[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 79 (Monday, June 3, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5670-S5671]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    A BROKEN PROMISE TO THE FARMERS

  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, on a different matter, on Friday last, I 
learned that the Republicans on the House side have now broken the 
promise to farmers contained in the most recent farm bill.
  Mr. President, I think everyone in this Chamber remembers that 
America's farmers were told that if you accept this new farm bill that 
has sharply declining payments in it and has no safety net for when 
prices plunge, you will at least be assured that for the 7 years of 
this farm bill the payments contained in that will be guaranteed. In 
fact, the proponents of the so-called Freedom to Farm Act told the 
American farm producers that this is like a contract. In fact, they 
related it to the Conservation Reserve Program contracts. They said, 
``Farmers, at least you will be assured you are going to get payments 
of these amounts.''
  Mr. President, last week, the House Appropriations subcommittee broke 
the promise, violated the pledge, and said to the American farmers that 
that was all a trick. We promised you a contract, but we are breaking 
the contract before the ink is even dry. The farm bill has just been 
signed into law, and already you might as well throw it out the window 
because the fundamental pledge and promise has turned out to be a hoax. 
Not a word of truth is in it because they have cut the transition 
payments before farmers have even received one--the payments that were 
supposed to be inviolate, the payments that were supposed to be 
guaranteed, the payments that were supposed to be a contract. It turns 
out that they have no guarantee attached to them at all. There is no 
contract. Farmers are being asked right now to sign up, put their name 
on the line. But they do not know what they are signing up to because 
it is very clear from the action taken in the House Appropriations 
Committee that they can cut the funding for those transition payments 
any time, in any amount, in any way they want. It does not have to be 7 
years of payments; it could be 3. In the first 3 years, they could cut 
them 50 percent, or they could cut them 80 percent.
  There is no contract here. There is no commitment here. There is no 
guarantee here. All there is is a betrayal, a betrayal of the farmers 
who trusted those who promoted this approach, who were told, and told 
repeatedly, that these are sharply declining payments, but at least you 
can be assured you will be getting what the formula provides over the 
next 7 years. Now we know none of it is true.
  Mr. President, I think those who promoted the Freedom to Farm Act on 
the basis that it was a guarantee ought to apologize to America's 
producers. I think they ought to stand up and admit that there are not 
contract payments here. There is nothing here that is assured. They 
have sold farmers a pig in a poke. That, I think, was one of the most 
disappointing betrayals that I have seen in the 10 years I have been in 
the U.S. Senate; if there ever was a circumstance in which it was 
absolutely clear what the promise was--with respect to the so-called 
Freedom to Farm Program.

[[Page S5671]]

  During debate on the farm bill, Republican Senator after Republican 
Senator stood on this floor in this Chamber and promoted the bill based 
on these payment guarantees. Farmers will have certainty. Payments will 
be guaranteed. Farmers will know how much money they will have to work 
with each year, they said. Now the truth is out. Freedom to Farm is a 
fraud. There is no contract. There is no guarantee.
  Mr. President, unfortunately, they did not stop. They did not stop in 
the House Agriculture Committee with breaking the promise on transition 
payments. They then, after promising a market-based farm program, 
announced an unprecedented move to put a cap on sugarcane prices at 
21.2 cents a pound--unprecedented. This is a market-oriented bill, and 
farmers are told you will get the benefits of the market. Well, it is a 
one-way benefit. You get the benefit when prices are going down. When 
the prices start going up, we are going to put a cap on them. That is 
an interesting idea of market orientation.
  I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.

                          ____________________