Regional Farm Bill Field Hearing: Ankeny, Iowa

Regional Farm Bill Field Hearing: Regional Farm Bill Field Hearing: Ankeny, Iowa

STATEMENT OF HON. CHUCK GRASSLEY, A U.S. SENATOR FROM IOWA

Senator Grassley. Yes, and we're glad to have you here and thank you for coming. As Tom has said, and thanks for all the
witnesses, these and the ones on the second and third panel, I'm not going to read my long statement, because it is long.
But I want to highlight some things. Number 1, is to highlight the fact that as we consider the next Farm Bill, as has been
the case with most Farm Bills, we have to think about having an environment so that the next generation of young people will be able to farm, as well. And with a son and a grandson in our family farming operations, I appreciate how difficult that is.
But I also appreciate how important the farm program is to making that happen.

We traditionally look at the Farm Bill as farm safety net, but connected with it are issues about--that I'm interested in
and other people as well, opportunities that a Farm Bill brings up to make sure that we have more competition in agriculture
and to limit concentration and consolidation within agriculture. And one of these issues is, not only the issue of
whether or not 10 percent of the largest farmers ought to get 72 percent of the benefits out of the farm program, which I
think is ridiculous, but also to make sure that we keep a political environment in Washington where the public at large,
meaning those in New York City, as well as Iowa are going to support a Farm Program or we're not going to have any Farm
Program. And farm programs are really under scrutiny now in Washington, D.C. not just because of the 10 percent of the
farmers getting 72 percent of the benefits. But just recently in three different programs that are in the Farm Bill, I would
hold up the Washington Post, July the 18th: No Drought Required for Federal Drought Aid. An article about abuse of the Farm
Program, from July the 19th: Aid to Ranchers was diverted for big profits, tons of powdered milk ended up on the market. And
then, Farm--on July the 2nd: Farm Program Pay one and three tenths Billion Dollars to People Who Don't Farm. So, we're
under scrutiny and the point is to make sure that we're able to keep the Farm Program for the benefit of farmers and the good
of America.

Another one from July the 3rd: Growers Reap Benefits Even in Good Years. So it's very much an issue that we have to be
cognizant of, as we write the next Farm Bill to make sure that the Farm Bill is for farmers and for farmers that need the
safety net, and not for just a few. So the next Farm Bill, will obviously entail a look at all of these abuses and a look to
make sure that the Farm Program is directed toward those who need the help.

And also of interest to me, on a second point, and also an interest to the Agriculture Committee, but secondary to my
committee, because the Finance Committee has jurisdiction over all international trade and that is something that Congressman
Boswell and others have alluded to, to make sure that we have a trading environment where we have market access. And one of the major issues in Geneva right now is to make sure that we do not give up anything on our Farm Program without having market access. And that market access is basically the figure of the United States having an average of 12 percent tariffs. The world average on agriculture tariffs of 62 percent, hence, foreclosing of markets, opportunities for our farmers, they
having market opportunities in the United States, and getting that 62 percent down closer to our 12 percent, and making sure
that we have a level playing field for farmers.

Of Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, I have told our negotiators don't bring an agreement to my committee that
is not going to have market access, because we're not going to even bother to look at it. We're not going to give up any of
our safety net, until we get a level playing field for American farmers.

And then last, I would just emphasize a couple things that have already been said and there's no sense of my saying it
twice, or three times. But the point of value added agriculture, rural economic development, so that we broaden
opportunities for farmers here. Not only for the benefit of American agriculture, but for the benefit of the entire economy
that's very closely tied to agriculture as the foundation of our State's economy. Thank you.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_senate_hearings&docid=f:30128.wais