[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 157 (Sunday, November 9, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Page S12289]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            JUDGE IN MINNESOTA BLOCKS CLASS I DIFFERENTIALS

  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, this week Senator Leahy and I addressed 
the Senate about our concerns and disappointment with the recent order 
by the U.S. District Court of Minnesota which enjoined the Secretary of 
Agriculture from enforcing class I differentials in 28 of the current 
33 Federal milk marketing orders. If the November 3, 1997, ruling 
stands, it will throw the entire milk pricing system into chaos 
threatening the continued existence of thousands of dairy farms 
nationwide.
  Mr. President, it is imperative that Secretary Glickman move 
immediately to seek a stay and file an appeal to the court's decision. 
I am joining several of my colleagues in a letter to Secretary Glickman 
to formally request that the U.S. Department of Agriculture appeal the 
decision. I urge others to contact Secretary Glickman to recommend that 
he act swiftly in this request as well.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the letter 
being sent to Secretary Glickman appear in the Record.
  This ruling should not impact the current reforms of the Federal milk 
marketing orders with respect to the basic formula price and class I 
differentials. It is important that the Department of Agriculture 
continue to use sound public policy in determining a pricing structure 
that is in the best interest of dairy farmers and consumers alike. Both 
the Senate and the House of Representatives have expressed in 
overwhelming fashion to the Secretary of Agriculture the support and 
importance of maintaining our class I differentials. Recently, 48 
Senators wrote to Secretary Glickman supporting class I differentials 
and endorsing the Department's option 1-A proposal.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the letter of October 10, 
1997, regarding overwhelming support for option 1-A appear in the 
Record.
  Mr. President, those of us who value dairying in our States should 
recognize the dangerous precedent of this ruling. The success of an 
appeal to overturn in this case is of vital importance to the survival 
of dairy farmers across this Nation.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                                  U.S. Senate,

                                Washington, DC, November 10, 1997.
     Hon. Dan Glickman,
     Secretary, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Secretary Glickman: Considering the recent district 
     court decision out of Minnesota, we want to reconfirm our 
     views on milk marketing orders and strongly recommend that 
     the USDA seek a stay and appeal the decision.
       In reviewing the various options for the pricing of Class 1 
     fluid milk, it is still our view that Option 1-A is the most 
     viable and economically sound approach to the future pricing 
     of fluid milk.
       Last month forty-eight Senators and one hundred and 
     thirteen Members of the House of Representatives indicated to 
     you that Option 1-A reflects good public policy necessary for 
     effective milk marketing order reform. Our support for Option 
     1-A is based upon a number of important factors:
       It recognizes the transportation costs involved in moving 
     fluid milk from the farm to the consumer.
       It takes into account the importance of balancing the 
     supply and demand for milk, ensuring adequate production to 
     meet all fluid milk needs.
       It recognizes the costs of producing and marketing milk 
     and, therefore, does not inflict economic hardship on dairy 
     producers in any one region to benefit others.
       It is sensitive to the need for attracting supplemental 
     milk supplies to regions of the country that occasionally 
     face production deficits.
       These are some of the reasons that most of the dairy 
     producing regions of the country support Option 1-A for the 
     regional pricing differentials for fluid milk.
       Under the November 3, 1997, court decision in Minnesota 
     Milk Producers, et al. v. Dan Glickman, the Secretary of 
     Agriculture would be required to end the Class I 
     differentials in the milk marketing order system. If this 
     decision stands, it will throw the entire milk system into 
     chaos threatening the continued existence of thousands of 
     dairy farms nationwide.
       Appealing the court's ruling is in the best interest of 
     milk producers and consumers across the country.
       We look forward to your comments and to working closely 
     with you on the federal order reform process.
           Sincerely,
     Jim M. Jeffords.
                                                                    ____



                                                  U.S. Senate,

                                 Washington, DC, October 10, 1997.
     Hon. Dan Glickman,
     Secretary, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Secretary Glickman: In reviewing the various options 
     for the pricing of Class 1 fluid milk, it is clear that 
     Option 1-A is the most viable and economically sound approach 
     to the future pricing of fluid milk.
       Option 1-A reflects good public policy necessary for 
     effective milk marketing order reform. Our support for Option 
     1-A is based upon a number of important factors: It 
     recognizes the transportation costs involved in moving fluid 
     milk from the farm to the consumer; it takes into account the 
     importance of balancing the supply and demand for milk, 
     ensuring adequate production to meet all fluid milk needs; it 
     recognizes the costs of producing and marketing milk and, 
     therefore, does not inflict economic hardship on dairy 
     producers in any one region to benefit others; and it is 
     sensitive to the need for attracting supplemental milk 
     supplies to regions of the country that occasionally face 
     production deficits.
       These are some of the reasons that most of the dairy 
     producing regions of the country support Option I-A for the 
     regional pricing differentials for fluid milk.
       As part of the reforms to the Basic Formula Price (BFP), we 
     urge the Department to seriously consider partially 
     ``decoupling'' fluid milk prices from the volatile cheese-
     based pricing system that has resulted in wide fluctuations 
     in milk prices.
       This pricing system has dramatically reduced farm milk 
     prices and has left permanently high consumer prices. In our 
     view, maintaining price stability is an extremely important 
     order reform goal for both dairy farmers and consumers.
       We look forward to your comments and in working closely 
     with you on the federal order reform process.
           Sincerely,
         James M. Jeffords; Patrick Leahy; Susan Collins; Lauch 
           Faircloth; Chris Dodd; Bob Graham; Alfonse D'Amato; Joe 
           Biden; Mary L. Landrieu; Bill Roth; John Breaux; Jesse 
           Helms; Jeff Bingaman; John F. Kerry; Tim Hutchinson; 
           Max Cleland.
         Connie Mack; Daniel P. Moynihan; John H. Chafee; Patty 
           Murray; Joe Lieberman; Edward Kennedy; Larry E. Craig; 
           Charles Robb; Paul Coverdell; Barbara A. Mikulski; Ron 
           Wyden; Richard Shelby; Pete V. Domenici; Mitch 
           McConnell; Jack Reed; Jeff Sessions.
         Ernest Hollings; Olympia Snowe; Strom Thurmond; John W. 
           Warner; Dale Bumpers; Bob Smith; Slade Gorton; 
           Christopher Bond; Thad Cochran; Rick Santorum; Arlen 
           Specter; John Glenn; Dirk Kempthorne; Mike DeWine; Judd 
           Gregg; Paul S. Sarbanes.




                          ____________________