[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 134 (Tuesday, October 9, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Page S10356]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             THE FARM BILL

  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, last week the House of Representatives 
passed a new farm bill. That piece of legislation is an important step 
forward because most of us believe the current farm bill does not work. 
The so-called Freedom to Farm bill, in fact, has been a disaster for 
family farmers now for many years. It had no ability to help farmers 
during tough times to provide for disasters and collapses in commodity 
prices. Because of this, each year Congress has had to come up with 
emergency funding at the end of the year.
  We did that. We did not do enough, but we did some each year to try 
to repair the hole in the so-called Freedom to Farm bill. That bill now 
expires at the end of next year and needs to be replaced.
  The House of Representatives, God bless them, said: No. We should not 
wait until next year. We should write a new farm bill now. And it ought 
to be in place for the next crop-year when people go into the fields 
next spring. We in the Senate now have the obligation to do the same, 
and I believe we will do the same.
  With respect to the bill that the House of Representatives enacted 
last week, let me say this: I think it is better than the Freedom to 
Farm bill. They have made progress. Good for them. I commend them.
  There are some things we need to do better than they did in the House 
bill. For example, in my part of the country we raise a great deal of 
wheat and barley. The loan rates, for example, for wheat and barley are 
not significant enough, when compared to other crops. They are far too 
low in the House bill. So we need to make some adjustments to that 
piece of legislation.
  Farm benefits ought to be better targeted to family farmers, in my 
judgment, as well. We have had the development in this country of these 
giant agrifactories. Well, that is not what we are trying to preserve. 
If this isn't about preserving family farms, families that are trying 
to live out their lives in the country and make a living on the family 
farm, if that is not what this is about, then, in my judgment, we do 
not need a farm bill.
  Abraham Lincoln started the Department of Agriculture with nine 
employees in the 1860s. As you know, a century and a half later, it is 
a behemoth organization. If a farm bill is only to support the giant 
agrifactories of the world, then count me out. But if it is to support 
family farms, I say: Good; it is important. And it is important to this 
country's future that we maintain a network of family farm food 
producers.
  There is a national security interest as well for the Senate to do a 
farm bill. The House has done the bill, so we also ought to do it 
before we adjourn, in the interest of national security.
  What is the national security interest? The other evening on national 
television, they described a feedlot with nearly 200,000 cattle in it 
over the year. This is a giant agricultural enterprise that brings 
large numbers of cattle together and feeds them in a huge series of 
feedlots. They talked about the potential of bioterrorism entering the 
food supply, and how convenient it would be for those giant 
agrifactories to be a target for efforts in bioterrorism.
  It seems to me a broad network of family producers across this 
country tends to thwart that.
  Security of America's food supply is best achieved by a network of 
family farms producing America's food. That is why a farm bill is so 
important.
  We have the obligation and the opportunity in the Senate to do the 
right thing. Between now and when we leave at the end of this session 
of Congress, we should pass a farm bill, go to conference, reach 
agreement with the House, and then send a farm bill to the President 
that he will sign. I understand the President says he doesn't support 
the bill passed by the House of Representatives. The fact is, however, 
if it is not his priority, it is ours. We ought to write a good farm 
bill and send it to him.
  I believe at the end of the day he will support it because the House 
passed it with a veto-proof majority. I would expect a good farm bill 
will pass the Senate with a similar majority.
  I believe we ought to waste no time. I have talked to the majority 
leader and others about it. He agrees. Let's try to do what we can do 
to pass a farm bill in the Senate, then go to conference and see if we 
can't get a farm bill signed into law before the end of this year. That 
way, family farmers who go into the fields next spring will understand 
what the new farm bill will be and will be able to plan accordingly.
  It will certainly be better than the Freedom to Farm bill, a bill 
that has undercut the interests of families trying to make a living on 
a family farm.
  Very few people in this country have seen their income cut as 
dramatically as the average family farm income has been cut over the 
years. This loss of income, then, is somewhat ironic. We are dropping 
food into Afghanistan because people are on the abyss of starvation; we 
hear reports of old women climbing trees in Sudan to forage for leaves 
to eat; and one-half a billion people go to bed every night with an 
ache in their belly because it hurts to be hungry. All told, thousands 
of children die every day from hunger and hunger-related causes. Yet 
the farmers of South Dakota and North Dakota and Kansas and Montana and 
Nebraska are told, when they load their truck with wheat or barley and 
take it to the country elevator, that which they produce has no value. 
They are told the food somehow has no value, that the price is 
collapsed because it is not worth very much. It seems to me that much 
of the world is placing great worth on that which we produce in great 
abundance on America's farms.
  If we can't find a way to connect that which we produce to those who 
need it, then we are not thinking hard. The surest road to stability 
and peace in the world is to try to help people who are hungry. We must 
place a value on the food our family farmers produce. Again, there is a 
disconnection there somewhere. We need to find it and reconnect it.
  Let me again say, I hope in the coming couple of weeks we will, in 
the Senate, make it a priority to write a farm bill, bring it to the 
floor, and go to conference with the House. We have that obligation to 
our family farmers. That ought to be our responsibility now. It is not 
only good for family farmers; it is good for American security 
interests, for food security interests to do that. I hope we will do it 
soon.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Corzine). The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________