[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 49 (Monday, March 23, 2009)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3613-S3614]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. FEINGOLD:
  S. 665. A bill to allow modified bloc voting by cooperative 
associations of milk producers in connection with a referendum on 
Federal milk marketing order reform; to the Committee on Agriculture, 
Nutrition, and Forestry.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, the first day of spring is appropriately 
also National Agriculture Day and a time to recognize the important 
contribution made by farmers, ranchers and the agriculture industry 
that is largely responsible for putting food on the table and clothes 
on our backs. Agriculture is critically important to both our Nation 
and Wisconsin. Over 22 million Americans and 420,000 Wisconsinites are 
employed by farms or agriculture related businesses. Approximately a 
fifth of U.S. gross domestic product is linked to agriculture and 
Wisconsin's farms and farm-related businesses create $51.5 billion in 
economic activity each year.
  Unfortunately, Agriculture Day this year comes at an unusually 
stressful time for the farm community. Even for an industry used to ups 
and downs from

[[Page S3614]]

a variety of sources, the recent problems associated with the global 
economic troubles are taxing farmers and agriculture in general more 
than usual. Dairy farmers have been particularly hard hit recently, 
with the price they receive for their milk having fallen by 50 percent 
or more since last year. While I was glad that the dairy safety net or 
Milk Income Loss Contract program was reauthorized and improved during 
the farm bill, the dramatic drop in prices combined with relatively 
high input costs will mean that many dairy farmers are not coming close 
to covering their expenses even with the safety net.
  Given these serious challenges facing dairy farmers, on January 30, 
2009, I sent a letter with Senator Kohl and 33 other Senators to U.S. 
Department of Agriculture, USDA, Secretary Tom Vilsack that calls on 
the USDA to take a series of actions to protect the industry from 
instability. This geographically diverse group of senators is asking 
the USDA to more fully utilize existing programs like the Dairy Product 
Price Support Program, DPPSP, and the Dairy Export Incentive Program, 
to reverse the outgoing administration's recent decision to halt 
purchases of value-added dairy products by the DPPSP, and to help more 
low-income individuals, food banks and schools gain access to 
nutritious dairy products.
  As Americans and businesses are feeling the impact of the current 
economic troubles and sometimes falling behind on payments, farmers 
across the country are increasingly facing the same prospect as well. 
This is one reason I supported $193 million for Farm Service Agency 
farm loans and loan restructuring as part of the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act, P.L. 111-5, also known as the stimulus bill--to 
ensure that credit for farmers is available during these difficult 
times. Also along these lines, on March 5, 2009, I sent a letter with 
Senators Brown, Kohl, Gillibrand and 15 other Senators urging the Obama 
administration to help reduce farm foreclosures related to the troubled 
economy. The letter to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and Treasury 
Secretary Tim Geithner called for additional requirements for banks and 
other financial institutions that have taken Federal bailout funds to 
work with farmers to restructure farm loans to help keep them in their 
homes and businesses. These conditions would mirror requirements that 
are already in place on farm loans supported by the USDA Farm Service 
Agency and the requirements being developed for home loans held by 
these same lenders that have taken bailout funds. While I did not 
support the flawed bailout bill, I believe it is essential that bailout 
funds be used as much as possible to help consumers, farmers, home-
owners and others feeling the pain of the economic crisis we are in.
  In addition to focusing resources to help farmers and others in 
agriculture ride out the current economic storm, it is still important 
to seek solutions to long term inequities in agriculture. I have been 
particularly concerned about the increasing concentration in 
agriculture sectors and the potential for this market power to be used 
unduly against farmers and small independent businesses. During a 
Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on March 10, 2009, I discussed the 
grave concerns of Wisconsin farmers about slumping dairy prices and the 
Bush administration's failure to take action against anti-competitive 
behavior in the agriculture industry. Under my questioning, Christine 
Anne Varney, the nominee to be Assistant Attorney General of the 
Antitrust Division in the Department of Justice, committed, if she is 
confirmed, to make agriculture a priority of the Antitrust Division. 
She indicated that she will examine questionable antitrust decisions of 
the Bush administration and order a thorough review of slumping farm-
level dairy prices, which do not appear to be reflected in retail 
prices paid by consumers.
  Even with the troubles currently facing agriculture, farmers, and 
agriculture are resilient and entrepreneurial. I am certain that these 
individuals and businesses will bounce back and continue to push for 
more opportunities for farmers, agriculture and the rural communities 
that depend on them. Wisconsin's diverse agricultural producers--from 
ginseng growers to cheese makers to cranberry growers and everything in 
between--are rightly proud of their work and look for ways to 
differentiate themselves and add value whether it is through country-
of-origin or other labeling, converting to organic production or other 
measures. During debate on the farm bill, I was glad to support federal 
programs such as organic programs, Value-Added Producer Grants and the 
Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Program as ways that the federal 
government can support important new opportunities for farmers to 
improve their livelihood without drastically changing the size and 
methods of their production.

  Of more general importance to all rural residents is closing the 
digital divide and providing affordable broadband Internet access to 
all Americans. I was glad the farm bill made improvements to the USDA 
broadband programs and that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 
followed this up with a commitment to spend $7.2 billion. On March, 9, 
2009, I cosigned a series of letters to the administrators of the 
Federal broadband programs highlighting the need to ensure that these 
funds are targeted toward bringing broadband and the opportunities that 
come with this connectivity to rural areas without service.
  Finally, the first day of spring also seems like an opportune time to 
reintroduce some legislation related to agriculture. While I was able 
to include several of my proposals in the farm bill last year including 
a tax provision to allow farmers to remain eligible for Social Security 
benefits in lean years, country-of-origin labeling for ginseng, a new 
higher profile office at USDA for small farms, and a provision similar 
to a bill I had with Senator Grassley to give farmers an option to opt 
out of mandatory binding arbitration in contracts, I have three bills 
to reintroduce: The Quality Cheese Act, The Democracy for Dairy Farmers 
Act and the Federal Milk Marketing Reform Act.
  The import of milk protein concentrates and casein, which can 
substitute for domestic milk in many food products, continues to put 
pressure on our farmers and can threaten the integrity of our dairy 
products. For example, concerns about the safety of imported dairy 
products such as the recent Chinese melamine adulteration have the 
potential to threaten consumer confidence even for U.S. dairy products. 
The Quality Cheese Act will preserve the integrity of our natural 
cheeses by preventing milk protein concentrates and other imported milk 
substitutes from ever entering cheese vats.
  Under the Federal Milk Marketing Order system, the deck has been 
stacked against Wisconsin's dairy farmers for some time. The legacy of 
transportation costs being calculated for the base milk price based on 
the distance from Eau Claire, WI, remains a problem to this day. This 
rule unfairly keeps Wisconsin's milk price disproportionately low, and 
bears no relation to the actual costs of transportation. While I hope 
that the commission provided for by the farm bill can address this 
problem also, my Federal Milk Market Reform Act would even the playing 
field for Wisconsin's producers and remove this longstanding inequity.
  If a dairy cooperative decides to vote on behalf of all of its 
members or ``bloc vote,'' individual members have no opportunity to 
voice opinions separately. That seems unfair when you consider what 
significant issues may be at stake. The Democracy for Dairy Producers 
Act of 2007 is simple and fair. It provides that a cooperative cannot 
deny any of its members a ballot to opt to vote separately from the 
cooperative. It also contains safeguards to make sure that farmers have 
information about each vote and is structured in such a way that it 
will not slow down the process, and the implementation of any rule or 
regulation would proceed on schedule.
                                 ______