ranking member to imfroouch national quality of food aid. and i'll put the rest of that in the -- in the record, but this is the commit committee on agriculture, nutrition, and forestry, and the both of you have recognized all three of them. i plaud you for it. it is not an easy job, as i know. >> well, thank you very much. and, senator leahy, we appreciate your leadership on dairy over the years as the champion of helping us get this right as well as organics and nutrition in other areas, as well. and now someone else who has been terrific, senator lugar, we would love to hear from you. >> well, thank you very much, madam chairwoman and ranking member roberts. before i begin, i want to thank the staff, the senate legislative council and congressional budget office for their assistance during this hurried process. i appreciate the work of the

committee's staff in particular. however, with major revisions to the commodity title being offered only late last night and no score being made available as of this morning, i'm concerned that members of the committee have not been given appropriate opportunity to review the proposed before us today and the manager's amendment. but as previous, chairman, ranking member, as you pointed out, senator leahy so generously mentioned, i recognize the very great challenge of writing a farm bill that meets the needs of policy reform and nfiscal responsibility. as a farmer, i also recognize the need for policy certainty. farmers have enough of a challenge in meeting market and weather uncertainty, so the congress should not make it more difficult for them by offering political impasses. i commend the chair and ranking member for including in the draft bill several similar policy proposals that i advocated as part of my rural economic farm and ranch

sustainability and hunger, the refresh act, last year, such as strengthening of the federal crop insurance programs, elimination of direct payments and countercyclical payments, a shallow loss/revenue option for producers that assists only in times of need, not every year, and a reduction in the size of the conservation reserve program sol the productive acres are used to produce and consolidation of several working land programs and consolidation of konser vags easement programs. i note, however, that while the committee draft offers savings in the area of $25 billion, much more should be done. my refresh act would save $40 billion, making a substantial contribution to reducing our nation's unstable fiscal situation. so, while i'm pleased to see the committee offer some of the refresh provisions, i look forward to working with this committee in the mark-up and on the senate floor. and with my partner, congressman

mar marla sessman to realize further taxpayer savings. notably, the committee marked as little to reduce waste and ensure the fiscal situation of our food and nutrition programs, which actually accounts for more than 75% of annual farm bill spending. by closing loopholes in the food stamp program that grant eligibility to some who are not truly needed, we can still meet legitimate hunger and nutrition needs and also fulfill our budgetary obligations. the refresh act demonstrates the that substantial save rgs possible even as we fund vital programs. in particular, the committee draft provided virtually no funding for energy. energy is an important growth area for rural jobs and the incomes of families, farms, and small businesses. at the same time, rural americans are rightly proud they're improving america's

national security situation by reducing the need for foreign oil. i thank senator conrad and the bipartisan majority of this committee that has joined me in funding the energy title. and i am proud that american agriculture does not need the federal government to make its decisions. are freedom to farm act ended many of those old controls. in a globally competitive marketplace, american agriculture has remained on top because of efficient land use machinery, science and technology, and as we debate these policies, we can celebrate the fact that america's farmers and ranchers will continue to grow even more successful, remain the world's leader in feeding growing populations. if our government programs stay out of their way. i thank you again, madam chair lady. >> thank you very much, senator lugar, and for all of your ideas and thoughtfulness and helping us get to this point and turning to senator conrad, i know he

will speak this, but we have good news on the energy front. so we're pleased about that. i want to take a personal privilege with senator conrad to say what i said in the budget committee a little earlier about the fact that very, very sorry to see you retire. you have been extraordinary budget chair. nobody knows more about agriculture than you do, sitting around here in terms of economics and numbers and how to make it work. it's a great pleasure to work with you, and we're going to continue. and just very grateful for all of your leadership over the years. senator conrad. >> well, thank the chairman -- chairwoman very much. thank you for your extraordinary effort on this bill. you have been fully ep gauged, fully committed, and very effective. and all of us owe you a debt of gratitude. i don't think i've ever seen anybody dig in as completely as you did at a very difficult time

with the special committee looming, you seized the reins of responsibility, and all of us are in your debt. i also want to thank your ranking member, senator roberts, who, surprise to me, has actually done some pretty good work on this as well. okay. it really has been good work. and i enjoyed his sense of humor as i hope he enjoys mine. look, this bill is a win for taxpayers clearly. this is a win for reformers. this is a win for farm and ranch families all across the country. this is a win for the economy of america. so this is important business. farm policy has many critics. and one of the things that's amazed me in my 26 years is how

often ill informed some of the critics are. we hear all the time that a farm bill benefits just a few wealthy farmers and ranchers. all of us who sit around this table and participate in the work of this committee knows that is not true. the vast majority of the funding in this bill goes for nutrition programs that are primarily directed to benefit children. and it goes into every corner of america. in fact, only 6% of farm bill spending, less than 2% of overall federal spending goes to farm programs. and i think somehow that gets lost in the national discussion. between natural disasters and unpredictable price fluctuation, farming is a risky business. safety net programs are absolutely critical to producing the most abundant, safest, least

expensive source of food in the world and helping our producers compete in world markets where our major competitors are providing four times as much support to their producers as we provide to ours. our european friends are providing four times as much support to their producers as we're providing to ours. that is a critical fact that the people of the united states need to know. of course it's not just the europeans or other competitors. we see brazil moving up fast. we have got to give our farmers a fair fighting chance. i believe the 2008 farm bill, which many of us around this table had a major role in, enhance the farm safety net and expanded conservation, nutrition, bioenergy production. it contributed to the strong economic performance of the american agriculture and an otherwise slow economy and it was fully paid for, fully paid

for. and i want to especially thank senator chambliss for the extraordinary leadership he provided in writing that farm bill. because it made a big difference across our country. north dakota farmers tell me that direct payments really can no longer be defended, that farm programs need to be simplified, and that crop insurance should be strengthened and complemented with new programs that are easier to administer and easier to comply with. in particular, while crop insurance works well in most circumstances, it has two gaps that i think we all recognize. first, it does not work well in a period of declining prices, especially when they're rapidly declining. second, crop insurance does not protect against repeated years of shallow losses. and over an extended period of

time, those shallow losses can mean very, very deep problems for our farm and ranch families. in response, we have pushed for a shallow loss revenue program that will fill these two gaps while saving taxpayer dollars. i am pleased the chairwoman has included some elements of those proposals in her bill by providing for a farm level revenue assistance program in the past few days. i think we've been able to improve it and strengthen it. i very much appreciate the chairwoman's commitment that we'll continue to work as we go to the floor and beyond to try to do them better. i'm also, just in conclusion, pleased that senator lugar and i were able to offer an amendment that you have adopted as i understand it in the mark, to provide funding for the energy tight. that, too, is a win for our economy, a win for the environment, and a win for national security. our amendment, which has a

support from the strong majority of the committee, will add a critical dimension. so, in conclusion, madam chairwoman, i just want to, again, thank you for your really extraordinary leadership. it is so important to the country, to the congress, to this committee. we appreciate it. and i also want to thank my colleague, senator baucus, who has been a rock, helping stick up for our part of the country. i really deeply appreciate senator baucus, how you've provided leadership over and over on issues critical to our part of the country, and to senator ohio valleyen as well. a new member of the committee, colleague of mine from my home state. i deeply appreciate the new energy that he's brought to this committee, as well, and sticking um for our state. >> thank you very much. i should just clarify that we actually will have to offer the energy amendment, but we're set with it, but we will have to offer that today.

so let me turn now to senator chambliss, who also has been someone who's obviose obvious ts leadership over the years in and in agriculture. i know we still have work to do and i'm looking forward to that, and i very much appreciate your championing the interests of georgia and of the south, and we're looking forward to continue to work with you on it. >> thanks very much, madam chair. let me just start out by saying that i think my friend, senator conrad, for his kind comments. this, as i will state in a minute, is my fourth farm bill, three of which i had the privilege of working very closely with senator conrad. when he was in the senate and i was in the house, it made no difference. we both had the interest of the american farmer at heart, and your leadership, your commitment

to american agriculture, is truly going to be missed. we'll miss you in some other ways. some ways i may not miss you. i'll have to think about that. but seriously, you have been a true champion of american agriculture, and you and i have had the privilege of working on any number of issues together. but we have consistently been strong advocates for agriculture, and i thank you for your leadership and your friendship there. madam chair, today we're here in the ag committee to once again reauthorize the farm bill. and as a former chairman and ranking member of this distinguished committee, i understand how difficult it is to combine all diverse interests into legislation that meets the needs of all members around this table and this bill before us is no exception. but i do want to say to the chairwoman and the ranking member you have been diligent, you have worked hard, you have

been open, and you have been willing to dialogue, even when we couldn't agree, you at least would hear our concerns. and this committee continues its stellar reputation in my opinion of being the most bipartisan committee in the united states senate. and under your leadership, i think that has just been strength strengthened. so to you and the ranking member, who is my dear friend, my -- as he and i have referred over the years, i'm his shotgun or he's my wing man. thanks to both of you for the great work that you've done. i think we can all agree that the farm will bill needs to provide an effective safety net that farmers and ranchers can rely on in times of need. agriculture faces challenges such as unpredictable weather, variable input cost, and market volatility that combine to determine profit or loss in any given year.

the 2008 farm bill has been providing a strong safety net program for producers over the last four years. and i believe that successive legislation must adhere and honor the same commitment we made four years ago to our ranchers and producers. at the same time, i believe the agriculture sector can contribute its fair share to deficit reduction, and the bill before us provides significant savings in mandatory spending programs. however, all sectors of this agricultural bill must contribute its fair share, and the key is to do this in an equitable and fair manner as we have always done. i've participated in the writing of four farm bills as a member of congress, none of which have been easy, and each bill has had its unique challenges and opportunities. balancing the needs and interests of all agriculture requires patience, fairness, and a willingness to work with all members of this committee. it's very important we recognize the unique differences between the geographical regions and the

commodities grown in those regions. as the international agriculture marks become more complex worldwide, we must be mindful that a one size fits all program will not work for u.s. agriculture with regions more diverse than ever before. we need to recognize this diversity by providing producers with different options to confront the marketing and regional differences that define our country. washington does not always know best. right now, the bill before us fails this test. it is neither equitable nor fair, and attempts to redistribute resources from one region to another. after deducting a fair share for deficit reduction, certain commodities receive more resources than others, and crops such as peanuts and rice are left without any safety net whatsoever. we've read reports anl analyses illustrating the lop sidedness of the bill. among the biggest losers in the budget baseline are wheat,

barley, grain sorghum, rice, cotton, and peanuts. we should not convince ourselves that this will not cause enormous negative consequences for many regions of the country but simply by making the bill more conducive for certain crops at the expense of the many, this bill lacks balance. some will say that planting shifts are responsible for much of the change in the budget baseline, and that is in part true. but it does not take away from the injury that would be inflicted on particular regions of the country, nor does it tell the whole story. by squeezing all crops and/or programs specially designed for one or two crops, this bill will force many growers, particularly in our region, to switch to those crops in order to have an effective safety net. and isn't this the very planning distortion caused by farm policy that we ought to avoid? but there's another very egregious problem with this bill. the safety net will not be there

when farmers truly need it. whether offered as an old farm or area-wide basis, a narrow 10% band of revenue protection will not help tarmers should crop prices collapse. under this bill, a farmer has an 11% deductible with the next 10% of losses covered. however, many farmers may be totally exposed to a plunge in crop prices that hits the proposed loan rates. these proposed loan rates are set so low that if prices reach that point, the farmer will be out of business. crop insurance can cover the production side of the risk if you can buy higher coverage but it doesn't cover consecutive year to year low prices. even the 10% revenue band the bill has significant problems since the guarantee is based on the previous five years' price and production which may not be sufficient to provide an effective safety net. this is wrong, and for this and

my concerns over the process that led us here, i'm not likely to support this bill. in spite of this, i do recognize the chair and ranking member for including a new crop insurance program that complies with our international commitments. as former chairman and ranking member of this committee, i've always been committed to try to find a solution to the wto brazil case. i offered legislation in 2005 and again in 2008 that made significant changes in the cotton and export programs to bring us into compliance with our international commitments. and along with senator cochran, we eliminated the step two program, we reformed the cotton marketing loan program, and reduced the cotton sount cyclical program unilaterally and in good faith. we find ourselves significantly reforming the cotton safety net with the stacks program. the program in this bill is a significant departure from what is available to other covered commoditie commodities, and hopefully will

resolve the wto dispute with brazil once and for all. my hope now is that our brazilian friends will engage in a real and meaningful way to put this issue behind us. the farm bill in front of us attempts to shoehorn all producers into a one size fits all policy. i do not believe this is equitable to my producers. producer choice is the better course to follow, and i regret the commodity title does not recognize this priority. let us remember that at the end of the day the reason we are here is to represent the hardworking men and women who work the land each and every day to provide the highest quality agriculture food and products in the world. i believe we have the opportunity to write a bill that can be equal to their commitment in providing the food, feed, and fiber that allows us to be the greatest nation on earth. but right now it appears that what this committee lacks is a willingness to do so. but i do look forward to the forthcoming debate, madam chairwoman, and thank you very

much. >> thank you very much, senator chambli chambliss. let me reiterate what we have talked about provely. this is step one of a long process. we're going to continue to work with you to improve and address the concerns that you have. let me turn to senator baucus and say thank you for your work as chairman of the finance committee. in this committee, i want to particularly say we wouldn't have a livestock disasters assistance program without your advocacy, and it's a very, very important, ten-year baseline part of this bill. we wouldn't have significant improvements in the farm level art program. i've learned more about montana. i think i can tell every member of the committee about how mt. m has a bigger counties than michigan. i now understand that. and the differences, in all seriousness, is part of the challenge. and i very much appreciate your advocating. nobody could fight harder for montana, and we appreciate your advocacy and leadership. well, thank you, madam chairwoman.

if possible, i'd like to return the compliments that other senators have given to you, and i say "if possible" because i don't know if -- i'd compliment you even more, but they compliment you so well. you have worked so hard to get us here. you know, the numeral telephone calls i've received from you, which i deeply appreciate, the calls i've made to you, i hope you appreciate as we try to work all this out. i mean, you're always there. you work -- i don't know anyone who works harder than you and is more receptive than you. you've been just terrific in helping put this bill together. there were times i wunltd sure we were going to make it, but you hung in there, you were determined to get a solid result. and i for one think i can speak for virtually every member of this committee and say how much we appreciate it. the same with the senator from kansas. i'm not sure if i was surprised or not surprised how hard you worked to make all this happen.

basically not surprised because you know the subject so well and got a good sense of humor. you try to do what's right while you're protecting kansas and thinking about the country. but, senator, i want to tell you how much i appreciate your work here, too. there are many others here in the committee, many meetings with the senator from georgia trying to work out the cotton issues, stacks and everything else, and especially inspector wto. and i echo the comments made by the chairman. got to keep working together so we can find a way to make that work. it makes sense. and i also want to just thank the senator of north dakota. now that we're thanking everybody here, i especially want to thank him. he gave a great statement, a statement i wanted to associate myself with, pointing out a lot of the myths in the country about agriculture. one of the myths being we're giving all this money to

farmers. really, as the senator so well pointed out, this is -- most of the money goes to nutrition programs. it doesn't go to the farmers and commodities. a lot of americans don't know that, especially people in the east. they assume, oh, there they go, those farmers, they're just padding their pockets, which is just totally untrue. this is a reform bill. we're saving $25 billion. and i agree with the senator from kansas that's a state we can't thank too often when we get to the floor. it is so important for people to hear that and to know that. you work back in the super committee era to come up with a program to save and now you've done even better. it's close to $25 billion. i can't tell you how much i appreciate that. i don't want to prolong this part of the mark-up with statements, but just to say how important this is to our state. agriculture is our number-one

industry. it's the most important industry by far in my state. one out of five jobs is related to agriculture in montana. one out of five. it's -- it's a bedrock of our state's economy. as you alluded to, madam chairwoman, i don't want to overstate this point, but montana is a little bit different from other states. it doesn't rain in montana. we have huge county, as you said. and our farmer, our wheat farmers really have no option. they've got to plant wheat. maybe they do some lentils and some other crops, but can't plant corn in montana, can't plant sorghums in montana, can't plant other -- soybeans, for example, in montana. those options are available to farmers in other states. they're not available in our state. so we've got to make sure the

farm bill makes sense. we all want a safety net that makes sense. enough of a safety net but not toosm, you know, trying to find the right balance. in each sate that balance is a little different than it is in other states. and i'm so thankful to you working out a way to recognize the sensitives in our part of the country, including north dakota. i want to thank senator conrad, too, aswy try to work out something that makes sense for our part of the country. we want to be part of the solution here. we don't want to be part of the problem. we want to be part of the solution and work with you to help get there. and this is a first step. there will be other steps along the way to keep make improvements, as is the case with cotton and some other commodities. deeply thank you for that. you mentioned the livestock program, and thank you so much for that to make that permanent, because there are a lot of livestock producers, i mean, whether it's floods or whether it's fire, whatever it is, loss

of grazing land, lose livestock. it just helps. i get a lot of compliments at home, you know, that that program has helped. you know, farmers and ranchers in my state are the same as they are in any other state. they're kind of philosophical about life. you know, they can't predict the markets very well, can't predict the weather very well. but they're still optimistic to get out there. they want to farm, they want to ranch, and they don't want to take advantage of other people. don't want to be taken advantage of. and this bill, i think, strikes that right tone of just being there, because we are all in america together here. and it just means a lot to me that you've found i think a pretty good solution here. want to keep working with you as we proceed. so thank you very much. >> thank you very much for those words. i want to turn now to senator johanson. on this committee we've always

said we have former chairmen and former ranking members. we are fortunate to have a former secretary of agriculture. and let me just note at this point that when senator johans was secretary of agriculture, he talked about reforming conservation. we have taken a number of your ideas. you really gave us a basis for thinking and for moving ahead. i think we have a terrific conservation title, and you deserve a lot of credit for giving us a lot of ability to get started. so i want to particularly thank you for that. >> madam chair, thank you very much for that. i appreciate you using some of those ideas. what more can i say in appreciation to you and to the ranking member. you've both done a great job. i will offer an insight that writing the farm bill from this table is a lot different from writing the farm bill in the office of the usda. but the great thing about this

committee is there's such deep experience. you know, you look at this committee, you -- virtually everybody here has great ag back grou background. they've either chaired this committee or been ranking members. it's been very helpful in flushing out my ideas as i thought about this package. i'm in the camp of saying let's move forward. i'm going to support your efforts today because i do believe it's a great first step. and we need to move this process along. a couple of thoughts i would offer. the ag economy is has experienced a remarkable few years here. it is really stronger than it's ever been. in some aspects, it's historically strong. in recent years, many producers have seen the opportunity to feed people or provide