[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 33 (Wednesday, March 22, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1583-S1584]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                RISK MANAGEMENT FOR THE 21ST CENTURY ACT

  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I am pleased to join many of my colleagues 
today in support of S. 2251, the crop insurance reform bill. Senator 
Grams spoke most eloquently on the issue and of its importance. He has 
certainly led the issue, along with a good many other of our colleagues 
who brought us to this point of shaping the legislation and bringing it 
to the floor.
  I thank the chairman of the Agriculture Committee, Senator Lugar, for 
recognizing the issue and the need for the legislation. While he didn't 
agree with all that is in S. 2251, he recognized its importance. He 
recognized the importance of building a compromise, as we were able to 
do in the committee.
  At this time, I am proud to join not only the chairman but certainly 
my good friend, Senator Roberts, and Senator Kerrey, who really led the 
issues that are found and embodied in S. 2251.
  There is no question that reform of the Federal Crop Insurance 
Program was not only a necessity but it was an obligation. It was a 
promise that we in the Senate and the House made to America's 
production agriculture when we moved to the new agricultural policy 
embodied in the current farm bill, Freedom to Farm. We said not only 
would we free up individual farmers to produce for the market absent 
specific Federal programs but we would provide them with the necessary 
tools to compete. One of them would be a risk management tool--crop 
insurance--so they could use it against downturns in the market or 
certain environmental circumstances such as drought, frost, or floods 
that might impede their ability to produce or destroy the very crop 
they planted in the ground.
  We also said we would look at the trade issue, and obviously the 
sanctions our Government had placed against certain potential markets 
across the world. We addressed that last year in the Senate. We will 
address it again this year. If we can pass the sanctions legislation 
and it becomes law, and if S. 2251 becomes law, then we will have 
completed a package that was promised a good number of years ago to our 
farmers and ranchers across this country.
  The bill before us addresses several concerns farmers in my State and 
I have had about crop insurance. The bill provides increased subsidies 
for a greater buy-up of the crop insurance; funding for research and 
development of specialty crop insurance, which is critically important; 
removal of the noninsured assistance program, better known as NAP, area 
trigger which was a true impediment in past Federal crop insurance 
programs; and several other items.
  Let me explain the uniqueness of Idaho agriculture.
  There are sometimes two or three crop components to our large 
Midwestern agricultural producing areas. Idaho's great agricultural 
economy is based on minor crops and nontraditional crops. We know about 
Idaho's potatoes. But we oftentimes don't know about Idaho's winter 
peas, or our trout, or our seed peas, or our lentils, or our sugar 
beets, or our barley, or our mint.
  Many people don't recognize that I have one of the most diverse 
agricultural counties in the Nation that produces large quantities of 
seeds for sweet corn, carrots, onions, celery, and all of those kinds 
of things you would not expect a State such as Idaho to grow, but we do 
because of our unique environment and our ability to control moisture 
through irrigation, and, as a result, creating the ideal situation for 
the growing of some of these seed crops. These are all minor crops and 
high-value crops that are sensitive to certain environmental or market 
downturns.
  Current Federal crop insurance does not always provide for them. This 
legislation not only provides for the research to move us in that area, 
but it removes the NAP area trigger that was very prohibitive.
  That is why I have worked with Senator Kerrey and Senator Roberts to 
include a provision to reform the Noninsured Assistance Program, or 
NAP, in this amendment. NAP is used by farmers who grow these 
``specialty'' or ``minor'' crops across our Nation. This legislation 
removes the area trigger and makes it a much more workable proposition 
for farmers in my State.
  I often hear from farmers who are frustrated that crop insurance does 
not exist for our many specialty crops. It is why my farmers don't use 
it at the rate other producers across the country do.
  This legislation should move us in the direction of creating another 
risk management tool for Idaho's agricultural production. I hope we can 
accomplish that. This legislation specifically encourages the 
development of specialty crop produce and allows the risk management 
agency to partner with entities to develop new crop insurance products. 
The bill also inverts the subsidy formula to make higher levels of 
coverage more affordable to farmers. These changes will speed new 
products to the market and make crop insurance a real risk management 
tool. These changes will help farmers protect crops against the 
disasters that oftentimes hit.
  I once farmed and ranched. I remember one day standing at the window 
of my farm and ranch home watching a hailstorm wipe out 200 acres of 
the most beautiful barley crop I had ever raised. But I was fearful 
that year that we were going to have hailstorms, and this was a unique 
crop. This was a seed crop, and a high-volumn crop because it was a 
new, hydrosized barley. I had it insured. While I was rather fearful of 
the destruction of crop, as I watched it, I also knew I had protected 
my investment. I had done the right thing. It was a tool that was 
available in the market at that time, and it was affordable.
  That was 25 years ago. Today, that tool doesn't exist at the level of 
affordability that it did in those days. As a result, farmers have 
walked away from crop insurance and have oftentimes during disastrous 
circumstances simply turned toward Washington to say to those of us who 
serve here: Help us.
  What we are saying today with this legislation on the floor of the 
Senate is: Agriculture, help yourself. We are providing you with the 
ultimate of risk management tools, so you should not have to rely on a 
Federal Government to bail you out of a circumstance that is beyond 
your control. We give you the option, and we want you to use the 
option, providing for yourself as a stand-alone, private 
entrepreneurial entity of this economy.
  This bill, however, provides a provision that concerns me, and it 
concerns the cattle producers of my State. The provision is federally-
subsidized revenue insurance for livestock production. This could 
disrupt markets by masking market signals and create dependency on 
subsidies that could stimulate overproduction and create perverse 
incentives for producers who are striving to make sound, market-
oriented management decisions.
  The livestock industry of our Nation has never turned to the Federal 
Government to help them. They have received in situations of drought 
sometimes feed assistance, but there has been no program in the past 
that simply provided a level of stability to their income as has been 
true of other commodities produced by the agricultural sector. They are 
inherently worried about a Federal program that might create or cause 
market incentives that are not true to the livestock or beef industry 
market.
  The beef industry is recovering now from a market downturn of the 
past few years. Relative to other segments of agriculture, the beef 
industry works unobstructed by Government pricing and direct payments 
to producers and other controls. This allows beef producers to make 
decisions about their own enterprises without having to worry about 
what Congress will do about the program or to the program. Cattle 
ranchers tell me they like it that way although it is sometimes very 
tough. I would like to see the beef industry continue down the path 
toward an open market approach, unstifled by any form of government 
involvement in their situation.
  I hope in conference with the House we might work out this livestock 
provision in a way that will not create a preferred market incentive.

[[Page S1584]]

  In my view, S. 2251 does the most for specialty crops and minor crop 
insurance of any proposal I have seen to date. Once again, I want to 
thank Senator Roberts, Senator Kerrey, Senator Lugar, and others who 
have directed a tremendous amount of their energy to resolving the 
issue of Federal crop insurance by presenting the legislation now 
before the Senate. I hope we will have a sizable vote on it tomorrow 
and that we can move it to conference with the House to work out our 
differences and put it on the President's desk at the earliest possible 
date.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.

                          ____________________