Agriculture, Rurual Development, Food And Drug Administration, And Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2007
AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2007 -- (Senate - December 05, 2006)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from North Dakota for his leadership on agricultural disaster assistance.
I wish to let this body know what assistance means to Minnesota's farmers by reading a few excerpts from letters I have received from producers in my State. I have been on the floor a number of times about this issue. We need to get it done.
One man starts out saying, ``I am a struggling young family farmer in Northwest Minnesota,'' and registers his plea:
We were counting on some help this summer to cash flow for the year after last year's devastating floods. We are now attempting to work with our banker to increase our operating credit limit, refinance our machinery, or refinance our land, just to make ends meet till we can harvest our crop. Please do not give up on this issue.
This urgency is repeated again and again in the letters I receive and conversations I have. Another Minnesota farmer writes there is an ``urgent need for ag disaster assistance for our family farmers devastated by weather disasters in 2005 and 2006. My family has farmed in Minnesota since 1882 and we need ag disaster assistance now. Please, please help us.''
These are heartbreaking stories. These are real emergencies for our farmers. These folks need our help or they will be put out of business, plain and simple.
And the need for agricultural disaster assistance is great. Minnesota's farmers have had to fend for themselves in the face of real natural disaster--first, against record flooding in 2005 and now against record drought in 2006.
In the sugar sector alone, revenue was reduced by $60 million in Minnesota in 2005, thanks to this natural disaster. In one county, crop loss exceeded $52 million and farmers were prevented from planting over 90,000 acres thanks to saturated fields. Now, thanks to one of the worst droughts ever experienced in the Great Plains, Minnesota farmers have experienced hundreds of millions of dollars of crop loss in 2006.
But it is not just about statistics. It is about farmers enduring personal struggles whom I have met all over the State. It is about farmers calling my office, desperate to save the family farm. Farmers are losing their operations, pure and simple. The producers who will not be coming back to the fields next year thanks to catastrophic weather are not just losing a business, many are losing a family tradition. We are losing a way of life. We are losing some of the heart and soul of America and of Minnesota.
I am concerned about the comments of some of my colleagues. My colleague and friend, the Senator from New Hampshire, indicated that the separate disaster assistance for sugar beets is akin to earmarks. I want to state that is not the case. It is not about porkbarrel spending. I think what some folks fail to recognize is that due to the nature of the sugar program, they don't get direct payments. It cannot be structured in the same way as other production loss assistance for other crops.
If you look at what has been laid out, we have been trying to be very focused and very clear. This is not about excess. This is about keeping families alive. This is about keeping farming alive. Some of the families have farmed for almost 100 years. With all due respect, these faulty characterizations do not do our farmers justice.
Another farmer in my State gets at the crux of this amendment when he writes:
Maybe the farmers in this area should have applied to FEMA for hurricane relief--it seems that hard working people in my community are looking to their government for help and getting ignored.
It is not that this Congress has refused to pass agricultural disaster assistance. We have provided $1.6 billion in emergency agricultural assistance. Of course,
none of the farmers in Minnesota will benefit from this assistance because they do not own a farm in one of the Gulf States. Congress has not provided a dime for farmers suffering from natural disasters outside of the gulf region.
I have stood on this floor supporting our farmers in the Gulf States. I support us doing what we need to do to lift them up. I think it would shock many Americans to learn that natural devastation must come in the right package to be worthy of Federal aid. The message being sent is that record flooding and drought do not count. That is not a good message.
Again, I have traveled to the Gulf States. I have seen the hurricane damage firsthand. And you should see the devastation here. The Senator from North Dakota has done a good job of making it real. Seeing it. And it is real. We cannot put one region against the next. This is about America doing the right thing. That is what we should be doing on the floor of the Senate.
The core of this issue is about equity and fairness for all regions that are suffering. And to the thousands of Minnesotans whose very livelihoods have been jeopardized, and those losing their farms due to last year's disastrous weather, withholding assistance is nothing short of cruel. We can do better. We should do better. I urge my colleagues to support this assistance package.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://thomas.loc.gov/