[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 34 (Thursday, March 23, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1626-S1627]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             FAMILY FARMERS

  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I support the pending amendment, which, as 
I understand, is the Wellstone amendment, a sense-of-the-Senate 
resolution commending the many farmers--the thousands of farmers and 
their families--who came to Washington over the last few days to rally 
in support of what I would call a sensible, sane, rational, and 
compassionate farm program that would support our farm families 
throughout this country.
  We had farmers from every State. In fact, I listened to one farmer 
from Alaska who was here, a dairy farmer. So the rally actually was a 
national rally, one that encompassed all parts of our country.
  What I heard, in talking to these farm families from across America, 
was a plaintive cry for us to have a farm policy in America that 
recognizes the essential worth, the essential importance, of having a 
structure of agriculture based upon family farming--widely dispersed, 
broadly based--rather than having a vertical structure characterized by 
conglomerates and huge vertical integrators that does not respond to 
the needs of local areas.
  What these farm families were expressing was a frustration, a 
frustration borne out of their life experiences in knowing that what 
they have done and what their parents and grandparents before them had 
done in agriculture, knowing that this had benefited not only our 
Nation but had benefited the areas in which they lived. Because we had 
a lot of farm families in rural areas, we had prosperous small towns 
and communities. We had businesses in those communities. We had good 
schools and churches. We had a sense of community in rural America. Out 
of this structure in rural America came the sons and daughters who went 
on to colleges--land grant colleges, many of them--and who then became 
some of the great leaders of our country.
  I need not remind those in this body of some of the great leaders in 
our own Senate who came from rural America, small towns and 
communities, farm families. I just saw our distinguished former 
majority and minority leader, Senator Dole, come across the floor. He 
comes from Russell, KS. You can't find a much smaller town than that. 
He has dedicated his life to public service. He is a great friend of 
mine and was a great leader in the Senate. I wonder how many more 
leaders we will get in this country coming from small towns and rural 
America when all these small towns have dried up, when there are no 
more opportunities there.
  I think what I heard at this rally was this frustration. The farm 
families know what they have contributed to the well-being of our 
country and our communities. Yet now they are being decimated. They see 
their neighbors, one by one, being driven off the farm because of the 
economic structure we have in America. In 1998, two Iowa State 
University economists reported that as many as one-third of Iowa 
farmers would face serious financial problems if the farm economy did 
not improve. They would either restructure their operations or go out 
of business entirely. That was one out of three estimated in 1998.
  Earlier this year, an updated study by the same economists concluded 
that as many as half of all Iowa farmers are classified as financially 
weak or severely stressed; that is, every other farmer in the State of 
Iowa is in real trouble.
  A couple of farm families spoke to me when I was at the rally on the 
Mall in response to something I had heard, saying that their churches, 
which used to be packed on Sunday morning--all the pews were filled--
are now half empty, that they can't even afford to pay their own 
minister any longer. They have a circuit rider who rides to three or 
four churches a week. So they lack that kind of pastoral counseling 
upon which families have come to rely. Indeed, we are seeing a 
wholesale selling out of our farm and ranch families and our rural 
communities. The stakes are very high.
  I heard this great frustration from all of these farm families. Their 
question to us is: What are you going to do? Is this just some 
inevitable, invisible hand that is doing this, or are the laws of our 
country structured so they discriminate unfairly against family 
farmers? I think the latter is true. There is no invisible handwriting 
that farm families are a relic of the past, that our farmers have to 
get bigger and bigger and bigger, that our small towns have to dry up. 
I think it is because of policies we set in the Congress. I think those 
policies have to change.
  The farm bill we have now, the so-called Freedom to Farm bill, has 
been a wreck. There is only one good part of it, and that is planting 
flexibility. That is all. The rest of it has been a wreck. The Federal 
Government has sent out over $15 billion in emergency money in the past 
2 years. That is not counting what we sent out under the regular farm 
bill itself. Of course, that money was needed by the bankers, by the 
chemical and fertilizer dealers, by the repair shops, by the fuel 
dealers, by the landlords. A lot of that money went out not to save the 
farmer but to save

[[Page S1627]]

the very people about whom I speak: the bankers, chemical and 
fertilizer dealers, repair shops, and the landlords. In fact, a lot of 
that money went to farmers who didn't even plant a crop last year. Tell 
me if that makes sense.

  The bailout packages we have had over the last couple of years have 
been bailouts for the Freedom to Farm bill and not for our farmers. 
That was a record amount of money we sent out last year. What did it 
get us? Is the farm economy any healthier? No.
  USDA tells us if we don't pass an emergency package again this year, 
net farm income is going to fall by 17 percent compared to last year. 
Tell me what farmer can afford to take another 17-percent cut. That is 
net farming; that is not gross. That is what they used to clothe and 
feed their families and buy some new equipment, pay the mortgage, and 
hopefully set aside a little bit for the children to go to college.
  So it looks as if we will have to come up with another emergency 
package again this year. That is not a farm program. That is not a farm 
bill. That is lurching from one emergency to the next. Again, our 
farmers are the victims.
  I was hopeful that this year we could have some hearings and a debate 
on the Freedom to Farm bill to see what changes we could make in it to 
get to a rational system of farm supports, a farm program combining 
conservation, storage payments, better loan rates, some shorter term 
set-aside programs, so we would have a balanced package, the prices at 
the farmgate would be higher, so the farmers could get their money from 
the marketplace and not from a Government paycheck. That is the debate 
we need. Yet that debate is not going to happen this year. We are not 
going to have the hearings, and we will not have the debate.
  Quite frankly, the frustration felt by most of these farm families is 
going to continue to fester and grow. I think we will see even more 
frustration in rural America because we lack the will and, quite 
frankly, we lack the leadership to redress the failed Freedom to Farm 
bill.
  I compliment the Senator from Minnesota for his sense-of-the-Senate 
resolution. I believe the farm families who took money out of their own 
pockets, which they could ill afford to do--they got on buses; they 
came here and endured rain and cold weather, slogging around in mud and 
water to make their case known to Congress, exercising their first 
amendment rights to petition their Government--did what is in the best 
tradition of America. I hope their voices and the frustration we heard 
will not go unheeded. I hope we can understand that we have an 
obligation in this body and in the other body to address the plight of 
what is happening in rural America today.
  I come from a small town of 150 people. I remember growing up as a 
child when we had an elevator, we had a grocery store, a hardware 
store, and a small implement dealer. They are all gone now. They are 
all gone. I am not saying we have to save every town of 150 people. But 
it is not only those towns. It is those towns of 2,000, 3,000, or 5,000 
people that are also going under, because I believe we don't have an 
adequate farm program that will enable our farmers to get a better 
price in the marketplace.
  Again, I support this resolution. I commend the farmers who came 
here. I hope and trust we can hear their plea and do something about 
changing the failed Freedom to Farm bill.
  I also wish to say I hope after this vote at 11 o'clock we can have a 
resounding vote in support of the crop insurance bill that is before 
us. We need to fix the Crop Insurance Program.
  I commend Senator Roberts from Kansas and Senator Kerrey from 
Nebraska for their leadership in this area.
  The Crop Insurance Program needs to be changed. We put $6 billion in 
the budget last year for that. I believe it will be a very strong part 
of helping farmers get through some of these tough times that we have 
right now. It is not the answer to all of the problems in the farm 
communities, but it is a part of it.
  Hopefully, with this modified crop insurance bill, we can go to 
conference with the House right away and get it to the President by 
May. I will for my part do everything I can with the conferees on our 
side to expedite the conference. There are not that many differences 
between the House and the Senate bill--a few, but nothing we can't work 
out in a timely manner.
  I hope we can get this crop insurance bill through. I hope we can get 
a resounding vote for it, and at least send some hope to our family 
farmers that at least in the area of crop insurance and revenue 
insurance coverage we are going to pay some attention.
  I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________