Mount Pleasant, Iowa.
    Please know that you have an open door to my office, 
Secretary Vilsack, if you or your staff need a helping hand in 
any of the missions that confront you, and particularly those 
that confront all Americans because of the coronavirus. I urge 
all of my colleagues to favorably report your nomination out of 
Committee as soon as possible. It is necessary to get your 
confirmation to the floor of the Senate very quickly as well.
    Congratulations, Secretary Vilsack.
    Senator Stabenow. Well, thank you very much, Senator 
Grassley. Mr. Vilsack, I have two things next to address. 
First, to administer an oath, which we have to do for all 
nominees. Please stand and raise your right hand. Do you swear 
or affirm that the testimony you are about to provide is the 
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you 
God?
    Mr. Vilsack. I do.
    Senator Stabenow. Thank you. Second, do you agree that, if 
confirmed, you will appear before any duly constituted 
committee of Congress if asked to appear?
    Mr. Vilsack. I will.
    Senator Stabenow. Thank you very much. Well, welcome again. 
We look forward to hearing from you. Your testimony will be 
made a part of the record in its entirety. You may proceed as 
you desire. Welcome.

 STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE THOMAS J. VILSACK, OF IOWA, TO BE 
           SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

    Mr. Vilsack. Thank you, Senator Stabenow, and thanks to you 
and Senator Boozman for the opportunity to appear today 
virtually and for the Committee's indulgence. I want to thank 
my Senator, Senator Grassley, for those kind remarks and 
certainly for his long-time service to the people of Iowa and 
the country. He is someone that I have a great deal of 
admiration for, and I appreciate the fact that he took time to 
introduce me to the Committee today.
    It is not lost on me, ironically, that this is Groundhog 
Day, and I realize that I am back again. I also realize that 
this is a fundamentally different time, and I am a different 
person, and it is a different Department, and I think we have 
to recognize that going into this process.
    When I was getting involved in politics, I followed Robert 
Kennedy and sort of modeled my views after his, and he often 
challenged us to think about, ``why not?'' He use to quote the 
quote that, ``Some people look at things as they are and say, 
why?'' ``Others dream of things that never were and say, why 
not?''
    I think we are faced today with a number of ``why not'' 
opportunities and moments in agriculture, in the food industry, 
and in rural America. Clearly, COVID is on the minds of 
everyone, as it should be, and the Department of Agriculture 
has a responsibility to aggressively promote the nutrition 
assistance that you all have provided, and they have begun to 
do that in the last week to ten days.
    We also, as Senator Boozman indicated, have to review the 
additional relief that has been ordered by Congress and try to 
get that into the hands of farmers, ranchers, producers, and 
those in rural America as quickly, as efficiently, and as 
effectively as possible.
    We need to make sure that our workers, our essential 
workers on the line, in the farm fields, in processing 
facilities and the like are protected and recognized as the 
essential workers they are. We certainly need to work 
collaboratively with the Congress and others to build back the 
rural economy in better shape than it was before the COVID 
crisis.
    There are, I think, four ``why not'' moments that I would 
like to briefly address to the Committee before taking your 
questions. I think we are at a ``why not'' moment with 
reference to climate change. I think there is an opportunity 
for us to create new markets, incentives for soil health, for 
carbon sequestration, for methane capture and reuse, by 
building a rural economy based on biomanufacturing, protecting 
our forests, turning waste material into new chemicals, 
materials, fabrics and fibers, creating more jobs in rural 
America, creating greater farm income stability, and also 
reducing emissions.
    I think we face a ``why not'' moment with reference to food 
security that plagues millions of financially distressed 
children, seniors, and families, and also a ``why not'' moment 
on nutrition insecurity that causes millions of Americans, 
especially people of color, to cope with obesity and diabetes 
and other chronic diseases. I think we can create a good system 
that makes healthy and nutritious food more available, more 
convenient, and more affordable to all Americans.
    We are at a ``why not'' moment in terms of the openness and 
competitiveness of our markets. The reality is we lack 
openness, fairness, and competitiveness, and resiliency, as the 
COVID-19 crisis has shown in many of our agricultural markets. 
I think we can strengthen the rules and laws designed to 
promote openness and fairness. I think we can support more 
marketing and processing opportunities in facilities throughout 
the country that will help to create jobs, greater resilience 
and more competitiveness in our food system.
    Finally, as Senator Stabenow has indicated, we need to 
fully, deeply, and completely address the longstanding 
inequities, unfairness, and discrimination that has been the 
history of USDA programs for far too long, to a future where 
all are treated equitably, fairly, where there is zero 
tolerance for discrimination, where programs actually open up 
opportunity for all who need help and lift the burden of 
persistent poverty for those most in need. I am happy to talk 
to the Committee in great length about the plans to do just 
that.
    I recognize the unprecedented challenge that we face with 
COVID and, while pursuing these ``why not'' opportunities, will 
not shirk the duties and responsibilities of the Department 
connected to COVID relief and recovery, as well as all of our 
other responsibilities. I look forward to working 
collaboratively with you on the Committee, if confirmed, with 
State and local leaders, the private sector, the philanthropic 
sector, and the hardworking and dedicated team at USDA to make 
a brighter and better future possible in rural America for 
farmers, ranchers, producers, and those who live, work, and 
raise their families in rural communities.
    It is the faith that President Biden and Vice President 
Harris have placed in me, the confidence they have in us 
working together that can make a real difference to the 
country, and especially in rural America. I look forward to the 
opportunity to work with all of you and to respond to your 
questions today.

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

    Senator Stabenow. Thank you so much, and we will begin a 
round of five-minute questioning, starting with Senator 
Boozman.
    Senator Boozman. Thank you very much. Again, thank you for 
being with us.
    I would like to talk a little bit first about trade. Our 
farmers and ranchers depend on strong relationships around the 
world. Expanding market access, ensuring that our producers 
have a level playing field free from non-tariff barriers, is 
certainly critical. In the 2014 Farm Bill, Congress mandated 
the U.S. Department of Agriculture to generate a plan for, and 
implement, a new Under Secretary for Trade and Foreign 
Agricultural Affairs. That role has been useful over the past 
several years.
    What is your vision for the mission of the Under Secretary? 
How can USDA work to strengthen trade policies in the coming 
years? Lots of discussion already in this meeting about that. 
In particular, how will you work with the U.S. Trade 
Representative, our lead trade negotiator, along with the other 
trade policymakers throughout the executive branch to make sure 
that agriculture is a top priority?
    Mr. Vilsack. Senator, thanks for the question. First of 
all, as it relates to the Trade Representative's Office, I 
think the USDA has the responsibility of making sure that there 
is a close communication between the U.S. Trade 
Representative's Office and USDA. I think we need to make sure 
that we work collaboratively with them to implement existing 
trade agreements. Specifically, I am talking about USMCA. There 
are issues relating to Canada and Mexico with reference to 
implementation. I would hope to be able to work closely with 
USTR on those issues.
    I think we want to provide advice and counsel and direction 
and efforts to try to look at additional free trade agreements 
that could potentially be negotiated during the course of the 
Biden administration. I think it is fair to say that we have 
work to do in terms of making sure that we have a competitive 
opportunity. Many of our competitors are engaged in free trade 
agreements that provide a competitive edge. In many markets, we 
need to reduce that competitive edge.
    I think the Under Secretary's office is an incredibly 
important one to do three things:
    One, to have a presence in those export markets, to make 
sure that U.S. agriculture is front and center in the minds of 
folks who are purchasing in those markets.
    Two, I think that office needs to work to create more 
partnerships in those foreign market opportunities. I know that 
there are universities, there are other ways in which we can 
create the kinds of relationships between our agriculture and 
our food companies and the consumers in these markets.
    Finally, we need to be part of an effort to continue 
promotion of U.S. agricultural products. I think if you have 
more presence, more partnerships, and more promotions, you will 
have more trade.
    Senator Boozman. Thank you. President Biden has repeatedly 
said that climate change will be one of the administration's 
focuses, and he said that climate change is the No. 1 issue 
facing humanity.
    As you know, changes in Government can have an impact on 
the cost of production for producers as well as throughout the 
food and ag value chain. Last week, the administration unveiled 
a call to action on climate, calling for input from farmers and 
ranchers to assess how best to use Federal programs to 
encourage adoption of climate-smart agricultural practices that 
reduce carbon and create new sources of income and jobs for 
rural Americans.
    In addition, the Executive Order directed the Agriculture 
Secretary and other agency heads to identify actions that could 
conserve at least 30 percent of our lands and waters by 2030, 
which is a very ambitious goal.
    In light of this directive, will you pledge to be a voice 
for farmers, ranchers, producers, and agricultural businesses 
throughout the food and agricultural value chain? How will you 
work with them during your time as Secretary with regard to 
climate policy rather than let farmers and ranchers be dictated 
to as we tackle this important issue?
    Mr. Vilsack. I certainly would make that commitment, 
Senator, and I share the President's vision of a net zero 
emission opportunity for U.S. agriculture. I think it would 
provide us a competitive edge in the world in terms of trade 
and would respond to the increasing domestic demand for greater 
sustainability.
    I think there are a number of ways in which the Department 
can create efforts to incent and to create new market 
opportunities that will provide resources and income for 
farmers and help to create jobs in rural places. I mentioned in 
my opening statement the bio-based manufacturing opportunity of 
turning agricultural waste into a variety of products. We know 
that the success of that with reference to biofuels, that can 
be expanded dramatically. I think there are ways in which we 
can invest and create incentives for farmers to continue to 
expand significantly the work that they are already doing, as 
you mentioned, with cover crops, no-till, and other soil health 
efforts. We know more about soil health. We know we need to 
dedicate ourselves to a more regenerative effort in terms of 
soil health. I think there are ways in which we can incent, 
create market opportunities.
    I think Senator Braun and Senator Stabenow recognize this. 
They have suggested the need for farmer input, as we look at 
carbon capture and sequestration, making sure that the systems 
that are set up actually have certified results that make 
sense, that will support markets, and support the opportunity 
for these kinds of investments. I think it is fair to say we 
will aggressively pursue an effort to get farmer input to make 
sure that programs that we design and programs that we advance 
are ones that will work out in the field.
    Senator Boozman. Good. Thank you.
    Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Senator Stabenow. Thank you so much. Welcome again, 
Secretary Vilsack. I want to start first with just the farm 
economy in general. We have seen such tumultuous years now for 
our farmers and ranchers. We have seen government payments 
replace markets as the main driver of farm profitability. I 
share Senator Boozman's concern about markets and trade, and 
what we need to do to get stability back for our farmers and 
our ranchers.
    We are going to continue to have challenges, because of the 
pandemic moving forward. It is good to see bright spots like 
corn, soybean, and wheat prices recently hitting their highest 
in the last six years. That is good news.
    Taking a step back, how can we return to a sense of 
normalcy in the farm economy with a focus on responsible risk 
management and building markets for producers, which really has 
been the foundation of our Farm Bills in recent years?
    Mr. Vilsack. Senator, that is an incredibly complicated 
question. I will do my best to try to respond in a short period 
of time. It indeed starts with markets. Historically, we have 
obviously looked at export market opportunities. Anywhere from 
20 to 30 percent of what is produced in this country is 
exported, so, clearly, a stable, secure trade policy that does 
not create havoc in the market, that does not put us at a 
competitive disadvantage would be helpful in terms of our 
ability to sell product overseas.
    Expanding market opportunities in new markets--I think 
Southeast Asia is an opportunity. I think eventually over time, 
we are going to see potentially opportunities in Africa. One-
half of the world's increased population is liable to come in 
the next 15 years in that single continent, so we want to 
obviously be engaged in trade opportunities there as they 
evolve. Certainly our competitors are doing that.
    It is more than just export markets. It is growing markets 
here domestically by investing in a robust local and regional 
food system that creates market opportunities for small and 
mid-sized producers so they can negotiate their own price. We 
began that process in the Obama Administration, but I think 
there is much, much more work to do down in that space.
    It is about creating new markets, markets that have never 
been developed before. Carbon sequestration and storage if done 
the right way, the opportunity for methane capture and reuse if 
done the right way, the development of bio-based manufacturing 
that creates new market opportunities for agricultural waste if 
done the right way can all create a more stable farm income and 
economy and can also help to create and support the jobs that 
many farm families need as well in rural places.
    It is also making sure that we have a safety net that 
operates. Our farmers are definitely more interested in markets 
than they are aid, but there are times and circumstances that 
it requires significant investment by the Government. We need 
to be prepared to do that, and we need policies and programs 
that allow and enable that. We need obviously a strong crop 
insurance program that provides protection in the event that 
mother nature simply will not cooperate.
    It is all of that and probably much, much more, but I will 
stop there.
    Senator Stabenow. Thank you. Very comprehensive answer and 
I could not agree with you more on all of those points.
    I wondered if you could just take a moment to go into more 
specifics in the climate arena. As you mentioned, Senator Braun 
and I have bipartisan legislation. Members of our Committee and 
others are very interested in moving this legislation. Our 
drumbeat is that whatever is done, it needs to be voluntary, 
producer-led, and bipartisan. The bill really starts with what 
producers have told us about the lack of qualified technical 
assistance in this area.
    From hearings we did last year in this Committee, we know 
that farmers are already doing things that are making a 
difference in capturing carbon and lessening carbon pollution. 
There is so much more that could be done. The Growing Climate 
Solutions Act is really about setting up that structure and the 
need to have that support for farmers. Could you speak more to 
that?
    Mr. Vilsack. With your permission, I think there are many 
proposals contained in what you and Senator Braun and others 
have proposed that could be essentially implemented 
administratively, for example, putting together an advisory 
group of farmers that would give us a better understanding and 
appreciation of how to structure a carbon sequestration, a 
carbon bank effort; making sure that we can, in fact, 
adequately measure and quantify the results that can be 
obtained by farmers; making sure that the benefits of whatever 
program we devise and develop accrue to the benefit of farmers 
and not necessarily to third parties; making sure that we 
promote the development of ecosystem markets that create those 
revenue sources for farmers; making sure that our conservation 
programs are structured and designed in a way that encourage 
and incent the kind of activities we know make a difference.
    Our soil is precious. We need to make sure we are investing 
in soil health. We also, frankly, need to up our game on 
research. There are ways in which root systems of crops can 
potentially be designed in a way that will sequester more 
carbon. We ought to be exploring that. We ought to be looking 
at ways in which we can increase market opportunities for 
greater storage.
    I think agriculture has as--it is probably the first and 
best way to begin getting some wings in this climate area. I 
think our farmers are prepared for it, farmers are anxious to 
do it. If it is voluntary, if it is market-based, if it is 
incentive-based, I think you will see farmers, ranchers, and 
producers cooperate extensively.
    Senator Stabenow. Thank you. I could not agree more. I know 
there are a number of different bills that we will want to be 
looking at as well. Senator Thune and I are looking at 
expanding the soil health demonstration project, cover crops, 
and a whole range of things. I think that is really an 
opportunity for agriculture, forestry, and others to really 
lead to show folks how to be able to do this right. Thank you 
very much.
    Senator Ernst was next on the list. I believe she is not 
here. She is not virtual at the moment, correct? Senator Hyde-
Smith.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you, Senator Stabenow. Secretary 
Vilsack, congratulations on your nomination, and I look forward 
to working with you----
    Mr. Vilsack. I cannot hear the Senator.
    Senator Stabenow. I think we need to have a button pushed.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. I am sorry. Again, congratulations on 
the nomination. I apologize. I did not hit the microphone 
correctly. I have enjoyed working with you in the past as 
former Commissioner of Agriculture in Mississippi, and 
agriculture is the No. 1 industry in Mississippi. One of every 
four jobs there in my home State is related to agriculture, so, 
obviously, it is a very important position that you are 
embarking upon.
    Mr. Secretary, farmers have had several difficult years, as 
you are very aware of: bad weather, low prices, and export 
market losses, and now coronavirus. Unfortunately, there is 
another growing concern that I am hearing about from my farmers 
and ranchers. Last June, a petition was filed in the Department 
of Commerce and the International Trade Commission seeking 
countervailing duties on phosphate fertilizer imports. Since 
that petition, fertilizer supplies have tightened across the 
country, and phosphate fertilizer prices are substantially up, 
25 percent or more.
    How concerned are you about maintaining adequate supply of 
these fertilizers? What are your plans for ensuring reliable 
markets for this critical ag import for farmers?
    Mr. Vilsack. Senator, I had an opportunity recently to 
visit with Senator Moran about this issue, and so I am 
certainly aware of the importance of it. One of the 
responsibilities, I think, as the Secretary of Agriculture is 
to communicate to sister agencies the impact and effect of 
decisions that they are making, making sure that they fully 
understand and appreciate the effect of whatever decision they 
are considering as it relates to farmers, ranchers, and 
producers, making sure that we have conversation and 
communication.
    One thing I would expect to do is to reach out to the 
Commerce Department to determine whether or not there is 
anything that can be done that would put us in a more 
competitive circumstance and ensure the supply of fertilizer 
throughout the U.S.
    I also think it is important for the Department of 
Agriculture, when faced with circumstances where for whatever 
reason a rule or regulation is impacting and affecting folks on 
the farm, looking for ways in which we can utilize the tools of 
USDA to provide some kind of transition assistance or provide 
some kind of way of mitigating the impact and effect. 
Certainly, I would task our team to take a look at whether or 
not there is anything we could do at USDA specifically and 
directly to address this issue.
    Finally, I would say that I think it is important and 
necessary to point out that I think there are ways in which we 
can help producers utilize fertilizer in the most effective 
way, using it at the right time, the right place, the right 
amounts, that we not overfertilize, which sometimes is 
unfortunately happening in many parts of the country. I think 
there are also opportunities, as I said earlier, to convert 
agricultural waste into a variety of products, including a 
pelletized fertilizer that would be transportable, storable, 
and create a new market opportunity for farmers. I think there 
are a multitude of ways to address this issue.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you very much for that answer 
because it is quite a concern. Another thing I want to mention 
while I have a few moments left is that the forest and wood 
products industry provides great jobs in rural areas throughout 
the country, including Mississippi. In addition to providing 
important economic support to rural economies, working forests 
obviously also provide for clean air, clean water, and wildlife 
habitat. Ensuring growing markets for wood products is critical 
for these rural economies and environmental benefits.
    One of the other things that concerns me is their 
eligibility for programs when they lose timber. We are a 
hurricane State; we are a tornado State. Last Easter, we 
experienced tornadoes, and there were no programs for the loss 
of that timber for individuals.
    What are your views on how USDA can strengthen and grow 
markets for wood products, including leading on new and 
innovative wood products like mass timber?
    Mr. Vilsack. Well, first of all, I think it is to take a 
look at the procurement position and opportunities that USDA 
itself has and that other departments of the Government have in 
terms of how they might be able to use wood in construction 
opportunities, projects that we have, the Forest Service 
projects that the Defense Department has, just to name two. 
There are ways, I think, where we can encourage, where it is 
appropriate, the use of wood.
    When I was Secretary before, we focused and began the 
process of trying to encourage the construction of tall 
buildings with cross-laminated timber. I think there is still 
an opportunity there as well to help spur that new market, look 
for ways in which we can incent, encourage, and educate people 
about the capacity of using cross-laminated timber as 
structural members, not necessarily decorative but structural 
members in tall buildings. There are a number of projects that 
are taking place in the U.S. and certainly quite a few projects 
taking place in other parts of the world that I think showcase 
that opportunity. There are also potentially biomass 
opportunities in terms of energy production as we look at 
renewable fuels.
    The challenge here, Senator--and I think it is important--
is that we want to be able to figure out how to use this wood. 
We want to be able to preserve the carbon that is in the wood. 
As we know, we have had horrific forest fires, which is not 
necessarily the issue in Mississippi, but it is in other parts 
of the country. To the extent that we can better manage our 
forests better to provide opportunities for markets, we can 
reduce that risk of forest fires, and we can keep that carbon 
stored for a lot longer.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. Again, congratulations, and thank you 
for answering my questions.
    Senator Stabenow. Thank you very much. Senator Hyde-Smith, 
I am looking forward to working with you on the issue of 
timber. Michigan State University just built its tallest multi-
floor building and is doing a lot of research around this as 
well. I look forward to working with you on that.
    Senator Klobuchar.
    Senator Klobuchar. Thank you very much, Senator Stabenow, 
and thank you for your service, Secretary Vilsack, and thank 
you for returning to service as well.
    I wanted to start by asking about renewable fuels, 
something near and dear to the hearts of the people in your 
home State of Iowa as well as in Minnesota and just what is 
happening. As you know, at the end of last year, in the last 
administration, there were some very bad decisions made from my 
perspective by the administration about waivers to oil 
companies, and we have had 150 ethanol plants that have shut 
down in our country or operated in a lesser capacity.
    Could you talk about what your plans are in a little more 
detail when it comes to biofuels? Also, I introduced the 
Renewable Fuel Infrastructure Act in December with Senator 
Ernst to buildupon the infrastructure program. We are going to 
reintroduce the bill next week, and I think that could be 
helpful as well. Your comments on biofuels and what you will do 
as Secretary, including about the refinery exemptions and how 
the past administration interpreted them.
    Mr. Vilsack. There are a number of [inaudible] including 
biofuels. First and foremost, our own vehicles, utilization of 
biofuels in the vehicle fleet that USDA has, so we want to make 
sure that that is occurring, and encouraging our sister 
agencies as they look at vehicles, as they look at marine 
fuels, as they look at jet fuel, to look at ways in which they 
could utilize biofuels appropriately and effectively, and to 
spur the industry.
    Second, working with----
    Senator Klobuchar. I notice, Mr. Secretary, that above 
you--or Secretary-to-be--are your four naval hats. Do you want 
to describe that to people, what those hats are?
    Mr. Vilsack. Well, three of the hats are from ships that I 
was on that were being refueled with biofuel, and it was an 
amazing experience to be in the middle of the Pacific Ocean and 
watch the refueling process. The Navy was basically, with their 
new Green Fleet, making a commitment to biofuels. I think 
marine and aviation fuel are the future for biofuels, and we 
should figure out ways in which we can encourage that.
    We obviously
    [inaudible] the USDA Secretary closely with his or her 
partner at EPA to make sure that folks at EPA fully understand 
and appreciate the benefits of this industry in terms of jobs, 
in terms of the environment, in terms of life-cycle analysis. 
This industry has made great strides in becoming much more 
environmentally friendly than it was at the beginning, and 
sometimes I fear that we are still working off old research. 
New research would suggest and indicate that this is an 
industry that is providing environmental benefits, cleaner air, 
for example, and making sure that as they make decisions 
relative to their renewable fuel standard, that they are 
consistent, that they are consistent with the rule, they are 
consistent with the law.
    The waiver system was designed for small refineries that 
were having trouble and difficulty. It was not designed for 
large-scale refineries that are owned by Exxon and Chevron to 
receive a waiver. I would hope and will certainly strongly urge 
EPA to go back to a day when those waivers are very, very, very 
infrequently granted.
    Then, finally, I think there is a way in which we can 
utilize USDA resources and work with Congress to increase those 
resources to build out the infrastructure to make it easier for 
higher blends to be available to consumers. Why? Because at the 
end of the day, consumers benefit. They have less expensive 
fuel. They have a cleaner-burning fuel. They have a fuel that 
is better for the environment. As we look at the future, I 
think biofuels continue to play a role in reducing emissions 
and providing job opportunities in all parts of the country.
    Senator Klobuchar. Thank you. I just have two last 
questions here. You earlier discussed some issues with Senator 
Stabenow about climate and environmental issues. I know it is 
going to be one of your focuses, and I believe, like so many on 
the Committee do, that farmers should be a major part of this. 
One of the ways you do that, in addition to the sequestration 
that I heard you talk about, is getting the data and making 
sure we know how best practices work, things like cover crops. 
I happen to know, having spent some time in Iowa, that there 
was a pilot program in your State about that. Could you--
Senator Thune and I had this bill called the ``Agriculture Data 
Act'' to better get more information and data for our farmers. 
Do you agree that research and data are important tools? Can 
you commit to finish the pilot program and examining the 
additional research opportunities that we could use data? The 
USDA is so important on that front.
    Mr. Vilsack. Senator, certainly I agree that data and 
research is important, and as I said earlier, I think we need 
to up our game as it relates to the data and research in this 
area. I am happy to take a look at the pilot to figure out ways 
in which that can be assisted and ways in which potentially the 
benefits or the information from that pilot can be distributed 
throughout the countryside and to the extent replicated.
    One of the keys with cover crops is creating market 
opportunities for those cover crops. It is one thing to ask 
farmers to essentially put the cover crop on there for soil 
health. It is another thing when we are asking them to incur an 
additional expense. I would hope that we would be able to 
figure out ways in which we could mitigate the impact 
financially, at the same time creating new markets or creating 
ways in which they can be incented or encouraged to do more 
cover cropping.
    Senator Klobuchar. Thank you. Last, Senator Cornyn and I 
included a provision in the 2018 Farm Bill creating a National 
Animal Vaccine and Veterinary Countermeasures Vaccine Bank and 
a program involving preparedness as we have seen from this 
pandemic, which has not hit our animals in any big way, but it 
sure hit a lot of people. What are your plans for implementing 
and improving animal disease preparedness and response policies 
at USDA?
    Mr. Vilsack. I think it is fair to say there is a 
recognition that animal health and human health are connected, 
and we have to understand this is a one-health system, and we 
need to make sure that we are in a position to, first and 
foremost, be able to detect more quickly at the farm gate when 
there is a problem so we can respond more quickly. We need to 
make sure that we have in place appropriate quarantine efforts. 
We have to make sure that we have in place the ability to 
identify the problem as quickly as possible. To your point, 
there needs to be the capacity to produce a vaccine and/or 
store the vaccine to be able to respond quickly, because the 
reality is if we do not respond quickly, there is not just the 
risk to animals and to the markets, but there is also risk to 
people. I think we have to understand the interconnection 
between the two.
    Senator Klobuchar. Thank you very much, and I will ask my 
questions for the record on Cuba. You and I share an interest 
in continuing to work on production issues and trade with Cuba 
as well as broadband and the CRP program. Thank you very much.
    Senator Stabenow. Thank you very much. We will now go to 
Senator Hoeven. I do want to indicate, if you step away 
virtually, make sure that we know you are back. We do not want 
to have you lose the ability to be able to ask your questions. 
We want to make sure we know who is with us. Senator Hoeven.
    Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Madam Chairman, and greetings, 
Secretary Vilsack. I appreciate the opportunity we have had to 
work together as Governors and during your first stint as 
Secretary of Agriculture, and I look forward to working with 
you in the future as Secretary of Agriculture on behalf of our 
great farmers and ranchers, the best in the world.
    Recently USDA froze more than $2 billion of the CFAP 
funding. Are you committed to continuing to get that funding 
out and then following the directives in the legislation that 
Congress included?
    Mr. Vilsack. I am, Senator. I hope that you understand and 
appreciate the fact that any new administration needs to have 
an opportunity to fully understand and appreciate exactly what 
is taking place with reference to that fund, what commitments 
have been made, what commitments have already been embraced. We 
just simply need time to have a better understanding of where 
that is. It is not designed for anything other than to give me, 
if I am confirmed, a better sense of that program. Obviously, 
we are going to follow the directives of Congress. That is 
reasonable and appropriate, and that is the way it should 
operate.
    I would say that we are going to continue to look for ways 
in which the tools that USDA has can be utilized in the best 
possible way to provide the assistance that people need to help 
build the economy back better, to expand opportunities when and 
if that presents itself. If there is a directive from Congress, 
we will obviously follow it.
    Senator Hoeven. Two I particularly worked on are both the 
WHIP Plus and making sure that we had follow-on funding to 
finish out the full intent of the WHIP Plus funding, and then 
also, QLA, Quality Loss Adjustment, something I included both 
language and funding for and would ask that in particular as 
you work on those, you would coordinate with our office.
    Mr. Vilsack. I am happy to work with your office and also 
would encourage us to provide input that we can make sure that 
the folks at the local level fully understand and appreciate 
exactly how these programs are supposed to work. I have 
received some indication from folks that maybe there is a 
disconnect between what is happening on the ground and what the 
intent was. We want to make sure there is consistency there, 
and to the extent you can provide help and assistance, to give 
us direction and instruction so our local folks know exactly 
what they need to do, that would be helpful, Senator.
    Senator Hoeven. Thank you. I appreciate that. We will do 
that. Also, on precision ag, the RISE Program, something I 
mentioned when you and I talked earlier, we have actually 
secured two rounds of funding for that. I think there is about 
$10 million. That is a new program. It is going to be great for 
precision ag, same thing, and if we could have that same 
approach on RISE, I would greatly appreciate it.
    Mr. Vilsack. Well, absolutely, and I am glad to see that 
you all have made the decision to focus and invest in this 
area, because as we deal with climate, as we deal with 
increased productivity, as we deal with farm income, and as we 
encourage soil health, precision agriculture becomes an 
important consideration, to the extent that we can invest in 
it, learn from it----
    Senator Hoeven. Yes, RISE is Rural Innovation Stronger 
Economy. I used the acronym. Yes, I think this is exactly the 
kind of thing that can have a very big impact, and I know you 
share that enthusiasm, and I appreciate that very much.
    On the carbon capture, we have talked about it a lot. I 
would just like to emphasize--and, of course, I am certainly 
willing to work with our Chairman. She is, I know, a strong 
leader in that area, and our Ranking Member. He and I work 
closely on everything. It has to be farmer-friendly. It has to 
be farmer-friendly. Could you respond to that?
    Mr. Vilsack. Well, I think there is a concern that a carbon 
sequestration bank would potentially benefit investors or 
benefit third parties. It has to be structured and devised and 
designed in a way that the principal beneficiaries are farmers. 
Why? Because we want them to do this. We want to encourage it. 
We want to incent it. Why do we want that? Because it is a 
quick win in terms of climate change. I think the farm 
economy--or the farm community, rather, is really ready for 
this. There have been conversations in every major commodity 
group about this. There is a commitment to proceed forward. 
Farmers know how to do this. We need to embrace them and 
encourage them and incent them.
    Whatever system we devise, whatever incentive program, 
whatever program we put together, there has to be farmer input, 
and at the end of the day it has to benefit farmers. If it 
does, I think there will be wide adoption.
    Senator Hoeven. As formerly Chair on Ag Approps, now 
Ranking Member, we work with the CCC, and the first priority of 
the CCC has always been funding the farm programs. I guess my 
question would be: Do you feel that the CCC is something that 
you would want to use for some type of carbon program? Are you 
willing to commit that the CCC has to be there to fund the 
priorities in the farm program, first and foremost?
    Mr. Vilsack. The first responsibility of the Commodity 
Credit Corporation is to make sure that the farm bill programs 
are adequately, fully, and timely funded.
    Senator Hoeven. Good.
    Mr. Vilsack. Having said that, Senator, to the extent that 
that vehicle is available without compromising the ability to 
fund the farm bill programs, it is a great tool for us to 
create the kind of structure that will inform future farm bills 
about what will encourage carbon sequestration, what will 
encourage precision agriculture, what will encourage soil 
health and regenerative agricultural practices. To that extent, 
there are resources available, I would hope that you all would 
provide me the opportunity to utilize that in a way, again, 
that does not compromise farm bill programs, but advances and 
creates additional markets.
    Secretary Perdue had great flexibility, appropriately so, 
after the current COVID situation. I would ask for the 
opportunity to use that flexibility appropriately, effectively, 
and smartly to create the opportunity for you, as you put 
together the next Farm Bill, to understand what works and what 
would be helpful in terms of programs.
    Senator Hoeven. We did use it to help with the trade, and I 
am encouraged. We are seeing more trade now, and we have seen 
some help there in terms of prices. I hope that continues. We 
know our producers want markets, and that is what we are all 
after.
    Two kind of final questions. I will be quick. One is we 
have got to do more for our livestock producers. We have got to 
get them more transparency in pricing in the market. We have 
got incredible concentration on the processor side. We have got 
to find ways to address that. That is a huge priority, if you 
could respond to that.
    Then one other point. The Forest Service, we do need your 
help with the Forest Service. It is, as you know very well, 
part of the Department of Ag. We have ranchers out there in the 
grasslands. We need your commitment to help with ranchers out 
in the grasslands. If you could just finish with responding to 
those two points.
    Senator Stabenow. In 30 seconds.
    Senator Hoeven. I apologize, Madam Chairman, for going 
over.
    Mr. Vilsack. We will work collaboratively with farmers and 
ranchers in terms of access to forest land. You know, in terms 
of--gosh, I have now forgotten your question, Senator.
    Senator Hoeven. Well, first, help for livestock producers, 
and then the Forest Service.
    Mr. Vilsack. Look, there is no question we need to 
strengthen the laws that are designed to create more openness 
and more transparency and more price discovery. No question 
about that. That is not enough. I think we need alternative 
processing opportunities. Why? Not just from the competitive 
standpoint, but also from a resilience standpoint. We have 
found that when one or two processing facilities shut down 
during COVID, it created havoc in the market. We cannot have 
that. We have to have a more resilient food system, and that in 
my view requires us to look at ways in which we can incent and 
encourage more processing facilities.
    Senator Hoeven. Thank you, and then help with the Forest 
Service, for our ranchers.
    Mr. Vilsack. I thought I had responded to that, but yes----
    Senator Hoeven. If you did, okay. Thank you very much. 
Again, Madam Chairman, thank you. I apologize for going over my 
time. I appreciate it.
    Senator Stabenow. Thank you.
    Senator Bennet.
    Senator Bennet. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, 
Senator Hoeven, for that question about processing. It is an 
important issue that we have got to address.
    Mr. Secretary, thank you for your willingness to serve and 
for your family's willingness to sacrifice. We deeply 
appreciate it, and I am very grateful that you are back.
    As I think you know, our national forests are an essential 
part of infrastructure throughout the West, providing water for 
our cities, sustaining agriculture, and driving our outdoor 
recreation economy.
    I want to say to the members of this Committee, in case you 
know him, this infrastructure is as important to our country as 
the Lincoln Tunnel is to Chuck Schumer and to New York. As you 
noted in your testimony, they also provide some of the best 
carbon capture systems that exist. Yet we are still not 
managing our forests like the critical infrastructure they are, 
and with climate change driving hotter and drier conditions, we 
are experiencing more catastrophic wildfires across the West, 
including the three largest in Colorado's history last year.
    Just in the last three years alone, NOAA tells us that this 
country spent--these fires cost our country $46 billion, and 
that does not even include the economy; that does not even 
include health--$43 billion up in smoke in three years.
    Mr. Secretary, that is why I recently introduced a bill 
that would set aside $60 billion to partner with our State and 
local governments to get this critical forest restoration work 
done across the West. I wonder if you could talk a little bit 
about what your priorities are going to be for the national 
forests ahead, what it would mean to the Forest Service, what 
they could achieve in terms of wildfire risk jobs, and avoiding 
costs if we actually did what is required, and what we should 
honor. These are national forests in our State.
    Mr. Vilsack. Senator, when I hear folks talk about 
infrastructure, invariably there is a discussion about roads, 
bridges, dams, ports, and airports, all of which are incredibly 
important, and we absolutely require significant investment in 
improving the infrastructure of this country so we remain 
competitive in a global market and that we can provide safe and 
secure access for the people of this country. I wonder why we 
do not also include the forests in that conversation because to 
me they represent a major infrastructure for the country.
    You mentioned carbon sequestration. The reality is clear 
air is directly connected to forests. Obviously, as we deal 
with trying to make our kids as healthy as we can, the outdoor 
recreational opportunities to the economy, the impact of 
forests in terms of outdoor recreation, hunting, fishing, 
biking, hiking, et cetera, all very, very significant job 
growth connected to it.
    I would hope, as the Congress deals with infrastructure 
issues and decides to commit significant resources to 
rebuilding the infrastructure of this country, that they would 
include forests in that conversation because if they do, we can 
do a better job of maintaining the forests.
    In the meantime, I think it is up to the United States 
Department of Agriculture to use the fire budget fix that you 
all did enact more effectively and more efficiently and 
utilizing that resource to do a better job to make sure that we 
are not diverting money away from the important job of 
maintaining and managing our forests. I am encouraged by the 
President's call for a Conservation Corps. We can put people to 
work. We can create new opportunities for folks as we do a 
better job of maintaining and repairing our forests.
    I think the Forest Service has tremendous opportunities 
here, and I look forward to working with you on your bill and 
any other way in which we can provide the resources to do a 
better job of forest management.
    Senator Bennet. I appreciate that, Mr. Secretary, and I 
think the Conservation Corps is a really good idea. We could 
create two million jobs in rural America in the West and 
probably in other places, too. In many communities that are 
facing a transition away from fossil fuels, this would create a 
real opportunity to drive incomes and drive jobs.
    In the limited time I have left, Mr. Secretary, it is my 
fault, but as you know, rural communities throughout our 
country and in Colorado face many of the same infrastructure 
challenges as larger communities, but they often face it with 
fewer resources and fewer staff. Too often local staff are left 
to navigate the Federal bureaucracy with little help. The 
pandemic has only made this problem worse, and I am worried 
that it will set rural areas even further behind on broadband 
and infrastructure projects. There are steps that agencies can 
take to help. For example, simplifying application 
requirements, increasing field staff, and improving 
coordination would help those rural communities compete for 
funding.
    You are now going to be in this job a second time, having 
the benefit of having been there before. Under your leadership, 
how will you make it easier for small and rural communities to 
access USDA's rural infrastructure funding?
    Mr. Vilsack. It begins by providing the technical 
assistance so people actually know what they need to do. We put 
together in the previous administration a thing called ``Strike 
Force,'' which was designed to provide a partnership between 
community building organizations and the USDA to create 
opportunities in persistently poor areas of the country for 
investment of all of our programs, not just our rural utility 
service programs, rural business development programs, all of 
our programs. The reality is we first have to teach folks how 
to play the game, and that provides technical assistance, and 
we have to basically guarantee success. We have to work with 
them long enough and hard enough to basically get to yes, and I 
think--I am committed to doing that in persistently poor areas 
in particular, but across the country. We need to improve the 
technical assistance that we provide, and I think if we did 
that, we would see better utilization of the resources and get 
more help to more people.
    Senator Bennet. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I am over time, 
but I would say Senator Boozman mentioned that the President's 
Executive order directs the Secretary of Agriculture to collect 
input from farmers and ranchers to use Federal programs to 
encourage adoption on climate-smart agricultural practices. We 
have been having a series of meetings in Colorado with farmers 
and ranchers over the last several years who are adapting to 
drought, communities dealing with reduced snow pack, and local 
elected leaders who are facing these rising costs of wildfire 
that you and I were just talking about. Mr. Secretary, I would 
like to invite you to come to Colorado at your soonest 
opportunity to begin to have those listening sessions on 
climate. We would roll the red carpet out for you.
    Mr. Vilsack. Senator, I look forward to that opportunity.
    Senator Stabenow. Senator Bennet, we are not sure exactly 
what that means in Colorado.
    Senator Bennet. Madam Chair, please come.
    Senator Stabenow. Yes, all right. Senator Boozman and I are 
going to go to Colorado. They are going to roll out the red 
carpet. This is good.
    Mr. Vilsack. Senator, I think it means an opportunity for 
me to see my grandson, granddaughter, son, and daughter-in-law.
    Senator Stabenow. That would definitely be the red carpet, 
so thank you.
    At this moment I do not believe we have present a 
Republican colleague. So Senator Brown is next on the list.
    Senator Brown. Thank you, Senator Stabenow, if I can call 
you ``Madam Chair,'' and I appreciate the generosity of Senator 
Boozman in doing this flip that is inevitable, and I believe 
will happen tomorrow, but thank you for doing that.
    Secretary Vilsack, good to see you again remotely before 
the Committee, and I appreciated our meeting a few days ago. 
Thank you for that.
    We know this, we have seen this pandemic is the great 
revealer in so many ways, how vulnerable people are and how 
much suffering is out there and why we need another package to 
help the American public. It is not just to fix the economy. It 
is to relieve suffering for so many people--the Dayton mother 
who needs SNAP benefits to put food on the table, the worker 
not too far from your home State, the workers in Sioux Falls at 
the meatpacking plant who have to choose between a paycheck and 
safety in the workplace. It is always important to understand 
these essential workers are people who, as one essential worker 
said to me, ``I do not feel that essential. I feel expendable. 
They do not pay me much, and they do not protect me on the 
job.'' That is up to you and up to the DOL and up to this 
Government, something we have not seen happen in a while.
    My question is this: How do we improve coordination between 
means-tested programs so that women and children already WIC-
eligible are actually seeing the benefit? We know that take-up 
is not as high as it should be. I know you struggled with that 
before. What do we do to make that work?
    Mr. Vilsack. Well, two things. I think that USDA needs to 
do a better job of educating people about the existence of the 
program, and I think we need to figure out creative ways to get 
folks interested in WIC in addition to the nutrition 
opportunities. Let me give you an example. There is a program 
that is operating in 12 States called ``Count the Kicks.'' It 
is a way of basically preventing stillbirths by counting the 
kicks. If we have things like this that are also tied--
educational opportunities that are also tied to WIC 
participation, maybe we get a broader awareness. This would be 
particularly true in communities of color to basically get--
because they have much higher stillborn rates than among white 
moms. The opportunity here I think is to create ways in which 
people see multiple benefits from programs.
    Second, I think it is important to get State and local 
leaders engaged in this as well. I think Governors, Mayors, and 
State Representatives, State Senators have a responsibility to 
make sure that people are aware of programs, aware how to get 
involved in programs. We need to look at ways in which we can 
create a much easier way of getting into these programs. If you 
are qualified for one program, is there not a way in which we 
could create--a way to have eligibility to a multitude of 
programs without necessarily requiring people to apply three or 
four or five different times, answering the same questions 
three or four different times, and doing it in three or four 
different offices? Making access to these programs more 
convenient, I think, educating people about the benefits, and 
expanding the benefits would be three ways, I think, for you to 
encourage increased participation.
    Senator Brown. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. You came out 
during your time with the Obama Administration and were very 
helpful in helping us combat algae blooms in the western basin 
of Lake Erie, the shallowest of the Great Lakes, as you know. 
The Congress allows States to pay up to 90 percent of the cost 
of ten high-priority EQIP programs. Many States decline to do 
so. How do we encourage all States to take advantage of that?
    Mr. Vilsack. Well, I think as we begin to have 
conversations about issues involving soil health, regenerative 
agriculture, new opportunities for farmers and ranchers, it is 
going to drive people to the practices that will reduce the 
risk of algae blooms or reduce the capacity of 
overfertilization that leads to these kinds of situations. It 
becomes in the best interest of a Governor and the best 
interest of a Secretary or Commissioner of Agriculture to 
advocate for this and to utilize those opportunities, because 
at the end of the day more productive soil means more profit 
for farmers. New market opportunities mean more jobs and more 
income for farmers.
    I think you make the economic case, and by doing so you 
encourage folks to amplify the message. I think with this 
climate discussion, Senator, we are going to have a lot of 
opportunity to visit with and to work collectively and 
collaboratively with State and local governments, because they 
are going to see the economic benefit in addition to the 
environmental benefit. The joining of those two ideas I think 
is very powerful.
    Senator Brown. Well, thank you. From my observation, I do 
not really know, but people tell me the President of the United 
States chose you to be USDA Secretary--well, for your 
experience, but in large part your vision and your clear-
sightedness and ability to look into the future on climate 
issues. You know, Lake Erie is one component of that. So is Jon 
Tester's farm in Montana. So are the lowlands in Bangladesh. We 
know all that.
    One last question. We talked about the pandemic being the 
great revealer. We saw pictures last year of farmers plowing 
under crops and dairies dumping milk because of a huge decline 
in demand. This past year has served as a wake-up call for many 
of us that, while we may have the most efficient food supply in 
the world, it is not as resilient as we thought. Improving 
local farm systems is a way not only to invest in rural 
communities but make our food system more equitable and more 
sustainable.
    How do you build on previous work that you have done and 
others have done to diversify our food supply chain, including 
local agriculture, while helping small and medium-sized farms?
    Mr. Vilsack. Well, you continue to look for ways in which 
you can create market opportunities for the small and mid-sized 
operations. You basically expand significantly the farm to 
school, farm to university, farm to college, farm to prison, 
farm to whatever institutional purchaser may be buying food in 
the locality, creating ways in which that institutional 
purchaser of food understands what is being grown and raised. 
You finance food hubs so that small producers can aggregate the 
amount of food that they are producing with other similarly 
sized farm operations so that you have uniformity in 
processing, packaging, and marketing.
    You obviously continue to expand commitment to farmers' 
markets. You look for ways in which you create risk management 
tools for those small and mid-sized providers so there is more 
profit opportunity. You create a transition assistance so 
people who are interested in going into organic can do it more 
easily.
    I mean, Senator, there are a multitude of ways to promote 
local and regional food systems. The Department of Agriculture 
can utilize existing resources to promote and to provide 
expansion for. Frankly, it is in everyone's best interest to 
have this.
    You also have to expand processing facilities. You have to 
give people the opportunity not necessarily to rely on a 
handful of large processing facilities. You need to create more 
of that. You started that process with the most recent COVID 
bill, a small program for processing. It has got to be much, 
much bigger than that, in my view. You also have a dairy 
donation program which I think is an incredibly good idea 
because there is a disincentive now. You have to spend money to 
process in order to be able to get it to food banks. You have 
to make sure that food banks have the infrastructure to 
collect, store, and refrigerate perishable items if you want 
more of that to go into the food assistance network if we have 
a disruption in food service.
    There is an entire supply chain program here that needs to 
be put in place, and USDA can impact and affect every single 
aspect of that supply chain.
    Senator Brown. Madam Chair, thank you. Mr. Secretary, thank 
you very much for serving.
    Senator Stabenow. Thank you very much.
    We will go now to Senator Ernst. I believe we have a vote 
that will start at noon, but we will continue on through as 
many members as we can. Senator Ernst.
    Senator Ernst. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Secretary 
Vilsack, for joining us here today. It is great to have you 
with us again, and you do bring a unique perspective to this 
position. Not only have you had the opportunity to serve as our 
Agriculture Secretary before, but, of course, more importantly, 
for Senator Grassley and me, you bring a unique perspective 
being from Iowa. It is my hope that if you are confirmed to the 
position again, you will stand firm for our farmers and 
ranchers in Iowa as you work to implement the new policies of 
this new administration.
    As you know, Iowa--and you know this intimately, but Iowa 
is a top producer of our biofuels, both ethanol and biodiesel. 
A new report released just last week found that greenhouse gas 
emissions from corn ethanol are 46 percent lower than gasoline. 
The Executive Order, however, last week establishes a policy to 
change the Federal vehicle fleet over to electric vehicles. In 
light of this announcement, will you be directing the USDA to 
purchase Tesla trucks that run on electricity? Or will you be 
supporting our farmers and purchasing Ford F-150's that run on 
E85?
    Mr. Vilsack. Senator, I do not think it is an either/or 
circumstance. I think there is an opportunity to advance both. 
The reality is we are going to need biofuels and the biofuel 
industry for the foreseeable future, and you mentioned the 
study that came out--I think it is a Harvard-based study--that 
I underscore the fact that as we educate people about the 
environmental benefits of biofuels, we will see, I think, the 
opportunity to expand the utilization of biofuels.
    I mentioned earlier the importance of marine and aviation 
fuel. It is not just transportation, cars and trucks. It is 
also jets and ships that will use this fuel. I think we look 
for expanded opportunities in a variety of different ways.
    At the same time, I think we recognize that there will be 
more and more electric vehicles that will be utilized in the 
country, and we also recognize that is going to require energy. 
Where does that energy come from? Well, I think there are 
opportunities within rural America to promote rural renewable 
energy, which can also be beneficial to the farmers, ranchers, 
and producers that we care about.
    Senator Ernst. I certainly hope that you continue to echo 
that sentiment very loudly and clearly with the administration, 
because my concern is this: As much as my Democratic colleagues 
would like to talk about Donald Trump and biofuels, you know, 
all day long, but when President Obama, your old boss, came to 
Iowa, he made a lot of really significant promises to these 
farmers in the biofuel industry, and I would argue that the 
reality is he simply was not a champion. We did not see E15 
year-round under his administration. He was not that champion. 
He put out the WOTUS rule, too, which was an attack on 
agriculture.
    Let us think ahead; 2022 is coming up. It is a significant 
milestone for the RFS. The Renewable Fuel Standard will need to 
be reauthorized, and if confirmed, which I anticipate you will 
be confirmed, you will be sitting in the Oval Office with 
President Biden in 2022. Just imagine yourself there, and you 
are there discussing the opportunity for the RFS, but you also 
have an electric vehicle advocate sitting across the table. 
What will you do in your capacity to make sure we get this 
done, get the renewal of the RFS done when we are facing near 
unanimous support of Democrats when it comes to electric 
vehicles? What is the way you will handle this as Secretary of 
Agriculture?
    Mr. Vilsack. Well, I would probably say to President Biden, 
I would probably remind him that I have a 2006 Ford Focus that 
I still own, so I have had it for--what? Fourteen, 15 years--17 
years--no, fifteen years. I would remind him that there are so 
many Americans like me and my wife who have cars that are six, 
seven, eight, ten, and twelve years old. The reality is that we 
are going to need both. We are going to need a biofuel industry 
that promotes, as you pointed out, the greenhouse gas emission 
savings over gasoline. We are going to promote biofuels because 
of the octane capacity, so if we are really interested in 
expanding mileage over time, one way to do that is by having 
biofuels, higher-blend biofuels that will expand mileage with 
new engines. The reality is that General Motors and Ford and 
all of those other car companies, they are not going to stop 
producing combustion engines, cars with combustion engines. 
They are not going to stop that process.
    We need an alternative fuel source in addition to, add to, 
complement our efforts on the electric. I do not see why we 
cannot have both. Over a long period of time, we are going to 
need both. While we are developing and ensuring that the 
infrastructure is in place, something the Obama Administration 
did invest in, additional infrastructure to increase the 
opportunities for E15 to be utilized in several thousand gas 
stations around the country, while we are doing that, we also 
need to look for ways in which we can incorporate biofuels, as 
I said before, in other forms of transportation. I think there 
are tremendous opportunities in aviation and marine fuel as 
well.
    I think there is a future for this industry. I think there 
are jobs connected to this industry. There is stability of farm 
income connected to this industry. I do not think I am going to 
have to be too persuasive in that Oval Office to have the 
President, who committed to the RFS during the course of the 
campaign, follow through on that.
    Senator Ernst. Thank you, Secretary. I do hope you stand 
strong.
    I have a question that I will submit for the record, but it 
is about the ``30 by 30'' climate proposal. It was a climate 
Executive order. It was a proposal to conserve 30 percent of 
U.S. land by 2030, and I know that is also very concerning to 
our farmers to have a proposal that would limit the opportunity 
for them to farm with widespread retirement of farmland. I will 
submit that for the record and look forward to your response.
    Senator Ernst. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
    Senator Stabenow. Thank you. As we move forward, Senator 
Leahy is next. Then, assuming we have time here, Senators 
Grassley, Casey, Fischer, Smith, Braun, and Gillibrand. Those 
are the names that I have here. I believe I just saw Senator 
Thune enter the room, so welcome.
    Senator Leahy, I believe you are with us.
    Senator Leahy. Thank you. Is it coming through okay?
    Senator Stabenow. It is. Thank you.
    Senator Leahy. Thank you very much.
    Mr. Secretary, it is good to see you, even though it is 
like this. We had a good chat the other day. I know we welcomed 
you in Vermont. We cannot provide grandchildren for you the way 
my colleague can in Colorado, but, you know, every time you 
have been in Vermont, everybody has been happy to see you, 
Republicans and Democrats alike. We will see you there again, I 
hope.
    It is so important, what you do--and, incidentally, I am 
glad to see that somebody has cars as old as the cars my wife 
and I have. Your Department helps our Nation's farmers and 
rural communities, underserved families, and look at the 
coronavirus pandemic, what that has done toward hunger and 
climate change, economic disruption, and communities all over 
the country, certainly my own State of Vermont but everywhere 
else. It has also shown us that race and gender and geography 
affect how Americans experience crises. I think we have to make 
sure that President Biden and you can work to make sure that 
not only Vermont but all over the country we have access to the 
resources we need.
    Madam Chair, I would like to put my full statement in the 
record, and I assume that is without objection.
    Senator Stabenow. Without objection.

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

    Senator Leahy. Last year marked the 30th anniversary of 
certainly one of my proudest achievements in passing the 
Organic Food Production Act. It is now a $55 billion per year 
industry. It has certainly been an economic factor in all parts 
of our country. There are several long overdue rulemakings 
which you initiated when you were Secretary before that are 
critical to maintaining this, the origin of livestock, closing 
loopholes and so on.
    We had mandated in the Fiscal Year 2020 appropriations bill 
that USDA complete the rule by June 17th of last year. Your 
predecessor did not. Could I ask that you look at that and see 
if the congressional mandate can be met and have those rules 
completed?
    Mr. Vilsack. Senator, it is my intention to be a supporter 
of the organic industry, and I understand that is a rule that 
needs to be looked at, and we will certainly do that and try to 
get that done as quickly as possible. If things have changed in 
the last four years in terms of that rule that may require a 
tweak here or there, whatever, we will be happy to take a look 
at that. I know that is an important rule, and we are going to 
get it done. We are going to support this industry because it 
is important. It is an important tool, it is an important 
value-added tool for farm income.
    Senator Leahy. Thank you very much. The other thing is food 
insecurity. You have heard about this all over the country. I 
know the University of Vermont found that one in four Vermont 
households were food-insecure between March and September 2020. 
We have done a number of things in our State to get food to 
people, including the creation of the Farmers to Families Food 
Box Program, which did a lot. Now, the last administration said 
they took that and they contracted it in some of the strangest 
ways,
    [inaudible] vendors delivered food boxes. There were many 
times food boxes were paid for, contracted for, and never 
showed up.
    We do know that we have local vendors that can work with 
local distributors and get local farmers and local food. I want 
to get back to that. I know when we tried that in Vermont, we 
had something all set to go, and they said, no, we have to go 
out of State to do it. It cost a lot more money and did not 
work as well.
    Please work with us, promise to families and make sure if 
there is going to be food assistance, that at least we try, 
whatever State it is, to see if the food is available from 
local providers. That helps the farmers, but it also gets the 
food quicker and usually cheaper to the families that need it.
    Mr. Vilsack. That is a fair request, Senator, and it is 
also a way by which you can encourage local and regional food 
systems as a complement to our more commodity-based system. I 
am happy to work with you on that and look for ways in which we 
can improve that program, especially as it relates to really 
remote areas that are serviced.
    Senator Leahy. I know others are waiting so I will submit 
any other questions for the record. I must say I am delighted 
to have you back. You and I have worked very, very closely 
together in the past years. I know Republicans and Democrats 
alike in the Senate have appreciated the fact that you have 
listened and are knowledgeable. After you have visited your 
grandchildren, come and visit mine in Vermont. Just remember 
there is a secret power in the Constitution, which is 
grandparents must spoil the grandchildren. My grandchildren 
believe in that power of the Constitution.
    Senator Leahy. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
    Mr. Vilsack. Thank you, Senator.
    Senator Stabenow. Well, thank you, Senator Leahy, former 
Chairman. Thank you for all of your leadership over the years.
    Senator Grassley.
    Senator Grassley. Thank you, Senator Stabenow. 
Congratulations once again to the Secretary for being 
renominated for this position.
    In your previous position, you used the Commodity Credit 
Corporation for E15 and E85 pumps to help increase biofuel 
infrastructure. You probably do not know this, but in the CARES 
Act No. 1 last March, we put $24.5 billion into it to help 
agriculture and food distribution, food supplement for lower-
income people, et cetera, et cetera. We tried to get the 
previous Secretary of Agriculture to use some of that money to 
help biofuel producers because we had just a lot of plants shut 
down or go into partial operation.
    We made it very clear, since the previous Secretary said he 
did not think he had the authority to do it, in the recent 
CARES Act passed before Christmas, we included authority for 
the Secretary to do that. I am hoping, if confirmed--I guess 
maybe I should say I am really asking you the question. Would 
you be able to help us with this authority to utilize your 
authority to provide direct assistance to biofuel producers 
negatively impacted by COVID-19?
    Mr. Vilsack. Senator, I am aware of the fact that the 
industry did not get the help that it needed and will certainly 
look for ways in which we can be assisting the industry. In 
addition to what you mentioned, there is also the opportunity 
to take a look at the infrastructure program that Secretary 
Perdue did start. Not all those resources, as I understand it, 
have been invested, so potentially there is a way that also 
could provide opportunities for us to help the industry at this 
point in time. We will continue to look for ways to provide 
assistance because it is about strong markets for farmers and 
it is about jobs in rural areas.
    Senator Grassley. Okay. Ensuring an affordable, safe, and 
stable supply of food is one of the most important jobs that 
you or any Secretary of Ag has. This past April, disruptions in 
beef production peaked when nearly 40 percent of the Nation's 
beef processing capacity was idle. While the normal spread 
between boxed beef cutout value and fed cattle is around $21, 
last April the spread was over $279 per hundredweight, the 
highest spread ever recorded. Because just four companies 
control over 80 percent of beef processing, the concentration 
of power in the industry led to beef shortages at grocery 
stores and producers out of luck to get bids on their animals.
    If you are confirmed, do you plan to reintroduce your Fair 
Market Practices Rule that you published the last week of the 
Obama Administration? I believe I was very supportive of what 
you were doing at that time, but then, you know, Trump came in 
and did not move ahead with it. I hope that you would be 
willing to go along that same line again.
    Mr. Vilsack. Well, Senator, I think we will take a very 
close and detailed look at every tool that USDA has available 
to it to ensure more openness and more fairness and more 
transparency in our markets. We will also look for ways in 
which we can work collaboratively with the Department of 
Justice if there are issues relating to antitrust that need to 
be explored in greater detail. We will also take a look at ways 
in which we can provide incentives or resources that could 
potentially expand the amount of processing facilities in the 
country so that we are not faced with the disruption that we 
have seen in the past; we are not faced with market distortions 
that we have seen in the past; and we are not faced with what 
farmers and ranchers believe they are not getting a fair shake, 
as we have seen in the past.
    Senator Grassley. We continue to see large farms use 
loopholes to maximize crop insurance payments. I have long 
advocated for responsible payment limitations on commodity 
programs and believe farmers should only receive payments if 
they are actually engaged on the farm and running the farm and 
working the farm. In 2020, the U.S. Department of Agriculture 
announced final rules on the definition of ``actively engaged 
in farming'' as part of the 2018 Farm Bill. This rule would 
have required additional family members to provide either 25 
percent of the total management hours required or perform at 
least 500 hours of management each year. However, just weeks 
later, the USDA said that they made a mistake; it did not apply 
to family run operations.
    How would you define ``actively engaged'' as it relates to 
commodity program payments? Or put another way, so I really 
only have one question, how many hours does someone need to 
work to qualify for a farm payment? Now, that may be a 
difficult question for you, but it gives you a chance to tell 
me how you would approach this so that we do not have a lot of 
people that are not really involved in farming to not get the 
help that only family farmers should get.
    Mr. Vilsack. You know, Senator, I think this is a really 
important question, and the reason it is an important question 
is because so few people in this country farm. People that you 
work with in the Congress and the Senate may represent 
districts or may represent States that are less agricultural 
than the State of Iowa. It becomes important for the programs 
that are legitimate, that are effective and efficient, and that 
are expensive. It makes it more difficult for you to advocate 
on behalf of a proper safety net, proper risk management tools, 
if those tools are being utilized in a way that provides help 
and assistance to people who might be practicing wrong in a 
high-rise in some big city as opposed to being on the ground in 
a tractor and a combine, as you often are.
    My goal here would be to make sure that programs that we 
have that provide that safety net are designed to help the 
people most affected--the farmers on the ground that are 
actually at risk financially, folks that are sweating every 
single day in terms of markets, and not necessarily create a 
system that can be gamed.
    I do not know if that is a direct answer to your question, 
but I hope it gives you a sense of where my values are, where 
my focus will be. It is on helping farmers. It is not on 
helping people who may be part of a partnership or a limited 
partnership or general partner structures that are set up to 
create avenues for people to take advantage of these programs. 
That does not help the program; it does not help you as an 
advocate of the program; and it does not help legitimize the 
appropriateness of a safety net for farmers.
    Senator Grassley. Thank you very much. I yield.
    Senator Stabenow. Thank you very much.
    Senator Casey.
    Senator Casey. Thank you, Senator Stabenow, and I want to 
thank you, Secretary Vilsack, in particular for your continuing 
commitment to exemplary public service and your willingness to 
serve this administration and the American people. Of course, I 
am always proud of your Pennsylvania roots.
    I have two questions and will submit more for the record. I 
want to start with food security or food insecurity. It is an 
issue that so many of us have worked on. I know you have in 
your work as Secretary, but also I want to thank you for the 
work that you did as Secretary of Agriculture and, of course, 
the work done by Senator Stabenow this year and others to 
provide more food assistance.
    We know the Biden administration has made clear they are 
committed to addressing food insecurity by providing more food 
assistance. The Executive order to expand nutrition assistance 
was an important first step, but as you know, Mr. Secretary, 
there are significant additional investments that require 
congressional action and that President Biden has called for in 
his American Rescue Plan.
    I appreciate the Executive Order including direction for 
USDA to work with the Department of Justice to review its 
authority to allow States to provide extra SNAP emergency 
allotments for the lowest-income households. As you know from 
our discussion, Pennsylvania has been unable to move forward 
with approved emergency allotments because the Department of 
Agriculture previously threatened to recoup more than $400 
million in additional benefits. The relevant legal challenge 
was put on hold for 30 days, providing USDA an opportunity to 
examine and reconsider the decision made by the previous 
administration.
    First question: As Secretary, would you explore every legal 
option and opportunity to maximize emergency allotments to the 
States and provide much-needed clarity to enable Pennsylvania 
and other States to move forward as quickly as possible?
    Mr. Vilsack. Senator, I am heartened by the fact that there 
are conversations taking place between the Department of 
Justice and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to try to get this 
resolved in a way that is appropriate and is acceptable to the 
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. I have encouraged those 
conversations and hope that they ultimate end up in a place 
that you find satisfactory. We certainly encourage that 
conversation and appreciate the fact that there is still time 
to get this thing resolved in a way that makes sense.
    Let me just simply say as a practical matter or as a 
philosophy, I think whatever we can do to provide as much help 
as we possibly can to people in need, we should do. I think 
however we can make benefits most conveniently utilized, we 
should do. I think we should figure out additional ways to make 
qualification for and access to these programs. I think in my 
conversations with Senator Boozman, we talked about getting rid 
of the hassle that can sometimes be connected with these 
programs. I think he is absolutely right about that. There are 
ways that you could do this without minimizing the integrity or 
without disregarding the integrity of the programs. If we can 
expand access, if we can increase benefits, if we could make 
them more convenient, I think more people would be helped. I 
think that is what I would hope we would be able to do, if I am 
confirmed at USDA. That would be the goal, more access, more 
convenience, and I frankly think at some point we need to take 
a look at the level of benefits. It is great that it is being 
extended for six months, the 15-percent increase, but the 
reality is I think you will find that the way in which we 
calculate that benefit does not make sense today. If you create 
a benefit that is tied to the way things are today,
    [inaudible].
    Senator Casey. Mr. Secretary, thank you for working with us 
on this issue. My last question is about water quality and 
climate change. We know that the same practices and programs 
that we worked to improve through the last Farm Bill for water 
quality also offer enormous climate benefits, as you know as 
well as anyone. We know the adoption of best management 
practices for water quality like forested riparian buffers and 
filter strips can also provide long-term carbon storage and 
emission reductions.
    The Department has an important role to play in not only 
providing the financial and technical assistance, but also in 
terms of measuring and evaluating the benefits they provide.
    I have got a bill, the Farmer-Driven Conservation Outcomes 
Act, which would direct the Department to establish a process 
through which USDA can measure, evaluate, and report on these 
conservation benefits. If confirmed, would you support efforts 
to stand up such measurement, evaluation, and reporting systems 
at USDA to help us quantify the benefits of climate-smart 
agriculture and water quality co-benefits?
    Mr. Vilsack. Senator, if you want to have a functioning 
ecosystem market that supports water quality, and encourages 
more investment in water quality, you need to be able to 
certify, measure, and quantify the results. I would be happy to 
work with you and anyone else who is interested in figuring out 
ways in which we can do a better job of that to make sure that 
those markets are as strong as they possibly can be.
    I am convinced that, compared to new income opportunities 
for farmers, we need to do everything we can to create those 
additional market operations.
    Senator Casey. Mr. Secretary, thank you very much.
    Senator Stabenow. Thank you very much.
    Next we have Senator Fischer, and just for everyone's 
knowledge, Senator Boozman has stepped away to vote. When he is 
back, I will do that. He will conclude the meeting. We will be 
able to have everyone who wishes to be able to question 
Secretary Vilsack.
    Senator Fischer.
    Senator Fischer. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
    Secretary Vilsack, I know that my colleague Senator Hoeven 
touched on this a bit, and I appreciate your comments on the 
need for additional slaughtering capacity. Are you concerned 
that negotiated trade levels in the fed cattle market may have 
diminished to the point that price discovery is not sufficient 
to enable the cow-calf and cattle feeding segment to benefit 
from our current market conditions?
    Mr. Vilsack. The quick answer to that is yes, I think we 
need more price discovery, Senator.
    Senator Fischer. Have you thought about different ideas on 
how that could be achieved? Because I just may have a bill for 
you.
    Mr. Vilsack. Well, I am happy to work with you, and I am 
sure that you have got very good ideas. Given the important 
role that that industry plays in Nebraska, I am not surprised 
that you have some ideas, and I would look forward, if 
confirmed, to working with you to figure out what works best 
for Nebraska and for the country.
    Senator Fischer. Great. Thank you. I enjoyed our 
conversation that we had before this hearing earlier, a couple 
weeks ago, and I do appreciate your interest in that.
    As you know, the U.S. is a global leader in the production 
of high-quality, sustainable feed because cattle producers 
worked hard for decades to improve the quality of our cattle 
and build the brands that consumers love and trust. I think 
there is a general agreement that the USDA's generically 
approved ``Product of the USA'' label has failed to keep up 
with the evolving consumer expectations. Many are of the mind-
set that USDA already has the necessary tools and regulatory 
power to improve this dated general level label.
    Do you believe that the current labeling policy adequately 
informs consumers?
    Mr. Vilsack. If it is the same policy as it was four years 
ago when I left, the answer is no. We made every concerted 
effort to try to create better transparency, better information 
for consumers, because we understand and appreciate that 
consumers want to know where their food comes from; they want 
to know when they are buying U.S. and when they are not 
buying--or they are buying from someplace else. We attempted on 
three occasions to sort of strengthen the country-of-origin 
labeling unsuccessfully because of the WTO challenges by our 
Canadian friends which would have resulted, obviously, in 
retaliation.
    I am absolutely willing to listen to anybody and everybody 
who has got an idea about how we can circumvent or how we can 
get to a point where the WTO does not necessarily slap it down, 
that it creates retaliatory impacts on American agriculture. I 
am frank to say I need help in that respect. We can ignore the 
WTO, but then we have got the retaliation, and then, you know, 
that is just not a good situation.
    Senator Fischer. No, that would not be a good thing. I hope 
that we can work together and bring in a lot of stakeholders 
from the cattle industry to be able to look at that and 
possibly look at what the USDA can already do, that maybe the 
tools that they said earlier--maybe the tools are already 
there. Maybe we can strengthen that ``Product of the USA'' 
labeling so it will work and be accepted by our trading 
partners so that we do not have to face sanctions and in the 
future as well.
    Mr. Vilsack. I am happy to do that, Senator.
    Senator Fischer. Wonderful. Thank you.
    As you know, Nebraska is the perfect agricultural 
laboratory for creating the data-driven farm of the future. 
With our seven climate zones and wide variation in soils and 
precipitation, we have been leaders on precision livestock and 
crop production. Would you expand on how innovations in 
agriculture will drive precision livestock and crop production 
and continue our Nation's global leadership role in feeding and 
fueling the world?
    Mr. Vilsack. Well, I am happy to do that. Whether it is our 
consumers here in the U.S. or our efforts to try to export 
overseas, I can tell you we are facing competition on not just 
the quality, not just the safety, not just the taste, not just 
the price. We are also now facing competition on whether or not 
whatever it is we are selling has been sustainably produced.
    To the extent that we can make the case to the world that 
what is being raised, what is being grown, what is being sold 
outside the U.S. is being raised and grown in the most 
sustainable, animal-friendly environments, we can make the case 
and provide a market advantage to the U.S. Innovation becomes 
critically important. President Biden has a vision of a zero 
emission agriculture, and I will tell you, if we reach that 
vision by 2050, the goal that he has set, as we are reaching 
it, it will give us an incredible competitive advantage in the 
world markets because people are hungry for this.
    We will not be able to do this without innovation. We will 
not be able to do it without precision agriculture. We will not 
be able to do it without a true commitment to soil health and 
regenerative practices. We will not be able to do it without 
organic playing a role. We will not be able to do it without 
the technology that converts agricultural waste into a variety 
of products so that we move away from an extraction economy we 
have had in the past to a more circular or more regenerative 
economy. That is the goal. If we do that, Senator, I guarantee 
you we will be able to sell our product anywhere in the world. 
If we do not do it, we are going to have trouble selling it 
anywhere.
    Senator Fischer. How important is the role of our land 
grant universities in all of this, in trying to complement the 
efforts of the USDA?
    Mr. Vilsack. Well, it is funny you mention land grant--this 
is an 1863 report of the Commission of Agriculture that was 
part of the Interior Department, the first report from the 
Commissioner of Agriculture to Abraham Lincoln. If you read the 
preface of that document, 600 pages about agriculture in the 
United States, you would be surprised how much similarity there 
is between that period of time in 1863 and now. The critical 
role that education, the land grant university system that was 
launched in 1862, and the need for research and innovation has 
in providing more profitability, more opportunity for farmers, 
ranchers, producers, and people who live in rural America.
    The land grant university is one of the great gifts that 
President Lincoln and succeeding generations have provided to 
this country, and it has an important role. I think it has an 
essential role. It is not just the 1862s. It is also the 
minority-serving institutions that also have that role in 
making sure that information gets out to the country. I would 
hope that the USDA could work collaboratively, and I believe it 
would if I am confirmed, work collaboratively with that land 
grant university system. I have spent the last four years 
affiliated with Colorado State University, and as a Governor, I 
had a very keen understanding of Iowa State University. I can 
tell you that it is a tremendous, tremendous treasure, and we 
need to utilize it, and we need to invest in it across the 
board. If we do not, we are not going to have the innovation 
that we need to be competitive.
    Senator Fischer. Well, thank you very much. I appreciate 
your being here today and your clear answers. Thank you, sir.
    Senator Boozman.[Presiding.]
    Senator Smith.
    Senator Smith. Thank you very much, Senator Boozman. 
Secretary Vilsack, it is great to see you again. I will give 
you a chance to take a sip of your tea or coffee because you 
have had a long morning so far.
    I so appreciated the chance to visit with you a couple of 
weeks ago, and I really appreciate, as a fellow Minnesotan, 
your understanding of the diversity of agriculture in our part 
of the country and the importance of family farmers and 
ranchers. I really liked also the way you have framed up your 
comments today, this morning, in terms of four what-if moments 
around climate and food security and competition and inequity. 
We have had a lot of great conversations about climate and 
biofuels, so I want to just associate myself with those good 
questions from Senator Klobuchar and others.
    I would actually like today to home in a little bit on this 
question of inequity and especially what USDA can do to expand 
access to resources, especially access to credit. I am sure you 
know that in Minnesota we have Hmong refugees who brought their 
farming traditions to Minnesota in the 1970's. We have a 
significant community of Latino farmers that are really 
integral to our ag sector, led by great organizations like the 
Latino Economic Development Center. We also have Native farmers 
that are really central to our history, and as they work to 
diversify their economies, they are working hard to find 
markets for their unique products like wild rice, which is 
becoming a very prized product overseas.
    In the 2018 Farm Bill, I pushed for provisions that would 
help to evaluate access to credit and how well diverse farmers, 
farmers of color have access to credit as they work to build 
their family businesses. The study came out--and they did that. 
The study came out in 2019, and it found that traditionally 
underserved farming communities face really significant 
barriers to receiving private agricultural credit, and that 
traditionally underserved communities are often not even aware 
of what their credit options and lending options are.
    In the spirit of your opening comments, could you just 
expand a little bit on how you see this and what you think the 
USDA can do internally and externally to ensure that these 
communities are aware of and have true and full access to 
credit options as they try to operate their farms?
    Mr. Vilsack. There are multiple steps that need to be 
taken, Senator. First of all, I think we need to take a much 
deeper dive than has ever been taken before in terms of USDA 
programs to identify what barriers actually, in fact, exist in 
each of those programs. I would anticipate and expect that we 
would put together, for lack of a better term, an equity 
commission or a task force that would be charged with taking a 
look at USDA programs, identifying is there systemic racism 
inherent in these programs, are there barriers, maybe 
intentional or unintentional barriers, that make it difficult 
for people to access the programs; and if so, how do we correct 
that. What steps need to be taken, No. 1?
    No. 2, I think it is about technical assistance and making 
sure that we work with people who are trusted in the 
communities. It is very difficult sometimes in those 
communities to go in from the Government and say, you know, the 
old adage, ``We are from the Government. We are here to help.'' 
Maybe it is better to say, ``We are from the Government. We 
want to affiliate ourselves with a community-building 
organization that you do trust, that you do listen to,'' and 
then we want to work with that community-building organization 
to provide the information and the technical assistance and the 
awareness and the steps necessary for you to be successful in 
developing these programs.
    Then I think it takes a work force that is diverse, that 
has the right perspective. Maybe some of those people 
themselves have been through this, so that you essentially have 
people that are sympathetic and understanding, that maybe the 
rules may not be fully understood. It make take a little time, 
it may take some patience to get it done.
    Then to the extent we have an appeal process, that appeal 
process has to be true, has to be a real appeal process. It 
cannot be a whitewash, if you will. What we need is to make 
sure that we have people on those appeal boards at the county 
level and at the State level that also represent that 
diversity.
    When I was Secretary before, I exercised the power to 
enhance the diversity in many of those county committees. 
Obviously, I am willing to do that again, but the hope would be 
that folks locally understand and appreciate the necessity of 
having that voice, that person in the room that can explain why 
this appeal should because considered.
    Also, I would say it is also accountability and making sure 
that I, if I am confirmed as Secretary, and the Under Secretary 
and the people who are responsible for administering these 
programs are held accountable. That means collecting 
information and data to make sure that we are aware if there is 
a problem, where the problem might be so we can address it as 
quickly as possible.
    Those are some of the steps that need to be taken, I 
believe.
    Senator Smith. I really appreciate your answer. I 
appreciate especially what you say about listening to the 
people that are on the ground. I think about in Minnesota where 
we have got the Hmong-American Farmers Association and the 
Latino Economic Development Corporation that know so much about 
what their members and their community need to make this work.
    I will also just point out that the Minneapolis Fed has 
also just recently released some data about underserved 
communities in Minnesota and have a really excellent center for 
Indian country development that could be really helpful here.
    I would love to invite you to Minnesota to have 
conversations with some of these really talented and 
knowledgeable community members. I bet Senator Klobuchar would 
be interested in this as well. I know she is, and I think we 
could do some real good here and strengthen the ag economy as 
well as create more opportunities for family farmers.
    Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
    Senator Boozman. Senator Braun.
    Senator Braun. Thank you, Senator Boozman.
    Secretary Vilsack, I enjoyed our conversation last week. We 
covered several topics, and I am going to focus on three of 
them, two with some time, and start off with talking about 
farmers being great stewards of the land. I have been involved 
in the conservation side of farming, been involved in farming 
for decades. One thing I see each year that is tougher for 
farmers is the stakes go up, the risk is greater financially. I 
harken back to 2009 to 2013, the last time until just recently 
we had decent profits in especially the grain markets, which 
have a ripple effect with poultry, livestock, and so forth.
    You know, mentioning anything you can do that is going to 
make life less complicated for farmers, if we are going to keep 
family farms as the grassroots level of how we produce food in 
this country, I think there are a lot of things that need to 
kind of work in the right direction.
    I am glad that you are interested in and I think there are 
benefits to be derived, adding profit per acre by taking the 
good stewardship that most farmers exercise anyway, and 
matching it up with voluntary markets. I am involved in a bill 
to do that. I think that will happen, hopefully maybe this 
year.
    I want to focus on what since 2009 to 2013, and that was 
right after, I guess, the days of LDPs and direct payments, 
which will get to the second thing I want to talk about here in 
a moment, the heavy involvement of Government over the years 
that we have just weaned ourselves away from. Part of the 
solution in my mind is to look at the inputs that they use in 
their business have doubled, tripled, and sometimes quadrupled 
between 2009 and 2013 and the present. I think market 
concentration is something that whenever you have too much of 
it--we see it in health care now; we see it in tech; we see it 
in many other places. Inputs, prices, costs go up, stay up, do 
not come down.
    Would you comment on what you would do in your unique 
position to address the things that farmers need to buy and 
purchase increasingly from fewer and fewer and less local all 
the time in terms of the major inputs that go into their 
business?
    Mr. Vilsack. Senator, I think one of the things that we 
could do and should do it is for the Secretary of Agriculture 
to reach out to the Attorney General and see whether or not the 
Attorney General, the Department of Justice, would be 
interested in reinvigorating, re-creating the task force that 
occurred a number of years ago with the express understanding 
of taking a look, a very deep dive into the issues that you 
have raised, and perhaps expanding that task force beyond the 
Department of Justice to include other players that may have an 
impact, whether it is in the Federal Trade Commission or 
whether it is the Small Business Administration or whoever 
might have an equity, if you will, in this issue of markets 
that are working, markets that are competitive, markets that 
are open.
    I think there are tools obviously within the USDA that we 
need to take a look at relative to examining the economic 
analysis and deep data of the impact of concentration on the 
costs, on the input costs, to create sort of a foundation, a 
basis for potential action and rulemaking if necessary. I think 
you and I talked about patent laws, whether or not they need to 
be looked at and examined to determine whether or not in a day 
of rapid, incredibly rapid change, they need to be looked at in 
terms of the amount of time that folks have in terms of patent 
protection. I think, frankly, we need to research--this is a 
bit afield from the input question you asked, but I think we 
need to take a look at how we might be able to significantly 
increase public research so that the foundation research upon 
which new seeds and so forth can be developed is not 
necessarily as expensive as our current system where the 
private sector basically creates the new technology and then 
licenses it to seed companies.
    I think there are multitude of ways in which the USDA can 
be engaged in this conversation.
    Senator Braun. You know, in times like these where 
agriculture has been stressed, so often in my two years here, 
any industry that gets in trouble generally comes to the 
Federal Government to look for help, and I think most farmers, 
as I mentioned earlier, were glad to wean themselves from LDP 
payments, direct payments, and basically most of the 
involvement, other than in a year like going through COVID, 
would have been through crop insurance.
    A couple things. Government can cost farmers per acre with 
burdensome regulations. Again, I believe in conservation. I 
believe in saving the resource, treating it well. Waters of the 
U.S. had a significant impact on farmers and developers in 
terms of, I think, adding undue burdens. I would hope that you 
would look at that side of the equation too because I think you 
will be in a unique position to weigh in. Regulation where you 
need it, make sure it is not in overdrive. Then try to keep a 
focus on maybe helping find new markets, do things that are 
going to broaden the ability for farmers to sell what they 
produce, and keeping costs down, which you mentioned a little 
bit ago; and then mostly avoiding Government ending up getting 
more involved because I think that is one thing that, first of 
all, from a budget point of view, we cannot take on the burden 
of doing more when we are running trillion-dollar deficits 
structurally.
    I would just like your comment on how we keep farmers 
healthy without, you know, reverting to the Federal Government 
being more involved in a financial way.
    Mr. Vilsack. Well, I think, in a word, markets; the ability 
to create more local and regional markets, the ability to 
create new markets with our emphasis on climate, the ability to 
expand on our export activities either by virtue of newer 
markets or by more competitive opportunities in existing 
markets. It starts with markets, Senator. I think that is 
critically important. I do believe that we are on the cusp of 
creating a series of new market opportunities that will provide 
greater resiliency in the system, that will provide more income 
opportunities for farmers, that will do right by the 
environment, and I think will create jobs in rural places.
    I think we need to seize this moment, and if confirmed, I 
would hope that I could work with you and others on the 
Committee to make that day happen. I think the President has 
got the right vision of zero emission agriculture. I do believe 
honestly that it will create enormous new opportunities and 
allow the family farm, regardless of size, to stay in business 
and to be able to pass it on to the next generation, which is 
what I think most farmers are anxious to do.
    Senator Braun. Thank you. I do look forward to working with 
you on those three topics and others as well. Thank you.
    Senator Boozman. Thank you.
    Senator Gillibrand.
    Senator Gillibrand. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Vilsack, 
welcome again to this hearing. I consider you part native New 
Yorker, having gone to school at Hamilton and Albany Law. I 
hope that you will come and visit New York State as Agriculture 
Secretary again. I think it would be very meaningful to a lot 
of our producers.
    One of the issues I wanted to touch upon is dairy. You know 
that New York is No. 3 producing State for dairy in the 
country. During this pandemic, and even over the last 10 years, 
dairies, especially small, family owned dairies, have continued 
to dwindle, and we have seen such extreme hardships that we 
have seen bankruptcies and suicides in the dairy industry. It 
is a vital interest of mine that we talk about how we can 
reform dairy pricing.
    You obviously headed a large dairy organization since 2017, 
and mid- and small-sized dairy farms will need to know that you 
will also be able to look out for them. What assurances can you 
give these dairies? Can you please elaborate specifically on 
how you intend to help them?
    Mr. Vilsack. Senator, I think first and foremost we talked 
a little bit about the local and regional food system. I think 
there are terrific opportunities for small- and mid-sized dairy 
operations to take advantage of being able to sell locally, to 
be able to negotiate prices, to be able to also potentially get 
assistance and help from the USDA, to create small processing 
facilities where they can convert their product into something 
more value-added instead of shipping it to a processing 
facility where it is value-added someplace else. There are 
examples of that. I think there are ways in which we can 
provide help and assistance.
    I think there are ways in which we can encourage from farm 
to school. You know, obviously, in addition to fluid milk 
products, there are other products that could potentially be 
purchased by a school that is being locally produced and 
creating more market opportunities. That is one.
    Two, I think what is interesting, you mentioned the milk 
marketing system, very complicated, very confusing, very 
difficult to understand. One of potentially a number of issues 
you could raise about that is that it does not take into 
consideration the value that comes from exports. More and more 
milk is, in fact, being, if you will, exported in the form of 
powder and cheese and so forth around the world. One out of 
every seven, one out of every six tankers of milk actually gets 
exported. The value of that is not factored into the price
    [inaudible] and it needs to be. I do not--you know, I think 
that there are ways in which we can work together to make sure 
that that process as it unfolds provides a better price for the 
farmers, a fairer price that takes into consideration all that 
is being currently done with--
    Senator Gillibrand. Yes. I think it also needs to actually 
take into account the cost of production and what that is 
regionally, because many times the reimbursement rate is below 
the cost of production. Different parts of the country have 
different costs of production. We do not want agriculture for 
anyone--fruit, vegetable, dairy product--to be regionalized 
because we know that ag should always be looked at through a 
national security lens. When trace elements of nuclear fallout 
material was found in dairies in California, that raised a huge 
alarm because of a nuclear fallout incident in Japan. We want 
to make sure that we do not lose areas of the country that are 
committed to production because our formulas do not work for 
everybody. I would just urge you to work with me on a really 
fulsome review of how that milk pricing takes place.
    The second issue I would like to talk about is nutrition. 
Obviously, the pandemic has left millions of families without a 
source of income, and many have turned to Federal programs like 
WIC and SNAP for the first time along with pandemic EBT. The 
USDA has given many flexibilities and waivers to States to 
operate these programs efficiently through the pandemic, making 
it easier for Americans to apply for those benefits and getting 
more families to be able to feed their hungry kids. Clearly, 
much more needs to be done, so I wanted to know what actions 
you will take as Secretary to support these programs to further 
alleviate the strain. Can you speak to the importance of the P-
EBT program? Do you believe that Congress should permanently 
authorize this program?
    Mr. Vilsack. Senator, one of the first things we need to be 
able to do is to provide the resources that you all voted on 
and provided for States to be distributed. I think it is $100 
million of assistance to encourage more help at the State 
level. A lot of the implementation of these programs occurs at 
the State level, so I think it is important for us to provide 
the resources so that the States can do a better job, provide 
clarity and flexibility so States can do a better job. I think 
the Secretary of Agriculture needs to work very directly with 
Governors to make sure that it is a priority of every single 
Governor, because, frankly, sometimes it is not. Sometimes they 
leave it up to their human services folks to take care of these 
programs. They need to be engaged personally to make sure that 
folks understand it is a priority that these nutrition 
assistance programs are available to people, they are 
accessible to people, they easily qualify for folks, and that 
the benefits get to them.
    Second--
    Senator Gillibrand. Keep going.
    Mr. Vilsack. Second, the reality is we need to figure out 
ways in which these benefits can be conveniently used, 
especially in the face of a pandemic. I mean, it is all well 
and good to give somebody a SNAP card and say, ``Go to your 
local grocery store and buy more food.'' That is great, 
assuming you have a grocery store. If you do not have a grocery 
store, then what? Are there ways in which with the online work, 
the restaurants that are closed, is there a way of 
incorporating them in an effort to get resources and food? How 
do we bolster the capacity of food banks and pantries by 
investing in their infrastructure? They are a significant asset 
here. They are underutilized because they do not have the 
capacity to store or refrigerate. I mean, there are a multitude 
of ways in which we need to work at USDA to make this system 
much more robust and more resilient.
    You mentioned WIC--
    Senator Gillibrand. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. My time is 
up, and I want to just tell you I have two questions I am 
adding to the record for you to answer in your free time. One 
is related to food stamps and other programs, about nutrition, 
and the second one is about the food supply chain. We have had 
horrible disruption because of COVID. I will submit those for 
the record so I do not abuse my time and take too much.
    Thank you, Mr. Secretary, and you can also finish your--or 
Mr. Soon-to-be Secretary, you can finish your answer on that 
also in writing.
    Senator Gillibrand. Thank you.
    Senator Boozman. Senator Thune.
    Okay. Senator Thune is having technical problems. Are we 
going to resolve those?
    Yes, he is not on. I know the Secretary will be glad to 
take Senator Thune's call if he has got some questions he would 
like to ask.
    Secretary Vilsack, thank you so much for your willingness 
to be considered for service to agriculture and rural America 
as Secretary of Agriculture. This Committee has a history of 
working in a bipartisan fashion while crafting legislation and 
considering nominations. In that spirit, Secretary Vilsack has 
agreed to expedite his responses to Committee members' 
questions for the record. As a result of that, as a result of 
his cooperation and the Senate Committee's, our Committee's 
cooperation, as a result later today we will hold a business 
meeting in conjunction with floor votes at a site off the floor 
of the Senate. The purpose of the business meeting will be to 
consider the nomination of Secretary Vilsack. Normally that is 
done 48 hours later, but, again, because of the circumstances 
and because we were able to agree to do that, we are going to 
do this as quickly as possible.
    I am going to yield to Senator Thune, who has solved his 
technical problems. You thought you were off the hook, 
Secretary Vilsack, but you have got one more. Senator Thune.
    [No response.]
    Senator Boozman. We are working on it.
    [Pause.]
    Senator Boozman. Are you there, Senator Thune? Can you hear 
us?
    The Clerk. Got it. Just one second.
    Senator Boozman. These are the trials and tribulations of 
COVID times.
    [Pause.]
    Senator Boozman. Okay. Well, again, as I said earlier, I 
know, Secretary Vilsack, that you are quite willing and able 
and want to talk to and followup with Senator Thune, so that 
should not be a problem at all.
    I ask members to submit any additional questions you may 
have for the record to the Committee Clerk by 5 p.m. today, 
Tuesday, February 2nd. The nominee has agreed to respond 
promptly and completely. In addition, the record will remain 
open for five business days for members to submit a statement 
or additional materials.
    Again, I thank everybody today--
    Senator Thune. Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Boozman [continuing]. for their time today and--
    Senator Thune. Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Boozman. Yes, Senator Thune.
    Senator Thune. Can I get in very quickly here?
    Senator Boozman. You can jump in, and then as soon as you 
are done, we will just bang the gavel, and we will be out of 
here.
    Senator Thune. All right. My apology. I was juggling 
multiple meetings.
    Senator Boozman. We understand.
    Senator Thune. Let me just very quickly, Secretary Vilsack, 
thank you for your willingness to serve again and welcome back 
to the Senate Ag Committee.
    Let me just touch on a couple of things that I talked to 
you about already, but that I would like to have you speak to 
on the record, and some of it has been covered by some of my 
colleagues. One of them has to do with volatility in the cattle 
market and integrity in that market.
    There are a lot of concerns out there about potential 
manipulation, market manipulation, lack of competition among 
meat packers, and as Senator Grassley pointed out, there are 
four packers who have 80 percent of the processing capacity in 
the country. I would like to get your thoughts on, if 
confirmed, what actions you would take to strengthen the 
integrity of the cattle market, your views on packers and 
stockyards, and what ideas you might have to address the 
consolidation issue. I know I am getting a lot of questions 
into one there. Then if you could segue into country-of-origin 
labeling, an issue which has already, again, been covered, but 
one that continues to be an incredibly important issue to many 
producers in South Dakota; your views on the COOL rulings, if 
confirmed, you know, whether you would be willing to work with 
us and my staff on finding a path forward, preferably a WTO-
compliant path, on COOL to help address the concerns of South 
Dakota producers.
    That is a lot in one question, but if you could just kind 
of give us your views on that, and if we do not get to cover it 
all, I can cover it in a followup question for the record.
    Mr. Vilsack. Senator, to sort of work in reverse, I am 
happy to work with you and your staff on anything that would 
allow us to advance country-of-origin labeling. As you know, we 
tried. WTO basically suggested that we had not succeeded. If 
there is a way to get it to be WTO-compliant, I would be more 
than happy to work with you and look forward to that.
    As it relates to packers and stockyards, we are going to 
look at every vehicle that we have, every capacity we have 
within USDA to make sure that we have open, fair, and 
transparent markets, where we have appropriate price discovery, 
where we have the data and the economic analysis that allows us 
to determine whether or not there is a problem in the market, 
and if there is, using the tools that we have to try to provide 
greater competition, greater openness, greater transparency, 
greater fairness.
    I think there are ways in which we could also expand 
significantly processing opportunities in this country so that 
we are not overly reliant on a small number of processors. I 
think we saw the penalty of that, if you will, during COVID. It 
is not the last time we are going to have COVID-type situations 
and major disruptions. We need to make sure we are prepared to 
make the system more resilient, and that means having more 
capacity.
    I would also look to work closely with the Department of 
Justice to determine whether or not they see reasons for 
additional action on their behalf, and we will certainly work 
collaboratively with them. I suggested the opportunity for the 
re-creation of the task force that was established sometime 
ago, potentially expanding the membership of that task force in 
a way that would give us the best opportunity to evaluate.
    These are not easy cases. They are not easy issues to 
resolve. I think there are a multitude of things that we can 
take and steps we can take to help producers to have greater 
confidence in the market.
    Senator Thune. Well, we look forward to working with you on 
those because there is a lot of skepticism out there right now 
that an actual free market exists, and so we will continue to 
work with you.
    Let me ask a quick question here. President Biden and some 
of the other Cabinet noms have not been shy about their desire 
to invest heavily in electric vehicles, in EVs. We believe 
biofuels like ethanol and biodiesel can achieve significant 
near-term greenhouse gas reductions using the existing consumer 
fleet, vehicle fleet, and a majority of existing fuel 
infrastructure. There was a recent Harvard study that found 
that the average greenhouse gas reduction of ethanol over 
gasoline is 46 percent, with some producers achieving as high 
as 61 percent life-cycle reductions.
    If confirmed, how will you help leverage the farm economy 
and biofuels as part of the administration's climate agenda? 
More specifically, how will you provide parity--or I should say 
will you provide parity for biofuel blending infrastructure 
with respect to EV funding?
    Mr. Vilsack. Senator, we are going to look for ways in 
which we can encourage and incent and continue to support the 
biofuel industry, whether it is utilizing the existing program 
that Secretary Perdue established and getting those resources 
out the door, whether it is taking a look at the COVID relief 
packages and determining whether or not there are ways in which 
the industry can be helped today for difficulties they have 
experienced during COVID, or whether it is directly working 
with my colleagues at EPA to make sure that the Renewable Fuel 
Standard is followed, that we do not grant waivers liberally to 
entities that do not need them, so that we continue to have a 
market.
    I think we can make the case, should make the case, and 
will make the case that there is a role to play for biofuels in 
climate, in reduction of emissions. I think there is a role for 
the biofuel industry to play as it relates to marine and 
aviation fuel as well. I think there is a terrific opportunity 
there. I think there is a role for the biofuel industry to play 
in terms of fleet maintenance. We are not going to convert--
there will not be enough electric vehicles to convert all of 
that fleet in a relatively short period of time. Obviously, 
there is going to be a fairly significant transition.
    I mentioned earlier that I am the owner of a 2006 Ford 
Focus. I do not think I am any different than a lot of 
Americans. They are going to continue to maintain and own those 
cars. GM, Ford, they are going to continue to make those cars. 
We have to have a fuel system that supplies those cars, and we 
might as well have a biofuel system that supplies those cars, 
because it is about jobs, it is about income stability for 
farmers, it is about better environmental and it is about more 
competition for your transportation dollars, and consumers 
benefit, and we reduce our reliance on fossil fuels.
    I think there are a lot of reasons why this administration 
and future administrations will continue to be investing in the 
biofuel industry.
    Senator Thune. Okay. Thank you. Again, you are hitting all 
the right themes there, and I look forward to working with you 
on that issue.
    I know, Mr. Chairman, my time has expired. I appreciate 
your indulgence. I have a couple of questions I would like to 
perhaps submit for the record.
    Senator Thune. Mr. Secretary, thank you for being with us 
today, and we will look forward to engaging you on this and 
other issues that impact the economy and farm and ranch 
country.
    Thank you.
    Senator Boozman. Thank you, Senator Thune, and with that, I 
want to thank everyone for their time today. I believe that we 
will have the confirmation vote between votes at 2:30. That is 
my understanding. We look forward to that. With that, we are 
adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 1 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]

      
=======================================================================

                            A P P E N D I X

                            FEBRUARY 2, 2021

=======================================================================

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
      
=======================================================================


                   DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

                            FEBRUARY 2, 2021

=======================================================================

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
      
=======================================================================


                         QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

                            FEBRUARY 2, 2021

=======================================================================

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                 [all]