[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 11]
[Senate]
[Pages 16052-16053]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                   AMERICA'S FARMERS NEED ASSISTANCE

  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, as the Senate prepares to leave town for 
the August recess, and most of my colleagues are perhaps already on an 
airplane, it might be useful to describe what has happened at the end 
of the legislative business we completed a couple of hours ago.
  This past week, we considered legislation dealing with some emergency 
help for family farmers. In fact, it was actually kind of hard to get 
that legislation even considered because the Republicans in the Senate 
filibustered the motion to proceed.
  For those who do not understand the mechanics of how the Senate 
works, in plain English that means they demanded a debate on whether we 
should even debate the bill. A motion to proceed and a filibuster on 
the motion to proceed meant we had to debate whether we should even 
start debating. If that sounds a little goofy and a little arcane to 
regular folks who sit around and talk about issues in a straightforward 
way, it is because it was arcane and, at least in this Senator's 
judgment, ``goofy.'' But sometimes, that is just the way the Senate 
works. However, I certainly would not want to change the rules of the 
Senate.
  We had to debate the motion to proceed and deal with a filibuster, 
and then we got the legislation to the floor. The legislation was 
written to help family farmers during tough times.
  Family farmers across this country have confronted a total collapse 
in prices for that which they produce. In most cases, in my State at 
least, they are trying to run a family operation. They are living on a 
farm, with neighbors a good ways away. They have a yard-light that 
illuminates that farm. They often have cattle, a few horses, some 
chickens, and in some cases a half dozen or so cats running around. 
They have a tractor, a combine, a drill or a seeder. They are all 
equipped to go about the business of farming.
  Family farmers all across this country go out when the spring comes, 
when it is dry enough to get in the fields, and they plant some grain. 
They hope then, after they plant their seed, nothing catastrophic is 
going to happen that would prevent it from growing. They hope it does 
not hail. That might destroy their crop. They hope it rains enough. 
They hope it does not rain too much. That would also destroy the crop. 
They hope it does not get disease, it could, and that could destroy the 
crop. They hope insects do not come, and they could, and those insects 
could destroy the crop. All these things, the family farmer must cope 
with.
  But, there is one more thing family farmers must deal with. They have 
all this fervent hope and trust, having invested all they own in these 
tiny seeds they planted in the ground. Then in the fall, they hope they 
can fuel up the combine and go out and harvest that crop. When they do 
that, they put it in a truck haul it to the elevator. The country 
elevator receives that grain when they raise the hoist and dump that 
grain into the pit. The grain trader then says to that farmer: Yes, we 
know you worked hard. We know you and your family planted in the 
spring. We know you and your kids and your spouse drove the tractor and 
drove the combine. We know you have your life savings in this grain, 
and that you managed against all odds to finally harvest it. But, this 
grain is not worth much. This food you have produced does not have 
value. The market says this food is not very important.
  Those family farmers, who struggle day after day in so many different 
ways to try to make a living on the family farm, are told that which 
they produce in such abundance and that which the world so desperately 
needs somehow has no value. Talk about something that makes no sense, 
this is it.
  We have at least 500 million people in this world who go to bed every 
single night with an ache in their belly because it hurts to be hungry. 
At the same time, our family farmers are losing their shirts because 
they are told the crop they struggled to produce has no value.
  A world that is hungry and family farmers producing food the market 
says has no value? Is there something not connecting here? You bet your 
life there is something not connecting.
  It is interesting to see what we have done in the last several weeks. 
The priorities around here are not so much family farmers. The 
priorities, if one closes their eyes and listens to the debate, are: 
missile defense, Mexican trucks, the managed care industry. Those are 
all the priorities, but when it comes to talking about the extra needs 
of family farmers during tough times, we are told they do not need that 
extra $1.9 billion. Enough votes were available in the Senate to pass 
that legislation. We had 52 votes in favor of it.
  I went to a real small school. I graduated from a high school in a 
class of 9, but I figured out enough from math to understand when one 
has 100 votes and 52 vote yes, that means yes wins.
  We had enough votes to pass this legislation, and we had a vote on 
it. We received 52 votes. But guess what. It did not pass. Why? Because 
there was a filibuster.
  President Bush and the Republicans in the Senate said: We are going 
to filibuster this--which requires 60 votes to break --because we do 
not want to give that extra aid to family farmers.
  All we are talking about is a bridge over price valleys. We are 
talking about a small bridge during tough times.
  During this discussion, some friends of mine came to the Senate and 
said: Things are better on the farm, prices have improved.
  When prices for grain hit a 25-year low and then improve slightly to 
only an 18-year low, I suppose one could say things are better.
  I ask those who say things are better to take a look at their bank 
account. Have they lost 40 percent of their income? If so, then come 
here and understand the empathy that ought to be shown to family 
farmers. If not, do not talk about slight improvements.
  Has anybody in the Senate, in recent years, raised a 250-pound hog? I 
don't think so. If they had, they would be aware of the time during 
these last several years in which a 250-pound hog brought less than 10 
cents a pound. A 250-pound hog from the farm to the market brought less 
than $25 for the entire hog. Someone bought that hog, processed it and 
sent it to the market to be laid on a grocery store shelf. But at the 
grocery store, the meat from that hog cost $300 to the folks who bought 
it. This was the same hog that brought only $25 to the family farm.
  Is there something wrong with this? Unless one has gotten less than 
$25 for a hog recently--and that has happened in recent years to those 
who produce hogs--do not talk to me about slight improvements.
  Yes, the price of hogs has increased, but tell me: What kind of loss 
did family farmers incur when they went through that $25 price valley? 
Commodity prices have collapsed in a very significant way. In most 
cases, they have stayed way down. We need to do something about it.
  I prefer that farmers get all of their income from the marketplace, 
but at this point that is not possible. The grain markets have 
collapsed. Until we find a way for that market to come back, if we want 
family farmers in our future, we need to provide a safety net. That is 
what we are trying to do.
  We are trying to write a new farm bill, and we were trying to provide 
an emergency piece that will get them to the point where we get this 
new farm

[[Page 16053]]

bill in place. That is what this debate was about.
  We lost today, no question about it. One can describe it a lot of 
ways. There was once a general who lost badly in a battle, and the 
press asked him what happened. He said: As far as I am concerned, we 
took quite a beating. He was pretty candid about it.
  We lost this morning. North Dakota farmers lost $60 million, but this 
morning was just the bell for the end of round one. There will be other 
rounds, and this issue is not going away. The $1.9 billion is not going 
away. That $1.9 billion is available to help family farmers.
  Senator Harkin from Iowa brought that help in a bill that did not 
have a budget point of order against it. It has been provided for in 
the budget. It was available, and we ought to make it available when it 
is needed. It is needed now.
  We lost today, but we will be back in September or in October. I 
believe in the end we will prevail on this issue.
  Let me make a final point. Some say: Why is it I care so much about 
family farming? Why don't I deal with other issues, other businesses? 
My State is 40 percent agriculture. What happens to family farmers has 
an impact on every Main Street and every business on every Main Street 
in the State of North Dakota. It is not just the economic issues that 
concern me, however. I think our country is more secure, and I think 
our country is a better place when we have a broad network of producers 
living on the farms in this country producing America's food.
  Europe does it that way because they have been hungry in their past 
and they decided never to be hungry again. They want to foster and 
maintain a network of producers across Europe. We ought to do the same.
  The family farm is not just an economic unit. It is that, to be sure, 
and it is an economic unit that is destined to fail when prices 
collapse if we do not do something to help. But it is much more than 
just an economic unit. Family farms produce more than just a bushel of 
wheat. Family farms produce a culture that is important to this 
country. They produce community. They produce values. They are a 
seedbed--and always have been a seedbed--for family values in our 
country. Family values that have for years been rolling from family 
farms to our small towns to our large cities.
  Family farms are not just some piece of nostalgia for us to talk 
about. Those who support big corporate agriculture and would not mind 
seeing a couple big corporations farming America from California to 
Maine say the family farm is yesterday. They say, good for you, good 
for supporting yesterday, but it is yesterday. It is like the little 
old diner, as I have said before, that is left behind when the 
interstate comes through: It is nice to look at, does not mean much, 
but it is not a viable part of our modern society. They are dead wrong. 
They are as wrong as can be. The family farm is important in this 
country. It is important to its culture, and it is important to its 
future.
  When we have a debate about these issues, we discover the answer to 
these questions: Whom do you stand for, whom do you fight for, and what 
are your priorities? Some say: My priorities are to let Mexican trucks 
into this country. That was the big debate we had for the past week and 
a half. My priorities are to build a national missile defense system 
and it does not matter what it costs, they say. My priorities are to 
stand with the managed care industry and the big insurance companies in 
the debate on a Patients' Bill of Rights. That is what they say.
  Those are not my priorities. My priorities are to say I stand for 
family farmers. I stand for the interests of family farmers and the 
role they should play in our country's future. But they cannot and will 
not play that roll, unless we help them over tough times.
  Let me go back to one final point. This is a big world with a lot of 
people living in it. I have traveled much of it. It is true that all 
over this world, even as I speak, people are dying from hunger and 
hunger-related causes, most of them children. About 40 to 45 people a 
minute die from hunger and hunger-related causes. My old friend--the 
late Harry Chapin, who died many years ago, this wonderful singer, 
songwriter, storyteller--used to devote half the proceeds of all of his 
concerts every year to fight world hunger. He said this: If 45,000 
people died tomorrow in New Jersey, it would be headlines around the 
world, but the winds of hunger blow every single day across this world 
and cause death. Nary a headline anywhere.
  My point is, we have wonderful family farmers who struggle and risk 
all they have and work very hard to produce the best quality food 
produced anywhere in the world. They produce this food in a world that 
is rife with hunger, in a world in which young children suffer by not 
having enough to eat in so many corners of our globe. And then our 
family farmers are told the food they produce has no value.
  This country is the arms merchant of the world. We ship more military 
equipment and sell more military equipment than any other country in 
the world by far. I would much prefer we be known as a country that 
helps feed the world, as a country whose family farmers labor hard to 
produce good quality food, and we find a way to connect that with the 
needs that exist in this world and give children a chance.
  This issue is a big issue, an important issue. Our family farmers 
have a big stake in it. This morning in North Dakota, our family 
farmers lost $60 million that they should have received to help them 
over these tough times.
  We are going to be back. We lost round one, but we are not giving up. 
We are going to come back and get that assistance for family farmers. 
Why? Because we think it is important not just for family farmers, but 
because we think it is important for our country and for our country's 
future as well.
  I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I thank Senator Jeffords for allowing me to 
go ahead and do this bit of work and make a statement about which I 
feel very personal and passionate.

                          ____________________