[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 4]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 5162]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  MOTION TO INSTRUCT CONFEREES ON H.R. 2646, FARM SECURITY ACT OF 2001

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                            HON. MAX SANDLIN

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, April 17, 2002

  Mr. SANDLIN. Mr. Speaker, I commend the Agriculture Committee 
Chairman Combest and Ranking Member Stenholm for the skill and hard 
work they have put into crafting the Farm Security Act. I would also 
like to commend the Conferees of the House Agricultural Committee for 
their continued efforts to work toward agreement on a farm bill that is 
good for America's farmers. I want to thank them for the great 
sensitivity to and understanding of the needs of our nation's farmers.
  This motion to instruct goes against that understanding and, thus, I 
rise in strong opposition to this motion and urge all my colleagues to 
vote against it.
  The presentation of this motion is unnecessarily repetitive in 
nature. The Members of the House of Representatives have already voted 
on this issue. During House consideration of the Farm Security Act, an 
amendment containing this language failed by a bipartisan vote of 238-
187.
  Mr. Speaker, one thing I can count on hearing every time I return 
home is that our farmers need help this year. Our farming families put 
everything they have on the line every year to feed America. America's 
families never got the economic boon that swept the nation in the late 
1990's.
  This year, good weather worldwide has created commodity surpluses and 
driven down the price that farmers get for their crops. The U.S. dollar 
also remains strong relative both to our competitors and customers, 
making U.S. crops more expensive and less competitive. U.S. producers 
continue to compete on an uneven playing field, facing much higher 
tariffs on our exports to other countries than other countries face on 
their exports to us.
  The goal of our farm policy should be to provide a safety net so the 
American agricultural sector survives through these difficult times. 
This motion to recommit would limit payments for commodity programs and 
is a slap in the face to those families.
  Furthermore, this motion unjustly deters the Conferees efforts to 
resolve funding levels for conservation and research programs. This 
motion claims to increase conservation programs as if it is a new idea, 
when, in fact, the Conferees have already allotted an eighty-percent 
increase in funding.
  I urge my colleagues to reject this unnecessary and disruptive motion 
and to stand aside and let the Conferees continue their hard work on 
the conference committee.

                          ____________________