[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 13]
[Senate]
[Pages 19097-19098]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                       AGRICULTURE APPROPRIATIONS

  Mr. HAGEL. Mr. President, over the weekend in Nebraska, I met with a 
number of agricultural producers about the current prices in American 
agriculture. Over the last 3 weeks, my staff and I have spoken to over 
100 agricultural producers in the State of Nebraska--hog producers, 
cattle producers, grain producers; and then the second rim, the outer 
rim representing the agricultural community--bankers, implement 
dealers, automobile dealers. All had a consistent theme as to what we 
must do to direct our attention and our effort to dealing with this 
crisis in America.
  As we begin debate today on the fiscal year 2000 Agriculture 
appropriations bill and on the emergency appropriation for agriculture, 
we should keep in mind some important dynamics about American 
agriculture. Leaders of both parties in the Senate committed last week 
to including in the fiscal year 2000 Agriculture appropriations bill an 
emergency funding measure to provide the short-term assistance needed 
for our agricultural producers, and that assistance should include 
increasing the market transition payments--I am confident we will see 
legislation to do that--lifting the caps on loan deficiency payments, 
and additional funding for crop insurance. I know that part of Freedom 
to Farm in 1996 was the commitment to America's agricultural producers 
to, in fact, reform crop insurance. We are on our way in that area, but 
we have not yet arrived at that reform.
  Crop insurance is a very key dynamic to the future of American 
agriculture. The emergency appropriations bill should include relief 
for livestock producers, and I am confident we will see that in both of 
the bills that will be presented today, plus other emergency measures.
  As we address this immediate crisis, we must continue to work on the 
long-term priorities. The perspective is clear. We have an immediate 
problem, and we will address that immediate problem. But let us not 
lose sight of the long-term priorities for American agriculture.
  To do that we must focus on the demand side of the equation. When I 
talk about the demand side of the equation, I am talking about trade. I 
am talking about trade policies that encourage market development and 
the opening of new markets for our producers. We must continue to work 
for trade and sanctions reform--another critical component of the 1996 
farm bill. I regret to say that Congress and the President have not 
done a very good job in the area of trade and sanctions reform. We are 
working on it, but we are a long way from being where we should be.
  For example, it is estimated that current unilateral sanctions cost 
the U.S. economy more than $20 billion each year. Who do we penalize? 
Who do we hurt? We hurt ourselves. We must stop using agricultural 
policy as a foreign policy weapon. Instead, we must extend a strong 
message to our customers and competitors around the world that U.S. 
agricultural producers are consistent and reliable suppliers of quality 
and plentiful agricultural products.
  We need fast track authority for the President in order to reach 
trade agreements that will open more markets to our agricultural goods 
and allow our producers to compete on a level playing field.
  Today we stand in a situation that is unprecedented in the last 25 
years. This President of the United States has been without fast track 
negotiating authority since 1994. Obviously, there has

[[Page 19098]]

been a lack of focus on priority on this issue. Every day the President 
does not have the authority to negotiate trade treaties and 
arrangements and deals, the European Union is doing it; the South 
American trade organization Mercosur is doing it; others are doing it. 
We are not. Do we not understand that we will pay a very significant 
price, a high price, for being moved out of those markets because we 
have not placed trade as a high priority? Fast track authority is 
certainly a very clear example.
  We must work to break down protectionist barriers in the next round 
of the World Trade Organization negotiations being held this fall in 
Seattle and strongly oppose the European Union's delay on lifting the 
ban on hormone-enhanced beef.
  We should work with China to encourage its entrance into the WTO. Do 
we really not understand that it is surely in the best interests of 
America, stability in the world, and new markets for all American 
products to have China in the World Trade Organization, not cutting 
corners but complying with all the necessary criteria to be a member of 
the WTO? It is in our best interests to continue to bring China into 
responsible organizations where China has more responsibility and 
accountability and opens a market of 1.3 billion people. We need more 
focus in that effort.
  The President must make trade a top priority. He must make trade a 
top priority and then lead. It is not good enough to say our trade 
ambassador will negotiate. The President sets the agenda; the President 
sets the priority. Presidents lead. The next President of the United 
States is going to be consumed with an immense series of challenges. 
The Congress needs to place a higher priority on working in these 
challenges.
  We must fulfill our commitment to American agriculture for tax and 
regulatory reform. Our national tax policy should encourage long-term 
investment in production agriculture that helps our current producers 
stay in business.
  We must reduce Government regulation and cut taxes. There are a 
number of things we can do, that we promised we would do in 1996:
  Eliminate the estate tax. Our family farmers should not have to sell 
the family farm to pay taxes in order to keep the farm going. That cuts 
right to the core for our future and for the next generation of 
farmers;
  Provide capital gains tax relief on the sale of the farmland by our 
producers, expanding on the exclusion given to homeowners in 1997. 
Eventually, we should abolish capital gains taxes. The Chairman of the 
Federal Reserve Board, Alan Greenspan, affirmed his view on that before 
the Senate Banking Committee;
  Create tax-deferred farm and ranch risk management accounts to help 
ease fluctuations in income, thereby giving our producers another 
management tool;
  Ensure that farmers and ranchers receive the full benefits of the 
permanent income-averaging provisions and not lose them because of the 
alternative minimum tax;
  Obviously, we must eliminate the marriage penalty and provide 100 
percent deductibility for health insurance premiums.
  These are real; these connect; they are relevant. They will help 
American agriculture; they will help our country.
  We must ease the regulatory burdens on our agricultural producers. 
The USDA, the EPA, and other regulatory agencies hit farmers with 
dozens of different regulations that tie up their land, they tie up 
their time, they tie up their capital, and reduce their efficiency and 
reduce their profits. To what end? What is the cost-benefit ratio?
  Let's take a real-life example. Two of our biggest competitors, 
Brazil and Argentina, have been gaining in their share of the world's 
commodity trade, especially in corn and wheat. The Brazilians and the 
Argentines are able to make a profit on these crops at prices lower 
than production costs in the United States.
  Why? There are many reasons we can measure. I will state a couple. 
The Brazilians and Argentines pay much lower taxes than our American 
agricultural producers pay. Second, they have fewer Government 
regulations to contend with. Their Government does not place added 
burdens on them, not only as producers but as marketers. Their 
Government actually helps. Their Government doesn't stand in the way. 
We need to do the same thing.
  In 1996, we got the Federal Government out of the farmers' fields. 
Now we need to get the Federal Government off the farmers' backs.
  In the short term, we must swiftly conclude action on an agricultural 
appropriations bill that will provide emergency relief to our commodity 
and our livestock producers. Over the long term, it is good public 
policy, domestically and internationally, to provide for abundant and 
inexpensive food. We can support that policy by adopting prudent 
Government policies, Government policies such as trade policies that 
encourage market development, policies which create international 
financial stability.
  Here is a very clear example of how the globe connects, how all 6 
billion people in the world connect. Stability is the base from which 
we work to help develop emerging democracies, market economies, opening 
new opportunities and new markets. All of our policies are connected--
national defense, foreign policy, trade policy--and ``ground'' all of 
our other policies with an anchor of stability so that the people of 
the world will have the hope that they must have to have a better world 
and a better life. It gives all people of the world an opportunity to 
build bridges to each other.
  We need tax policies which encourage long-term investments in 
production agriculture to help sustain our current producers. These are 
the most important ways we can help our farmers and our consumers, our 
taxpayers, and our international trade partners.
  In the short term, we need to share the risks--yes, share the risks--
that from time to time will adversely impact farming, such as has been 
the case for the last 2 years. We cannot sustain a long-term policy of 
providing abundant and inexpensive food without occasionally producing 
more than the market will absorb in the short term. We cannot control 
the weather or international markets. We need to factor in those 
realities of farming and not act shocked every time this happens.
  Most agricultural producers I have spoken to, not just in the last 
month but in the last 4 years, 5 years, 10 years, do not believe that 
the United States should retreat to the 1980 set-aside, higher price 
support policies which they believe only extended and deepened problems 
of the 1980s and certainly would extend and deepen the current crisis. 
I agree.
  To support production agriculture and sustain the producer base which 
has contributed so much to our economic stability and prosperity, we 
need to provide short-term support to our agricultural producers now.
  Congress needs to pass a realistic and a responsible emergency 
agriculture bill. The Congress must act this week.
  I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. HAGEL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________