[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 17 (Tuesday, February 26, 2002)]
[House]
[Page H527]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                          AGRICULTURAL REFORM

  (Mr. SMITH of Michigan asked and was given permission to address the 
House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Madam Speaker, the Senate recently passed 
their farm bill. In that farm bill, they had payment limitations that I 
think is the kind of farm policy we should have in this country.
  I ask all my colleagues in this Chamber to support the idea of some 
kind of payment limitations, whether it be $200,000 or $300,000 or a 
half a million dollars, but something so that the megafarms and the 
megacorporations that own 50,000, 60,000, 80,000 acres are not 
capturing so much of the proceeds of our farm program payments.
  Madam Speaker, there are some people who say that there are payment 
limits for price supports. There are no payment limits for price 
supports. They can do an end-run.
  Let me just demonstrate the top five recipients of farm program 
payments for 1996 through 2000, according to the Environmental Working 
Group's Web site: Riceland Foods, $49 million; Farmers Rice Co-op, $38 
million; Harvest States Co-op, $28 million; Tyler Farms, $23 million; 
and Producers Rice Mill, $19 million.
  It is reasonable to have farm policy that helps most of the farmers 
in this country. We can argue about what a family farm is, but what we 
cannot argue about is farm policy that gives most of the money to the 
megafarms.

                          ____________________