[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 11]
[Senate]
[Pages 16061-16063]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                      FAMILY FARMS NEED ASSISTANCE

  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, before leaving for the recess, I, too, 
wanted to address a couple of points on my mind and I am sure on the 
minds of the people of Louisiana. We have enjoyed, as a State, some 
success this session on many different issues. Of course, some of them 
are not resolved.
  Senator Breaux and I have been very involved with the issue of 
education

[[Page 16062]]

and health care. As we wind down this particular part of our session, I 
wish to speak for a moment on the area of agriculture.
  The Senator from Washington just spoke. She says she is leaving town 
with some disappointment. I add my voice to say I, too, am disappointed 
in the outcome of our Agriculture supplemental appropriations bill. We 
seem to have room in the budget for many other items, but sometimes 
when it comes to our farmers and agriculture, they are cut short or 
draw the short straw.
  That is very unfortunate because, according to the budget outline, 
there was money available to allocate in an emergency and supplemental 
way to meet the needs of farmers, not only in Louisiana and throughout 
the South but, as the Senator from Washington said, the farmers and 
agricultural interests in her State and throughout the Nation.
  The House adjourned, setting the floor quite low at $5.5 billion. The 
Senate, in a bipartisan fashion and with bipartisan support, went on 
record as supporting a higher number of $7.5 billion. When $2 billion 
is cut out, a lot of farmers in Louisiana are shortchanged.
  Our AMTA payments were reduced substantially. The conservation 
programs, so important to farmers in Louisiana because of our 
tremendous wetlands conservation efforts, are shortchanged.
  The public/private partnerships that farmers and landowners can enter 
into with the Government to reduce production and help keep prices 
high, was curtailed because of our lack of commitment to this funding 
level. In addition, because of the unfortunate timing, we are not going 
to be able to come back in the fall and recoup the lost ground because 
we will be past the September deadline.
  I have here an interesting letter from the American Soybean 
Association, National Corn Growers, National Association of Wheat 
Growers, and, of course, the National Cotton Council.
  This letter says: We would rather have $5.5 billion than nothing, and 
so would I. But they should not have had to settle for the $5.5 billion 
when even settling for $7.5 billion is not enough to meet the needs and 
the emergencies being experienced by farmers everywhere who are, 
frankly, entitled to more.
  I most certainly do not blame these associations for saying, listen, 
we are between a rock and a hard place. They are saying, ``The House 
has adjourned. It has approved $5.5 billion. We would just as soon take 
that.'' I know if they could stand here and speak their minds, and 
speak the truth, they would say $5.5 billion is not enough. It is going 
to leave a lot of our farmers with higher debts and impact a lot of our 
rural communities across the Nation.
  In Louisiana, we have experienced some of the lowest prices in 
decades, and a severe drought. This drought has brought about an 
intrusion of saltwater into many of our marshes and farmland, creating 
additional problems. It is a very difficult time in agriculture.
  I did not want to leave without saying I am extremely disappointed we 
were not able to get the level of AMTA payments higher. It is very 
important to our farmers and our conservation programs. I think we will 
end up paying a higher price in the months and years to come.
  In addition, it is of particular disappointment we do not have 
included in this particular package our voluntary State-supported, 
State-recommended, and State-endorsed dairy compacts. Compacts are 
important to dairy farmers all over this Nation and come at no cost to 
the taxpayer.
  We are arguing about an agricultural funding bill because the two 
Houses cannot decide whether $5.5 billion is the right amount or $6.5 
billion or $7.5 billion. I know money does not grow on trees, and we do 
not want to overspend.
  We want to live within budgetary constraints, but what puzzles me so 
much about this debate is the dairy compact does not cost the taxpayers 
a penny. We could have added it and not added one penny to the 
Agriculture supplemental appropriations bill because dairy compacts do 
not cost the taxpayers any money. They are a voluntary, State-run, 
State-supported and allow dairy farmers, along with consumers and the 
retail representatives, to set a price for fluid milk so we can make 
sure everyone in our districts and our regions have a fresh, steady 
supply of milk.
  It is a system whereby if prices go up, the producers pay out of 
their profits; if the prices go down, the farmers are paid out of the 
profits to retailers and others, therefore, leveling the price and 
allowing the farmers to make plans for their growth and production of 
dairy products.
  It has been proven very successful in the Northeast. The Senators 
from Vermont have been two of the lead sponsors and advocates. New York 
has petitioned to join, Pennsylvania has petitioned to join, and the 
Southern delegates and the Southern Senators want the South to have the 
same right to organize into compacts and help our farmers.
  In Louisiana, we have lost 204 dairy farms since 1995. We have only 
468 remaining. If we do not answer in some way to the dairy farms, I am 
going to be back in 3 years saying: We had 468, now we are down to 250, 
and 3 years from now we will be down to 150. Before you know it, we 
will be in a position where we are importing all of our milk from other 
parts of the Nation. We will be paying higher prices, because there 
will be less competition and less of a competitive organization of 
dairy farmers.
  Had Louisiana been a member of the Southern Dairy Compact last year, 
our 468 dairy farms would have received almost $12 million in compact 
payments. That is not a huge amount of money by Washington standards. 
It is not in the billions, but I can tell my colleagues, $12 million 
means a lot to the people of Louisiana and to these farmers who are 
scratching out a living, trying to operate their enterprises at a 
profit. It not only means a lot to the farmers and their families, but 
to the communities in which they buy supplies, pay taxes that provide 
for vital community services.
  When a dairy farmer goes out of business, it does not just collapse 
that particular dairy farm and bring harm to that particular family, it 
affects the whole rural economy of many of our States.
  Northeast Dairy compact States show the compact had a steadying 
influence on the support of farms. Without exception, we know, based on 
the facts and the figures, that the Northeast experiment has been very 
positive.
  When we come back in the fall, I am not sure what we can do to 
restore the level of funding. As I said, this was an opportunity lost. 
We now have to operate under new budget constraints. I am not sure how 
we are going to fill in the gaps, but because the dairy compact does 
not cost additional funding, I am hopeful. I look forward to joining 
with my colleagues in building a bipartisan support for State-run, 
State-supported voluntary dairy compacts that do not cost the taxpayer 
a dime but help keep a steady, reliable source of fluid milk coming to 
our consumers and to consumers in every region of this Nation. I am 
hopeful that when we get back, we will have success.
  We have a farm bill to debate. There are many changes that our 
farmers are going to need so that we can compete more effectively. We 
need to open up trade opportunities, more risk management tools, and 
the dairy compact that can help our farmers help themselves and not 
just rely on a Government handout. That is all they ask. They just want 
to be met halfway. We can most certainly do a better job.
  I am going to fight as hard as I can for the Southern region of this 
Nation that, in my opinion, has historically been shortchanged when it 
comes to agriculture. I am going to join with Senators from New York, 
New Jersey, and Washington, and other States which have, in some way, 
also been shortchanged because of the lack of emphasis on speciality 
crops. Although I do not represent New Jersey, New York, or Washington, 
I think it is important for us to make sure the agriculture bill is 
fair and equitable to every region of this Nation.

[[Page 16063]]

  The South has been shortchanged time and again. We are going to join 
a coalition to make sure our farmers get their fair share and that we 
are providing the taxpayers a good return on the money that is 
invested. We need to create ways to help farmers minimize the cost to 
the taxpayers and maximize the total benefit.

                          ____________________