WRITTEN TESTIMONY FOR FEDERAL FARM POLICY HEARINGS I am Duane Lessen, a family farmer and corn and soybean producer from Delavan, Illinois in Tazewell County. I farm 700 acres and use a variety of conservation and tillage practices. I was not selected to give testimony at the Federal Farm Policy Hearing in Peoria, Illinois, so I would like to provide written testimony. There are several points that I would like to make concerning Farm Policy. I feel that we should keep going in the direction that Freedom to Farm is taking us, and I believe we will eventually reach the goals of this program. Keep Price Support levels (Loan Levels). This allows production agriculture an economic bottom to work from. It allows a MINIMUM level of sustainability, to allow the time necessary for the agriculture economy to improve. With the U.S. Government, the grain industry, the producers, and others involved in the marketing process, all WORKING TOGETHER to increase exports and domestic use of agriculture products, we can only go up. The second point that I feel is CRUCIAL to Farm Policy, is to NOT implement set aside or acreage reduction programs. For years, U.S. Agriculture and Illinois agriculture in particular has prided itself in being the food supply of the world. By implementing set aside acres, the goal would be to reduce supply, thus causing the Supply/Demand balance to increase prices. The U.S. taking acres out of production only encourages foreign countries to increase their production, and increase their acres planted. They are the ones capturing the potential increase in commodity prices. Once demand for particular agriculture products is lost to foreign competition, it is very difficult to capture their market back. DO NOT implement set aside acres! By everyone involved working and cooperating together, we can make this thing work. I feel that Farm Policy should contain undeniable support for ETHANOL and other biodiesel fuel alternatives. By expanding the use and promotion of ethanol, the United States of America will become less dependent on oil and the ability of foreign countries to supply us with the energy needed. This is a win, win, win situation. First, we increase the demand for corn, thus helping the price to farmers. Second, we provide a cleaner burning fuel for the environment, and third, we become less dependent on foreign oil. Ethanol definitely deserves a place in Farm Policy. I encourage the Federal Government to continue the strides it has achieved in the Crop Insurance programs. I feel future farm policy should include the option, but not the obligation, to obtain cost effective coverage. Crop insurance needs to be affordable, economically worthwhile, and available to those producers who want to use this as a risk management tool. I also feel better utilization of the current marketing systems could be used by producers today. Producers need to be encouraged by federal grants or pilot programs on how to maximize the potential gains by using hedging, options, and other marketing potential gains by using the present commodity exchange. In summary, I feel the Government should not look at Federal Farm Policy as "How can we help the family farmer survive?" I feel Federal Farm Policy should look at the situation in the following light. How can the government provide low-cost, economical and ample supply of quality food and grain to all its citizens, and allow the producers of that food to export it to foreign countries and reap the potential economic benefits of all markets available? By keeping ample supply of food and grain to all markets, domestic and foreign, all involved will prosper. Duane Lessen 2346 Delavan Rd. What a Farm Policy should be. Practical A policy that is implemented with the least amount of regulation to produce the greatest outcome. We are set in production Agriculture where a farmer wants to satisfy the non-agricultural community, but must maintain a profitable operation. In the aspects of environmental regulation there has been no consideration given for what will jeopardize the farming operation. Though not every operation will be safe regardless of what extent is measured, there is a fine line in the practicality of what is asked of the farming community. Considerations for what the Farm Policy should address. I. Production A. Economic Aspects C. Research Concerns II. Environment Production The United States currently is a world power in the production of food and fiber not only for the residents of the country, but also those that inhabit the world. It has in place a complete trade system whereby the product can be delivered, traded, and received in a way that is to maintain the social, economic and political power. Why is this system having complications? Free trade-The free trade policies that were implemented in the 1990's, NAFTA and GATT, have given all security of the greatest agricultural production force to the people of the world. It has provided the consumers worldwide with the opportunity to “second guess” the leadership position of the people of the United States. Farmers have been led to compete with countries of a development status that are opportune investments for those countries with little or no natural resources. These countries that are looked at as "investments" have unstable leadership values with importance of economic investment as primary concern, regardless of whatever else maybe needed to maintain its own longevity. The United States trading with such countries will put the security of its trading system, those industries involved, and that of the nation into uncertainty. As a leader in the production of food and fiber, the United States needs to remember that the resources involved are in jeopardy due to the value that its own citizens put on them. Real Estate development, Environmental concerns and unfair pricing all play as factors in the usage of the producing unit, farmland, into jeopardy. Yes, the United States is a country of tremendous value and the opportunity cost of its real estate is greater at the present for all other industries, but Agriculture. The regulation of the percentage of the food produced and consumed in this country in the future will have the greatest impact on the usage of our farmland. We as Americans will be setting ourselves in a "price fix" by letting a growing number of consumer goods to be produced in other countries. In the textile industry alone we have the problem where by half the industry has relocated to Mexico when the raw materials are mostly produced here. Producers of cotton will in the future be put in a acquired position for any program or policies that will help them stay in business as a result of the localities of the growers and manufacturing facilities. The people that rose and stood out for the formation of this country did so because of the poor representation in their trade and economic system. We are at that point again, but who do we rise against? Ourselves? For the lack of consideration given to the hand that helps to feed us? The world? For such an unfair advantage? These all questions that need great consideration. Maybe the only thing that will be in jeopardy other than ourselves are those that are depending on our cheap food supply. Another challenge for all people and businesses that are tied to Agriculture in the future is how to deal with the large corporate identities. Yes, the days of the small farms are gone, the family farm is in danger, and the corporate-style agricultural identities will drive us to a point of no control of the most important thing in our life, food. The only monopoly in this country is not a software manufacturer, the largest number of them are involved in Agriculture. The corporations control from what and how it is produced to where the harvest will be shipped and where it will be processed. They have been very important to the successes of this country, but how much control should they have? Light is slowly fading on the independent pork producers of this country. The production of pork is not the only priority that these corporations have. The packaging and distribution of the pork itself shows the greatest promise. These corporations owning the packaging plants hold the markets position ruling against any independent producers, a position of unfair advantage, driving them out of business and increasing consumer prices. Social Aspect Consumer Education The responsibility of consumer education is a responsibility that should be shared in all segments of Agriculture. Though there are great strides being made into the right direction the consensus of groups providing information has been somewhat off balance. Agricultural Research Is the money spent in this country for Agricultural Research done so on a timely and as needed basis? Through my own personal experiences, farmers seemed to have some of the same production problems facing them now, that they had when they began farming. It seems to me that their should be some no-nonsense review of past research in order to solve some of these modern ailments. History could possibly be an educator. The "grassroots movements" that are taking place in this country have had a great impact on farmers and the way they farm. These "movements" are driven by farmers, local researchers, county government officials and small agricultural input companies. How effective these people have been in the past can only be measured by themselves and the people around them. These people are much like farmers themselves, they are woven into the land. This is a education system that has long been effect and proven itself worthy. Consideration should be given. The Environment There is not a farmer in business that is not concerned about the environment. The environment that we all live in is what the farm operates on. It seems to me that the farmer being the person that works in cooperation with the land should have a better position in the rule making body for the environment. Even though this is something that has done on a local level with the local Soil and Water Conservation Districts. It is the news and efforts and how they have flowed through the chain of command is where the majority of the problem remains. This is one way that there may be success with new rules and regulations and help pinpoint where the main concerns should be. I hope that I have been able to shed some light to the Agricultural Committee with my viewpoints. Thank you, William N. Mann Jr. Roanoke Rapids, N.C. 27870 To: US House Committee on Agriculture From: Board Members and Producer Customers of Missal Farmers Grain Co. Re: Written testimony for Farm Policy Field Hearings The undersigned board members and customers of Missal Farmers Grain Co. would like to submit the following ideas as written testimony. Missal Farmers Grain Co. is a country elevator dealing in corn, beans, and wheat. We have been in existence since 1904 at the same location in Streator, IL. Our board members are local producers. We feel the following items should be included in your discussion when writing the new farm bill. 1. As a minimum, Increase CRP to the current limit, and expand the legal limit of CRP acres. Target the more environmentally sensitive ground. Higher prices should be paid for the more sensitive ground. 2. Raise the loan rate for all commodities; index the rate to the Consumer Price Index. 3. Increase subsidies for crop insurance. 4. All commodity check-off programs should be put to a vote every four years; simple majority of producers voting, requiring a yes/no vote as opposed to current system. More disclosure of fund disbursement; i.e., publication of check register. Collect check off on corn and soybeans sold on CBOT. 5. Emphasize use of USA products: · USA ethanol. Ethanol used in U.S. should be produced in U.S. from U.S. commodities. • Mandatory Country of origin labeling of all meat products Provide Federal research dollars for alternative uses of corn and soybeans • Provide for Federal research to increase domestic usage of U.S. grains. • Market promotion for U.S. products; Fair Trade, not necessarily free trade. • Allow interstate shipment of State inspected meat products • Do Not allow packer ownership of livestock 6. Concentration/Competition - Enforcement of existing laws Force Justice Dept. to investigate seed and chemical companies • Increase Justice Dept. staff to deal with agricultural issues • Support legislation to allow USDA same power as Justice Dept. in enforcing anti-trust laws 7. Require transparency in marketplace - eliminate nondisclosure contracts 8. Maintain and upgrade river system 9. Consider reinstatement of set aside acres, possibly based on trigger price, or possibly a flexible fallow program where loan rate increases with acres set aside |