[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 82 (Thursday, June 10, 1999)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1221-E1223]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   HUGO AND LAMAR AGRICULTURE FORUMS

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. BOB SCHAFFER

                              of colorado

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, June 10, 1999

  Mr. SCHAFFER. Mr. Speaker, last month during the April district work 
period, I had the opportunity to hear from many of my constituents 
regarding the economic challenge in agriculture. Specifically, on April 
7, 1999, I held two agriculture forums, one in Hugo, Colorado, and one 
in Lamar, Colorado, to discuss some of the challenges facing 
agricultural producers. The purpose of these forums was to allow 
individuals and organizations to provide advice and suggestions about 
the problems currently facing today's farmers and ranchers. We heard 
from a number of experts who made presentations and fielded questions 
at the well-attended events.
  For example, at the earlier meeting in Hugo, we heard from Mr. 
Freeman Lester, President of the Colorado Cattlemen's Association 
(CCA). He mentioned country-of-origin labeling, packer concentration, 
the European ban on hormone enhanced beef, estate taxes, wilderness 
legislation, and reform of the Endangered Species Act as his main areas 
of interest and concern. At this time, Mr. Speaker, I hereby include 
the ``Colorado Cattlemen's Association Key Issues for the 106th 
Congress'' in the record.

       Taxes.--CCA supports the repeal of the death tax and 
     reductions in capital gains taxes. Death taxes are extremely 
     punitive with onerously high rates, and are the leading cause 
     of the breakup of thousands of family-run ranches, farms and 
     businesses. Congress' Joint Economic Committee has concluded 
     that death taxes generate costs to taxpayers, the economy and 
     the environment that far exceed any potential benefits 
     arguably produced.
       Country-of-Origin Labeling.--CCA supports efforts to let 
     consumers know the origin of the beef they purchase. Consumer 
     surveys have consistently shown that the majority of 
     consumers support country-of-origin labeling for meat. 
     Imported beef is labeled by country-of-origin, either on the 
     product or on shipping containers, when it enters the U.S. to 
     facilitate inspection. However, these labels are lost during 
     further processing. Country-of-origin labeling will provide a 
     ``brand-like'' mechanism for the beef industry. Currently 
     most beef is marketed as unbranded generic ``beef'' 
     regardless of where it is produced. Other countries require 
     U.S. beef to be labeled by country-of-origin. Japan has 
     required all meat imports be labeled by country-of-origin 
     effective July 1, 1997 and Europe will likely require 
     labeling comparable to that required for domestic product, 
     once access to the European market is achieved.
       Price Reporting.--CCA supports mandatory price reporting by 
     any U.S. packer controlling more than 5 percent of the live 
     cattle market. CCA also supports price reporting on boxed 
     beef and imports. It is vital to keep the playing field level 
     especially given that four major packers slaughter 80 percent 
     of the fed cattle and market approximately 85 percent of the 
     boxed beef. Openly assessable up-to-date information and 
     market transparency are necessary to keep the highly 
     concentrated processor sector from having insider or 
     privileged information that could give packers a significant 
     advantage over sellers or others in the beef trade. Secretary 
     Glickman has publicly indicated that the U.S. Department of 
     Agriculture (USDA) would welcome authorization to implement 
     mandatory price reporting.
       Water Quality.--CCA believes that water quality regulations 
     address site-specific as well as species-specific needs and 
     are based on sound science, taking into account current 
     cattle industry environmental and economic practices that 
     have been successful for generations.
       Property Rights.--CCA supports passage of a law to require, 
     at minimum, the federal government to prepare a takings 
     implication assessment (TIA) prior to taking an agency 
     action. Such TIA should: define the point at which a 
     reduction in the value of the affected property, due to a 
     regulation, constitutes a compensable taking; set clear 
     takings guidelines, and provide a mechanism for landowners to 
     avoid lengthy and costly litigation.

  Also on hand was Mr. Brad Anderson, Executive Director of the 
Colorado Livestock Association (CLA). Mr. Anderson expressed his 
disappointment with the lack of fairness in implementation of the North 
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Specifically, he felt our 
government should do more to expose Canada's subsidies and that we 
needed to do a better job of opening more markets around the world for 
Americans agricultural products.
  He also mentioned his concern with Amendment 14, a recently passed 
state ballot initiative, he said would ``put hog producers out of 
business.'' Amendment 14 sets the air particle ratio, an odor 
measurement, for hog farms at 2-1, a standard which is virtually 
impossible to meet. The air particle ratio for industry is 7-1, leading 
him to believe that agriculture is being unfairly targeted.
  Mr. Anderson also mentioned the shortage of workers and the need to 
eliminate the sales tax on agricultural products, which was recently 
accomplished at the state level at the end of this year's session of 
the General Assembly in Colorado.
  The panel also included Mr. Greg King of the Lincoln County Farm 
Service Agency (FSA). Mr. King mentioned his frustration with the 
Freedom to Farm Act passed by Congress in 1996. He felt it would not 
work as originally designed, unless our government was willing to open 
more markets for trade. ``We are currently shut out of 108 markets 
because of embargoes,'' he said.

  In addition, Mr. King also spoke of the need to reform the Endangered 
Species Act. He specifically mentioned the possibility of devastating 
impacts to the agricultural industry should the proposed listing of the 
mountain plover and the black-tailed prairie dog move forward. The 
irony is that the Natural Resource Conservation Service under (USDA) 
has worked with farmers and ranchers for years to develop 
``environmentally friendly'' ranching and farming practices. Now, 
however, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has stepped in and 
said farmers and ranchers need to manage their land for these species, 
the mountain plover and the black-tailed prairie dog. if this were to 
occur,

[[Page E1222]]

ranchers would be forced to manage at least a portion of their land in 
a way which could include overgrazing and other practices harmful to 
the environment.
  Mr. Ron Clark, Secretary-Treasurer of the Colorado Association of 
Wheat Growers, was another member of the panel. Mr. Clark observed 
wheat prices are very low. Low wheat prices combined with two above 
average wheat crops in the last two years have caused an extreme 
hardship for wheat farmers. At this point, Mr. Speaker, I will include 
for the Record Mr. Clark's remarks:

       Thank you Congressman Schaffer for the opportunity to 
     provide comments at this Ag. Forum. My name is Ron Clark and 
     I am a wheat producer from Matheson, Colorado, and Secretary-
     Treasurer of the Colorado Association of Wheat Growers.
       Wheat prices are at their lowest level in eight years as a 
     result of two above average U.S. wheat crops and ending 
     stocks of wheat significantly above historic levels. Because 
     of this difficult situation, the National Association of 
     Wheat Growers has developed a 1999 Wheat Action Plan which I 
     would like to highlight for you.
       First, let me discuss the domestic part of the plan. We 
     need a safety net. This can be accomplished by the following 
     legislative action: lifting loan caps and reauthorizing '99 
     market loss payment; advancing year 2000 agricultural 
     marketing transition act payments; and reforming crop 
     insurance to develop affordable alternatives that will 
     protect against crop and revenue losses.
       Now, let me discuss the export part of the plan. We 
     recommend the following legislative action to move more U.S. 
     wheat into export markets.
       Request that the administration immediately approve Niki 
     Trading Company's request to buy $500 million of U.S. 
     agricultural products for Iran, including two million metric 
     tons (or 73.5 mil. bu.) of wheat.
       Seek an end to trade sanctions that currently preclude U.S. 
     wheat from 11 to 15 percent of the world wheat market.
       Fund existing export programs to the full extent authorized 
     in the 1996 Farm Bill.
       Fund discretionary export programs like PL-480 Title I and 
     the Foreign Market Development Cooperator Program at Fiscal 
     Year 1999 program levels or greater.
       Fund the Market Access Program at the Fiscal Year 1999 
     level.
       Fund the Export Enhancement Program at the Farm Bill 
     authorized level of $579 million and strongly urge the 
     Secretary of Agriculture to use it.
       Approve trade negotiating authority (or fast track) 
     immediately.
       Approve the United States Agricultural Trade Act of 1999 
     (S. 101), to promote trade in U.S. agricultural commodities, 
     livestock, and value-added products and to prepare for future 
     bilateral and multilateral trade negotiations.
       Approve the Food and Medicine Sanctions Relief Act of 1999 
     (S. 327), to exempt agricultural products, medicines, and 
     medical products from U.S. sanctions.
       The Colorado wheat industry sincerely appreciates your 
     leadership and support that you have shown as a member of the 
     House Agriculture Committee. We look forward to hosting the 
     annual wheat tour for you again this year on June 5. I would 
     be happy to answer any questions that you might have. Thank 
     you.

  Another member of the panel was Mr. Carl Stogsdill of Lincoln County, 
representing the Farm Bureau. Mr. Stogsdill spoke of his concerns 
relating to the Endangered Species Act and its impacts on farmers and 
ranchers. Following are the Farm Bureau's ``Priorities For the 106th 
Congress:''

       Food Quality Protection Act.--Farm Bureau has declared the 
     proper implementation of the Food Quality Protection Act as 
     its top priority. Farm Bureau will work with the 
     Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), land grant 
     universities and local officials to get the act implemented 
     as Congress originally intended.
       Budget and Tax Reform.--Farm Bureau will continue to work 
     for the elimination of the ``Death Tax'' and reduction of the 
     capital gains tax. Other issues include: Farmer and Rancher 
     Risk Management accounts, the balanced budget amendment, 
     elimination of the Alternative Minimum Tax for agriculture, 
     income averaging, unemployment tax exemption and Individual 
     Retirement Accounts for farmers.
       Environmental Issues.--Farm Bureau will continue to push 
     for private property rights protection and elimination of 
     disincentives in regard to endangered species, clean water, 
     clean air and wetlands.
       Trade.--Farm Bureau will be heavily involved in gaining 
     ``Fast Track'' authority for the administration and 
     eliminating existing trade barriers. Also, Farm Bureau hopes 
     to be active in this year's round of the World Trade 
     Organization's discussions.
       Regulatory Reform.--Farm Bureau will attempt to pass 
     legislation requiring standardized risk assessments and cost/
     benefit analysis on all proposed regulations. There will also 
     be a push for a reform of the Department of Labor's H-2A 
     program.

  Mr. Mark James of the Lincoln County Stockmen also served on the 
panel and expressed his concern with aspects of the Endangered Species 
Act. Mr. James thought it was silly black-tailed prairie dogs would be 
added to the Endangered Species List. ``Prairie dogs? Get reasonable,'' 
he said. Mr. James' comments were echoed by many of those in 
attendance.
  Later that evening, at the forum held in Lamar, Mr. John Schweizer, 
District Representative for the Colorado Farm Bureau, spoke about 
issues facing farmers in the southeastern portion of the state. Mr. 
Schweizer cited his hope there would be continued tax relief for 
farmers such as complete elimination of the ``death tax.'' He was quick 
to point out, however, that even though times are tough, ``(farmers) 
are not looking for handouts.'' In fact, he expressed support for the 
1996 Farm Bill which was supposed to remove government from the farm. 
Unfortunately, according to Mr. Schweizer, ``rather than cut the cord, 
the government tightened the noose.''
  Mr. Schweizer also said the Administration and Congress needed to do 
more to open markets abroad. One way in which this could be 
accomplished, he felt, would be to fully fund and utilize the Export 
Enhancement Program. He also questioned the effectiveness of shutting 
American farmers out of world markets by using political sanctions 
against other countries.
  Chad Hart of the Prowers County Farm Service Agency also offered his 
perspective. His main concern was the administration of the disaster 
assistance program which is running way behind. Cuts in funding have 
adversely impacted their ability to do their job in that the speed of 
response to emergencies has been greatly reduced. They are forced to do 
much more with far fewer employees.
  Another member of the panel was Mr. Bob Arambel of the Northeast 
Prowers County Conservation District. He runs a farm northeast of 
Holly, Colorado, and has had concerns regarding water quality on the 
lower Arkansas River. Although they have received some money to 
increase their compliance with water quality statutes, he was concerned 
reauthorization of the Clean Water Act may have adverse impacts on 
farming and ranching in the region if standards cannot be met right 
away. Mr. Arambel also had concerns about the direction of the 
Endangered Species Act.
  Mr. Vernon Sharp, President-elect of the Colorado Cattlemen's 
Association, mentioned taxes as his issue of greatest importance. He 
felt estate taxes and capital gains taxes were big problems, that they 
were punitive in nature and punished people for making good business 
decisions. He also felt the government should provide some sort of 
income tax relief in the near future. ``This year I spent $900.00 to 
have someone do my taxes to find out I have no income,'' he said.
  Mr. Sharp went on to say property rights were also a very important 
issue and the federal government should fully compensate landowners 
when impeding their ability to use their land as they see fit. He cited 
the Endangered Species Act as a major threat to farmers and ranchers 
and their ability to manage their land.
  Also on the panel was Mr. Jim Geist, Executive Director of the 
Colorado Corn Growers Association. At this point, Mr. Speaker, I refer 
the House to the remarks of Mr. Geist.

       On behalf of Colorado's corn farmers, I appreciate the 
     opportunity to express corn's policies and positions on 
     issues that will have direct and indirect effects on the 
     state's corn industry.
       Demand for corn grows when our customers are satisfied. To 
     increase demand and customer satisfaction, the United States 
     must become a dependable supplier of commodities. Some of the 
     issues that can assure U.S. corn and its products full access 
     to world trade markets include the following: sanction 
     reform; Fast Track authority; support of IMF funding and 
     trade negotiations, including the specific objective of 
     mutual acceptance of genetically enhanced agricultural 
     products; continued leadership in the World Trade 
     Organization; and Free Trade Area of the Americas 
     negotiations.
       Corn producers continue to strive for a fair deal from the 
     government. They are looking for market-driven farm programs, 
     minimal consistent regulations, federal tax policy reform and 
     sufficient financial and credit program so that this country 
     can maintain its food security.
       Improving our national transportation infrastructure in 
     order to maintain a competitive advantage is becoming a high 
     priority for grain producers nationwide. Upgrading rivers, 
     locks and dam systems, improving the nation's railroad system 
     and maintaining adequate highway funds for states will enable 
     grain producers to move commodities to domestic and 
     international customers when needed.
       We support an active research and education commitment by 
     all segments of the corn industry and government. Research 
     and commercialization of corn products adds to the value of 
     corn. Investing in technological advancements, working with 
     the marketplace, and educating and communicating with 
     consumers about the value of corn in their daily lives will 
     enable our nation to have a stronger rural economy and 
     greater national economic strength.
       Leaving our world in better shape than when we found it has 
     been a top priority in  agriculture for generations. In using 
     Best

[[Page E1223]]

     Management Practices (BMP) to build soil through 
     conservation programs, BMP implementation to improve water 
     quality, and utilizing the best crop protection practices 
     available, corn producers are truly planting a crop that 
     can help clean up the environment, from both a water and 
     air quality standpoint. The growing concern within 
     agriculture is the small, vocal, hard-line environmental 
     groups trying to impose regulations on production 
     agriculture that are uneconomical, unproven and that could 
     have the effect of driving our nation's food production 
     capabilities off our shores.
       Agricultural producers in Colorado are struggling with poor 
     economic conditions in the marketplace due to burdensome 
     supplies--supplies that could be sold in international 
     markets--and environmental regulations that will choke off 
     sustainable food production capabilities. Much has to be done 
     in short order to protect one of our nation's most valuable 
     resources--America's farmers and ranchers.
       Again, thank you for the opportunity to express to you just 
     some of the issues and concerns that Colorado corn producers 
     will be focusing on in the near future.

  Our last panelist of the evening was Ms. Elena Metro, State Executive 
Director of the Colorado Pork Producers Council. Her thoughts focused 
on the state initiative, earlier alluded to, Amendment 14. Ms. Metro's 
presentation included this statement which I ask to be included in the 
Record:

       The Colorado pork industry has been singled out by 
     individuals and groups to be ``controlled'' by harsh rules 
     and regulations. Amendment 14 here in Colorado is the result 
     The Colorado Pork Producers Council on behalf of the pork 
     industry in Colorado asks that if rules and regulations are 
     written and become law, whether on a state or national level, 
     that these rules be based on ``sound science,'' be fair and 
     equitable, and not ``socially engineered.''

  Mr. Speaker, I would like to close by thanking all of the 
participants for their input. Former Speaker of the Colorado House of 
Representatives, Mr. Carl ``Bev'' Bledsoe moderated the forum in Hugo. 
Ms. Sparky Turner moderated the forum in Lamar. Both did an outstanding 
job and helped draw many helpful thoughts and comments from all 
speakers.
  It's obvious after hearing from my constituents that more needs to be 
done to expand trade with foreign countries. We need to bring some 
sanity to the Endangered Species Act, and we need to use sound science 
when making decisions about regulations which will affect a very 
important segment of our population--the farmer.

                          ____________________