[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 7 (Wednesday, January 28, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Page S325]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS

                                 ______
                                 

  SENATE RESOLUTION 293--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT THE 
PRESIDENT AND UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE SHOULD ENSURE THAT ANY 
  FUTURE FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS DO NOT HARM THE DAIRY INDUSTRY OF THE 
                             UNITED STATES

  Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself, Mr. Kohl, Mr. Craig, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. 
Schumer, Mr. Jeffords, Mr. Specter, Mrs. Clinton, Mrs. Boxer, Ms. 
Collins, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Dayton, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Domenici, Mr. Coleman, 
Mr. Leahy, and Mrs. Feinstein) submitted the following resolution; 
which was referred to the Committee on Finance:

                              S. Res. 293

       Whereas the United States is home to thousands of dairy 
     producers, with dairy farmers in every State;
       Whereas, as of the date of this resolution, the United 
     States and the Australia are negotiating the development of a 
     free trade agreement;
       Whereas these negotiations could have dire consequences for 
     several of the agricultural industries of the United States, 
     including the dairy industry;
       Whereas improper treatment of dairy in the United States-
     Australia Free Trade Agreement could concentrate the 
     exporting focus of Australia largely on the United States; 
     and
       Whereas significantly increasing access to the dairy 
     markets of the United States for Australian imports would 
     greatly undermine milk prices, thwarting Federal efforts to 
     support dairy producers and their families: Now, therefore, 
     be it
       Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that the 
     President and the United States Trade Representative should 
     exercise great caution in negotiating and drafting the 
     trading terms that would apply to the dairy industry under 
     the proposed United States-Australia Free Trade Agreement.
                                  ____

  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, as many of my colleagues know, 
Wisconsin's dairy industry is one of the largest industries in the 
State, generating billions of dollars for the State's economy. With an 
estimated impact of $18.5 billion, milk sustains over 16,000 farm 
families and nearly 200,000 jobs in the State. With thousands of dairy 
farms and hundreds of dairy processors, the industry is vital to 
creating and sustaining good jobs in Wisconsin. These numbers do not 
capture the full import of the dairy industry, however. In Wisconsin, 
dairy is more than an issue of dollars and cents--it is part of our 
heritage that every Wisconsinite takes pride in.
  America's Dairyland is already threatened by bad trade agreements, 
but one of the worst for dairy farmers is currently in the works. U.S. 
negotiators are trying to wrap up a trade agreement with Australia, 
which is expected to include new terms of trade for agricultural 
commodities. Any agreement with Australia, and any subsequent agreement 
with New Zealand, could have a very negative impact on Wisconsin's 
dairy industry.
  The administration has contemplated changes to our trade laws that 
would lay open our markets to dairy and other farm products from 
Australia and possibly New Zealand. Australian and New Zealand milk 
producers are among the many who have been using a trade loophole on 
milk protein concentrates to undercut our domestic dairy prices, a 
loophole that I am working to close. Further imports from Australia can 
only push U.S. milk prices lower.
  This proposal comes at a time when dairy farmers are just beginning 
to think about a recovery from the low milk prices of the past few 
years. The impact of this agreement on the Nation's dairy industry, and 
Wisconsin in particular, will be significant. According to the National 
Milk Producers Federation, the flood of imports from Australia that 
would follow from a trade agreement could cost this country nearly one-
quarter of our dairy farms. Wisconsin has been losing dairy farms at an 
alarming rate, and we certainly cannot afford a trade agreement that 
hastens that change.
  I have opposed the efforts of the U.S. Trade Representative to pursue 
this agreement given its negative consequences for Wisconsin. I have 
clearly stated my position, and the position reiterated to me by dairy 
farmers across the State, to Ambassador Zoellick. Joined by 30 of my 
State colleagues, I have called upon President Bush to respond to the 
concerns of Americans regarding the negotiations on a free trade 
agreement with Australia. Today, along with several of my of my 
colleagues--Senators Kohl, Craig, Stabenow, Schumer, Jeffords, Specter, 
Clinton, Boxer, Collins, Dayton, Crapo, Domenici, and Snowe. I am 
submitting a resolution reiterating the fact that we must ensure that 
our dairy industry, especially dairy producers, will not suffer undue 
hardships if this agreement is put in place.
  If the U.S. gives Australia significantly increased access to our 
dairy market, this will greatly undermine milk prices, thwarting 
federal efforts to support dairy producers and their families. 
Estimates suggest that an agreement with Australia would cost this 
country more than 150,000 jobs that depend on a healthy U.S. dairy 
sector. Wisconsin's communities area at great risk, and I call on all 
my colleagues to join me in working to protect the country's dairy 
industry from an unfair trade agreement with Australia.
                                  ____

  Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I join my colleague from Wisconsin in 
support of this resolution. I remain deeply concerned about the 
direction the President's negotiators are headed in the U.S.-Australia 
Free Trade negotiations.
  I know there are lots of moving parts to this or any trade 
negotiation. But if recent reports are correct the U.S./Australia 
negotiations seem to be boiling down to a handful of critical issues--
among them are dairy and drugs. Australia is angling for more access to 
our dairy markets. The Bush Administration, on behalf of pharmaceutical 
manufacturers, is pushing for greater access to Australia's 
Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme.
  I suspect I know who wins if the Bush administration has to make a 
trade-off between the interests of dairy farmers and huge 
pharmaceutical corporations. The Bush administration demonstrated 
remarkable loyalty to pharmaceutical manufacturers during debate on the 
Medicare bill. I suspect those loyalties are alive and well and fear 
they may trump the interests of thousands of dairy producers and 
processors across the country.
  Out of an abundance of caution, I will reserve judgment on the final 
package until we have something more concrete to review. But the 
President's negotiators should be on notice that we will be closely 
following these negotiations to assure that dairymen's concerns are 
given every consideration.

                          ____________________