[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 142 (Tuesday, October 4, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: October 4, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
       THE SHEEP PROMOTION, RESEARCH, AND INFORMATION ACT OF 1994

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce and ask for 
passage of the Sheep Promotion, Research, and Information Act of 1994. 
This legislation will provide a much needed market development and 
promotion program for the sheep producers, and the sheep products 
industry in the United States.
  This bill will create an industry funded market development and 
promotion program that will be administered by a board made up of 
producers, feeders and importers. This legislation is critical to the 
sheep industry which, as a result of the elimination of the National 
Wool Act last year, will soon lose its current promotion program.
  This bill is a product of a cooperative effort of all elements of the 
sheep, sheep product and textile industry.
  Mr. President, I support the sheep industry's efforts to establish 
this self-help measure and I urge quick passage of this legislation.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. I first want to express my appreciation to Senator 
Leahy and his staff for working with me to address some of the issues 
that arise each time the Congress creates a generic commodity promotion 
board. We have resolved a number of concerns which I had with respect 
to the establishment of the Sheep Promotion, Research and Information 
Act. The chairman and the sponsors of this bill have graciously agreed 
to a number of amendments I have proposed to ensure the integrity of 
the board's activities as well as to provide for the utmost 
representation of all segments of the sheep industry on the board.
  There were several amendments which I wished to include but have 
withdrawn in the interest of seeing this legislation proceed through 
the legislative process. Those amendments addressed issues relating to 
the contracting ability of the board and the resulting impact on the 
prohibition in this bill that the board's funds not ultimately be used 
to influence government activity or public policy. Specifically, I am 
concerned about the growing practice of commodity boards entering into 
contractual relationships with the related trade association 
representing the lobbying arm of the industry. This raises the issue of 
the fungibility of checkoff dollars as well as the question of whether 
checkoff dollars ultimately subsidize the lobbying association. 
Additionally, I had an interest in more specifically defining the 
prohibition on influencing legislation or government action or policy 
in order to provide more guidance to the board with respect to 
allowable activities.
  These issues have been of growing concern to a number of producers in 
my State as well as national farm organizations such as the National 
Farmers Union. Unless we can assure the integrity of the promotion 
programs, they will continue to be subject to criticism. These programs 
are extremely important to farmers and I believe we must do our utmost 
to ensure that the programs are meeting their original intent as 
established by Congress. However, because this is a matter which is not 
exclusive to the sheep board, but rather is an issue that needs to be 
examined in the context of all of the existing 16 commodity promotion 
and research boards we have created, I have withdrawn the amendments 
addressing these concerns. It would be my hope, however, that the 
Senate Agriculture Committee be able to pursue these broader issues 
relating to all the promotion boards during consideration of the 
upcoming 1995 farm bill.
  Mr. LEAHY. I thank the Senator for his interest in this area and 
agree that many of the issues of interest to him are also of great 
interest to the Agriculture Committee and to the farmers paying for the 
promotion programs. I would like to work with him to pursue these 
matters, in particular the issues relating to the prohibition on use of 
the checkoff funds and fungibility of checkoff dollars, as part of the 
Agriculture Committee hearings on the 1995 farm bill next year. That 
process will allow us to determine what types of reforms might be 
necessary for the various promotion boards in the 1995 farm bill.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. I thank Senator Leahy. I look forward to working with 
him to address these very important issues next year and appreciate his 
willingness to examine this area of concern.
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. President, I rise in support of the Sheep Promotion, 
Research, and Information Act of 1994. This most important piece of 
legislation offers the sheep industry the same opportunity afforded to 
all other commodity groups--the ability to promote their industry to 
the consumer.
  When the National Wool Act was so swiftly eliminated last year, the 
authority for the sheep industry's 40-year-old self-help program for 
lamb and wool promotion was also unintentionally terminated. With the 
elimination of the Wool Act still so very fresh in the minds of Members 
of Congress and based on the erroneous belief that the program was an 
antiquated World War II program, Congress, at a minimum, should be 
agreeable to helping the sheep industry compete with foreign producers 
and ``leveling the playing field'' with a program that costs the 
Federal Government nothing. The check-off program is paid for entirely 
by the lamb and wool industries.
  That said, I must point out that the industry must prepare for some 
major changes. I believe all of American agriculture would benefit 
greatly by throwing away its ``government crutches'' of subsidies and 
tariffs on foreign products. I know that it will be hard to even fathom 
that possibility.
  But, without reasonable alternatives to the old programs and phase-
down periods that are fair and equitable, American agriculture will 
continue to crusade for farm programs that are not market driven--
programs that have coddled them into an unhealthy reliance on 
government support. The sheep industry wants the authority to compete 
with foreign producers--they are not asking for a handout.
  We can all agree that this industry must promote itself! That message 
was clear last year when at the rap of the gavel only 36 Members 
supported the National Wool Act. Almost $1 billion is currently spent 
annually on advertisements and research efforts to expand or at least 
maintain the demand for U.S. agricultural commodities. Through 
mandatory assessments on producers--or check-offs--promotion activities 
are devised to provide consumers with specific information about the 
product.
  Most studies indicate positive rates of return for check-off 
programs. Check-off programs are a benefical self-help marketing tool 
that the Senate should support. I urge my colleagues to support this 
important legislation, and I am very pleased to be a cosponsor.
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the Sheep 
Promotion, Research, and Information Act of 1994, and the future of the 
American sheep and wool industry.
  A year ago, the majority of Congress voted to abolish the wool 
support system for our Nation's wool producers during the next 2 years. 
However, I did not vote in favor of that particular provision, as I 
knew the impact this action would have on the producers of the wool on 
ranches in Montana. Congress left our wool ranchers high and dry when 
it comes to funding to promote their commodity.
  After much discussion between Members of the Senate and the American 
Sheep and Wool Industry, an accord has finally been reached, one that 
addresses the concerns of all the parties involved. An accord that 
through a referendum vote will now allow the producers in the industry 
to decide for themselves on the future of this program. This measure 
will allow these producers a means to collect funds from their own 
pockets to promote the sheep and wool industry. This act will provide a 
small, but meaningful step towards leveling the playing field that our 
American producers must compete on.
  In Montana, we have 2,900 farms and ranches that are in the sheep and 
wool producing business. These are hard-working men and women, people 
who fight the elements, predators and ultimately the world market. They 
provide the American public with some of the safest and finest products 
in the world, yet due to their inability to compete evenly with the 
rest of the world many are second guessing their decision to raise 
sheep. Sheep producers are not asking us to provide them with anything 
other than a chance to compete.
  I stand here before you today and ask for your support for these 
families, and for the opportunity for them to provide and develop a 
future for their children. Let these Americans compete on the world 
market by providing them the tools, establishing this fund as a means 
to market and promote their product. The sheep industry in Montana 
joins with me in thanking you all for your support.

                          ____________________