[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 166 (Wednesday, November 2, 2011)]
[House]
[Page H7219]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1110
                            FARM ACT OF 2011

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Kansas (Mr. Huelskamp) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. HUELSKAMP. Mr. Speaker, as I have traveled across the First 
District of Kansas to host more than 70 in-person town hall meetings 
during my first 10 months here in Congress, constituents have 
reaffirmed our shared belief that Washington cannot be everything to 
everybody and nor should it be. They have told me they can and want to 
do more with less. They know that the more Washington spends today, the 
more their children and grandchildren will have to pay back in the 
future, and likely to a foreign nation.
  And while they scale back their expectations, they want Washington to 
scale back what it asks them to do. The ever-tightening grip and 
imposition of the Federal bureaucracy's expensive, counterproductive, 
and unnecessary burdens are killing America's agriculture industry. 
Today, I will introduce the FARM Act of 2011--Freeing Agriculture to 
Reap More Act. I am unveiling it today in light of the pending ag 
discussions we hear are occurring in the supercommittee.
  The FARM Act reflects the conversations I have had with constituents 
and farm groups all across the First District and addresses their 
concerns about the economic impacts of overregulation. In essence, the 
FARM Act adds a regulatory title to the farm bill. Given the 
consequences of overregulation, it merits its own title amid others 
like trade, research, conservation, or farm credit.
  Farmers and ranchers arguably pay some of the largest costs for 
Washington's crushing burden of overregulation. Whether it is on youth 
involvement on family farms, pesticide application permits, greenhouse 
gases, farm dust, farm commercial vehicles, fuel hauling limitations 
for farm equipment, or livestock emissions taxes, the Federal 
Government continues to insist that it control the intricate, day-to-
day affairs of America's agriculture community. The FARM Act prohibits 
this regulatory overreach.
  Kansas' family farms do not need Washington writing detailed 
instruction manuals for them on how much fuel they can or cannot put in 
their tractors. They do not need Washington prohibiting them from 
teaching their own children the value and importance of hard work by 
allowing them to work a few hours on the farm. And they most certainly 
do not need Washington imposing taxes on them for supposed greenhouse 
gases emitted by their livestock. No, they need Washington to let them 
run their operations in the safe and responsible, yet productive, ways 
they have done for generations. The FARM Act allows our family farms to 
continue the family tradition without fear of expensive and unnecessary 
regulations.
  Like the families that live and the farms that operate in rural 
America, small towns in the First District of Kansas also have no need 
for additional instruction from Washington. That is why the FARM Act 
prohibits funding for the newly established White House Rural Council. 
Rural communities are the embodiment of family and entrepreneurial 
freedom, and this council seeks to replace that freedom with 
centralized planning schemes. We simply cannot afford more of the 
President's failed approaches.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the FARM Act of 2011. 
It's time to stop the overregulation of America's farmers, ranchers, ag 
communities, and rural America. It's time to put an end to Washington's 
distrust of America's growers, ranchers, and producers, as well as all 
of rural America.

                          ____________________