[Senate Hearing 109-283]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]
S. Hrg. 109-283
NOMINATION HEARING OF CHARLES F. CONNER TO BE DEPUTY SECRETARY, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE,
NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
APRIL 6, 2005
__________
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.agriculture.senate.gov
_____
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
20-614 WASHINGTON : 2006
_________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government
Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free
(866) 512-1800; DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail:
Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY
SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia, Chairman
RICHARD G. LUGAR, Indiana TOM HARKIN, Iowa
THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont
MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky KENT CONRAD, North Dakota
PAT ROBERTS, Kansas MAX BAUCUS, Montana
JAMES M. TALENT, Missouri BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas
CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming DEBBIE A. STABENOW, Michigan
RICK SANTORUM, Pennsylvania E. BENJAMIN NELSON, Nebraska
NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota MARK DAYTON, Minnesota
MICHEAL D. CRAPO, Idaho KEN SALAZAR, Colorado
CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa
Martha Scott Poindexter, Majority Staff Director
David L. Johnson, Majority Chief Counsel
Steven Meeks, Majority Legislative Director
Robert E. Sturm, Chief Clerk
Mark Halverson, Minority Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing(s):
Nomination Hearing of Charles F. Conner to be Deputy Secretary,
U.S. Department of Agriculture................................. 01
----------
Wednesday, April 6, 2005
STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY SENATORS
Chambliss, Hon. Saxby, a U.S. Senator from Georgia, Chairman,
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.............. 01
Harkin, Hon. Tom, a U.S. Senator from Iowa, Ranking Member,
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.............. 04
Leahy, Hon. Patrick, a U.S. Senator from Vermont................. 03
----------
WITNESSES
Conner, Charles F., Nominee to be Deputy Secretary, U.S.
Department of Agriculture...................................... 05
Lugar, Hon. Richard G., a U.S. Senator from Indiana.............. 03
----------
APPENDIX
Prepared Statements:
Letters to Senator Saxby Chambliss and Senator Tom Harkin.... 26
Conner, Charles F............................................ 30
Document(s) Submitted for the Record:
Conner, Charles F. (Biographical Information)................ 34
Questions and Answers Submitted for the Record:
Baucus, Hon. Max............................................. 92
Crapo, Hon. Mike............................................. 95
Harkin, Hon. Tom............................................. 96
Roberts, Hon. Pat............................................ 101
Salazar, Hon. Ken............................................ 103
Talent, Hon. James........................................... 106
NOMINATION OF CHARLES F. CONNER TO BE DEPUTY SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT
OF AGRICULTURE
----------
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 6, 2005,
U.S. Senate,,
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry,,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:17 a.m., in
room 328-A, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Saxby
Chambliss, chairman of the committee, presiding.
Present or submitting a statement: Senators Chambliss,
Lugar, Talent, Coleman, Harkin, Leahy, Conrad, Baucus, Lincoln,
Nelson, and Salazar.
STATEMENT OF HON. SAXBY CHAMBLISS, A U.S. SENATOR FROM GEORGIA,
CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY
The Chairman. Good morning. We are here today regarding the
nomination of Chuck Conner to be Deputy Secretary of
Agriculture.
Mr. Conner is no stranger to this committee. From 1980 to
1985, he served as Senator Lugar's agricultural aide. From 1985
to 1987, he was a professional staff member with the Senate
Agriculture Committee. From 1987 to 1997, he served first as
Minority Staff Director, then as Majority Staff Director of
this committee.
I will have to say, just from a personal perspective,
having served in Congress for 10 years, I have known Chuck for
basically all of those 10 years, and Senator Lugar, you made an
excellent choice when you chose Chuck Conner to join your
staff. He is certainly someone who has extensive knowledge of
agriculture and of our programs and has been a very good person
to work with over the years.
Mr. Conner was President of the Corn Refiners Association
from 1997 to 2001. Since 2001, he has been the Special
Assistant to the President for Agricultural Trade and Food
Assistance.
Mr. Conner is accompanied today by his wife, Dru, and their
four children, Katie, Ben, Andrew, and Emily. We are pleased to
have all of you with us. Also in attendance today are Chuck's
brother, Mike Conner, and his sister-in-law, Sally Lindsey.
Welcome to each of you.
Senator Harkin is not here yet, but we will give him an
opportunity to make any comment he wishes to when he comes in.
I want to let you all know what we are going to do this
morning. Because of the Joint Session later this morning, I
will ask my colleagues either to submit their opening
statements for the record or present them during the first
round of questioning. We have the session at--I believe we need
to be on the floor at 10:30, so we are going to try to move
this along, and that is our reason for bumping up the time
table.
With that, I would like to turn to Senator Lugar for an
introduction of Mr. Conner. Senator Lugar.
STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD LUGAR, A U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA
Senator Lugar. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. This is
an especially high moment for me and I am grateful to have this
opportunity to introduce to my fellow members Chuck Conner. He
is a true friend of American agriculture and certainly a loyal
friend of mine.
Almost 20 years ago, Chuck Conner was a young member of my
staff, was with me when former Secretary of Agriculture John
Block visited our farm and announced the first Conservation
Reserve program. It is fitting that both Chuck Conner and the
Conservation Reserve have matured during that generation into
pillars of American agriculture, in my judgment.
He began working for me, as you have mentioned, Mr.
Chairman, in 1980 in my personal office as a legislative
assistant handling agricultural issues. Chuck was always in
tune with agricultural issues on a national level, but more
importantly, he understood the issues farmers were facing and
that he faced in the fields of Indiana. In fact, he grew up on
one of those Indiana farms in Benton County, was an active
participant in the family's 1,100-acre corn and soybean farm,
and paid for his college education at Purdue University by
starting his own hog operation that I believe blossomed to
nearly 20 registered Chester white sows.
Chuck combined this formative experience and his Bachelor
of Science work in agricultural economics at Purdue just prior
to coming to Washington to serve on my staff. Subsequently,
Chuck has been an integral figure in forming Federal
agricultural policy. While working with me as a member of the
staff and later as the staff member and Staff Director of this
committee, Chuck helped usher forward farm bills through the
Senate, including the 1996 FAIR Act that ended 60 years of
Federal reduction controls. Chuck's work in the Senate can be
seen in moving American agriculture to a more free market
system, thoughtfully making the USDA more efficient, making
food safer, reforming the farm credit system, updating
commodity futures laws, and preserving and improving our
nation's child nutrition laws.
Chuck later played important roles in policy development as
President of the Corn Refiners Association, and most recently
as President Bush's Special Assistant for Agriculture.
I have had the distinct pleasure of witnessing Chuck
succeed in each of these professional pursuits. More
importantly, my wife Charlene and I have also enjoyed watching
Chuck marry another Hoosier who also worked in my office. His
wife, Dru, is with us today. They have done a tremendous job in
raising their four children, Katie, Ben, Andrew, and Emily.
Chuck has always possessed sound character, an ability to
work in a bipartisan manner to improve our nation's food and
fiber infrastructures. As both a farmer and Senator on this
committee, I am confident that Chuck will serve our nation
superbly as Deputy Secretary of Agriculture at the United
States Department of Agriculture.
I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me to make this
statement. I will ask your leave in a few minutes to go do my
duty on the floor as we proceed with the other responsibility I
have in foreign relations. There will be a vote probably about
10:10, so this may influence the work of the committee
likewise. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator. We appreciate your
continued strong leadership as a member of this committee. I
just received that same information, that there is a vote on
your bill at about 10 this morning. I will just say, too, there
is a possibility we may not finish until after the speech of
President Yushcenko. If we are not finished, we can come back
and we will resume the hearing.
Senator Leahy had a quick comment.
STATEMENT OF HON. PATRICK LEAHY, A U.S SENATOR FROM VERMONT
Senator Leahy. I do, Mr. Chairman, and I appreciate it. I
couldn't help but think, I was talking with Chuck Conner
earlier and it feels like old times with Dick Lugar and myself
and Chuck. I have known him for a lot of years. The President
could not have made a finer choice. He really could not have
made a better choice for the No. 2 slot at USDA.
I know during the time he worked for Senator Lugar and
worked with this committee, part of the time I was chairman,
part of the time Senator Lugar was chairman, and we all
benefited by his good judgment. I told him today he has that
facility, which very much reflects Senator Lugar, that he
always kept his word, and it made our life a lot easier as a
result.
It was in 1990, we did a farm bill in about a week, a 5-
year farm bill that had taken, 5 years before, had taken seven
or 8 weeks, but because we could work together, we worked out
probably 95 percent of the Farm bill by consensus and a lot of
that is because of the great work that Chuck was doing.
I know there are going to be a lot of challenges ahead. I
want to commend you, Mr. Chairman, for your effort to protect
the programs. A lot of them are facing funding cuts. I know you
have been working with Chairman Gregg on that. Obviously, I
wish we didn't have any cuts, but we are in far better shape
because of the work you are doing.
Chuck Conner and I talked earlier about some of the feeding
programs. It has been a hallmark, a bipartisan hallmark of this
committee from the time of Dole-McGovern to Dole-Leahy to
Lugar-Leahy, feedings programs that have gone through here. It
has worked very, very well.
We will have questions on the MILC program here. Chuck
knows well there have been divergent views on dairy in this
committee. We have found something we can bring a lot of those
views together.
Frankly, Mr. Chairman, your leadership is going to be very
helpful to us, but you are going to be helped by having such a
consummate professional at USDA. I compliment the Secretary. I
compliment the President. I hope that doesn't hurt you, Chuck--
--
[Laughter.]
Senator Leahy [continuing]. I compliment you all for this,
and I thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will put my full statement in
the record.
The Chairman. Thank you.
The Chairman. Before I turn to Mr. Conner, let me say that
we received a letter this morning addressed to Senator Harkin
and myself from over 60 commodity groups that are in support of
the nomination of Chuck Conner for this position.
[The letter can found in the appendix on page 26.]
Senator Leahy. Also, Mr. Chairman, if you do reach a point
where you are going to be voting, you have my proxy to expedite
this in any way you can.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Harkin, we are just getting ready to turn it over
to Mr. Conner, but if you prefer to go ahead and make a
statement, we will let you go ahead, whatever is your
preference.
Senator Harkin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize for
being late to the committee.
The Chairman. Senator Harkin.
STATEMENT OF HON. TOM HARKIN, A U.S. SENATOR FROM IOWA, RANKING
MEMEBER, COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY
Senator Harkin. I will put my whole statement in the
record. I won't burden you with reading the whole thing, but
again, just to welcome Chuck Conner here, to congratulate him
on his nomination to serve as Deputy Secretary.
Obviously, I first met Chuck when I came here in 1985 when
he was with Senator Lugar and we have had a great relationship
ever since. I can say without any hesitation or any fear of
contradiction that any time that we worked on farm legislation
in the 1980's--we had some pretty tough bills in those days, on
the credit bill that we passed, Chuck was working on that--on
through the 1990's, every time we had any dealings, Chuck was
always there, open, above board, willing to work with us, just
a great person to work with.
Then I followed him through his work in the administration
on the last Farm bill when I was privileged to be chairman for
a brief shining moment and Chuck was representing the White
House and we had a great relationship. We got the Farm bill
through in a great bipartisan manner and had a great signing in
the White House.
I just say that in the 20 years I have known Mr. Conner,
Chuck Conner, I can say that he is an outstanding individual,
someone I admire greatly, someone who knows agriculture, cares
about rural America deeply, and I just congratulate him on this
new position, look forward to working with him, and hope we can
expedite this, Mr. Chairman, and get him confirmed as soon as
possible.
Thank you, Chuck, for so many years of service to this
committee, to agriculture, and to our country.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator.
Chuck, before we ask you to testify, would you please stand
and let me swear you in.
Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to
provide is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth, so help you, God?
Mr. Conner. I do.
The Chairman. There is one question we need to ask you for
the record, before you make any comment. Do you agree that you
will appear before any duly constituted committee of Congress,
if asked to appear?
Mr. Conner. I will, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, and we look forward to
your comments.
STATEMENT OF CHARLES F. CONNER, NOMINEE TO BE DEPUTY SECRETARY,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Mr. Conner. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, Senator Harkin,
members of the committee, I am grateful to the Committee on
Agriculture. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, also for promptly
scheduling this hearing to consider my nomination. I am humbled
and honored to have been nominated to serve President Bush in
this way.
I want to begin my opening statement by thanking the man
who is responsible for many of my professional successes.
Senator Lugar, as most of you know, has had a profound impact
on my life. You will note from my information that I was only
22 years old when Senator Lugar took a chance and offered a
farm boy from Indiana the opportunity to come to Washington to
work on food and agricultural policy. On the day that I started
working for Senator Lugar, I left behind tearful relatives in
Indiana and flew on an airplane for the first time and traveled
to Washington, DC. My life would never be the same, and the
next 17 years were some of my very best. Senator Lugar, you
have modeled for me a life of integrity and decency in public
service, and for that, I will always be grateful.
Senator Lugar, as he mentioned in his opening statement,
has had a large impact on my personal life, as well. He also
gave an opportunity to a young woman from Fort Wayne, Indiana,
to work in his office. My wife, Dru, and I met and were married
while working for him and I will always be grateful to him for
providing me that opportunity to meet my wife, and, of course,
now to have our four terrific children who are here with me
today.
Mr. Chairman, if confirmed by the Senate and by this
committee, I want you to know that I will be guided by my
experiences that have helped to shape my professional career
over the last 24 years.
I have seen this committee through many leadership changes.
Herman Talmage, a Democrat from Georgia, was the chairman of
this committee when I started working here in 1980. Senators
Lugar, Cochran, and Leahy, I believe, are the only members
still serving from those days. The issues have changed
somewhat, but one thing that has not changed is the fact that
this committee continues to accomplish great things through
bipartisanship efforts.
During my tenure as Staff Director of this committee, I
hope, Mr. Chairman, that I demonstrated my desire and ability
to work with both sides of the aisle. We may disagree, but we
can debate those disagreements knowing that each participant
has a common goal, the goal of promoting the welfare and
interest of the farmers and ranchers of this great land and
those who produce the products that sustain us. That is a value
shared by Secretary Johanns and President Bush. If confirmed by
this committee and the full Senate, I pledge to you that I will
continue to make every effort to work with both sides of the
aisle and to reach out to all regions of the country.
Second, my firsthand experiences have developed in me an
appreciation of the honor and importance of production
agriculture. I grew upon a family farm. I watched my father
toil every day of his life just to provide a modest living for
his family. If confirmed, I will be an advocate for the farmers
and ranchers. The farmers and ranchers who provide an abundance
of low-cost food and fiber for this country and others around
the world should be given the opportunity to earn a decent
living for their family. This applies to the farmers and
ranchers of Georgia, Mr. Chairman, North Dakota, Vermont,
California, wherever the case may be, and including, of course,
the farmers and ranchers of Indiana.
Third, I believe we must do everything we can in order to
keep a competitive advantage around the globe for U.S. farmers
and ranchers. This principle means that, just like President
Bush and Secretary Johanns, I am firmly behind our trade
negotiations and their efforts to reduce tariffs and duties on
our agricultural exports. It is difficult to remain competitive
if big duties must be paid in order to export. I believe this
can be done in an environmentally sensitive manner by using
incentive-based programs, many of which are targeted at working
lands. To remain competitive, we also must utilize our strong
agricultural research system, which I am a strong advocate of,
and must get this information into the hands of our producers.
Mr. Chairman, my experiences on this committee have not
been limited to farm programs. The late 1980's and early 1990's
were difficult years for American agriculture. The senior
Senator from Vermont, Senator Leahy, was the chairman of the
committee during many of those years and we faced difficult
challenges. We tackled issues like rescuing the Farm Credit
System, promoting conservation programs, providing a safety net
for the poor, reorganizing the U.S. Department of Agriculture,
managing our National Forest System, and strengthened our rural
development programs, and many others. All were priorities of
the chairman and ranking member, and it has gone a long way
toward preparing me for the awesome responsibility that awaits
me if I am confirmed by this committee.
I close, Mr. Chairman, by simply thanking the members of
this committee, past and present, for your help in preparing me
for this job. If confirmed by this committee and the U.S.
Senate, I can assure you that I will work hard to earn your
support and respect and to live up to the standards exemplified
by the members of this committee.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I would be happy to answer any
of your questions.
The Chairman. Chuck, thank you very much for that fine
opening statement.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Conner can be found in the
appendix on page XX.]
The Chairman. Traditionally, the Deputy Secretary has acted
as the day-to-day Chief Operating Officer of the Department.
What management skills area would you bring to that aspect of
the Deputy's job?
Mr. Conner. Mr. Chairman, one of the responsibilities that
came upon us in the late 1980's and early 1990's was
legislation that was proposed by this committee to actually do
what was regarded as probably the most comprehensive
reorganization of the management structure of the Department of
Agriculture. This, as you can imagine, was a very controversial
piece of legislation. Any time you are talking about changes,
changes in offices, perhaps even relocating or collocating
offices, as was the case, these are very controversial matters.
Over the course of a long period of time, we successfully
produced legislation that both Senator Lugar and Senator Leahy
championed, had broad bipartisan support, and really is the
framework of the existing Department of Agriculture as we know
it today. Certainly, that was a big training ground, if you
will, for my understanding of the structure of the Department
of Agriculture, how the management system works within that
agency.
Just generally over the years, many, many experiences have
prepared me for this job. Most of all, Mr. Chairman, what
prepares me for this job is the heart that I have for the
American farmer and rancher, and that is basically what the
agency has, as well, and whether it is career people, political
people, they serve at USDA because they want to promote the
welfare and interest of the farmers and ranchers.
We are going to get along well. There are many, many fine
professional people over at USDA whom I have worked with for
many years. I look forward to working with them, as well, in
this capacity.
The Chairman. One frustrating area for this member has been
the lack of communication with the administration relative to
agricultural issues, and no greater point on this can be made
than the recent issue relative to the budget. I don't know of
any member of this committee who had any dialog of any sort
with the administration prior to that budget coming out, and
that is very frustrating to us because it has to be a team
effort, particularly on something as sensitive as the budget.
What level of communication do you think is necessary, and
if we are going to improve that dialog, how do you intend to
improve the relationship from a communications standpoint
between the Hill and the administration?
Mr. Conner. This is an area, Mr. Chairman, that I know Mike
Johanns and I want to focus upon a great deal, and the current
Secretary has already done a great deal to promote that
increase in communication. The Secretary is quick to pick up
the phone to call. I certainly know that he is quick to respond
to your requests and is eager to do so, and certainly, Mr.
Chairman, I am going to be that way, as well.
I want to work with this committee, obviously. If it is not
clear from my opening statement, I regard this committee as my
home in many ways, professionally speaking, and it would give
me no greater pleasure than to have a very close working
relationship with this committee, with the House Agriculture
Committee, where I have many colleagues whom I have worked with
for many years. I just can't imagine attempting to run the
Department without that close working relationship.
The Chairman. You alluded to this in your opening
statement, but let me just ask you again. We live in a country
that is very large and very diverse and we are blessed with a
variety of soil and climatic conditions that allows us to
produce a wide range of food and fiber products. Different
parts of the country face different challenges and have
different histories and needs. New England dairy farmers face
issues that are different from Midwestern corn and soybean
farmers or Western cattlemen or Southern cotton producers.
Do you agree that there are regional differences in
American agriculture and that the government programs should
not attempt to penalize any region of the country?
Mr. Conner. I agree with that statement, Mr. Chairman. I
will openly acknowledge to you that perhaps my knowledge of the
agricultural commodities in this country outside of what I grew
up with, which were corn, soybeans, wheat, cattle, hogs, those
kinds of issues, my knowledge of those perhaps came the hard
way, sitting around this committee. It probably began in 1985
when I actually became a professional staff member on this
committee and Senator Jesse Helms was chairman of this
committee at that particular time and I had to learn in a hurry
about tobacco----
[Laughter.]
Mr. Conner [continuing]. Peanuts and issues like that. I
believe I have done so. Obviously, when Senator Leahy, and the
relationship we had with him during all of those years, Vermont
agriculture was very, very unique, as well, in that situation.
I may have a few lumps and bruises over the years, but I
believe my 24 years has given me a hearty understanding of just
how broad and diverse American agriculture really is.
The Chairman. From personal experience, having a keen
interest in tobacco and peanuts myself----
[Laughter.]
The Chairman [continuing]. You learned well, Mr. Conner.
Mr. Conner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. You have always been very knowledgeable and
very helpful to this member as a member of the House as well as
over here.
With that, I will turn to Senator Harkin.
Senator Harkin. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Again, Chuck, congratulations on this appointment. I look
forward to working with you. I just have a couple of things I
want to cover with you.
Back in 2001 and 2002, when you were representing the White
House, you were engaged in the Farm bill negotiations quite
intimately. One that I know that you were engaged in was the
energy title because we came up with a new energy title for the
first time. We discussed this at length and it received pretty
broad bipartisan support, to put an energy title in the Farm
bill.
In that title, as you will recall, there is a provision,
Section 9002, that requires all Federal agencies and
departments to purchase bio-based products identified by USDA
as long as they are reasonably equivalent in price,
performance, and availability. It is a very simple title, 9002,
but this is a very vital but often unheralded provision that
will greatly benefit American agriculture, help drive rural
economic development, wean our country off foreign sources of
oil, and provide tangible environmental benefits.
Now, that is in the bill. That doesn't just say the
Department of Agriculture. It says all Federal departments and
agencies, from the Department of Defense to Department of
Interior to everything else shall--it doesn't say may--shall
give a preference to bio-based products in their purchasing as
long as they are equivalent in price, performance, and
availability.
Well, not much has happened. Last year, I asked GAO for a
study on this to see what had happened. About a year ago, it
came out with a pretty scathing, I thought, indictment of the
USDA for not doing anything on this. Still to this date, we
still don't have any action from USDA. Not one product has been
designated for purchase after all this time, and yet the
language is very clear. It says, ``shall give a preference.''
This wasn't something slipped in. This was discussed. People
thought this was a great way to start getting the Federal
Government to be a purchaser of these products.
Now, about a year ago about this time, President Bush was
in Iowa and I had the privilege of riding in the car with him
and I talked about this with him and he became quite intrigued.
I didn't expect him, obviously, to know about it. He doesn't
know about all these little things in the bill. He called a
staff person over, whose name I don't know, and said, ``Talk to
Harkin here about this.'' He talked about it and he took some
notes, but not much has happened.
It has been very frustrating for some of us who worked hard
on the energy title to see that provision there, to see the
great purchasing power of the Federal Government. I remember I
told President Bush, he said, ``Well,'' he said, ``we are for
ethanol.'' I said, ``It has nothing to do with ethanol.'' He
said, ``What are you talking about?''
He was drinking water out of one of these little plastic
cups. I said, ``Mr. Chairman, how many of those plastic cups do
you think the Department of Defense buys every year, just the
Department of Defense?'' He said, ``Obviously a lot.'' I said,
``Well, that is what we are talking about. There is a plant
right north of Omaha, Nebraska, right now, Dow Cargill, makes
these cups out of biodegradable starch. McDonald's is buying
them. If McDonald's can buy them, certainly the Department of
Defense could buy them.'' Well, that got his interest. That is
when he called the staff guy over and had him talk to me.
I just want your thoughts as Deputy Secretary, since you
will be operating the day-to-day operations, to make this
program a high priority. Specifically, will you work to get the
first rules designating items for purchase published in the
Federal Register and effective as soon as possible?
Mr. Conner. I will, Mr. Chairman, or Senator Harkin. I
acknowledge to you this is a mandate in the Farm bill, and I
will also acknowledge to you that it has probably taken us too
long to get this in place. I can't recall the precise
timeframe, Senator Harkin, but we are moving and getting closer
on this----
Senator Harkin. Good.
Mr. Conner [continuing]. We can expect some action on this
relatively soon.
Senator Harkin. Great.
Mr. Conner. I can assure you, though, that if confirmed and
I get over there, that we will get this done because it is a
mandate of the Farm bill and it should be done.
Senator Harkin. I appreciate that very much. You can see
why I am a fan of Chuck Conner's. He is straightforward. He
just says it right the way it is.
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. He said what you wanted.
Senator Harkin. He is just straightforward. He doesn't beat
around the bush.
The second thing, with your indulgence, and you knew I was
going to ask about this, the Conservation Security Program.
Mr. Conner. I did know that.
Senator Harkin. You knew I was going to get to that, right?
[Laughter.]
Senator Harkin. Participation in the first CSP sign-up was
much lower than NRC has expected. This year, with 220
watersheds, there will be much less money per watershed from
the contracts, and the President has proposed even less money
for new contracts next year. Again, I am concerned that the
Conservation Security Program as enacted in the 2002 Farm bill
is being eroded by restrictive rules and limited funds. Again,
we designed a program. It was supported across the board. We
walked into this with eyes open and we knew what we were doing.
Compromises were made. Agreements were made in the Farm bill.
The President, when he signed the Farm bill, Chuck, as you
remember, touted loudly the conservation provisions in that
Farm bill when he signed it. This program was intended to be
attractive to producers that would generate significant and
lasting conservation benefits from widespread participation.
I would just, again, like your commitment that USDA will
help achieve the original program objectives of the
Conservation Security Program.
Mr. Conner. Senator Harkin, you are correct. I did
anticipate this question a little bit, and you and I have had a
few conversations about this since the Farm bill. I recall,
Senator Hark, I believe it was actually the very first meeting
that I had when I came to the White House was with you early in
that Farm bill stage and you, for the first time, shared with
me some of the thoughts that you were looking at with regard to
the Conservation Security Program.
As I told you then and I continue to feel, Senator Harkin,
I am intrigued by this concept. I believe we--this is something
we need to give full attention to, because I believe the notion
of providing some financial help to producers, but at the same
time, too, making that help based upon the conservation
activities that they are putting in place on that farm, is a
long-term sustainable, if you will, farm program that I have a
lot of personal interest in.
Now, having said that, I know that the first sign-up did
not go as well as the Senator would expect. I guess I was
pleased that we were able to go forward with the sign-up,
because as I have told you before, it probably took us too long
to get to the stage of that first sign-up because it does seem
like we passed the Farm bill quite some time ago, and I
recognize that as I told the Senator when we met several months
ago.
Some of that reason for delay, in this case, I won't put
all of that upon the backs of the people at USDA because there
have been a lot of legislative changes to the Farm bill since
its enactment dealing with this particular program, and I know
the Senator would have preferred those changes not happen, but
nevertheless, there are--those are significant changes that
were more than just dollar changes. They did, in order to
achieve the amount of money that Congress had allocated, they
required a different type of program, perhaps, than had we not
had those kind of budget limits.
Now, we are working very, very aggressively on this,
Senator Harkin, and I know Mike Johanns has jump-started this
again after his process. We do have another rule out for
comment. I can't really go into the details, obviously, of that
comment, but I will just say we are improving our outreach as
reflected in this rule and getting input from the
organizations, the farm organizations and the conservation
community to make this a better program and perhaps do better
than we did in that first sign-up for you.
Senator Harkin. I appreciate that, Chuck----
Mr. Conner. It is, again, our full intent to get this thing
up and running well.
Senator Harkin. I appreciate that very much.
Again, Mr. Chairman, it was not right that the Congress pay
for disaster assistance by invading the Farm bill. Disasters
are emergencies. I have said that many times on the floor and I
continue to say that. We shouldn't penalize Florida because a
hurricane hit, or Georgia. Sometimes hurricanes hit Georgia,
too, I guess. We shouldn't penalize Kansas because a tornado
has hit or something like that. These are natural disasters and
emergencies.
We have never before ever invaded the Farm bill to pay for
a disaster until, what, 2 years ago? Until 2 years ago, the
first time. It was a mistake then. It was a mistake last year
to do it again. Those of us on Agriculture have really got to
pull together and just not allow this to happen again. It is
wrong and it should have never been allowed to happen, and that
is what you are referring to Mr. Conner, in terms of the
changes legislatively that caused this program to be disrupted.
Hopefully, it will not be happening in the future and we
can restore the program again to what it was in the Farm bill.
Both the former chairman, Senator Cochran, and others have
stated on the floor, it is in the record, that this program
should be reinstated to operate as was intended in the Farm
bill for the duration at least of this farm bill. Now, if the
committee wants to change it when the next Farm bill comes up,
well, then that is fine, but it shouldn't be changed in between
that.
Thanks very much, Mr. Conner. Thanks for your indulgence,
Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Conner. Thank you, Senator Harkin.
The Chairman. Senator Conrad.
Senator Conrad. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is good to see
you back here in this room, Chuck.
Mr. Conner. Likewise, Senator Conrad.
Senator Conrad. I first of all want to say I am delighted
at this appointment. Chuck Conner is a pro. Chuck Conner's word
is good. We dealt with a lot of issues in this committee. We
didn't always agree, but it was never disagreeable. I know
Chuck will bring that same attitude to USDA. I would say the
only thing that would have been better, if they had made you
the Secretary.
Mr. Conner. No, thank you. No, thank you.
[Laughter.]
Senator Conrad. I hope that word goes out.
Now, I want to just visit with you, and I see somebody else
in this audience that would have made an outstanding Secretary,
too, Congressman Combest. Senator Harkin and I and Congressman
Combest and Congressman Stenholm spent a lot of time
negotiating the last Farm bill. They were outstanding
individuals with terrific staff assistants, as you always
provided, Chuck.
Let me just go to the larger question here. According to
OECD, the international scorekeeper, Europe is providing $277
an acre of support per year to their producers--$277 an acre of
support in Europe. The comparable figure here is $48. They are
outgunning us more than five-to-one.
On export subsidy, Europe accounts for 87 percent of all
the world's agricultural export subsidy. We account for 1
percent. They are outgunning us there 87-to-one.
We are now entering negotiations to attempt to level the
playing field, and as we enter the negotiations, the
administration sends a budget up here that says, cut
agriculture, that is 1 percent of the budget, the budget that
passed the U.S. Senate, cut agriculture 16 percent. In my
State, that means the average farmer is going to lose about
$5,000 of income. On top of that, the administration says, cut
from crop insurance another $538 million, putting that at risk.
I just want to say, I don't see the rationale for these
cuts. I don't see the rationale for cutting the farm program in
the middle of it. I certainly don't see it being done as we
enter into trade discussions to try to level the playing field
for our producers. If we look at the trend lines, they are
ominous, because we have moved from a dramatic trade balance,
trade surplus in agriculture, and now they are telling us this
year we may actually have net imports of food and food stuffs
into the United States.
Could you tell us how it makes any sense to you that in the
context of Europe providing much more support to their
producers than we provide to ours, why we cut support from our
producers?
Mr. Conner. Well, Senator Conrad, you might be surprised
that I anticipated this question, as well, and I appreciate the
context in which you are raising it. You have always been a
gentleman in these debates and I admire that in you.
Let me just say, I don't believe you have ever heard me
apologize for the $19.1 billion, I believe, dollar level,
aggregate level of support that the U.S. has authorized under
our trade laws versus, as you have noted, the sizably higher
amount that our European counterparts are allowed to have. If I
am not mistaken, I believe their agriculture and our
agriculture are comparable on a total basis, yet their
aggregate level of support is some three times, almost four
times, perhaps, higher than our level. You certainly will never
hear me apologize for that.
Now, with regard to the budget situation, let me just say,
Senator Conrad, first of all, that we feel like we have turned
the corner on the agricultural economy in the last couple of
years. That is in no way a reflection, a statement upon
absolutely every region of the country because we have a big
and diverse agricultural system and there are always pockets.
In general, I don't think you can dispute the record net farm
income that we have seen in the last 2 years, the record low
level of debt-asset ratios that we have seen, record amount of
production, record amount of exports this past year----
Senator Conrad. It sounds like a pretty good endorsement of
the last Farm bill.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Conner. Well----
Senator Conrad. Would you want to endorse the last Farm
bill?
Mr. Conner. Senator Conrad, as you know, I was a strong
advocate of the last Farm bill, as was the President.
Continuing on that, though, obviously----
Senator Conrad. If we could have only had the Secretary on
board.
Mr. Conner. Our challenge is obviously to sustain that
recovery in American agriculture so that it is not a hiatus but
something that is continuing over time.
I believe firmly, and I believe the President and the
administration believe firmly, that one of the key elements of
sustaining that recovery in agriculture as well as the
remainder of the economy in terms of job growth is getting our
arms around this Federal budget deficit, and----
Senator Conrad. Well, I understand you have to be up here
and be a good soldier. I just wanted to make the point. Look,
it makes absolutely no sense to be cutting agriculture when
Europe is providing much more support than we are, and when we
are right at the dawn of negotiations to try to level the
playing field.
One other question, if I could, on a parochial basis, in
Devil's Lake, you are familiar with--you have heard me talk
about this before--we have this lake that has risen 26 feet.
The lake is now three times the size of the District of
Columbia and it is flooding more and more land. When you were
still here, Chuck, you saw me put up a number of charts then
about how this lake had risen dramatically.
We have now got an additional 100,000 acres of crop and
grazing land that have been flooded by the overflow of this
lake and it continues to rise, threatening another 200,000
acres. Many of these producers are suffering very, very
significant losses. Will you be willing to work with these
producers to explore existing USDA programs that they might
utilize to reduce these losses or offset them?
Mr. Conner. I will, Senator Conrad. You know me, and one of
my trademarks is I am accessible to not only farm
organizations, but individual farmers who call. My direct line
is generally readily available and it rings a lot. I am
accessible to these producers. Obviously, we will talk to any
group of them that you send my direction, but let us continue
to take a look at this and see what we can do for them.
Senator Conrad. I look forward to working with you, Chuck.
Mr. Conner. I appreciate that.
Senator Conrad. We really are delighted at your
appointment.
Mr. Conner. Thank you, Senator.
The Chairman. Senator Nelson.
Senator Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Let me add my congratulations and appreciation, also, for
your nomination, Chuck. In our brief time together, we have had
more than one opportunity to work together, and that has always
been a very positive experience for me.
Senator Conrad, if you have that excess water and could
channel it to Western Nebraska where the drought continues, we
will be glad to take our share.
[Laughter.]
Senator Nelson. I am concerned about the future of trade as
it relates to agriculture. I am more concerned about it from
the standpoint that at the end of the day, with many of the
trade agreements, you would have to say that they are stronger
on imports than perhaps they have been on exports, and I don't
know if we are now a net importer of food, but I have heard
such suggestions. Do you know, are we now importing more food
than we are actually exporting in terms of agricultural
products?
Mr. Conner. I don't have the precise numbers in front of
me, Senator Nelson. I believe there was a quarter in which we
were. I am not aware that for a given marketing year for
agricultural products that we are importing more for that given
year than what we are exporting, again, because we have seen
record exports this past year.
Senator Nelson. As it relates to importation of
agricultural products, we have to be very concerned that we not
become a net importer on any extended period of time. If we
like importing 60 to 70 percent of our fuel, we will love
importing 60 to 70 percent of our food, which brings me to the
question about trade agreements.
I know you are not going to the USTR, but my sugar farmers
in Western Nebraska and the panhandle are very concerned, and I
have spoken to other sugar interests around the country about
the CAFTA agreement because of the importation of more sugar,
and I wanted to bounce an idea off you for consideration in the
future. If we can divide--you mentioned food and fiber, but
also an agricultural program, a Farm bill which I hope we will
talk about in the future is the Food Security Act, could also
have another ``F'', and that is ``fuel'' because of what we are
doing today in growing our own fuel.
I wonder if there is a thought about how we might import
virtually unlimited amounts of sugar if they go to fuel as
opposed to food so that we can continue to grow our own food.
Almost every country that produces its own rice is very
reluctant to import much rice because they never want to be
dependent on anyone else. It seems to me that sugar may fall
into that category, but on a very different basis. Recognizing
that sugar can also be fuel, I wonder if you have any thoughts
about what that might entail if we were to consider CAFTA and
other future trade agreements that might involve sugar or other
commodities in requiring those to go to the production of our
own fuel.
Mr. Conner. Senator, I appreciate the comment and the
question. Your idea about--I believe sugar-to-ethanol would be
a simple way to sum that up--is an intriguing one. Certainly
from my past work at the Corn Refiners Association, where we
were heavily involved in the ethanol question, sugar is a
carbohydrate. It is a starch. Obviously, those starches can be
readily converted into fuels with the technology that we have
today, much as we do with corn and other biomasses. The
technology is there.
I am not certain, Senator, and perhaps some of your folks
at the University of Nebraska and others could help us to know
just what the economics would be and just how much it would
involve to make that conversion relative to using other
feedstuffs, but it is an intriguing idea that we would be happy
to talk with you further about that.
Senator Nelson. I appreciate that, and I can say from my
experience of having been to Brazil on a few occasions and
checking out their ethanol industry, which is based largely, if
not entirely, on sugar, where they have referred to it as
``drink the best and burn the rest''----
[Laughter.]
Senator Nelson [continuing]. That it does make some sense
to consider how we might channel that sort of importation so
that it doesn't disrupt food production in the United States. A
good deal of our effort for protection of our own production is
referred to as subsidy. There is no question about it. We also
deal with imports that are under-priced coming into the United
States because of larger subsidies in other countries.
Let me add my comments to Senator Conrad's about the cuts
to agriculture. I don't think that they are well thought
through at the present time and I hope that in your new
position, you will spend a great deal of time working with us
to see how we can even out some of this potential disruption to
our agriculture production.
Mr. Conner. You have that commitment, Senator.
Senator Nelson. Thank you, and good luck.
Mr. Conner. Thank you.
Senator Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Senator Talent.
Senator Talent. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I will
restrict myself to one area because I know we have a vote on.
Mr. Conner, thanks for being here. Congratulations.
Mr. Conner. Thank you.
Senator Talent. I agree you are going to do a great job.
Let me just bring up the issue of locks and dams with you.
We are trying to compete internationally. We are demanding that
our ag community accept--a lot of people are pressuring them to
accept less and less in terms of domestic support,
notwithstanding what the foreigners are getting, and then we
are not keeping the promises that we made regarding, among
other things, the transportation system. We have the
Mississippi River system. Two-thirds of our grain goes down
that system. We have locks and dams 600 feet when they should
be 1,200 feet wide, built 70 years ago for paddle boats.
I would like you to tell me that you are going to assist
the Secretary in being an advocate within the administration
for rebuilding this system, for making these locks and dams
wider, fixing this infrastructure so that we can get our
product to market. The only people benefiting from this current
system are the Brazilians, and we really need the Department of
Agriculture to make that clear within the administration. I
just hope you will do it. That is my only question and comment.
Mr. Conner. Well, I will, Senator. Let me assure you,
growing up in the Midwest, I fully understand the impact that
the Mississippi River has on commerce coming out of that region
of the country. It is not important, Senator, it is absolutely
essential and I recognize that. What has been going on in terms
of the last couple of decades with the efforts to stop one
dollar's worth of rehab, renovation from going on in that
region is very, very unhealthy for American agriculture. We
flat out have to be able to get our bulk agricultural
commodities out of that portion of the Midwest and down to New
Orleans to a point of export or we are absolutely dead in the
water.
I will be an advocate of that, I can assure you, and look
forward to working with you on that.
Senator Talent. Thank you. We need to stitch together the
old brick-and-mortar coalition in both parties. We have some
people who are opposed to this from an environmental
standpoint, which is ridiculous. These barges--one of these
barges replaces 800 to 900 trucks. It is the best thing we
could do for the environment, to make this river system work
better. It is like a one-lane highway now with no shoulders and
it is carrying so much of the nation's commerce.
I know you believe that. I wanted to give you a chance to
say that on the record. I really hope you will go in there and
fight the short-sighted people at the Office of Management and
Budget on this issue. I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you. We do have a vote open, but I have
told the floor that we need to finish this hearing, so we will
continue. We are going to go to the Capitol at 10:30, so I
think we are OK.
Senator Lincoln.
Senator Lincoln. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and certainly
thank you for your leadership in this committee. We are
grateful to you for all that you do. Certainly to Mr. Conner,
we do welcome you back home to the Agriculture Committee.
Mr. Conner. Thank you.
Senator Lincoln. You have done a tremendous amount here and
we are all very, very proud and congratulate you on your
nomination----
Mr. Conner. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Lincoln [continuing]. Know that you will be a hard
worker.
I also share your respect for Senator Lugar. He is a
devoted member of this body, and having helped to start the
Senate Hunger Caucus last year, I have found no other member as
dedicated and as compassionate and passionate about those
issues, so I share your respect for Senator Lugar.
Your background and your willingness to serve are certainly
an indication of your commitment and your dedication to
agriculture and I thank you for that. I, too, grew up on a
farm. My dad was a farmer. I watched as my father agonized over
the drought, the floods, the markets, all of the conditions and
all of the circumstances which he had absolutely no control
over.
I also grew up with a man who was very proud of his
country, very patriotic. He was the only man I ever met that
loved to pay his taxes.
[Laughter.]
Senator Lincoln. He loved to pay his taxes because he loved
his country and he said, ``You know, for what I pay in taxes, I
get a tremendous amount, the honor and the privilege to be a
part of this country, to serve in its armed forces, to be able
to be something that I have always dreamed of being, and that
is a farmer, to get my hands dirty every day and to be able to
do the best job I can in producing the safest, most abundant
and affordable food supply.'' I share your pride in that,
coming from a farm family.
I know he believed in his government, and I know he
believed that when his government made a contract with him,
that he felt strongly that his government would not back out on
him. I guess that is one of the biggest disappointments that I
have had in all of the efforts you and many, many others put
into the 2002 Farm bill. I see Chairman Combest in the audience
there. He provided tremendous leadership there, as well as many
of the other members of this committee.
I guess, knowing how proud your family is today sitting
there with you, I remember this morning dropping my children
off at school and each of them had a little Ziplock bag of
change. Their school and student body, each of the students
were collecting money to find a cure for cancer, and they were
distraught in that they felt like they should have more. I
said, you have cleaned out your piggy banks. You have cleaned
out my pocketbook. We have gathered up all the change and you
have given, and that is important. It is important to know that
each of us gives what we can.
For Southern agriculture and the rural communities of the
South, we do desperately want to be good Americans and we want
to give and we want to participate in the historic debt that we
have in this nation, in bringing it in line. We want to
participate in providing the safest, most abundant and
affordable food supply in the world.
I guess my biggest concern is that much more is being asked
in terms of sacrifice for producers as well as the rural
communities of this country in the South when you look at all
of the decisions coming out of this administration, whether it
is the decisions through the Department of Treasury and the
OFAC Office in limiting our rice trade, whether it is--and many
on this committee may agree with--the payment limitations for
the crops that we grow and that we are suited for, the fact
that we are different and the diversity that exists.
I would just say that, both in recognizing my
responsibility to raising my children but also the
responsibility I have to the people I represent in the Senate,
consistency is critical. It is critical in the trust that we
develop and the important element of making sure that
government is a positive part of who we are and what we can do
in the global community.
I would just ask of you, as a part of the Department of
Agriculture, that we can really look at these long-term
commitments that are being made to our farmers. I know last
week I was with my farmers and their bankers and the folks that
they do business with in rural America who are not just seeing
cuts in agriculture programs, but seeing cuts in their COPS
programs and their Medicaid dollars and their health care
providers are up against the wall. I guess it is just making
sure that we can provide for them, in the diversity that exists
in this country, the peace of mind that their government is
going to support them just as it does the other regions of the
nation. That is something that is going to be really, really
critical for us in the coming years and we hope that you will
be there with us.
I guess, in closing, my comments would be that I hope that
you will provide us here on the committee the assurances that
you will be an advocate for the current law that we negotiated
out in good faith that recognizes the regional differences,
where everyone came to the table and gave a little bit to come
up with a compromise.
I hope that you will also reassure us, or at least explain
to us what kind of a message we give to the rest of the world
when we say that we are ready to lower our supports to our
producers before we get a commitment from our trading
competition to help level the global disparities. If what we
are going to do is ask our producers to be competitive in a
global marketplace, let us help frame the environment they are
in in a reasonable way.
I guess, Mr. Conner, I am asking for your help, because I
can't explain to my farmers any more than what I have done, and
I hope that you will join me and that you will bring the
Secretary with you as we come, and perhaps travel to Arkansas
so that you can help me explain what it is we are asking of our
producers, particularly in that region of the nation, to
contribute to what this great country is all about.
Is there some way I can get an assurance from you on a
couple of those things?
Mr. Conner. Well, let me--Senator, I appreciate your
comments and I know they come from deep within your heart, as
mine do, as well, and I appreciate that.
In terms of assurance, let me just share a couple of
thoughts with you and perhaps we can talk more about this if
you want in subsequent questions. We are willing to work with
you on these issues. In the President's budget, you are at a
little bit of a disadvantage in that if the budget process were
a poker game, you probably wouldn't want to bet on the
President because he has to show his hand early in that
process, and we have done that. We have put the issues out
there on the table----
Senator Lincoln. Well, if he is bluffing me, I am OK, but--
--
[Laughter.]
Senator Lincoln. Let me know now.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Conner. It is a pretty poor bluff if he is, Senator.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Conner. Again, let me just say, and if there has been a
theme this morning perhaps of who I am, it is the fact that we
are dealing with issues here that are very controversial, not
just between the administration and you, Senator, but between
members of this committee, and there are extremely wide and
diverse opinions on this committee over the issues that you
raised, payment limits being a very, very obvious one, and
there is sharp, sharp division here in this committee.
My point is simply I want to help you play a role of being
the--a bad word, I guess, in these kind of times, but the
reconciliation person in those differences. It is a role that I
have played in the past for a long, long time. I hope some of
the testimony given here this morning says that it is a role
that I played successfully and I certainly see no reason that
that is going to change when I--if I am confirmed and become
the Deputy Secretary of Agriculture. It is the role that I
played when I was with the President in the 2002 Farm bill.
Former Chairman Combest can speak for himself, but I believe he
would tell you that that is the role that I played with him
coming in a little bit late in the game, but immediately tried
to move us into a constructive position. We want to be
constructive in this process and I commit that to you.
Senator Lincoln. I appreciate that. There are many people
around that table. There are not just these here that may
disagree in the Congress, but there are international elements
involved, as well, that are a huge part of this global
marketplace that we find ourselves ever more in a competitive
nature.
I hope you won't ask me to fold, because I don't want to
have to fold at this poker game----
Mr. Conner. Indeed.
[Laughter.]
Senator Lincoln [continuing]. On behalf of my farmers. I
would very much like to ask you and the Secretary to travel to
our part of the country and to answer the questions of my
farmers and see the capital-intensive investment they have to
make in the crops that they are best-suited to grow to compete
on the world marketplace. I hope I at least have that
commitment from you.
Mr. Conner. You do have that commitment from me, Senator. I
can assure you that there are things in the works that are
going to take us to your great State, and frankly, many others
as the Secretary--I know his passion is to get on the road and
to get some views of the farmers out on the local level.
Senator Lincoln. Well, I hope that will be sooner than
later, because as I said, the answers that I have are exhausted
in terms of what we need to do.
Mr. Conner. I will just tell you, Senator, the last time I
was in your State on an agricultural matter, I was in a Tyson
chicken plant. That was an experience beyond description, to be
inside that plant----
Senator Lincoln. Yes, it is. I have been there, too.
Mr. Conner [continuing]. I look forward to a different
view, perhaps, when I come down.
[Laughter.]
Senator Lincoln. Good luck.
The Chairman. I am told by the floor that they are going to
keep the vote open until 10:30, which means we have 9 minutes
left.
Senator Salazar.
Senator Salazar. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and
congratulations, Mr. Conner, to you and to your wonderful
family. I wish you the very best of success in this new
position.
Mr. Conner. Thank you.
Senator Salazar. Let me be brief and just make three quick
points. One, I would request of you, and you don't have to
comment today, but to get a response from Secretary Johanns on
a letter that I sent to him on March 10 concerning the ban on
Canadian beef imports. I believe that we need to move forward
with a process that makes sure that we are protecting consumers
and ranchers here in our nation, and it is incumbent upon the
Secretary, given where we are, to at least lay out where we are
and where we are going, and I made that request of him, so if
you would look into that for me, I would very much appreciate
it.
Mr. Conner. I will.
Senator Salazar. Second, I wanted to just echo the concerns
that you have heard here from my colleagues this morning in
terms of investment to rural America and to agriculture.
Talking about farmers and ranchers is sometimes like talking
about motherhood and apple pie. It is very different when we
ask our government to work with farmers and ranchers to walk
the talk. It is easy to do the talk on supporting farmers and
ranchers. I know that from a statistical point of view, you can
make an argument that some things are improving in the
agricultural economy.
Well, at least in my State, when I travel through the
Eastern plains of Colorado and down to the San Luis Valley and
places that are some of the poorest counties in the United
States of America, I can tell you that these family farmers and
ranchers are suffering and many of our agricultural communities
continue to wither on the vine. I will just join the chorus of
concerns that you heard here from my colleagues about the
President's budget.
It is easy to say you support farmers and ranchers in
America. It is another thing to actually do it. From my point
of view, Mr. Conner, the budget that the President has proposed
does not do the job. It leaves out a small portion of our
overall population out in the cold because they don't have the
same kind of opportunities in my State, for example, that
people would have in Denver, Colorado, or in the larger cities.
I would hope that part of the commitment that we see from you
in your new position is to help us make sure that we are
prioritizing what I call the forgotten America.
With that, Mr. Chairman, given our time limits, I don't
need a response. I will just go yield to you so you can
conclude.
Mr. Conner. I appreciate your comments, Senator Salazar.
The Chairman. Thank you very much. Senator Baucus.
Senator Baucus. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would also like to chime in on the point that Senator
Salazar made. You responded to Senator Conrad's question about
why are we cutting our budget now. We have to negotiate. Your
basic response was, well, gee, the farmers are doing pretty
well. You cited some numbers, farm income is up and so forth. I
don't know about those numbers, but whatever they are, as you
know as well as anyone, it is the tyranny of averages. Average
numbers don't really mean a lot. We are such a large country
with so many pockets of income that is low. There are pockets
of farmers where income is low. Senator Salazar mentioned parts
of Colorado. The same is true in, I would say, most of Montana.
Those numbers you used, I don't know, again, what all was
in it, and I know you know this, but I just wish the USDA
would, on a proportionate basis, stand up a little more for the
producer, because the industry can pretty well take care of
itself. They have different means, different ways of doing
things. The producers don't have any other ways. As you know,
they are at the mercy of price, the mercy of the weather, and
all that. The big boys, they can take care of themselves. The
big boys also, unfortunately, have much better access to you
because they are in Washington. They have people working for
them in Washington. The farmers don't. The farmers depend upon
us.
What I would like to know is your telephone number. You
mentioned that you had an open line to everybody, and I want my
Montana farmers to give you a telephone call.
Mr. Conner. Well----
Senator Baucus. Would you give me a number, please?
Mr. Conner. Senator Baucus, I am not over at USDA yet, but
I----
Senator Baucus. Well, give me your number that you have.
What is the number to reach you at right now?
Mr. Conner. At right now?
Senator Baucus. Yes.
Mr. Conner. It is 202-456-7804----
Senator Baucus. Four-56-7804.
Mr. Conner [continuing]. As some of the people in this room
can tell you, that rings at my desk. One thing you learn at the
White House is it is a lean operation, so there is nobody there
to pick it up but me.
Senator Baucus. Right. I appreciate that, because in
Montana, I take all calls from all Montanans unscreened. I
don't care who it is. I take the telephone call.
Mr. Conner. That is my policy.
Senator Baucus. I give my personal e-mail, not the office
e-mail, my personal, private e-mail to all Montanans. I know
that it helps.
Mr. Conner. Yes.
Senator Baucus. I applaud you for having the same policy.
You gave us your number, thank you, so people have an
opportunity to talk to you, too.
Mr. Conner. Absolutely.
Senator Baucus. I appreciate that. When I was home during
the break, I ran into a lot of anger, frankly, from farmers who
were wondering when will they be able to sign up for the
Agriculture Disaster Assistance Program. We were promised first
of the year. That was promised by USDA. Now we are told it is
March. There is no software at the offices in Montana. Now we
are told we won't get checks until maybe October.
Mr. Conner. Right.
Senator Baucus. That is inexcusable, and you will agree.
There is not much----
Mr. Conner. I will----
Senator Baucus [continuing]. I called Secretary Johanns
about this. As things work, you have to, to some degree, and he
said he would look into it and try to help. My office followed
up with people at the USDA just getting the run around. The
follow-up calls that my office is making on this are just run-
around telephone calls. It is a stone wall. I am asking you now
to follow up if you could, please, and see what in the world is
going on here. We have to get that software out there. We have
to get these offices up and running and we have to get those
checks out earlier than October.
Mr. Conner. Senator, I will assure you I can do that. There
was the software. It was out and it was up and was running for
several hours. Then they figured out that there was some kind
of a glitch in it and they had to shut it back down. They
tried--and it's no explanation other than to say we know that
this is not the kind of performance we expect, and I can assure
you we will push on this issue.
Senator Baucus. Can you get back to--you are going to be
confirmed, and you will be a very good Deputy Secretary, but
within a week of your confirmation, if you personally could
give me a telephone call and give me an update----
Mr. Conner. Yes. I would be happy to do that, Senator,
absolutely.
Senator Baucus. Do you want my telephone number?
[Laughter.]
Mr. Conner. They know how to get hold of you.
[Laughter.]
Senator Baucus. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Mr. Conner. Thank you.
Senator Baucus. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Mr. Conner, you will find that every farmer
in America is listening to this over C-SPAN today and your
voice mail will be full----
[Laughter.]
The Chairman [continuing]. By the time you get back.
Mr. Conner. Well----
The Chairman. Senator Coleman, Senator Baucus and I are
going to go vote before the vote was ended close this down, so
I am going to turn this over to you to wind up and let you have
all the time you need for questions for Mr. Conner.
Senator Coleman. This is a rare opportunity, Mr. Chairman.
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. He is under oath, so----
Mr. Conner. They said you were my friend, Mr. Chairman.
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. Let me just announce that the record will be
left open until Friday, April 8. Mr. Conner, there may be
written questions that will be submitted to you. I would urge
you to get those back very quickly because it is my intention
to bring your nomination to a vote as soon as possible next
week. If you could get those right back to us, if there are any
questions----
Mr. Conner. We will do that, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. All right. Senator Coleman.
Senator Coleman [presiding]. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Conner, it is a great pleasure to be with you today. I
am looking forward, obviously, to supporting this nomination,
looking forward to working with you. I appreciate the time you
spent with us in Minnesota. I know you had some family
conflicts there and figured out a way to make it happen and I
am appreciative for that.
I have just two questions and a statement. We had a chance
in my office yesterday to raise some concerns and we don't have
to go over that again today. We did talk a little bit about the
manner in which the quality loss provisions of the current
disaster program for my wheat farmers is being implemented.
Mr. Conner. Yes.
Senator Coleman. We have concerns under the new disaster
program. The farmers are just out of luck if national
adjustments are out of whack, which is what is happening in the
local market. I just have some real concerns there. Can you
give me some reassurance? Law should trump regulation. That is
a pretty fair comment. I hope the USDA will carry out what is
clear Congressional intent. Can you talk to me a little bit
about this issue?
Mr. Conner. Senator Coleman, since our meeting yesterday, I
have had a chance to very briefly, and I will say a little bit
superficially, review this issue. What I have found is it is my
understanding that the problem in Minnesota can be resolved if
we provide some flexibility back to the State committees, to
the Farm Service Agency State committee. In the case of--there
is a similar problem in North Dakota, is what I understand, and
I noted that there was a communication from Under Secretary
Gebler to the North Dakota delegation in which some of that
flexibility was granted in their particular case.
I need a little bit further time to just review why
additional flexibility would not be appropriate, as well, in
the State of Minnesota, which again, is my understanding, would
probably solve your issues there.
Senator Coleman. I believe under the old disaster program,
if quality adjustments nationally weren't reflecting what was
happening in the local markets, that the State FSAs had that
kind of discretion.
Mr. Conner. That is my understanding, as well, Senator.
Senator Coleman. That would go a long way to helping our
problem.
Mr. Conner. We are on it, and I can assure you we will
figure out what is going on there.
Senator Coleman. The other issue I want to raise is I
appreciate the President's strong support for the MILC program.
I am very appreciative of that and just want a clear sense of a
commitment to helping us get this important program extended
for 2007.
Mr. Conner. Yes. Senator, as you know, the President on
multiple occasions indicated that he was strongly in favor of
working with you and other members of this committee and the
House side in extending that program. Certainly, that
commitment remains good today and was reflected in the
President's budget and we look forward to that.
Senator Coleman. Great. Just a last more of a statement
rather than a question, two observations. One, standing behind
a farm bill that still has a couple more years to go without,
and this is not just to you, but we all have to stand behind
the Farm bill. I am concerned in some of the budget discussions
about the impact on growers and producers who have made
commitments, saying these are the rules of the game. It is a
little discouraging at times when there are budget proposals on
the table that appear to put us in a position of changing those
rules. It is hard for folks who have made commitments and work
with their bankers and others with an expectation of what the
lay of the land is to all of a sudden have a sense that land
may be shifting. It is a little disconcerting. I just hope we
continue to have great sensitivity to that and stand firm
behind the bill that we have as we look forward to working on a
new one.
Then the last observation is on the issue of trade, that as
we move forward on the WTO discussions, that again we stand
behind this farm bill. That is important. It is important that
our growers and producers are the great beneficiaries of trade.
I understand that. On the other hand, as we negotiate bilateral
and regional agreements, it sometimes pits one set of growers
against another and that concerns me, deeply concerns me.
If we can do the things we can to look at things and see
that they are handled in a global context--sugar, for
instance--we all would be better off. It is a little, I don't
know if the word is ``dangerous,'' but it is certainly a
concern to me if we seem to be pitting one group of growers and
producers against the other. Hopefully we will keep that in
mind.
I look forward to working with you. It is a great
opportunity. The President has been tremendously supportive of
agriculture, tremendously supportive, and the key to that is
surrounding himself with great talent. Secretary Johanns was a
friend of mine when he was the Mayor of Lincoln, Nebraska, and
I was the Mayor of St. Paul, Minnesota, two capital cities. He
is an extraordinary man and I said he is a really smart guy
because he was educated, he and his wife, in Minnesota, so
clearly that is a----
[Laughter.]
Senator Coleman [continuing]. I know how smart he is. With
that, I look forward to working with you.
Mr. Conner. Likewise, Senator Coleman. Thank you.
Senator Coleman. This hearing is now adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 10:36 a.m., the committee was adjourned.]
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
April 6, 2005
=======================================================================
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
=======================================================================
DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
April 6, 2005
=======================================================================
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
=======================================================================
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
April 6, 2005
=======================================================================
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]