[House Hearing, 115 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
STATE OF THE RURAL ECONOMY: SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE SONNY PERDUE
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MAY 17, 2017
__________
Serial No. 115-6
Printed for the use of the Committee on Agriculture
agriculture.house.gov
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
25-545 PDF WASHINGTON : 2017
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
E-mail, [email protected].
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas, Chairman
GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania COLLIN C. PETERSON, Minnesota,
Vice Chairman Ranking Minority Member
BOB GOODLATTE, Virginia, DAVID SCOTT, Georgia
FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma JIM COSTA, California
STEVE KING, Iowa TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota
MIKE ROGERS, Alabama MARCIA L. FUDGE, Ohio
BOB GIBBS, Ohio JAMES P. McGOVERN, Massachusetts
AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia FILEMON VELA, Texas, Vice Ranking
ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD, Arkansas Minority Member
SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM, New Mexico
VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire
JEFF DENHAM, California RICHARD M. NOLAN, Minnesota
DOUG LaMALFA, California CHERI BUSTOS, Illinois
RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York
TED S. YOHO, Florida STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands
RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina
MIKE BOST, Illinois DWIGHT EVANS, Pennsylvania
DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina AL LAWSON, Jr., Florida
RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana TOM O'HALLERAN, Arizona
TRENT KELLY, Mississippi JIMMY PANETTA, California
JAMES COMER, Kentucky DARREN SOTO, Florida
ROGER W. MARSHALL, Kansas LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware
DON BACON, Nebraska
JOHN J. FASO, New York
NEAL P. DUNN, Florida
JODEY C. ARRINGTON, Texas
______
Matthew S. Schertz, Staff Director
Anne Simmons, Minority Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Bustos, Hon. Cheri, a Representative in Congress from Illinois,
submitted report............................................... 67
Conaway, Hon. K. Michael, a Representative in Congress from
Texas, opening statement....................................... 1
Prepared statement........................................... 3
Kuster, Hon. Ann M., a Representative in Congress from New
Hampshire, submitted letter.................................... 72
Lujan Grisham, Hon. Michelle, a Representative in Congress from
New Mexico, submitted photo and article........................ 74
Peterson, Hon. Collin C., a Representative in Congress from
Minnesota, opening statement................................... 4
Witness
Perdue, Hon. Sonny, Secretary, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Washington, D.C................................................ 5
Prepared statement........................................... 7
Submitted questions.......................................... 75
STATE OF THE RURAL ECONOMY: SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE SONNY PERDUE
----------
WEDNESDAY, MAY 17, 2017
House of Representatives,
Committee on Agriculture,
Washington, D.C.
The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in Room
1300 of the Longworth House Office Building, Hon. K. Michael
Conaway [Chairman of the Committee] presiding.
Members present: Representatives Conaway, Thompson,
Goodlatte, Lucas, King, Rogers, Gibbs, Austin Scott of Georgia,
Crawford, DesJarlais, Hartzler, Denham, LaMalfa, Davis, Yoho,
Allen, Bost, Rouzer, Abraham, Kelly, Comer, Marshall, Bacon,
Faso, Dunn, Arrington, Peterson, David Scott of Georgia, Costa,
Walz, Fudge, McGovern, Vela, Lujan Grisham, Kuster, Nolan,
Bustos, Maloney, Plaskett, Adams, Evans, Lawson, O'Halleran,
Panetta, Soto, and Blunt Rochester.
Staff present: Bart Fischer, Caleb Crosswhite, Callie
McAdams, Jackie Barber, Josh Maxwell, Matthew S. Schertz,
Stephanie Addison, Rachel Millard, Anne Simmons, Evan
Jurkovich, Keith Jones, Kellie Adesina, Lisa Shelton, Liz
Friedlander, Mary Knigge, Matthew MacKenzie, Mike Stranz, Troy
Phillips, Nicole Scott, and Carly Reedholm.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, A REPRESENTATIVE
IN CONGRESS FROM TEXAS
The Chairman. Good morning. This hearing of the Committee
on Agriculture entitled, State of the Rural Economy: Secretary
of Agriculture Sonny Perdue, will come to order.
I would ask David Scott to open us with a prayer. David.
Mr. David Scott of Georgia. Sure. We will bow our heads,
please. Dear Heavenly Father, we come before your throne of
grace to first of all say thank you. We thank you for so many
blessings that you bestow upon us; many which we don't even
know. On this occasion, we ask a special blessing on our
agriculture industry, and that your blessings come upon our new
Secretary of Agriculture, Sonny Perdue. Dear Heavenly Father,
finally, we thank you for your Holy Spirit, for oftentimes we
know not what we should pray for as we ought, but your Holy
Spirit intercedes for us with groanings that cannot be uttered.
We thank you for that, and we ask your Holy Spirit to enter
this room today. These and other blessings we ask in your son,
Christ Jesus', name. Amen.
The Chairman. David, thank you.
Mr. Secretary, welcome. You and I have had several
conversations before this morning, but let me officially
congratulate you on becoming our nation's 31st Secretary of
Agriculture. We are excited about working with you and couldn't
be happier with the President's selection of you to be the
current Agriculture Secretary. We are eager to work with you.
We also know you have a great heart and concern for
America's farmers and ranchers. And we know that you have both
the policy and political acumen to get a lot of things done at
the Department. In short, I don't think there is a better man
for the job of Secretary of Agriculture in these challenging
times.
While it took some time to get you confirmed, I want to
commend you for landing on your feet and going full throttle
right from the very start. I greatly appreciate you weighing in
with the Administration on the vital importance of trade to our
nation's farmers and ranchers, particularly regarding NAFTA.
Your work to begin reining in the Waters of the U.S.
regulation, by putting in place a new rule that fully respects
private property rights, federalism, and no fewer than three
Supreme Court rulings, is critical to helping dismantle this
attempted Federal land grab.
Your successful support of the issuance of an Executive
Order by the President to revisit the myriad of regulations
affecting American agriculture could not be more appreciated.
And again, thank you for taking on these other challenges.
Restoring some common sense into the school lunch program,
and putting the brakes on harmful regulations that would
threaten longstanding livestock marketing arrangements and
would force organic producers to comply with overly
prescriptive animal protection welfare practices are also
welcome actions.
As you begin the work of implementing Federal biotech
labeling requirements, I hope that you exercise the same kind
of prudent judgment.
Thank you for your role in helping ensure that the United
States fully enforces its trade laws, including those against
Mexico's illegal dumping of sugar onto the U.S. market. I also
want to underscore the importance of your leadership in working
with USTR to continue building the case against China's
domestic support and TRQ administration for corn, rice and
wheat.
If we are to regain America's confidence in trade, we must
hold our trading partners accountable for their commitments. On
the topic of the importance of trade, you announced this week
that you are embarking on a reorganization of the Department of
Agriculture which would include an Under Secretary focused
solely on trade.
I look forward to hearing more about your ideas on how to
make the Department even more effective in the important work
that it does every day, even as it does so within the confines
of tighter budgets. As we look to the budget, it is important
to point out that our current farm bill is expected to save $23
billion over 10 years, but the most recent CBO projections show
that the 2014 Farm Bill is actually now targeted to reduce
spending by some $104 billion, nearly four times the level
anticipated.
This is an achievement made possible by the hard work and
determination of the Members of this Committee and our
counterparts in the Senate. Mr. Secretary, I hope and trust
that you will make sure the President knows about this as he
makes tough choices on the allocation of scarce budget
resources.
As you know, America's farmers and ranchers have seen their
net incomes cut in half over the last 4 years. Times are
difficult on the farms and ranches across this country these
days. And, if those who are paid to make forecasts about these
things are correct, economic times in the farm and ranch
industry will not be any better over the next several crop
years.
It is my experience in farm and ranch country that a bad
farm economy can adversely impact the entire economy, while a
good farm economy can boost the nation's economy and job
creation. It is also my experience that strong U.S. farm policy
not only sees our farmers and ranchers through hard times, but
it mitigates the adverse impacts on the national economy and
jobs.
Thus far, we have had a safety net in place that is largely
working as intended, with the exceptions of cotton and dairy.
America's cotton farmers, and the entire industry, have rallied
around a way to mend their safety net to make it more effective
in mitigating the effects of China's and India's predatory
trade practices.
We believe that you have the legal authority to effectuate
this policy, and I would urge you with the utmost urgency to
exercise that authority. As you know, Congress would have done
this a couple of weeks ago but for the recklessness of a couple
of folks in the other chamber. It didn't happen, and we will
continue to state that over and over. It was reckless and
inappropriate.
And while the dairy industry continues working on a unified
approach to mending its safety net, I believe that there is
ample authority for you to help them as well, as did your
predecessor. If we can thread these two needles, we will be in
a much better position to deliver on the President's promise of
a strong farm bill passed on time.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Conaway follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. K. Michael Conaway, a Representative in
Congress from Texas
Mr. Secretary, welcome to you, sir.
We have visited many times before--including prior to your taking
office--but allow me to officially declare this Committee's sincere
congratulations on becoming our nation's 31st Secretary of Agriculture.
We are eager to work with you and are certain you will uphold the
office with the utmost respect and concern for rural America's
interests.
We also know you have a great heart and concern for America's
farmers and ranchers. And, we know that you have both the policy and
political acumen to get things done.
In short, I don't think that there is a better man for the job of
Secretary of Agriculture in these challenging times.
Mr. Secretary, while it took some time to get you confirmed, I want
to commend you for landing on your feet and going full throttle from
the second you took office.
I greatly appreciate you weighing in with the Administration on the
vital importance of trade to our nation's farmers and ranchers,
particularly regarding NAFTA.
Your work to begin reining in the Waters of the U.S. regulation and
put in place a new rule that fully respects private property rights,
federalism, and no fewer than three U.S. Supreme Court rulings is
critical to helping dismantle this attempted Federal land grab.
And your successful support for the issuance of an Executive Order
by the President to revisit the myriad of regulations affecting
American agriculture could not come soon enough.
Whether it is Department of Labor regulations that frustrate the
goal of a functional guest worker program or the onslaught of EPA
regulations that number too many to be mentioned by name, you have a
big lift in front of you.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for taking on this challenge.
Restoring some common sense into the school lunch program and
putting the brakes on harmful regulations that would threaten
longstanding livestock marketing arrangements and would force organic
producers to comply with overly prescriptive animal welfare practices
are also very welcome actions.
As you begin the work of implementing Federal biotech labeling
requirements I hope that you exercise the same kind of prudent
judgment.
Thank you for your role in helping ensure that the United States
fully enforces its trade laws, including against Mexico's illegal
dumping of sugar onto the U.S. market. I also want to underscore the
importance in your leadership in working with USTR to continue building
the case against China's domestic support and TRQ administration for
corn, rice and wheat.
If we are to regain America's confidence in trade, we must hold our
trading partners accountable for their commitments.
On the topic of the importance of trade, you announced this week
that you are embarking on a reorganization of the Department of
Agriculture which would include an Under Secretary focused solely on
trade.
I look forward to hearing more about your ideas on how to make the
Department even more effective in the important work that it does every
day, even as it does so within the confines of tighter budgets.
As we look to the budget, it is important to point out that the
current farm bill was expected to save $23 billion over 10 years, but
the most recent Congressional Budget Office projections show that the
2014 Farm Bill is now on target to save $104 billion--more than four
times what was anticipated.
That is an achievement made possible by the hard work and
determination of the Members of this Committee and our counterparts in
the Senate. Mr. Secretary, I hope and trust that you will make sure the
President knows about this as he makes the tough choices on the
allocation of scarce budget resources.
As you know, America's farmers and ranchers have seen their net
incomes cut in half in just 4 years.
Times are very, very difficult on the farm and ranch these days.
And, if those who are paid to make forecasts about these things are
correct, economic times in farm and ranch country will get worse before
they get better.
It is my experience as a CPA in farm and ranch country that a bad
farm economy can adversely impact the entire economy, while a good farm
economy can boost the national economy and job creation.
It is also my experience that strong U.S. farm policy not only sees
our farmers and ranchers through hard times, but it mitigates the
adverse impacts on the national economy and jobs.
Thus far, we have a safety net in place that is largely working as
intended, with two exceptions: cotton and dairy.
America's cotton farmers--and the entire industry--have rallied
around a way to mend their safety net to make it more effective in
mitigating the effects of China's and India's predatory trading
practices.
You have the legal authority to effectuate this policy and I would
urge you with the utmost urgency to exercise your authority.
As you know, Congress would have done this a couple of weeks ago
but for the recklessness of a couple of folks in the other chamber.
And, while the dairy industry continues working on a unified
approach to mending its safety net, I believe that there is ample
authority for you to help when needed just as your predecessor did.
If we can thread these two needles, we will be in a much better
position to deliver on the President's promise of a strong farm bill
passed on time.
With that, I recognize my friend, the Ranking Member, for any
opening remarks that he may have.
The Chairman. And with that, I recognize my friend and
Ranking Member for any comments that he has.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. COLLIN C. PETERSON, A REPRESENTATIVE
IN CONGRESS FROM MINNESOTA
Mr. Peterson. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I am very
pleased to welcome Secretary Perdue to the Agriculture
Committee. It took a while for you to get here but it is nice
to see you have hit the ground running, and now that you are at
USDA, I think I speak for all of us, when I say that we are
ready to work with you.
The Administration has been in need of someone who
understands farm programs and their impact on rural America.
Hopefully, now that you are there, you will get them to
reconsider some of the proposed $4.7 billion in cuts to USDA
that were outlined in the March budget. I know you weren't part
of that, and I just don't think that anyone in the White House
really understood what these cuts would mean to rural America.
This hearing is focused on the rural economy, and as you
are well aware, and everybody is, the rural economy, is
trending downward. We had a pretty good year last year;
relatively high yields that kept things afloat, in spite of the
fact that the prices aren't what they should be, but I worry
that we could find ourselves in real trouble if we have an
ordinary year or somewhat of a down year this summer.
This is why it is so important that the farm bill safety
net be set right, so I will be looking forward to your thoughts
on what you think needs to be done in the next farm bill, and
what your role and what you anticipate the role of the
Administration is going to be in that process.
The farm bill is just one of the many topics I expect us to
cover today. I know our Members are looking forward to hearing
from the Secretary, so with that, Mr. Chairman, I will yield
back.
The Chairman. I thank the gentleman.
The chair would request that other Members submit their
opening statements for the record so our witness may begin his
testimony, and to ensure there is ample time for questions.
With that, I would like to welcome to our witness table the
Honorable Sonny Perdue, Secretary of the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, here in Washington, D.C. Mr. Secretary, the floor
is yours.
STATEMENT OF HON. SONNY PERDUE, SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE, WASHINGTON, D.C.
Secretary Perdue. Well, thank you, Chairman Conaway, and
thank you, Ranking Member Peterson. It is a delight to be with
you this morning. And I look up there on the podium and see my
good friend, Mr. Scott, who kindly showed up at my confirmation
hearings, if you all are not familiar with that, but thank you
again, David, for those very kind remarks there. And I see some
other Georgia homeboys here with you today as well.
But my staff was a little concerned, since this was our
first date and I hadn't got a chance to meet all of you, that
they had about 15 pages of prepared remarks, but I am going to
not do that to you all. You can read my remarks in the written
record, but I just really want to share a few things with you.
You have indicated correctly that 2017-2018 is a very
different economic situation for our farm community and our
rural communities across this land than it was when the 2014
Farm Bill was promulgated. We have some challenges ahead, our
budget situations are challenging, but together we can weather
that.
I am excited about being in the Department. What I have
found is a cadre of hardworking, dedicated career people over
there, not ideological, but they are passionate about American
agriculture, how we can make it better. My goal, and I have
stated internally and externally, is to make you as the
Committee on Agriculture here in the House proud of the way the
USDA is run. My goal is to make it the most effective, most
efficient, the best-managed, the best value agency in the
United States Government.
We had an opportunity in Georgia to do some of that. We
have begun already in looking at that, and I know some of your
questions will want to hear about my ideas for reorg, or I
really call it realignment today. I look forward to hearing
those and answering those. But the challenges we face now, you
know that our farm economy is down about 50 percent, a drop in
net income from where it was in 2013, as you all were looking
and contemplating the 2014 Farm Bill. We have several members,
particularly younger farmers, have leveraged-up in this
situation where the revenue is not supporting their debt
structure, and they are in some dire straits that way. The
safety net that you all referred to, has worked very well, that
you said, without maybe a couple of situations that we can
improve on, has been a safety net. Our crop insurance combined
with the ARC and PLC programs have worked very well generally.
But we are in some dire straits out there. And the government
payments totaled almost $13 billion in 2016, and based on those
great yields that Ranking Member Peterson talked about, that we
can't continue to depend on, it is going to be less than that
in 2017.
The crop insurance, again, has been a good support. But the
other thing is Rural Development has been a wonderful program
area. What I have learned about USDA; how vast, how broad, how
helpful it can be in rural America overall. That is why I was
glad to see and glad to participate with the President in his
signing of the Executive Order, of interagency cooperation,
determining what are those barriers to American agriculture and
how can we eliminate those and mitigate those for the
prosperity of rural America. It is not just the producers. You
know if farms aren't doing well in our rural communities, those
rural communities don't do well. We are looking at how we can
help those thrive as well. And I look forward to explaining my
vision for Rural Development with your questions.
You also know that USDA provided approximately 243,000
loans of $35.2 billion to farmers and ranchers. That led to a
full utilization of the program level for Fiscal Year 2016, and
with record loan levels at $6.3 billion. Those are the kind of
things that we think will help the safety net out here. And I
look forward to engaging with you personally here today, but
also in your offices and your phone calls about the issues that
pertain to your constituents in the ag community, so together
we can resolve their concerns, their fears, their anxieties
over where the future of agriculture goes, and address those in
a way that makes sense for our shareholders, the taxpayers, and
the United States of America.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Secretary Perdue follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Sonny Perdue, Secretary, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
Good morning, Chairman Conaway, Ranking Member Peterson, and
distinguished Members of the Committee. It is an honor to be with you
today as the nation's 31st Secretary of Agriculture. I am truly humbled
by the opportunity to serve the American people and our farmers, and I
assure you I will work tirelessly on their behalf. I thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today, and I look forward to working
with you in the coming months and years as we can continue our nation's
agricultural preeminence, building the innovative progress of years
gone by and growing to meet the needs and demands of customers and
consumers here in America and around the world.
Given that this is my first time appearing before your Committee,
I'd like to take a moment to share a little of my background with you.
I have lived a blessed life, growing up in rural Georgia on a dairy and
diversified row crop farm. Early on, I decided I wanted to become a
veterinarian, so, after high school, I enrolled at the University of
Georgia. As I entered Veterinary school in 1967, Viet Nam was roiling,
so I signed up for an early commissioning program in the U.S. Air
Force. As I finished my veterinary education in 1971, I began active
duty service in Columbus, Ohio as a base veterinarian with primary
responsibilities in food safety, public health, and sanitation.
Following completion of my active duty commitment, I joined a small
veterinary practice in Raleigh, North Carolina. But I soon realized
that I missed the farm and my former agricultural way of life. In 1976,
my wife Mary and I and our two small girls moved back home where I
partnered with my brother-in-law to build a grain elevator in my home
county, which didn't yet have one. I've been in agribusiness since 1977
and was the founder and operator of three agribusiness and
transportation firms serving farmers across the Southeastern United
States. Farming and farmers have been my life ever since.
While I hadn't dreamed of elected politics growing up, I did
understand that we all have civic rent, so I agreed to chair our local
planning and zoning commission. After 10 years, a State Senate seat
opened up and I was asked to run for the seat. I initially declined but
a pre-planned family trip to Williamsburg, Virginia changed my mind
after observing the founder's goals of citizen engagement.
In 1990, the people of District 18 elected me to serve as a Member
of the Georgia State Senate. I served for 11 years and during my tenure
was elected by my colleagues to be Senate President Pro Tem. You've
probably heard, and it's interesting to note, that I served both as a
Democrat and as a Republican while in the Georgia State Senate.
In 2002, I was elected the first Republican Governor of Georgia in
more than 130 years. I assumed that office, believing that it was a big
job, not a position. Our team worked diligently for 8 years, striving
to make Georgia the best managed state in the nation. As you remember,
the period from 2003 to 2011, were not the best economic times for our
nation. But, we learned, with the help of a joyful state workforce,
that we could continue to provide value to the citizens of Georgia,
even in times of extreme budget pressures.
Even though Georgia may not compare to some of your states in some
agricultural sectors, I am still proud to come from a state whose
number one economic driver is agriculture. In Georgia, agriculture is
one area where Democrats and Republicans consistently reached across
the aisle and worked together, and I look forward to doing the same
with this Committee.
Gauging the State of the U.S. Agricultural Economy
You asked me to provide an update today on the state of our
agricultural economy. While I believe the farm safety net is working,
we are seeing and hearing from producers that they believe it needs
updates to meet the needs of the farm economy. Over the past 3 years, a
strong dollar, generally weak global economic growth, and ample global
production have combined to lower trade demand from the United States
and to depress many commodity prices. As a result, we have seen a 50
percent drop in net farm income from the all-time record highs farmers
experienced in 2013. This has squeezed some of our farmers and others
who also contribute to the ag economy, and we are seeing it across the
countryside in a broad range of areas from input dealers to food
manufacturers.
According to our USDA economists, net farm income this year
accounting for inflation will be the lowest since 2002. Of course
farming is a cyclical business, and previous good times have helped
some producers weather the current downturn in agricultural commodity
prices and income. However, without the record levels of crop and
livestock production we have seen over the past few years, farms would
be in a much worse situation today. And we know that we can't always
count on a bumper crop to pay off loans and to buy inputs for next
season. Looking at the flood, fire, and snow conditions we've already
seen this spring reminds us of that.
It is clear that more and more producers are increasingly exposed
to financial risk: bank credit is tightening, delinquency rates on both
commercial and FSA loans, while still at relatively low levels, have
been trending upwards since 2014, and land values are falling in many
agricultural regions. All are contributing to increased uncertainty and
concern in rural America. As you could expect, those producers with
high costs of production, who rent a significant portion of their land
base, or who have increased borrowing to cover operating costs have
been most at risk as returns decline with commodity prices. About one-
in-five cotton, wheat, hog, and poultry farms have a debt-to-asset
ratio of more than 40 percent and more than one-in-three of our
youngest farmers are in a highly leveraged position.
Nevertheless, even as falling global commodity prices continue to
depress farm income, the current farm safety net that was created
during the last farm bill is providing support for producers. Roughly
1.8 million farms are enrolled in the Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC)
and Price Loss Coverage (PLC) programs, which are helping cushion the
downturn in some commodity prices. To date, the ARC and PLC programs
have provided $5.3 billion in financial assistance for crop year 2014
to one million farms and $7.8 billion to 1.7 million farms for crop
year 2015, which was paid out to producers last fall. Overall, in
calendar year 2016, government farm payments totaled about $13.0
billion in 2016 and are expected to total $12.5 billion in 2017. On top
of that, the crop insurance program offset roughly $6.3 billion in farm
losses in crop year 2015 and is expected to cover $3.6 billion in 2016.
Yet, not all programs are functioning as producers hoped they
would. For example, over 25,000 U.S. dairy farms--more than \1/2\--have
enrolled in the Margin Protection Program for Dairy (MPP-Dairy), which
provides payments if the margin between milk prices and feed costs
falls below the coverage level selected by the producer. While many
dairy producers saw milk prices fall below their overall costs of
production, the margin between dairy prices and feed costs remained for
the most part above the levels supported by the program. Many producers
said the feed ration used in the MPP program was not representative of
the rations they fed their cows. As a result, most dairy producers have
been paying to participate in this program meant to insure them against
tightening margins without realizing any benefits though their own
margins were being squeezed. This is a critical issue for our dairy
producers.
As another example, cotton was taken out of the title I commodity
programs. Cotton producers were allowed to participate in the ARC or
PLC program on their base acres only by growing another crop. For
cotton plantings, producers were allowed to participate in a new crop
insurance program called the Stacked Income Protection Plan for
Producers of Upland Cotton (STAX). While about 95 percent of cotton
acres are enrolled in other types of crop insurance policies each year,
only 25-30 percent of cotton acres have been covered by STAX since it
began in 2015. Many cotton producers have found faults in STAX and
assert it is not as beneficial as the assistance provided to other
crops. Both the dairy and cotton examples are the types of issues that
producers hope will be addressed in the next farm bill.
As I mentioned, access to credit remains a significant issue for
producers, particularly as working capital on farm businesses has
fallen nearly seventy percent since 2012. Demand for credit continues
to be strong, particularly for farm operating loans, as farmers cope
with lower commodity prices. As commercial channels become more
difficult for producers, we anticipate that demand for USDA credit
assistance will continue to remain high. Since 2009, USDA has provided
approximately 243,000 loans totaling over $35.2 billion to farmers and
ranchers. The recent increase in demand led to full utilization of the
program level for farm operating loans for Fiscal Year (FY) 2016, with
record loan levels at $6.3 billion. So far in 2017, we've seen a slight
decline of six percent in loan numbers and value over the same period
in 2016, but that is a small decline coming off a record year-demand
for FSA financing is still strong.
Looking forward to the next farm bill, I hope we can work closely
with you to identify ways to make USDA programs work better for
America's farmers and ranchers. However, we have to be sure to make
those programs work as a safety net that helps farmers in tough times.
We don't want to see programs that encourage production choices simply
to increase government payments to the farm; rather we want our
producers to be responding to the market when they are deciding on what
to plant for the coming year. In addition, I believe it is imperative
to improve the tools the Department has to address pressing and
difficult situations faced by our producers, and to react quickly and
provide additional assistance if current market conditions persist or
worsen. The authority of the Secretary has been limited by
Congressional action when it comes to using CCC funding, Section 32,
and other authorities to provide relief, while at the same time our
farmers, ranchers, and constituents are asking USDA to help. I'm not
suggesting that USDA would take action in every instance where a
commodity sector or group of producers is hurting--we certainly must be
mindful of fiscal challenges--but it would be helpful for the Secretary
to have authority to evaluate the needs of U.S. agriculture and use
these tools when appropriate. As another example, while not in this
Committee's jurisdiction, USDA's annual appropriations is so
prescriptive that it is rivaled only by the Department of Defense. For
instance, I recently learned that there is language in our
appropriations act that requires the Farm Service Agency to notify
Congress of relocating any county based employee if the relocation
would result in an office that has two or fewer employees. Even if an
employee in an office of three wants to leave for a voluntary
promotion, the agency could not relocate that person until Congress is
notified. This kind of limiting language is what challenges USDA's
ability to be a more nimble and effective organization.
Finding Opportunities, Making Progress
As I've laid out, we have a farm economy that is facing increasing
financial challenges and is not going in the direction we think it
should or know it can. Like you, we want to do the best for our
producers and provide critical tools and resources to help them
succeed. To that end, this segues into the first of four goals I have
set for my time as Secretary. First, I will maximize the ability of the
men and women of America's agriculture and agribusiness sector to
create jobs, to produce and sell the foods and fiber that feed and
clothe the world, and to reap the earned reward of their labor. We want
to remove obstacles, and give them every opportunity to prosper.
Today, we need to feed some seven billion people. By the year 2050,
that population will swell to 9.5 billion, over \1/2\ of which will be
living in under-developed conditions. Also, the demographics of that
population will change over time. If we examine the data available, we
can see that our global population is aging, and by the year 2050, more
of the population will be older than 65 than younger than 5 years of
age. What this means is that as we move forward, the dietary demands of
the global population are going to change. We are also going to see
stronger middle classes in developing countries that will join the
already strong middle classes in the developed world. This means that
the demand for meat will grow exponentially as will the demand for
grain production. To put the demand for food into perspective, we are
going to have to double our production between now and 2050. We will
have to produce more food in the next 30 years than has been produced
in the last 8,000 years--a daunting task, to say the least. Rest
assured it is a task that USDA is ready to take on.
That being said, we cannot feed the world if we continue to place
obstacle after obstacle in front of those who produce our food and
fiber. People in agriculture used to fear disease and drought as the
greatest threats to their livelihoods and their mission of feeding
their neighbors and the world. Those hazards remain, but now too often
it is the government--through interference and regulation--that poses
the most existential threat to American farmers and producers. We aim
to put a stop to that. As you may know, the President recently
announced the creation of the Interagency Task Force on Agriculture and
Rural Prosperity. With USDA as chair, we will examine, consider and
take actions to address current barriers to economic prosperity and the
welfare of communities in rural America, including how innovation and
modern technology and infrastructure play a critical role in fully
bringing communities into the 21st century. This multi-department group
will find ways to improve regulatory flexibility and provide relief for
farms and small businesses. We will examine how the Federal Government
does business and how that impacts rural communities, and food and
fiber production. And we will, at every turn, ensure that decisions and
actions are founded in principles of sound science and validated facts.
The questions we are asking at USDA, and that I will be asking the task
force, are fundamental to this process: How do we impact jobs and job
creation; are we doing things that make sense; do the costs outweigh
the benefits; and, is there better way or better place we can do it?.
We have a lot to tackle. It is long overdue and must and will be done.
Another key issue that I hear about is the continued instability in
the agricultural workforce. This instability often limits not only
farmer's ability to grow their businesses but also consumers' access to
freshly grown, local products. It is my priority to ensure farmers and
ranchers have access to a legal and stable workforce and I look forward
to working with the President, Congress, and with the other
stakeholders to find a solution.
We must also work with our producers to expand foreign markets to
sell their products. Ninety-five percent of the world's consumers live
outside of our borders. That means our trade agreements open a world of
opportunities for American businesses. In FY 2016, American
agricultural producers achieved $129.7 billion in exports, and FY 2017
exports are projected to reach $136 billion. Agricultural exports
totaled over $1 trillion for the period FY 2009 through FY 2016, the
best 8 year stretch in history, and agriculture has produced a trade
surplus each year since the 1960s. Agricultural exports support more
than one million American jobs both on and off the farm each year, a
significant part of the estimated 11.5 million jobs supported by total
exports all across the country. Agricultural exports support farm
income, which translates into more economic activity in rural areas.
Each dollar of agricultural exports is estimated to stimulate another
$1.27 in business activity.
However, the slowing global economy and appreciating dollar have
put unprecedented competition on U.S. farmers. Many countries do not
respect fair trading rules that have already been agreed to as part of
previous agreements and many others insist on enforcing trade barriers
to our products that are not based on sound science. I assure you that
USDA will use all the instruments available to us to ensure our
agricultural producers and products get fair treatment in foreign
markets. For example, we are challenging China's trade and support
measures affecting our grain exports, and we are actively engaged in
addressing the discriminatory and unfair dairy policies that Canada
recently implemented. This Administration will not stand idly by as
other countries try to take advantage.
In addition, just last week, I directed a reorganization of USDA to
focus our attention keenly on agricultural trade, consistent with
direction from the 2014 Farm Bill. The Under Secretary for Trade and
Foreign Agricultural Affairs will be responsible for coordinating
agency efforts at opening new and protecting current markets. I believe
your Committees had great forethought in including this provision in
the farm bill, and this will strengthen USDA's ability to ensure a
level playing field for U.S. farmers and ranchers in the global
marketplace. Moreover, the Under Secretary for Trade will bring new
energy and support to our interagency relationships with Commerce and
the U.S. Trade Representative.
As part of that reorganization, and touching on the equally
important priority of customer service, we are combining the critical
functions in our Farm Service Agency, Risk Management Agency, and
Natural Resources Conservation Service under a single umbrella to
ensure our services to farmers and ranchers are efficient, streamlined,
and deliver the results that our producers expect and need. Our
customers will have a one stop shop, with common leadership and one
voice, to provide the services they need. The walls are coming down,
and our employees will be empowered to work together to serve USDA's
customers. I am also elevating our Rural Development program to report
directly to my office. The economic vitality of small towns across
America is crucial to the future of the agriculture economy, and we
will be leveraging USDA's expertise in rural development as the
Administration works to increase investments in America's
infrastructure.
Through these and other actions, USDA will prioritize customer
service every day, across the mission areas. Our customers expect, and
have every right to demand, that we conduct the people's business
efficiently, effectively, and with the utmost integrity. Arguably, no
other Federal agency has more direct interface with Americans than does
the Department of Agriculture. In food and nutrition services alone, we
interface with over 50 million Americans every year. This does not even
count the children who benefit from school, summer, and child care
nutrition programs. We touch millions of Americans through a host of
other programs, as well. If we take into account our farm services,
rural development, conservation, extension and education programs, we
touch every single facet of American life. If we are to do the best for
our producers and feed the world by 2050, we must not only continue to
provide top rate customer service, but we must also develop strong
partnerships so that we can face our challenges together. Together with
our 100,000+ employees spread across thousands of locations around the
United States and the globe, I know we can make USDA the best agency in
the country.
Next, since our taxpayers are also consumers, we know they expect a
safe and secure food supply, and USDA is committed to continue to serve
in the critical role of ensuring the food we put on the table to feed
our families meets the strict safety standards we've established. By
having the best science and data, we will be able to make strong
strategic decisions that will transcend generations, not just the next
budget cycle or farm bill.
And, last but certainly not least, we must preserve the land--and
we must relentlessly pursue clean air and water. Stewardship is not
optional for farmers, producers and ranchers. American agricultural
bounty comes directly from the all the resources used to produce food
and fiber. Today, that land and those resources sustain more than 320
million Americans and countless millions more around the globe. My
father's words still ring in my ears, ``Son, if you take care of the
land, it will take care of you. Owned or rented, we're all stewards,
and our responsibility is to leave it better than we found it.''
Without proper care, our resources could be squandered. Science and
hard work will help us find the best ways to produce our crops, be
mindful of our use of inputs, preserve the soil, keep our air and water
clean, and allow us to live in a better place than we found when we
started. Rather than clearing another acre of land, let's first seek
out ways to produce more with what we already have. If we live by these
principles, we can preserve our wetlands, our watersheds, our forests,
our prairies and our ecosystems for generations to come.
In conclusion, I want to make clear that the U.S. Department of
Agriculture will make sure that our interests are represented in policy
deliberations, that we will advocate for agriculture at every turn,
that we will seek out and open markets for our commodities, that we
will be stewards of our land and that we will meet our moral obligation
to feed a hungry, anxious world. We have a farm safety net that--while
not perfect--is providing assistance to many, but that can be improved
to be more market oriented. And, overall, I am confident in the future
of the rural economy and see opportunities for us to continue to
strengthen this outlook and create opportunities for Rural America in
the future.
I look forward to answering your questions.
The Chairman. Well, Mr. Secretary, thank you very much.
The chair reminds Members they will be recognized for
questioning in order of seniority for Members who were here at
the start of the hearing. After that, Members will be
recognized in the order of arrival, and I appreciate Members'
understanding.
And with that, I recognize myself for 5 minutes.
Mr. Secretary, again, thanks for being here, and we are
looking forward to working with you across the myriad of issues
that we have, going forward. As I mentioned in my opening
comments, I represent a lot of cotton farmers. I believe we had
a very elegant fix to the issue with respect to cotton, to the
STAX program, that didn't work. It should have been in the
omnibus bill, but our colleagues, particularly two of them in
the Senate, refused to see the wisdom of that, and for their
own purposes and own benefit, didn't let that happen. Now we
are left with the same wreck in cotton. I hope I can count on
working with you across whatever tools that we have. Obviously,
we think that cottonseed could go under the title I program,
and although there could be a lot of challenges with making
that happen, we would look forward to working with you either
on that or other issues with respect to getting some help to
offset what China and India have done to the market, that will
allow our producers to compete properly.
I would like to turn now to the Trade Under Secretary that
you have announced. Obviously, as authorizers of the 2014 Farm
Bill, we thank you very much for seeing the wisdom of that. Can
you talk to us a little bit about how you see your Under
Secretary working with the other array of trade entities,
whether it is the USTR, Department of Commerce, whoever that
might be, and the role that that Under Secretary would play,
not only in making sure the negotiations go the correct way,
but also making sure that the Administration keeps a close eye
on enforcement of the various trade things that we have out
there. Could you walk us through your vision of that?
Secretary Perdue. Certainly, I would be happy to, Mr.
Chairman. Before I get into the answer to that question, you
and I have had conversations. I was very pleased that the
National Cotton Council came up with a very innovative and
creative budget-neutral idea over their program, and it is very
disappointing that we were not able to get that done, but we
can look for its resolution in the 2018 Farm Bill as you
indicated.
Certainly, as I went around visiting, I visited with really
\3/4\, 75 of your Members on the other side of the House, and
trade was on all of their minds really because we are fortunate
to live in a nation where we can grow more than we can consume,
and that is the essence of trade; doing what we do well, and
also it is a noble endeavor to feed the world. Our new motto
for USDA is, ``Do right and feed everyone.'' And that is what
we want to do; we want to feed the hungry here in the United
States, but we want to feed the hungry around the world. And
our producers and ranchers have demonstrated a capacity to
share and to do that. That is what trade is all about.
In the 2014 Farm Bill you all recognized that, and
suggested very strongly for an Under Secretary for Trade. I
happen to agree with you. It was not an easy thing to do. There
were several components that had to come together, and we are
working through those details right now. But we felt it was
important because trade was almost number one on everyone's
mind that I spoke with, internally, externally, in the Senate,
and for those of you who commented as well. We have to sell our
way out of this supply/demand situation that are depressing
prices in the U.S. now, and that is what we hope to do.
We have seen some early successes of that, and we will
continue. The fact is, my opinion is that people do business
with people, and I want someone every day that woke up with
that on their mind: where can I go to sell United States
agricultural products around the world, who is hungry, who will
buy, how can we do the deal. Now, our role at USDA is to
provide the expertise, the content, to the Secretary of
Commerce, Secretary Ross, and to our new Trade Representative,
Mr. Lighthizer, in order to be a triumvirate of sales. The
Secretary of Commerce has a broader portfolio than we do at
USDA. But that is the blending of trade; you do what you do
well, and we sell you what we do well.
I have been very impressed with Secretary Ross and his
really sinking his teeth into ag issues and ag products there,
and we are very pleased with the progress that we have made so
far.
We believe the Secretary of Trade will be on everyone's
front door as often as can be. This guy is going to be a
million mile flyer around the world to be there in person,
because we know that foreign interests love to see you in
person. It is an honor for them, for us to come to their
doorstep, and call on them and say here is my card, we want to
do the deal. And that is important. We can do conference calls,
we can do videos, but the presence is important. That person
could not do that when they were also charged with the Farm
Service Agency of having all these multiple offices around the
country dealing with those customer-facing issues every day. I
felt very strongly that the segregation of that; having an
Under Secretary for Trade, was vitally important to get the job
done of selling these bountiful products.
The Chairman. Well, again, thank you, Mr. Secretary, for
being here. I look forward to working with you.
With that, I will recognize the Ranking Member for 5
minutes.
Mr. Peterson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First of all, Mr. Secretary, I want to let you know, and I
think you know this, that I very strongly support the Chairman
and the cotton industry, and finding a fix for them, and so
whatever you can do to help, I will be there to help as well.
The Rural Development issue has caused some consternation
here and there, but I take you at your word that you are going
to continue to make that a priority, you are the Secretary, you
decide how the Department should be run. And the only thing I
would say is we are going to watch to make sure that Rural
Development gets the same kind of emphasis that it always has.
And you have said that, and I expect that will happen.
And another issue that I hope you and Secretary Ross, and I
think you will, keep the Mexicans' feet to the fire on the
sugar issue and try to get that resolved. So far you have been
doing a great job with that.
One of the things that I went through here recently, we had
a High-Path AI outbreak in my district, and the Department did
a great job responding to it, and the state and everybody. I
have had a firsthand look at this, and it is clear that the
time to start a conversation with our trade partners regarding
the use of vaccines to minimize the impact of High-Path AI
doesn't need to happen during the course of the outbreak. It
seems like what we do, but it needs to happen at a different
time. That is when the trade impacts are the most damaging.
Do you think that because of the trade impacts associated
with a decision like the use of vaccines to eradicate a
disease, such as a stamp-out procedure, should begin now rather
than when we get into the next----
Secretary Perdue. It is wise, obviously. Sometimes, I
guess, the saying we have in Georgia, ``When the mule is out
the gate, it is too late to close the gate.'' You don't get
that opportunity after an outbreak has occurred. You all are
wise in considering a vaccine bank, whether it is foot-and-
mouth disease, whether it is High-Path Avian Influenza.
I will comment on the fact that while the 2015 outbreak of
High-Path we were a little slow to respond, both at the state
and probably the Federal level, the outbreak that we have had
in Tennessee and north Alabama this year, I was very, very
impressed with the process there. The biosanitary processes and
protocols that our producers have learned, the depopulation, in
the speed with which USDA moved over the indemnification
issues, and there was no confusion there. To their credit, that
was confined very, very tightly. And that is the best kind of
insurance we can have, although this Committee and Congress is
very wise to consider a foot-and-mouth disease bank, maybe
High-Path AI as well, because of the damage to the market
psychologically. What happens whenever we have any of these
outbreaks, you go back to BSE almost 15 years ago or longer,
that is how long it has taken us to get beef back into some
nations there. It damages the market, not just for that period
of time, but it gives people a loss of confidence in our
reputation of safety in the U.S.
We know that vaccination is effective, and you are wise to
consider those efforts.
Mr. Peterson. Thank you, and you are right that the people
have learned a lot, and we are much better prepared to deal
with this. But would a companion program for animal health
mirroring the Plant Pests and Disease Program, administered by
APHIS, be helpful in your opinion in managing these disease
threats?
Secretary Perdue. Certainly. From a food safety
perspective, from the Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service, the USDA and those sub-agencies are probably second to
none in the world. And that is why the USDA stamp is so
valuable and revered around the world. People trust it and we
want to continue to maintain those high standards in those
areas.
Mr. Peterson. I believe that you have tasked the Farm
Service Agency with looking at a revamp of the CRP program. Did
you give them any specific direction or are you just having
them look at where things are at?
Secretary Perdue. Well, Congressman, I am just beginning
today my fourth week on the job, and while we are waiting for
some of the other people to get into that, as you know, on the
realignment we are talking about the FSA and NRCS and RMA being
collocated and speaking with one voice and one database,
frankly. But, again, the opportunity to deal with those kind of
issues we have not specifically dealt with. I know a topic of
interest and concern to you is CRP, I look forward to visiting
with you again. I have not given specific directions. My
comments about that is we can have some flexibility in the CRP
program, maybe take out some of the least productive areas and
use them rather than the whole-field type of philosophy we have
had with CRP, give a little more flexibility in that way. With
the wildfires we gave some flexibility regarding grazing on
some of these areas as well. We want to be flexible while we
maintain the integrity of the program, and help to train
through FSA and NRCS our farmers to utilize their least
productive acres; those that cost the most, and they may even
have a better, higher net income if we don't try to plant wall-
to-wall.
Mr. Peterson. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
And I yield back.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Lucas, 5 minutes.
Mr. Lucas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And, Mr. Secretary, it
is indeed good to see you.
And you mentioned a moment ago on some of the burning
issues, let's talk about that for a moment. I think most of my
colleagues are aware that in the early part of March this year,
a series of wildfires burned over 1\1/2\ million acres of land
in western Oklahoma, western Kansas, and the Texas Panhandle.
And these fires killed thousands of head of cattle, destroyed
hundreds and hundreds of miles of fence, impacted countless
families, businesses, and it is hard to estimate the impact on
the smaller communities.
On the 4th of April, 2017, USDA authorized emergency
grazing on Conservation Reserve Program lands located in
Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas for 90 days. The flexibility to
graze on CRP was, and is critical to the survival of many
operations throughout my district. And that being said, it will
take longer than 90 days to regrow the foliage, rebuild the
facilities needed to maintain, contain, and care for the
surviving livestock. And last week I, along with Representative
Marshall on this Committee, and Representative Thornberry, sent
you a letter requesting extension of the emergency grazing
authorization past the current 90 day authorization. Would this
extension be something that you would be willing to consider,
Mr. Secretary?
Secretary Perdue. Absolutely. I think it is a reasonable
request. As you know, I didn't get to the burned areas, but my
first trip outside was Kansas City. I heard directly from many
of those affected about that. And that is a reasonable request,
certainly one that we would consider very, very seriously in a
reasonable request effort, because we know that grass doesn't
just necessarily grow right back on those kind of issues.
Mr. Lucas. Absolutely, Mr. Secretary. And I have lived all
my life in northwest Oklahoma, but I have never seen anything
of the magnitude of these fires. Drive for 20 miles and see not
one living creature.
Secretary Perdue. Yes.
Mr. Lucas. It is just the most amazing thing. The potential
for that extension would have a tremendous impact upon my
constituents.
To touch on one other point that my colleagues have talked
about already, in concept, the NRCS, the FSA, and the RMA
coordination could improve by being under a single mission area
of farm production and conservation. And I am particularly
sensitive about these issues because my district was ground
zero in the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl of the 1930s.
And part of why, in the drought of the 1950s, and the drought
that we went through in the early part of this decade, things
were so dramatically different were all of those conservation
efforts properly practiced out there, encouraged by the NRCS
and the predecessors of the Soil Conservation Service. How will
you ensure that that conservation mission will not be
diminished in any way under this new management program, and
that the voluntary incentive-based conservation, which is the
way we have practiced it since the 1930s, will continue to be
the highest priority of the Department?
Secretary Perdue. It is a good question. Mission has no
change at all. Personnel, no change. All we are doing is trying
to bring the family together where we can communicate better to
serving that same customer, whether they are signing up for a
farm program, an ARC, PLC, or EQIP or other things there, to
come in. I view it as an economy of scale issue. If you have
NRCS in one area, and you have FSA, and they have two people in
the office and one of them out, our customers are suffering. If
you have four people there, that is a little bit better economy
of scale to serve people.
We are really talking about the same customers. Now, from a
family perspective, how do we communicate, when farmers and
ranchers walk into those offices I want to say, whoever greets
them, how can we help you today, not, that is not my job. And
that is the purpose of the realignment. We will learn better to
communicate, we will learn better the real needs of the farm
rancher customer that walks in the door, helping to do a farm
plan for them. If they are signing up for one thing and we are
right there, then we can say, well, let's do an NRCS waterway
program that way, and help them be more aware of all the things
NRCS can do.
I agree with you, the technology of better water, cleaner
water, we are making great strides in. Our farm community is
really understanding their stewardship ability, or really
opportunity, better than they ever had. They now understand
they are responsible for that off-flow off their farms, and
they want to do the things. NRCS is critical in enabling them,
teaching them, educating them how to do that.
There will be no change in the mission. We are realigning,
in a closer family atmosphere where we can have a critical mass
to help people better.
Mr. Lucas. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
I yield back.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Scott, 5 minutes.
Mr. David Scott of Georgia. Thank you very much.
Mr. Secretary, all of Georgia is very proud of you, and
this nation will soon find out why. You are a wonderful,
wonderful person, and we are delighted to have you as our
Secretary of Agriculture.
Mr. Secretary, we are faced with a very serious national
crisis, and that national crisis is the expanding age of our
farmers. The average age of our farmers is right at 60 years of
age. And we in this Committee have put together a bill to
address that. It is House Resolution 51. Let me just tell you,
we have been on this mission for over 2 years. It gives us an
opportunity to utilize the 19 1890s African American land-grant
institutions, which you are familiar with. Fort Valley is a
case in Georgia. And you know the whole history of that. We
were able to make sure that we had these land-grants.
You have the University of Florida, you have Florida A&M,
and Prairie View in Texas, and so forth. The Presidents of
these universities have come before this Committee and
addressed this need. We have this bill. It is House Resolution
51. What it does is this. It will allow us to utilize these 19
1890s to address this issue and get our younger generation into
farming, into agriculture. And more than that, agriculture is
new farming, it is far beyond the mule and the plough from
past; agriculture is a very sophisticated, technology-driven,
science-driven engineering. These African American institutions
have curricula applied to address what we refer to as STEM;
science, technology, education, and math, at these.
What we want to do with this bill is to change some
language in the farm bill which would, one, right now these
universities can only spend the money we give them in
education, research, and extension. But we want to change and
add a fourth area that they could spend it in, which would be
student scholarships. We have also set aside and we are working
with the CCC, which is the Commodities Credit Corporation, to
make sure we have the sufficient funds available. We are
offering $1 million for each of the 5 years, for each of the 19
schools. That comes to $95 million. It is something that these
universities who have been there in the fire, and have helped
to find young people a way out of no options. And we have not
exactly been efficient in applying funding, but this would be
the area to do it.
I want you to know that this is a bipartisan bill. We have
Kevin Cramer, from North Dakota, as the sponsor on the
Republican side, myself, several on this Committee; Ms. Fudge,
Mr. Lawson, Ms. Adams, another Republican, Mrs. Mia Love out of
Utah.
So what I want to ask of you, and I know you have been on 4
weeks, we want to make sure, we sent the bill to your staff,
and certainly we want you to really get familiar with it and
help us get this bill through our Committee here where it is
now, onto the floor and to the Senate, and to the White House.
We have been in touch with the White House. We are working with
the Senior Legislative Director there, Marc Short. Marc is very
familiar with it, and our Blue Dog Democratic meeting he and I
talked about it. And President Trump is interested in this type
of effort. And, of course, when you read it, if they haven't
already informed you, the administration of this particular
bill will be through the Department of Agriculture.
So we appreciate you. We can't get it done without your
help here. And so I want to ask you for your support, and to
work with the Committee and help us get this through the House,
through the Senate, and over to President Trump.
Secretary Perdue. Congressman Scott, you have identified
some real challenges. You talked about the age issue, but those
are particularly significant and disadvantage to opportunities
as well.
Mr. David Scott of Georgia. Yes.
Secretary Perdue. You know that I am very, very familiar
with Fort Valley State University, having grown up in the
county next door, and the beneficiary of one of their honorary
doctorates as well. We understand the power of these land-grant
universities here across the country, because our extension
service is directly responsible for the productive capacity of
that. If we can use some scholarship dollars to bring these
young people in who have a desire. Many times they haven't had
the advantage of growing up on a farm. We are seeing this in 4-
H and FFA where young people understand all the science, the
technology, the big business, the problem is the high capital
barrier to enter agriculture.
Mr. David Scott of Georgia. Right.
Secretary Perdue. But if we can train more people with a
passion for agriculture in these institutions, and you have
heard the President affirm his commitment to that with funding,
I would welcome the opportunity to utilize those kind of funds
across the HBCU community and those land-grant facilities where
we can use that for the betterment of agriculture. I applaud
you.
I hate to tell you, your colleague, Mr. Bishop, has already
beat you to the punch on that. He got me the copy of it, I am
familiar with it.
Mr. David Scott of Georgia. No wonder. Great.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Gibbs, 5 minutes.
Mr. Gibbs. I thank the Chairman. And congratulations, Mr.
Secretary, and thank you also for the willingness to take on
this endeavor. It is not an easy task and I want to thank you
for doing that.
I see in your bio, I am from Ohio, that you did spend a
little time in Ohio as a veterinarian during the Vietnam
conflict, and so you got a little taste of the Buckeye State. I
think you were just there in southern Ohio recently.
Secretary Perdue. I did. We were in Cincinnati just
recently and southern Ohio, but I was just south of Columbus at
the Air Force base there and got familiar with a lot of your
farmers out the south gate of that base, and they had some
pretty nice pheasants at that time. I hope they are coming
back.
Mr. Gibbs. Yes, I hope so too. You might not remember, but
about 3 years ago I was asked to make some remarks, it was the
National Council of Farmer Co-ops in Hilton Head, and I
remember this, after I had made my remarks you came up and
introduced yourself and we had a nice little chat. And that is
my only interaction so far I have had with you, and it was a
good memory so I appreciate that.
I want to mention a couple of things: I want to also thank
you for re-evaluating the School Lunch Program, bring some
commonsense to that, and I wish somebody, and maybe it will be
you, not only talk about the nutrition aspects but let's talk
about exercise and activity. School-age kids can burn a lot of
calories, and I don't think they are getting the activity and
exercise like we used to when we were kids. It is good that we
are putting, I guess we only have two percent milk, it is one
percent or skim milk in the schools, and just some common sense
and reasonableness. And I know my dairy producers will
appreciate that in Ohio, we are a big dairy state.
Also I want to thank you too, on the regulatory side the
Waters of the United States, some common sense in there, and
working with Administrator Pruitt and the EPA to go back to the
states, and work on a rule that addresses the Supreme Court
decisions.
Also I want to ask a question, first of all, on the crop
insurance. Do you have any thoughts how we can make crop
insurance better and make it a more essential part of the
safety net program, because as a policymaker, when I talk to
non-farming public, you talk crop insurance the non-farming
public can understand that better. And I would argue in a 10
year budget window, it probably isn't that much cost to the
taxpayers, but it really helps in the years when we have a
disaster, like a widespread drought. But on the revenue side
and the weather side, can you maybe give us your thoughts of
what we could do to make crop insurance even better, and it
would work for the producers' aspect.
Secretary Perdue. I would be happy to, Congressman. Again,
what we see, I agree with you, I think an insurance program for
our producers is a much more palatable safety net program from
the public shareholder perspective than direct payments were. I
thought you all made a lot of progress in 2014 in transitioning
to that area of ARC, PLC, backed up with crop insurance, which
put some responsibility on the producers themselves.
Now, that insurance program is not perfect, we have some
things we need to readjust. There is, on cotton, for instance,
the Chairman is interested in, we have a quality issue that the
quality degradation is not right. We hope to adjust that.
The other thing that your producers may have, if they are
on ARC, may have a county payment in one county, or might farm
in both counties, and it is different and they don't quite
understand those differences either as well. There is some fine
tuning. Overall, the insurance program has been a great
addition. We need to look at more specialty crops, how we can
cover more specialty crops in that area and more. We don't want
to create a program where our producers are farming for the
program, and that happened in the past, and that creates some
unnatural market forces that we don't want to have happen. We
want a true safety net for those who are doing right, and we
don't want people farming for insurance payments either, we
want them farming legitimately. But the insurance ought to be
utilized when there is a true revenue loss to that producer, be
it be price, or be it be production, and how can we design that
program.
You all had a great start, and we will look forward to
working with you all as we go through the 2014 Farm Bill to
make sure that the RMA program is even more effective, going
forward. We know that the STAX program was not as helpful to
the cotton producers as you all would have hoped, and the dairy
program, certainly on some of those issues----
Mr. Gibbs. Yes. Well, I am really concerned about the
dairy. We are running out of time here, but hopefully we can
have time get to questions on trade and especially Asia and
NAFTA.
Secretary Perdue. Sure.
Mr. Gibbs. I have to yield back now.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Costa, 5 minutes.
Mr. Costa. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Again, welcome, Mr. Secretary, and we look forward to
working with you. And you, like myself and many of us here,
reflect generations of farm families, and we obviously welcome
you to this important effort as we look at reauthorizing the
farm bill.
I don't want to repeat what has been discussed already;
Farm Credit, crop insurance, cotton, and dairy, but I would
like to focus on some California issues specifically.
As the number one agricultural state, the diversity and the
breadth and the width, we take great pride in the production in
California, and I know you are aware of it. My California
colleagues and I here on the dais would like to invite you
sooner rather than later to come out to California where we
could have a conversation with our farmers, ranchers, dairymen
and women, and talk about the complexity of California
agriculture.
Speaking of which, we worked very hard in the last farm
bill to provide the opportunity for the California dairy
industry to participate in the Federal Marketing Order. We have
completed the process of the due diligence. USDA is moving on
this Milk Marketing Order. I would like to get your thoughts on
the current timeline, and can we tackle this final rule before
the end of 2017? As you know, the quota issue, if you haven't
been briefed on it, is a key part of whether or not the dairy
producers will provide a \2/3\ vote to join the Federal
Marketing Order.
Secretary Perdue. Certainly, Congressman, I would be happy
to answer as best I can. I will admit to you that even when we
were in the dairy business, I am not sure I ever understood the
Marketing Orders, but I hope to understand it better, going
forward.
Back to your original question about diversity of
agriculture in California. I had the pleasure this past week of
meeting with about 30 of your Western Growers there that
comprised California, Arizona, a little bit of Nevada there.
Mr. Costa. They said you did a good job.
Secretary Perdue. And we talked about that. They were
thrilled to know that while I grew up on a diversified row crop
farm, my father's first love was truck farming; melons and
beans and sweet corn, and those kinds of things. We kind of got
out in a brotherhood bond there with those guys. But the Milk
Marketing Order, you have a very significant dairy industry in
California, and the Marketing Order is important for stability
and predictability in the milk prices. As I understand it, we
just completed the first step in that on the 15th of May here,
releasing that, and I will commit to you that we will complete
that Marketing Order by the end of the year.
Mr. Costa. All right, let me move on because we don't get a
lot of time here. Obviously, this is a conversation to be
continued.
Trade, obviously, is very important. I was disappointed
when the President withdrew from all the work that had been
done on the TPP. Nonetheless, there were a lot of elements in
there that applied to both Mexico and Canada, and I want to
applaud your efforts to taking that map. I would like to see
that map that you took to the President and talked about the
importance of our trading partners, both in Mexico and Canada.
Do you believe that some of the elements that were
contained in the TPP can be the basis of moving forward, as
Secretary Ross and yourself and the trade ambassador do what
the President has requested, and that is to renegotiate NAFTA?
Secretary Perdue. Absolutely. Again, many of the principles
that were included in that, and actually in tandem with the
renegotiation of NAFTA, you might see sort of a trilateral TPP.
I am just suggesting that, but many of the principles that you
all had in these negotiations are still viable, it is just a
matter of fine-tuning those in a way that makes sense, I don't
think this Administration is not against free trade at all, it
really is more concerned to fair trade.
Mr. Costa. Well, and to that point, it works both ways. I
mean we, in 2010, dealt with the Mexican trucking issue, and
last year with the Country-of-Origin Labeling. If we play that
game, they can play that game with reciprocity, and then it
becomes a real problem, and we need to understand that. We
stand ready to work with you on that.
And then finally, agricultural labor is a big issue, and I
know that Western Growers brought that to your attention. It is
something we are going to have to continue to fix the broken
immigration system in this country, and we would look forward
to your support and efforts along those lines.
Secretary Perdue. Absolutely. Again, I want to define my
definition of fair trade. You don't have trade unless it is
fair for all those involved.
Mr. Costa. Right.
Secretary Perdue. And we understand that. That is the
essence of trade, actually. They have some pretty good
negotiators on the other side as well, so I don't think you
have to be too concerned about us taking advantage of anyone.
Mr. Costa. No, it is just a two-way street, that is all.
Secretary Perdue. Right. On the labor issue, it was trade,
labor, and regulation as I heard over and over again; and
critically important is agricultural labor. I had an
opportunity to converse with the President on that. He
understands the contribution that many immigrants are making to
the ag economy, and we are going to help to provide a way
forward for our producers in that area.
Mr. Costa. Thank you.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. King, 5 minutes.
Mr. King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And, Mr. Secretary, I very much appreciate you being here.
Secretary Perdue. Yes.
Mr. King. I want to start out with a retraction of a
statement that I made when I first heard of your name coming
forward as Secretary of Agriculture, and I will say I thought
it was candidly, but I said I hope it is more than about
peaches and peanuts. And you came to Iowa 11 days after
confirmation, and it was absolutely clear it is much, much more
than about peaches and peanuts. And I was gratified to hear
many of the things that you had to say there in the heart of my
district. And I just wrote down a few of them here from memory.
There will be a lot of colloquialisms that will come from our
new Secretary of Agriculture, and it adds a lot of flavor to
our rural life. For example, I am speaking of the trade that
you grow it, we will sell it. I like that bumper sticker, and I
have every confidence that will be the policy coming out of the
USDA.
And now, one of the other things you said is an oath is
stronger even than a contract. That stuck in my mind as the
piece of wisdom that a lot of us can apply to our job here
every single day. And let's see, the equipment might be a
little different but the people are the same. That is another
thing that is true all across this country, and it is something
we can keep in mind here in this Agriculture Committee. And I
will leave out the full story about the cow's tail, but that
made it all real, Mr. Secretary.
So I wanted to welcome you to this Agriculture Committee,
and I look forward to many discussions that we will have in the
future years, and they will be very productive.
One of the things on my mind though as far as an issue is
concerned is the fear of foot-and-mouth disease, and it is some
of the things that we have been working on for I would say a
year and a half or 2 years now in my district and beyond. That
is the worst calamity we can imagine as far as biosecurity
situation is concerned. I have been doing some work there
through Iowa State, and the request that I see across the
industry is for a vaccine bank that starts out at about $150
million, and then sells off some of that vaccine and keeps
always a fresh supply there. We have another way to go where we
can genetically design a vaccine that is going to be cheaper
and can be reproduced more quickly.
You went up the road to APHIS and I wasn't able to tag
along on that stop, but I wondered if you had any fresh
thoughts on FMD and what you might be able to tell this
Committee on how you would approach our preparations for
potential calamity.
Secretary Perdue. Well, as a veterinarian, I obviously
understand the benefit of vaccination, and the fact that we
cannot psychologically afford even a foot-and-mouth disease
scare here at all. We saw what BSE did to us, and we talked
about that earlier, but I want to compliment you on how well
you listened in Iowa. I was delighted to be in your district,
and to move up from the cows on the farm, a very innovative
family farm operation there, up to the APHIS Ames facility. I
was very impressed. We talked specifically about vaccine banks
there. They are a repository, along with Iowa State, a USDA
facility responsible for vaccination protocols as well. I am
hopeful, I look at vaccine banks as insurance, and you can't
have your house burn down and take out insurance after the fact
and have it pay off. You have to have vaccines and you have to
have a vaccine availability ahead of the time. I look at it as
a wise insurance program.
Mr. King. And I know there have been some estimates out
there on what kind of a cost it might be if we have an outbreak
of FMD, but do you have a sense of that? And I don't want to
hold you to that on oath because those things are kind of
amorphous, but could you give us a sense of the scope that your
perception is?
Secretary Perdue. I don't have any numbers right there, but
it would be the antithesis of priceless.
Mr. King. Yes, I will go with that.
Let me shift subjects just a little bit, there has been a
little discussion here on crop insurance, and I want the record
to show that I absolutely support crop insurance. It is the
essential component for risk management. And if we don't have
crop insurance, we lose perhaps generations, especially young
farmers. And so it is essential to keep our family farms on the
farm, the ones we have left.
I will just ask the question this way. Would it be your
belief that the unsubsidized premium for crop insurance should
reflect the risk?
Secretary Perdue. Again, any valid insurance program,
whether it is crop insurance or any other insurance program,
has to reflect the reality of risk there. That is what
insurance is all about. As I said, as we continue to perfect
the insurance program, because I agree with you, and as you
well know, credit in these economic times is getting more
tight, lenders are requiring an insurance product, maybe
forward contracting as well, so that the producers can
demonstrate repayment ability. And as we go through there, yes,
I agree that it ought to be commensurate with risk. That is a
tough issue, how do we do that individually, or by county or by
region, in a way to do that. That is why reporting is so
important for our farmers. The Census is so important for our
farmers and producers to make sure we have accurate data that
we can make good, wise actuarial decisions on.
Mr. King. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
Ms. Fudge, 5 minutes.
Ms. Fudge. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And thank
you, Mr. Secretary.
Mr. Secretary, it was really good to hear you talk about
feeding the world. That is very different from the President's
budget which has cut almost every single feeding program, or
zeroed them out. I am hopeful that you will win.
I am as well concerned, as my Ranking Member, about Rural
Development. It is indicated in the reorganization plan that
there would no longer be an Under Secretary; it was going to be
elevated in some way. I am not sure how that is, except because
the Under Secretary reports to you now, so I am not sure what
that change is really going to be. But I am concerned, and
certainly we will see how it goes as we move forward because, I
tell you, you have been really busy in 4 short weeks. This is a
major reorganization. I am just going to be watching, as is the
rest of the Committee, to see how we progress with that.
Mr. Lucas raised the issue of NRCS, which I am also
concerned about. And my first question to you is should we, in
the future, look forward to seeing any kind of mergers within
the agency or plans to close any of our NRCS offices? And my
second question relates to the Office of Advocacy and Outreach,
which Congress put in place so that there would be an advocate
on behalf of small, beginning, and minority farmers. Last year,
the USDA elevated that office to report directly to the
Secretary, to you, sir. Your proposed plan now drops it back
down to reporting to the Assistant Secretary for Departmental
Administration. I just want to know what your thinking was on
that.
Secretary Perdue. Okay. Those are three important issues,
and I would be happy to address all of them, if you don't mind.
Again, from an RD perspective, I welcome the accountability. I
am an outcome kind of guy. As I understand the current
organizational chart, the Under Secretaries report to the
Deputy Secretary, and I view the RD portion of this,
particularly in limited resources, possibly with an
infrastructure program from the Administration and you all. I
am not a micromanager but I am a hands-on manager, and this is
an area that Secretary Vilsack and I had wonderful
conversations about how the potential of USDA has been used
across the country in rural communities, both in water systems,
both in utilities, and both in community facilities. This is
something I guess I jealously wanted to be a part of. When I
say elevated, I mean elevated to a portion where that person is
going to be sitting close to me, with walk-in privileges over,
this is a great opportunity, this is the deal, what do you
think about, how can we do better to do that.
I welcome your oversight in the RD portion. The mission is
not going to diminish whatsoever. The distribution network that
has been developed out here with great people all over the
country is not going to be diminished at all. The people in RD
are going to report to this Assistant Secretary, who will have
direct access to the Secretary, and I consider that an
elevation. You can think about it as a nomenclature, but there
was in no way a diminishment. If you gave me the opportunity in
a corporation to have direct access to the CEO on walk-in
privileges over ideas versus a title of a VP, give me that
direct access anytime. That is the influence, that is the
power, the access. That is the way I view the RD, and I look
forward to your accountability in that.
NRCS' mission is not going to change, people aren't going
to change. Maybe some locations might change from an economy of
scale perspective, as I explained earlier. If we have disparate
people and maybe two per office in different places, and we can
combine there to have an economy of scale that makes a
difference of service to our customers, we may consider doing
that. In fact, there are actually preclusions about closing any
places. If there is any combination of bringing the family into
one house rather than being scattered out in a compound, then
we look to have better service in that way.
Third, the advocacy and Secretary Vilsack had made a lot of
progress in that. I don't see that diminishing whatsoever.
Ms. Fudge. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
The Chairman. The gentlelady yields back.
Mr. Austin Scott, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Governor, Mr. Secretary, Mary's husband.
Secretary Perdue. All great titles.
Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia. Yes. I am not sure if you
would be mending fence or checking cows right now if she hadn't
agreed to marry you. You probably wouldn't be here.
Great man, great family, and what you will find from Sonny
Perdue is, if he can help you, he will help you, and if he
tells you he is going to do something, he is going to do it,
and I have always appreciated that from you.
And, Governor, just a couple of quick comments and
questions maybe. I was at the USDA research station in Byron
this last week. As you know, research is not something that you
can simply cut on and off; it is a long-term commitment, it is
a long-term investment, and that investment has to be coupled
with extension for it to actually get to the fields and help
the farmers and our economy. And so they brought up while I was
there the hiring freeze, and certainly hope that as we go
forward we are able to come out from underneath that hiring
freeze, and that you have the flexibility to put the people in
the most effective areas with regard to research, and that that
partnership will be there with the states, I know under you for
the extension to actually get that research to the field.
Your commitment to 4-H, your commitment to FFA is something
that also those two organizations are extremely important to
rural America, and I know that those organizations will benefit
from you being in that position as well.
One of the things that has changed on the farm in the last
couple of years, and is changing at an exponential rate, is the
use of technology. We know that President Trump will have an
infrastructure program that will be put forward. The rural
broadband, as you know, we need that, quite honestly, more than
we need roads and bridges in many of the counties that I
represent. You know from growing up in Houston County, you have
metropolitan areas and then just a few miles down the road you
have areas like you grew up in, in Bonaire, and I lived in
Ashburn for a long time. I tell people I live in Tifton now but
I actually live in Chula, Georgia. And so if you could just
speak to the rural broadband issue, and any assistance that you
believe that the USDA can give us with making sure that the
rural broadband is a part of President Trump's infrastructure
package. I would appreciate your comments on that.
Secretary Perdue. I would be happy to, friend. First of
all, let me talk about research just a second because you
mentioned that. And you are absolutely right, the reason our
producers are so productive today in the 21st century is
because of the research and the foundation that has been laid.
It is not something that can be cut off and on. And the other
thing is the delivery system of that basic and applied research
to the field through the extension service has been the wonder
of the world, and we see what difference it has made in our
productivity, and will continue to need to be as we have to
feed nine billion people by 2050.
That is important, but you made a great point, another
thing that is just as important is the technology, because you
know your producers in middle and south Georgia are using
technology for better water usage, better technology for
precision agriculture, for monitoring crop needs; whether it is
whatever adding, and the telemetry that is needed out there is
dependent on wireless technology and WiFi. The other thing
sociologically, Congressman, in today's world of connectivity,
it might be true in your house with Wells' age, if the water
goes off that is kind of a disadvantage, if your lights go off,
oh, bummer, if your heat goes off you will get a blanket, but
if your WiFi goes off that is a crisis. And that is kind of
what happens out there in the world today is we are not
sociologically, to Congressman Scott's point, we are not going
to keep these young people on the farm attracted there if they
don't have the connectivity they are used to when they go to
college. They are not going to come back. And it is vitally
important. The good news is this is square on the radar scope
of the President, as well as the FCC Chairman. I have had
conversations with him. He is anxiously awaiting the
infrastructure plan where we can ambitiously take rural
broadband ubiquitously across the country. As you know, there
are places in our home state you can't even get a cell signal.
We have a lot of challenges, but I am convinced of what you
hit on, it is the modern-day road, sewer, water of the 21st
century is connectivity. And I look forward to promulgating as
much of that as we can across the country.
Mr. Austin Scott of Georgia. Well, Mr. Secretary, thank
you. And Wells is most upset right now that it is not duck
season, turkey season, and Nash Springs Fishery Services just
took the snapper season away from him and only gave him 3 days,
so any help with that would be appreciated. Thank you.
The Chairman. The gentleman yields back.
Mr. McGovern, 5 minutes.
Mr. McGovern. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for
being here. And I appreciated reading that your new motto at
USDA is, ``Let's do right and feed everyone.'' I think we all
hopefully share that goal.
I was a little surprised in your opening statement and in
your written testimony I didn't see any mention of SNAP, which
is the premiere anti-hunger program in this country. We have 42
million Americans who are food-insecure, who are hungry, many
of them rely on this program to be able to put food on their
table for themselves and their kids. It is one of the most
efficiently run Federal programs we have. And I want to take
this opportunity to thank the men and women who work at USDA
who oversee and implement this program because it has one of
the lowest error rates and fraud rates of any Federal program
we have. We might want to consider lending some of those staff
to the Department of Defense to oversee their defense
contracting. They might get it better over there. But the
bottom line is this is a good program. I worry because there is
lots of talk, I have a bunch of articles that appeared in the
last couple of weeks of Members of this body, and some people
in the Administration, looking at SNAP as a place to basically
try to find money to pay for other priorities; essentially,
using it as an ATM machine, and that would be a mistake. We
have heard talk of block granting SNAP, we have heard talk of
putting more restrictions on the program, putting more hurdles
in place to make it more difficult for people to be eligible
for the program, which would be a mistake. The average amount
of time that people are on this program is less than a year.
And the benefit, I would argue, is inadequate. It is, on
average, about $1.40 per person, per meal, which you can't buy
a coffee for that nowadays.
My question to you is, and I am looking for some assurance
here that; first, you are a strong defender of the program,
that you are not advocating structural changes, or trying to
put more hurdles in place to make it more difficult for poor
people to get food, because it is a concern of a lot of people
in this country. I would be interested in hearing your views on
what you plan for SNAP.
Secretary Perdue. Thank you, Congressman. I did not include
that because I was hoping you would ask me the question. I
thought you would. But nonetheless, I agree with all that you
have said. It has been a very important, effective program. I
am a continuing improvement guy; can we improve maybe the
delivery and the processes and the protocols there. Yes, we
have some disparity between our states of how they are
implementing and executing that, and the cost over delivery,
and I would like to see more unanimity in some of those
delivery mechanisms, learning from the best, learning from one
another about how we can deliver those programs even better.
But as far as I am concerned, we have no proposed changes. You
don't try to fix things that aren't broken. And when the motto
is, ``Do right and feed everyone,'' I view that as very, very
inclusive.
Mr. McGovern. Well, I find that reassuring. Just one other
point, there has been a lot of focus on this group of people
called able-bodied adults without dependents, and some have
suggested that we be tougher on that population because, as you
know, the rules are that if you are on the program and you are
not working, or you are in a job-training program in 3 months
you lose the benefit and you are not eligible to get it back
for another 3 years. Bottom line is a lot of those able-bodied
adults without dependents are veterans who have returned from
serving our country halfway around the world. And while it may
sound nice to kind of go after that population, the bottom line
is it is a complicated population.
And one other thing. Ms. Fudge mentioned the issue of our
commitment overseas. Again, acknowledging that you were not
here when the President drafted his budget, I am worried that
programs like the McGovern-Dole International Food for
Education Program, which has fed millions of kids around the
world in school settings, the most vulnerable children in the
world, it has been a tremendous success. I have visited these
programs. It is zeroed-out in the President's budget. I worry
about the future of Food for Peace. I am hoping that you will
be a strong advocate to put the money back in for those
programs, because I do think they represent the best of our
country, and they contribute greatly to our national security.
Secretary Perdue. I can't disagree with you again,
Congressman. Again, from the perspective of veterans, I will be
in South Dakota this Friday at a Vets for Ag program as we help
to transition them into those jobs, because as you well know,
the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program was a time-
limited program in a tough time period to help them get a job
and so we want to be part of growing the economy of help
restoring these veterans to a livelihood; and, frankly, we need
them in agriculture. That is the heartbeat of USDA regarding
veterans in there.
We also support the states' waiver ability for veterans in
that as well on those kind of restrictions.
Mr. McGovern. Right.
And I hope maybe beyond veterans too, not just veterans but
sometimes there are vulnerable populations in addition to that,
McGovern-Dole and Food for Peace as well. Thank you.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Crawford, 5 minutes.
Mr. Crawford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, thank
you. Good to see you again.
Secretary Perdue. Yes, sir.
Mr. Crawford. It has been just a couple of weeks since we
toured some of the devastation in my district. Let me thank you
for your responsiveness, your Department's responsiveness, and
your personal attention on that issue. I think our 100 year
floods are coming a little more frequently than every 100
years. This is our third in 6 years, you saw that yourself. And
I guess, as I mentioned before, and has been talked about here,
crop insurance is an important component, no question about it,
but as it applies to rice the practical to replant provision
there has really added more confusion than clarity. And so I am
hoping that you can, and I am certain that you will work with
us on actually trying to provide some flexibility on that
because, as you know, after May 15 it is strictly not practical
to replant rice and expect a yield, so having some alternative
would be much appreciated.
Secretary Perdue. Congressman, I agree with you. You know
that those contracts are set and it can't be changed for this
incident, this tragedy that just happened, but the RMA has
learned from that, and certainly on some of these dates on
practical replant, makes a huge difference for guarding yield
production, the quality of seed, the hybrid seed, and other
things, the chemicals that are linked with that. You will see,
and I will commit to you that you will see some changes in the
RMA practical dates, going forward, for the 2018 contract.
Mr. Crawford. I appreciate that. And I also want to thank
you for your comments during your confirmation hearing with
regard to Cuba. I think that is very important, and we have had
a chance to visit about that, the value proposition that
presents for U.S. farmers and ranchers. And I know at this
point the White House is right now undergoing a Cuba policy
review, and considering whether or not to reverse course on our
recent expansion of relations with Cuba. I hope that you will
be a vocal advocate on that score so that when they do develop
that policy, that it would be inclusive on the ag front.
Secretary Perdue. Well, certainly, the financial policy
that you all are faced is beyond my pay grade, but someone said
it earlier, if our folks grow it, I want to sell it. And they
eat in Cuba as well.
Mr. Crawford. Absolutely. On that note, H.R. 525 is
something we have been working on for a while now. The Cuba Ag
Exports Act actually removes the financial restrictions that
you mentioned. Right now, we can sell ag products in Cuba, it
is a cash up-front requirement that is really an impediment to
fully realizing the potential of that market for U.S.
producers. Many of the Members on this Committee are cosponsors
of that legislation, including the Chairman and the Ranking
Member. And I hope that you would be able to review that and
endorse that bill because we want to try to move that forward
as quickly as we can, provide greater market access.
Secretary Perdue. As I said, that is something I would be
supportive of. If folks around the world need private credit to
buy our products, I am all for that. I probably would have some
personal concern if we were doing public credit to the Nation
of Cuba.
Mr. Crawford. Absolutely. I share that sentiment. The bill
is written to address that very provision, that it is strictly
a private transaction with no taxpayer backstop, and that is
important to note.
To go back to cotton real quick. I just want to echo the
concerns of the Chairman in regards to the problems that we are
facing in cotton country. We are behind you by one, we are
number three in cotton and Georgia is number two, and the
Chairman will claim credit for Texas being number one in cotton
production, but we are all in this together. And cotton
producers need relief, and they need it yesterday. And, when we
start to lose our gin infrastructure, as the old saying goes,
``You can cut down an oak tree in 5 minutes but it takes a long
time to grow it back.'' And so as we start to see our ginning
infrastructure disappear it is going to have an impact on our
rural economies, and in the broader sense on our economy and
state in general. I hope that, as you have indicated, and I am
sure you will, use every tool at your disposal to help us
address that issue of the cotton producers belt-wide.
Secretary Perdue. Thank you, sir. I haven't told the
Chairman yet, but our Chief Economist just said Georgia was
number one in cotton.
Mr. Crawford. Is that right?
The Chairman. Depends on which year.
Mr. Crawford. Well, I appreciate it, Mr. Secretary, and we
certainly look forward to working with you. And I congratulate
you, and you certainly are the right guy at the right time, and
we appreciate you.
Secretary Perdue. Thank you.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mrs. Bustos, 5 minutes.
Mrs. Bustos. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Perdue,
thank you for joining us today. I look forward to working with
you as I represent the northwestern part of the State of
Illinois.
I want to start with a quick question, I hope, and then go
into something a little more in-depth. To start with, our aging
locks and dam system. There is $37 billion in agriculture and
food products that flow through the Illinois ports and
waterways. Upgrading aging locks and dams on the upper
Mississippi and Illinois Rivers is a top priority for the
growers that I represent in my region. Congress has authorized
these upgrades, but the Administration has to request the
funding. And what I would ask of you, if you can answer with a
yes or no that would be appreciated, but can we count on you to
push this Administration to invest in our water infrastructure,
and specifically, will you push for 1,200 locks on the upper
Mississippi and Illinois Rivers in the President's
infrastructure plan.
Secretary Perdue. Yes, in the broad answer. Specifically,
on the 1,200 dam, we will look at that and see. I was at the
White House yesterday for an infrastructure meeting, and let me
tell you that inland waterways is right at the top of their
list over the contribution to the economy. We know how
important it is to the ag economy. I was on the banks of the
Ohio River in Cincinnati the other day and saw some of those
barge-loading facilities. It is a huge advantage for the U.S.
economy, and producers especially. We have other parts in the
world in South America that might compete with us production-
wise, but they don't have the infrastructure. That wonderful
river network that runs through your state and all through the
middle of our nation is a vital resource for the world economy.
If there is anything we can do, I commit to being a serious
advocate for American agriculture. The logistics part is part
of that, and the waterways are right at the front of that.
Mrs. Bustos. Yes, we have the legislation, it is just a
matter of authorizing the expenditure on that. And I would like
to offer an invitation to you to come see the locks and dam
system along the Mississippi River. That is the entire western
border of my district is the Mississippi, and seeing the locks
and dams that were built in the 1930s that really need a lot of
attention. But we would love to have you come and visit us, so
consider that an invitation.
Quickly shifting gears, yesterday the Joint Economic
Committee released a report outlining many of the economic
challenges in rural America, which I would like to have entered
into the record. But I would also like to acknowledge something
that Congresswoman Fudge said earlier, that I am concerned
about the Trump Administration budget that calls for a 21
percent cut in USDA, including eliminating Rural Development's
water infrastructure programs, and the Rural Business--
Cooperative Service. Just a big concern. And that can be
echoed, you will probably hear some other questions from my
colleagues here. But the reorganization also eliminates the
Rural Development mission area entirely, as well as the Senate-
confirmed Under Secretary, which you have addressed for a
moment. But it is my understanding that you have already
submitted the reorganization plan to Congress for the mandatory
30 day notification period, however, just today, you sought
public comment through a Federal Register notice on the
proposal. I was wondering about the formal reorganization plan
sent to Congress, why that was presented to Congress before
seeking feedback from the impacted stakeholders. Just your
thought on kind of that order of that.
[The report referred to is located on p. 67.]
Secretary Perdue. I am not sure I can answer that question
specifically, other than that I have given my vision, and we
are progressing in the protocol, as I understand it, directed
by our General Counsel to implement this. I visited with your
Chairman and Ranking Member here, the Chairman and Ranking
Member of Ag Appropriations to let them know of my plans and to
do that. I may not be as attuned to the Federal requirements of
permission as they are, but all I know is my heartbeat is to
make good and to do well, and to make sure USDA continues to
serve [Audio malfunction in hearing room] the best way. I can't
answer the specific process question that you asked.
Mrs. Bustos. Okay. I think your microphone might have gone
out for a second there.
Secretary Perdue. I got cut off?
Mrs. Bustos. We still want to hear you.
All right, well, I am hoping that you will listen to that
feedback that is offered, and I am sure you will.
The other thing is, will someone in your office take on the
day-to-day management responsibilities of leading Rural
Development with this new structure? It is a staff of 5,000, it
is a loan portfolio of more than $225 billion, and for that to
go straight up to you, the concern is just the attention that
is going to be given to Rural Development. It is a big concern.
Secretary Perdue. No, I can't handle all that myself. We
are going to have an Assistant Secretary directly reporting to
me that will be the go-to person. If it makes you feel better
to call that person ``Under Secretary'' then enjoy that, but
that person is going to have not only the responsibility of
managing that portfolio, doing what we were doing that way, but
also having direct access so we can move quickly and nimbly
with a vision of improving rural America. So that is important.
That person will be Senate-confirmed in that area, so you will
have an opportunity to visit with that person and ask them all
those questions of their commitment and passion to Rural
Development.
Mrs. Bustos. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
My time has expired. I yield back.
The Chairman. The gentlelady yields back.
Mr. DesJarlais, 5 minutes.
Mr. DesJarlais. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning,
Secretary Perdue. Your presence is greatly appreciated here
this morning.
I represent Tennessee's Fourth Congressional District. It
is home to the National Tennessee Walking Horse Celebration,
with a nationwide economic impact of approximately $3.2
billion. The Tennessee Walking Horse industry directly or
indirectly employs over 20,000 people in largely rural areas in
farming communities where economic hardship is commonplace. The
previous Administration obstructed progress and refused to
cooperate with the industry to develop scientific inspection
methods to replace the current subjective methods that were
prone to error. Can folks in Tennessee count on you to be
supportive of the Walking Horse industry, and facilitate
scientific and objective inspection methods to eliminate soring
so that people can continue to enjoy this time-honored
tradition?
Secretary Perdue. Certainly. I would love to comment on
that. As you know, we have delayed that rule in order that we
can get the facts about that. Beautiful horses, beautiful
animals, but we have to balance that with our humane treatment.
That is what APHIS does. For the reputation of the wonderful
people in the Walking Horse industry, they want the bad actors
out as much as anyone does. That is what we hope to have as a
regulatory protocol that will ensure how the enforcement
operates in that, how that is done, best assures the public
that these animals are not being treated inhumanely in order
for them to perform. I welcome that.
Mr. DesJarlais. All right. We look forward to working with
you on that.
The Tennessee Cattlemen's Association appreciates the
establishment of an Under Secretary for Trade position created
in the 2014 Farm Bill. How are the bilateral agreements
progressing with the countries that have been part of the TPP
agreement? And many of these countries, as you know, offer
significant market opportunities for U.S. beef, and I hope that
under your leadership we can count on you to negotiate these
bilateral agreements.
Secretary Perdue. Well, certainly, the two great wins in
that area is American beef back into Brazil already, already
the first shipment, and I hope we will be able to announce very
soon and show you a picture of U.S. beef going into China,
which is a huge market. I think your cattlemen are looking
forward to that. There are technical issues to continue to
resolve when dealing with some of the international buyers. It
is the Yogi Berra philosophy, ``It ain't over until it is
over.'' That is what we are working on.
Mr. DesJarlais. Any updates on Japan?
Secretary Perdue. Japan, again, Secretary Ross, the
President obviously asked me to write him a letter that he
could write a note to the President, when he met with the
President of Japan, to indicate again the protocols that we
need to do to get back into there as well.
Mr. DesJarlais. All right. And, Secretary, as you know, the
nation's poultry industry has been reeling from devastating
outbreaks of High-Path Avian Influenza the past several years,
most recently which occurred in my district. A GAO report
released last week highlighted that USDA has taken significant
steps to respond to the crisis, but few ways to determine the
effectiveness of these steps. In your opinion, how can our
farmers enhance biosecurity and make their livestock less
susceptible to the introduction of disease?
Secretary Perdue. As indicated earlier in my testimony, I
am very, very pleased with the reaction of your Tennessee State
authorities in conjunction with our USDA APHIS people over the
containment of the recent outbreak in south central Tennessee.
I thought that was the way the system should work. There was
very timely action toward depopulation and eliminating the
potential spread of that disease, and it has been long enough
now that if that had not been effective, we would have seen
that. I think the system is working. We learned a lot from
2015, and your State of Alabama and the State of Georgia all
collaborated very, very well to make sure that the High-Path AI
was contained. I think we are making progress. Can we do
better? We can always do better.
Mr. DesJarlais. All right. Well, again, congratulations. We
are glad that you are finally in place. It took too long, but
we are glad to have you, and thanks for being here today.
I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. The gentleman yields back.
Mr. Evans, 5 minutes.
Mr. Evans. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning, Mr.
Secretary. How are you today?
Mr. Secretary, you are a veterinarian by trade, and that
Pennsylvania is the home of one of the greatest veterinarian
schools in the nation; University of Penn. I was just visiting
that school last week. Can you share the importance of
veterinarian programs that you look to strengthen as it relates
to our nation? I don't hear a lot about that, and obviously, I
am really concerned. And also the aspect of diversity added to
the element of veterinarian school.
Secretary Perdue. Right.
Mr. Evans. Can you speak a little bit to that?
Secretary Perdue. Well, when it comes to food safety,
Congressman, there is a zero tolerance policy, and that is what
Americans expect, that is what we have come to benefit from,
and the veterinary profession is intimately involved in that.
When I graduated from veterinary school in 1971, I had
volunteered for an assignment in the United States Air Force. I
don't know that I realized that that would be a food safety and
public health mission there. When I served in Ohio it was food
safety and public health, and I learned a broad perspective of
how important that was. The food safety industry and profession
had not matured at that time in the 1970s, but I learned a lot
about it, was trained in that area.
We have great veterinarians in our inspection services all
over. And while you are correct, your veterinary school in
Pennsylvania is one of the renowned ones, along with Iowa
State, Kansas, and others, along with my alma mater, University
of Georgia, have done a great job putting out professionals who
are part of that food safety network. We have also got great
career professionals in USDA under the guidance of
veterinarians who are doing great work in that.
Much of the foodborne illness you see happens after that in
the supply chain, delivery, in restaurants, and others, but we
are committed to a zero tolerance policy to make sure that the
food that Americans feed their families are safe.
Mr. Evans. Mr. Secretary, in Pennsylvania, I was in the
state legislature, and we dealt with the issue of Pennsylvania
of food deserts and food insecurity, and came up with a program
called the FFI Program, which was a public-private partnership
that worked to address food deserts. How do you seek to address
food insecurity and food deserts?
Secretary Perdue. Well, again, some of the programs that
you all have funded that we have the opportunity to award some
grants regarding fresh vegetables and others, it is a healthy
food program, FINI is one of them in that area, as well as
another one that has to deal with those problems. There is very
little money in that, frankly, but we have used pilot projects
to understand how we can make sure that those people in the
areas where food is not readily available have access, be it
local farmers' markets or other ways, and certainly to be able
to use their Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program to
access those. We look forward to understanding better how we
can even do better in that regard.
Mr. Evans. I have always said that food policy is foreign
policy, and we know that food is a bipartisan issue that we all
have to eat. What would you do to assure that everyone on the
spectrum, from neighborhoods to global food economies
prioritize the importance of food policy?
Secretary Perdue. Well, we talked about, I want the motto
to be more than just a motto; ``Do right and feed everyone.''
We have an awesome opportunity in this country as abundant food
suppliers for the world, and that doesn't exclude our American
citizens too who have less opportunity for food safety and food
nutrition. But the fact is that whether it is the P.L. 83-480
program, Food for Peace, McGovern-Dole, or others, I hope that
we can see these programs sustained and be able to use the
bountiful production of our American producers in order to be a
weapon for peace around the world.
Mr. Evans. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The Chairman. The gentleman yields back.
Mr. LaMalfa, 5 minutes.
Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And welcome, Mr.
Secretary. It is really great to have you here, and I hope
things are going well for you in your transition. And it is
also very heartening to hear the colleagues that you know the
best; our Georgia colleagues, that have welcomed you here
today, and the nonpartisan way which everybody likes working
with you. That is a really good indicator compared to some of
the things going on around this town.
There are so many issues here, and I am hoping, of course,
that we see a rebound in ag commodities at the farm gate there,
and then we can see exports are expected to come back up a
little bit from a peak of just a few years ago.
We have a lot of issues going on. I have a northern
California district, top of the state, and one of the things
that we are very, very, concerned about is USDA's oversight of
the Forest Service and the need to be much better managing our
Federal lands, and moving more into biomass using this over-
inventory we have of forest products, so that really need to be
managed much better, as we have wildfires every year and we
need to incentivize the biomass situation.
So as we work on the Federal land issue, what do you think
we can do to grow the markets for biomass, have more economic
activity that would be jobs right in our own backyard, for
material that needs to be moved right out of our backyard, for
private land and Federal land? What do you think we can do more
in that area for biomass?
Secretary Perdue. One of the things that has not been
talked about in our realignment, reorganization had to do with
aligning NRCS and their mission area with FSA. That leaves NRE
really with the responsibility of managing our U.S. Forest
Service. That is where over \1/3\ of the employees in USDA are,
and that is, frankly, where some of the biggest challenges have
come from. We face litigation, we face NEPA challenges, and
other kinds of things in order to utilize the renewable
resources on all of our millions of acres out here; northern
California and many other states, to do that. Actually, that
means jobs as well.
The good news, the fact is a healthy forest is less
vulnerable to fire, and you all know that the fire budget has
kind of gotten upside down in the Forest Service. We are
spending more to fight fires than we are to prevent fires. We
hope to get that corrected with your help and reestablished.
But I believe, again, a mission area that is focused directly
on utilizing the renewable aspects; whether it is deadfall
going into biomass, or recovering these trees that might be
down, they have a certain period of time that you can harvest
them and they would be good lumber, to get ahead of that curve.
The challenge is right now so much of that budget is spent in
suppression rather than prevention, and we have to get ahead of
that. But that is my desire.
Mr. LaMalfa. Switch from \1/3\ of the budget to \2/3\ over
the years.
Secretary Perdue. That is right.
Mr. LaMalfa. We are trying to address that with other
legislation.
Secretary Perdue. Right. That is right.
Mr. LaMalfa. You mentioned NEPA too, that is very
frustrating after a fire you have already had, the need to get
in there and salvage within a short amount of time. We have to
get it done. Instead, we waste sometimes a year, year and a
half, and the value of the wood is pretty much shot by then.
Then it is just a detriment out there.
Also, you did mention merging NRCS and others. That sounds
like a great idea to have these folks be all speaking the same
language.
I also have a very large rice acreage that is in my
district, and in my real life I am a rice farmer as well. You
talked with Mr. Crawford about that a lot.
Secretary Perdue. Yes.
Mr. LaMalfa. California is number one in medium grade.
Thank you for meeting the California folks earlier this week as
well too; for rice. We just need a little more help in the
exports on that, getting more of that product into Japan. There
was a lot of disappointment over the TPP with only opening up
another 50,000 tons, which I and about seven other growers
could grow that ourselves. That didn't mean a whole lot, so
maybe as that comes back around, we can see a little more entry
for rice as well as other exports.
Last, I would just like to hear what you think on this. We
did hear a little mention of SNAP earlier. We have had a lot of
hearings on that during this last year. Very comprehensive. And
it keeps coming up the issue of SNAP, which is a program this
Committee very strongly supports, but the way it is targeted,
and there are a lot of issues with some of the products SNAP is
being used for; soda and candy, and things like that, that
aren't generally healthy, where the original intent was ag
products that come from here. Could you just touch in general
on what you feel the direction should be with SNAP, and what
kind of products we should be using with that? Thank you.
Secretary Perdue. Well, our desire as parents and
grandparents is that the people who take advantage of SNAP
would use them for healthy food products. That is the balance:
on what level do we want to become a nanny state of directing
how, and what, people feed their families. That is the
challenge for that. And I probably lean more to the laissez-
faire rather than a prescriptive in that area, from a
perspective of not wanting, if parents and people who use the
SNAP benefits are not doing that at home, I don't know that we
can corral them enough with restrictions in SNAP to make them
do that. It is a really dicey issue of how we do that. We try
to do it through education and through examples, and allowing
SNAP to be used at local farmers' markets and making sure in
our school program that the free vegetables and fruits are
there so our kids can get used to that, and hopefully won't ask
Mom and Dad for more of the other than they would healthy
things. Someone mentioned earlier, and I wanted to comment on
it then, but we have a serious obesity problem in our youth.
How do we not only get a good nutrition program, but how do we
get a good activity program going as well. All of that is
complicated, complex, but it needs to be all of our business
about that.
Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, sir.
And, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Soto, 5 minutes.
Mr. Soto. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And, Secretary Perdue,
thank you for coming today.
I represent central Florida, your neighbor to the south.
And we all here today have some of the great orange juice that
is developed in central Florida. But I do want to say if we
don't get citrus greening under control, it will be Brazilian
orange juice pretty soon.
Our production is down 70 percent over the last decade, and
while we are developing resistant rootstocks, I wanted to gauge
your commitment on continuing the robust funding to address
this crisis that could eliminate all Florida citrus if we don't
get a handle on it.
Secretary Perdue. Done. It is obviously a serious issue. It
has been a tenacious pest, and research is important to get
that done, but we need to build that barrier. You are well
aware of how many acres have been just plowed up in Florida
over in the citrus industry, so I am a great consumer of that
product you have in your hand there, and I want us to have more
of it.
Mr. Soto. Well, we appreciate that.
In addition, we have a large cattle industry in and around
my district, including the largest herd in the nation at
Deseret Ranch, and we appreciate your commitment to help
modernize the North American FMD vaccine bank. I do want to
bring to your attention what you may already know, we had a
small screwworm outbreak in the Keys, which was a pretty
strange place for that to happen. While that is under control,
it just highlights that we still have risk to Florida cattle.
And one other thing I know my local cattle ranchers will be
sending you an invite to the RAM Rodeo in Osceola County. I
encourage you to come along if you can make it, or one of our
others. It is part of our tradition there.
The other issue I wanted to bring up is there has been
reports that foreign farmers are bringing in fruits and
vegetables labeled as organic, that are not organic. And in
Florida, we are working on protecting a fruit and vegetable
industry that is really struggling under low wages coming
through areas like Mexico and Central America.
It is a twofold question. What do you think we can do to
assist in making sure organic means just that, particularly
from foreign commodities, and what do you think we could do
within the NAFTA confines to trigger higher wages under the
existing provisions of NAFTA in Mexico and other areas?
Secretary Perdue. Regarding the organic issue, certainly,
that has become a valuable brand as we see the growth from
consumers wanting more of that. The way the oversight works on
that from USDA is we authorize or legitimize the certifiers;
many times state agencies, to go out and make sure the
principles and the processes and the programs that define
organic are being carried out. As you might imagine, that is
not a 24/7-type inspection. It works much like the
Environmental Protection Agency authorizes state EPDs to work
in that regard as well.
That is a challenge. Our goal is to have better education
of these authorizing certifiers, and to maybe do some auditing
out here, not only of the certifiers, but on the ground as
well, to do that. We want to jealously guard the legitimate.
And there is some legitimate concern regarding cheaters coming
into the country with organic labels, that aren't following
organic processes. It is a very important responsibility of
USDA. We have to leverage that because there is no way for USDA
to have enough inspectors on the ground everywhere to certify
organics. But in working with our authorized certifiers, and we
will just try to do a better job in making sure those people
who are violating the rules are not allowed to continue to do
that.
Mr. Soto. And then on the wage disparity through NAFTA in
Mexico, and then also in other trade treaties in Central and
South America, how could we help make sure that our agriculture
products and fruits and vegetables can be competitive under
existing provisions?
Secretary Perdue. Certainly, our vegetable and our produce
section of agriculture, and your people in south Florida and
the growers in Florida have maybe been the ones that have not
benefitted as much from NAFTA as the rice or the grain, the
grain producers, or even dairy in that way. It is a real
challenge, but most of the challenge comes from the
countercyclical culture of growth. I mean they are lower in the
hemisphere than we are, and can grow things different
seasonally in that way. But we have to make sure that the
safety of those products is just what we insist on in our
American producers as well.
And as regarding NAFTA negotiations, my hope and my
advocacy will be that we don't go backward in that. But you
see, that is one of the areas where we probably can improve our
position vis-a-vis Mexico, with regarding fruits and
vegetables.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Yoho, 5 minutes.
Mr. Yoho. Secretary Perdue, thanks for being here. I feel a
kindred spirit being a fellow veterinarian. And I don't know
whether to call you Doc, Governor, or Secretary. If you are
like me, you probably prefer Doc. And I look forward to helping
you achieve your mission.
The way you opened up, and everything you have said I am in
alignment. And it just sounds like you have common sense. I can
only feel that comes from working on the south end of a horse
or a cow in your past. But what you were talking about, I look
forward to helping you achieve your goal of making a
realignment of the USDA to make it the most efficient agency in
government. And that is such a critical thing, knowing the debt
that our country is facing, we have to do more with less, and I
look forward to working with you on that.
And you also talked about the USDA stamp, it should be
revered and trusted, and I agree, because that stamp around the
world stands for the highest quality product that you can get,
and it is so important that we protect it.
And several of the things I wanted to talk about were
already talked about. Your understanding of FMD, it is music to
my ears. There was a point up here where it wasn't talked about
much, and we know the threat. We haven't had that here since
1929. If it comes here, it would be devastating. And certainly,
we know what happened with BSE with the three cases that were
here, and how long it is just now taking us to recover after 15
years. And that was with no depopulation of any of the herds.
And certainly, if we had an FMD outbreak, it would be
devastating. It would take years and years to recover, not just
our cattle herd but our trade.
And as we look forward, I look forward to working with you
on the new farm bill to make continued improvements in the
cotton program, as was talked, but not at the expense of other
crops, i.e., peanuts. I come from north central Florida, and
the cottonseed program is something we talked about, to help
give diversification to the cotton growers. And that is
something that I hope you would consider looking at. But what
we know is with these programs, you can't have one at the
expense of the other one. And with peanuts, we certainly know
within that one program you have discrepancy because you have
the people that have generic and/or base acres, and then you
have people that have neither, and they are growing peanuts
right next to each other. One is at a disadvantage because they
don't fall into a program. And we have seen people switch from
cotton to grow peanuts because of the farm program. And there
are some things that can be fixed in that, and I hope you will
look at that. And not to penalize anybody, just to give that, I
guess, parity on one peanut field to the next so that those
farmers can stay in business, especially the young farmers that
we see.
We have several things that we have put together. What I
would like to do is having a meeting with you and maybe your
staff, and go over some of the things.
And then coming from Florida, we have over 360 specialty
crops in Florida. Florida is known for number one in the nation
for melons, sweet corn, and citrus. Even with citrus greening,
as Mr. Soto brought up, we went from 470 million boxes, we are
down to under 70 million boxes. It is something that has to be
dealt with, and we look forward to the robust funding that USDA
has done.
And I guess one of my asks for you is, the research and
development that we are doing is so vitally important, and
again, USDA has been great on this, that we take that research
and development, because we know one of the cures is probably
going to be a GMO tree, to have the USDA help in marketing
those products. And that is something I would like to see USDA
get involved now to move to where we can start marketing that
stuff.
Do you have any thoughts about that?
Secretary Perdue. Well, you mentioned several things. Let
me think of that and then I can address your final question.
But certainly, from the vigilance over foot-and-mouth, as well
as any other disease, Congressman, you know that we thought we
were done with screwworms, and yet we have these things break
out, and very quickly contained, but you have to be vigilant
every day.
Mr. Yoho. Yes.
Secretary Perdue. With your professional training, even the
zoonosis that are threatening us around the world, we have to
be there. The USDA inspectors and the food safety are the
frontline, the safety net that we have in doing that. I look
forward to discussing that with you.
Second, on the issue of peanuts and generic base, there
probably needs to be looked at, some adjustments on generic
base and the way they are used, going forward. That would
probably be our recommendation, but that is a discussion for
another time. The goal and the principle in the farm bill,
whether it be crop insurance or the ARC or PLC, is let the
market determine what our producers grow, not the programs. And
that is my goal is to let them look at market signals and
determine what they want to plant, not that I have to plant
this because that is a better program crop than here.
Mr. Yoho. Exactly. Right.
Secretary Perdue. We don't want to change people's habit of
what they do well and how they do it. And we have seen some of
that change, obviously, from cotton to peanuts, through the
2014 Farm Bill to do that as well.
Now, you are going to have to repeat your last question for
me because I am a----
Mr. Yoho. I will send it to your office because I am out of
time.
Secretary Perdue. Okay.
Mr. Yoho. And I appreciate it, and I look forward to
talking to you, and thank you for being here.
Secretary Perdue. Thank you. Thank you, Doc.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
Ms. Blunt Rochester.
Ms. Blunt Rochester. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary
Perdue, on behalf of the State of Delaware, I would like to say
congratulations on your confirmation, and also to welcome you.
I have a good friend who is our Secretary of Agriculture in
Delaware, Michael Scuse, and he said to say hello to you, and
that it will be a great pleasure to work with you. I am looking
forward to that.
Secretary Perdue. Good.
Ms. Blunt Rochester. I want to follow up on a question that
Representative Bustos asked earlier. In my different roles in
the State of Delaware, one of them was as state personnel
director. When you talked about the reorganization and the
realignment, I was interested specifically in the Under
Secretary position for Rural Development. And I know that it is
one that carries significant weight. You talked about it as
well, the different responsibilities, and now pulling it closer
to your office. And I just was hoping you could clarify, it is
my understanding that there are many functions that the Under
Secretary is legally able to perform, that a special assistant
would not be able to perform. Is that correct?
Secretary Perdue. I am not familiar with that. I don't know
that that would have influenced my decision, had I thought
that. With the Assistant Secretary reporting directly to me, I
can't believe that that would be diminished. You are going to
have directors in the three areas of Rural Development, with
utilities service, water, and community facilities. You will
still have directors in that, with the same subagency mission
areas there. My expectation is that those people will continue
to report to the Assistant Secretary. If their powers or
influence or ability to operate are diminished, we will just
have to figure out how we resolve that.
Ms. Blunt Rochester. Great. Maybe we can follow up just to
clarify that after the fact.
Secretary Perdue. Sure.
Ms. Blunt Rochester. And then the other question was, the
Under Secretary was Senate-confirmed, and this would be
appointed.
Secretary Perdue. Our expectation is this Assistant
Secretary will be confirmed as well.
Ms. Blunt Rochester. Confirmed as well?
Secretary Perdue. Yes.
Ms. Blunt Rochester. Okay, great. And then the other
question that I had was, I was really pleased to hear you say
if they grow it, we want to sell it. And the whole focus on
trade really sparked my interest, and given your high priority
on enhancing trade opportunities in the U.S. agricultural
products, can you share with the Committee your views on FAS
programs like the Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops, and
the MAP, Market Access Program? Do you support these programs
remaining as critical tools in USDA's trade toolbox?
Secretary Perdue. Absolutely. Your represented state, it is
understood in your poultry industry how much export and how
much trade affects that. The good news is we have a poultry
ecosystem in this nation; Delaware, Georgia, Arkansas, and
across the country, that is just unable to be replicated, from
the feed grains and the processing and the growing, and it is a
great blessing to do that.
All these tools, we have to have those tools and more
available because our producers are going to challenge us. They
can grow it, they have demonstrated they can grow it, and the
challenge would be to feed that hungry world with trade and
export. We need all those tools available.
Ms. Blunt Rochester. Great, thank you so much.
Secretary Perdue. Yes.
Ms. Blunt Rochester. And I yield back my time.
Secretary Perdue. Thank you.
The Chairman. The gentlelady yields back.
Mr. Abraham, 5 minutes.
Mr. Abraham. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Perdue,
certainly, as another fellow veterinarian, as Mr. Yoho said, we
are glad to have you, as a fellow farmer we are glad to have
you, and I am sure General Bacon, who is sitting right in front
of me, as an Air Force veteran, is glad that he has a fellow
Air Force veteran sitting in your chair. We are so happy.
We certainly look for a close relationship. And for a man
that, as Governor, stood on the Capitol steps during a severe
drought and prayed for rain, and then shortly thereafter
addressed record flooding, I definitely want to be closer to
you if things go south.
So you have answered certainly most of my questions. The
Chairman had one on the cottonseed issue, and that is very near
and dear to me in Louisiana. The Ranking Member brought up the
State Director of Rural Development and FSA, when they would be
filled. And then Mr. Crawford brought up the practical to
replant issue, which hit us right between the eyes in Louisiana
with the flooding last year. I appreciate you addressing all
those issues.
The quick question I do want to ask is that, with furrow
irrigation rice, your agency has allowed that to become an
insured crop, and in Louisiana we certainly appreciate that. As
you know, with the furrow irrigated rice they tend to use the
blast resistant seed. And for those here that don't know what
that is, it is a fungus that affects rice and just devastates
yields. And if they use that seed; that blast resistant seed,
production goes up, yield per acre, and certainly water usage
goes down, so it is a great thing. My question is when can we
expect final approval of this process to take place?
Secretary Perdue. Congressman, you have me under water on
your rice production right now.
Mr. Abraham. Okay. Well, I will submit it to you.
Secretary Perdue. That is something we will have to check
on and to understand that, because as a non-rice farmer, I am
familiar generally with the----
Mr. Abraham. Okay. That is no problem.
Secretary Perdue.--protocols, but not specifically that,
and I can't give you a specific answer, but I can assure you we
will get you one.
Mr. Abraham. Okay, fair enough. And just one other quick
question then, on my sugar farmers, RMA has kicked their crop
insurance premiums up about 45 percent. And I have talked to my
Farm Bureau people and they don't have any actuarial numbers to
explain that increase. Does your agency yet have a reason as to
why the sugar farmers got that increase and their premiums went
up?
Secretary Perdue. Again, we can get you the answer. The RMA
has a board, as you know, that is responsible for setting the
actuarial risk tolerances in that, and that is part of USDA,
and you and your farmers, your constituents have a right to
that answer. I am hoping the answer would be that it is
actuarially risk-based, and that is what has been demonstrated.
If that is the case then it is hard to argue with that, but we
will find an answer out for that as well.
Mr. Abraham. Yes. If we have the objective data I would be
good; but, talking to our Farm Bureau people, they say, ``Well,
the data is not there.'' But anyway, we will have the
discussion, and I appreciate the forthrightness, and look
forward to working with you.
I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. The gentleman yields back.
Mr. Lawson, 5 minutes.
Mr. Lawson. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And welcome
to the Committee.
Secretary Perdue. Thank you.
Mr. Lawson. I represent northwest Florida, but one of the
things that is interesting, within my district, one in every
four Floridians have been on SNAP at some point over the last
12 months; twice the national average. And so what level of
commitment do you see that we can give to those of us in
Congress that have this kind of food insecurity in our area to
either enhance the SNAP program? And I was very interested in
some of the information that you talked about earlier about
education, when someone said about what do people have in their
baskets in the grocery store, because growing up in a rural
area in a community involved in a lot of farming, all of us as
kids, wanted candy and different things in their basket, as a
part of what kids actually do. How would you advise food banks
to prepare for the added demand if SNAP gets cuts in the farm
bill?
Secretary Perdue. One of the ways, what you indicated in
your district, what we need to educate people on is that SNAP
usage is just not in urban areas, we have a huge rural
utilization of SNAP as well in those areas, and the good thing
about using those fresh fruits and vegetables you all grow down
there is extremely helpful. Food banks, one of the things we
can do in food banks is develop a wonderful, progressive food
waste program where many of these foods we ought to be ashamed
as a nation over our waste of some products, while some people
go hungry. Developing programs where we can coordinate with our
food banks in these under-served areas with safe food waste
issues, policies that make sense, and maybe removing some of
the things that don't make sense, maybe one of the areas we can
work on together.
Mr. Lawson. Right. And early on, Congressman Scott spoke
about the 1890 institutions, and I happen to represent Florida
A&M University that is one of them. And in the early years,
there was quite a great deal of interest in agriculture and
people returning. In fact, my father-in-law was the farm
manager at the university. And it was a great deal of interest
to students who were coming out. When I came up, as you say, I
was in the FFA, 4-H club, and all of those areas that help you
get very acquainted with farm products, growing cattle and
poultry, and so forth. But they have been under-funded, and I
really feel similar, and I know you have an institution in
Georgia, which is right across the line, that we really can
enhance that opportunity for students that are going in. You
made a statement earlier about, if you don't have these right
here, these cell phones and other activities, that is what the
young people really need, and the technology that goes along
with it.
My question is what can we do when working on the farm bill
to make sure that we engage those institutions more with the
funding they need to develop more farmers? My father-in-law was
at Tuskegee where they did a lot of research with the peanuts
and all this other stuff. And so that sets the mould for the
future of feeding everyone like you talked about, but those
institutions need to get more engaged.
Secretary Perdue. You represent the Rattlers?
Mr. Lawson. Yes.
Secretary Perdue. You mentioned FFA, and not only what
Congressman Scott talked about with the HBCUs is that the
opportunity to start earlier is helpful in these areas. And
what I am really impressed about FFA and 4-H is, I had tele-
town hall with FFA across the country in about six or eight
places when I was in the school in Virginia, and the minority
participation was amazing, and it thrilled me to see young
minority students there interested in FFA projects, and not
only from a production standpoint, but from the leadership it
provides. And so anything you all can do, anything we all can
do to encourage these young people, that is how we are going to
change that old question of the aging of American agriculture
and what that means. But Congressman Lawson, connectivity, we
have to make it where they want to come back. And we also
talked about the science and the technology. We have to help
them with the capital inputs there on the front-end to let them
start and understand how they can grow bigger in that way. But
education is a huge part of it. Our extension agent working
with 4-H is also critical to inspire them. I mean I have known
some young people who would have been on the streets had it not
been for 4-H and FFA, because that gave them purpose. And
anything we can do on those programs is money well repaid many
times over.
Mr. Lawson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Kelly, 5 minutes.
Mr. Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And welcome, Secretary.
I am from Mississippi, and as you are aware, the conditions
in cotton country just aren't good right now. And I know that
the Chairman started out with that, but farmers in my state are
telling me that they can't make it through another year without
some relief from somewhere. I can't overemphasize how important
this is because, as you know, Secretary, once we lose that
cotton infrastructure, you just can't go back and re-get it
there. And so I just want to make sure that you are going to
explore all the options that you can to work with us, to take
care of our cotton farmers so that we don't lose the ability to
produce cotton in the future.
Secretary Perdue. I will commit to you to do that.
Certainly, the disappointment in the latest budget issues was
kind of a tough slug for us because it limits my opportunities,
limits my ability extremely there. But I have committed to the
Chairman, you know that he is concerned about that, to do
anything we can from the USDA to help relieve that.
Mr. Kelly. And I would be remiss, when Secretary Vilsack
was here, I brought up to him, he ruled that cottonseed oil was
not included in the other oilseeds. I disagree from a legal
standpoint, being a lawyer. I just hope that you will re-look
and make that your assessment, not his assessment. The law is
not always black and white; sometimes it is gray. But I can see
where reasonable minds can differ on whether or not cottonseed
oil should be included in the other oilseeds or not, and I
actually think that it should. And so I ask that you re-look at
that and at least come to your own assessment on that.
Secretary Perdue. We will. Again, certainly, cotton
producers believe that the Secretary has that authority. Again,
as a non-lawyer, I have to rely upon my General Counsel in that
area, and will do so.
Mr. Kelly. Okay. And then the final thing is, several
stakeholders are contacting me about your reorganization plans
for replacing the USDA Under Secretary for Rural Development,
and what can you do, and are you listening to their fears, are
you listening to them, and what are you doing to alleviate some
of those fears?
Secretary Perdue. The fears are that the proof is in the
pudding, and will it be held accountable. We have talked about
it a good bit in here this morning about how I view it as an
elevation with influence and access in Rural Development,
rather than just a title. It is unfortunate that the media
chose to portray it as a diminishment of the importance of
Rural Development, and that is not the case. We are doing
everything we can to persuade people and, again, we are willing
to be shown, I am an output kind of guy, so wait and watch and
see what I do. And that is what I would tell your producers is
that I have brought this up, and I am convinced the fellow
wants to do more, not less.
Mr. Kelly. I am very proud that you are here, Secretary. We
have high expectations from you, but most importantly, I am
glad because you don't have an accent like most of these people
up here.
And with that, I yield back.
The Chairman. The gentleman yields back.
Mr. Panetta, 5 minutes.
Mr. Panetta. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary,
congratulations on your confirmation, and thank you very much
not only for your past service to the State of Georgia, but for
your future service to our nation as Secretary of Agriculture.
It is an absolute pleasure to have you here. Thank you for
taking the time to come here, and it is an honor to be in front
of you to ask you these questions, to have this opportunity.
Secretary Perdue. Thank you.
Mr. Panetta. Once again, my name is Jimmy Panetta. I
represent the Central Coast of California; what my colleagues
know as, based on my advertising, and I will tell you, the
salad bowl of the world. We have plenty of specialty crops in
that area. And this point I will be so brash as to personally
invite you out to the Central Coast of California so that you
can reinforce your understanding of specialty crops, and also
what it takes to harvest these specialty crops. And what I mean
by that, and what you know and what you have heard, is labor,
and that has been an issue. Obviously, California, like
Georgia, experienced some droughts, especially one in the past
few years, excluding this year, thankfully. But even during
that drought, the number one issue for our people in
agriculture, especially on the Central Coast, was immigration,
was labor force. And now, based on the political atmosphere in
this country, based on the changing socioeconomic atmosphere in
Mexico and southern Central America, and based on Congress'
failure to do anything on immigration since 1986, it is not
just an issue, it is an emergency. And I tell you, every single
person that I speak to in agriculture, farmer to farmworker,
they will tell you that the lack of labor force is the number
one most pressing issue that they are facing right now, and it
is an emergency situation.
I appreciate your statement during confirmation to Senator
Gillibrand when she asked if you had a commitment to making
sure that producers have access to farmworkers, and your
response was, ``I will commit that to you, Senator.'' And then
right away today, to Representative Costa, you said, ``I will
help to provide a way forward when it comes to immigration and
making sure that there is labor there to help us harvest our
crops.''
If I could, Mr. Secretary, could you please elaborate what
your commitment is and how you will help provide a way forward?
Secretary Perdue. Certainly. I smile because with your
Western Growers the other day, we were talking about produce
and melons and those kind of things, and we were talking about
this very issue. And I said, well, when I grew up, we were a
diversified row crop farm, but he loved truck farming, he loved
melons, watermelons, cantaloupes, beans, and sweet corn, but I
was his labor right there handling those watermelons, so I know
what it takes to harvest them, and I know that it is very, very
difficult to get domestic labor to do that any longer. And it
is not really a matter of taking American jobs at any cost. We
had a situation in Georgia where the legislature felt like they
needed to have a tough immigration bill, and it really flushed
out a lot of the harvest labor that we had there in Georgia.
And there was an example where the Governor said we will let
probationers do this, and so they did that for a day or so, but
after about half a day the guys said can we go back to prison,
because they just weren't willing to do that work. We
understand it.
The good news is the President understands as well. This
roundtable that we had, I think he understands the contribution
that immigrant labor has made to our fields and farms, in
processing and other things. We know from poultry processing
and other things, there is a lot of immigrant labor.
When I said a way forward, I don't know that I can
elaborate on the path today, but I have specifically hired a
young woman who is a lawyer from Nebraska, who worked with Farm
Bureau, whose expertise is in the farm labor. And what we want
to do is to give to my boss in the Administration an
opportunity and to thread the needle over this issue of how we
utilize immigrant labor in this nation.
I believe the heart is there, the how-to and the process
right now is what we have to figure out, but I can tell you,
trade, labor, regulations are job one, two, and three.
Mr. Panetta. Great. Great. I appreciate that. Thank you.
And briefly, in order to make up for the lack of labor,
does the USDA plan on any sort of investment in agriculture
technology and ways forward?
Secretary Perdue. Yes. It is interesting, I gave those guys
the same example of that. While we have the wonderful land-
grant institutions that Congressman Scott talked about, we have
also got some technology schools that are using great
processing technology, harvest technology, and preserving
technology that make a lot of sense. We are going to look at
where our research dollars go. If it makes sense to have a
processing, harvesting part of the whole supply chain to
benefit agriculture, we will do that. Our example in Georgia,
as Congressman Scott knows, is that while our primary land-
grants; University of Georgia as well as Fort Valley State,
Georgia Tech Engineering School does a lot of work with poultry
processing, and how to make that more efficient and better.
Those are the types of things we want to look at to make
sure that we use those research dollars wisely, not just maybe
in the basic production or applied production sides, but how we
get that product in a safe, palatable way to the consumer.
Mr. Panetta. Great, thank you.
I yield back.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Comer, 5 minutes.
Mr. Comer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And, Mr. Secretary, I
am so glad to see that you are now the Agriculture Secretary.
And everything I have read about you was excellent, and just
hearing your testimony is really reassuring to me. I have
always said it should be a prerequisite that the U.S. Secretary
of Agriculture should have a farm background. I know you have
an excellent track record in farming and agribusiness, and I am
looking forward to working with you.
I represent 35 counties in Kentucky, 35 rural counties, and
there are six Congressional districts in Kentucky. And when you
look at the total agriculture sales in Kentucky, the
overwhelming majority of those sales come from the First
Congressional District of Kentucky. We have poultry, we have
beef cattle, corn, wheat, horses, and a lot of tobacco. Tobacco
is still a very important crop in Kentucky.
My question is, in many instances the previous
Administration promulgated regs that were unachievable. For
example, the FDA pushed forward a proposed rule at the very
last minute that would limit NNN, I am going to say it, N-
Nitrosonornicotine, in smokeless tobacco to levels lower than
growers could achieve. Will you commit to use sound, scientific
data in rulemaking, and work with farmers and ranchers in
drafting regulations to ensure that they are realistic and
practical?
Secretary Perdue. I will, Congressman. Again, my mantra has
been sound science, fact-based, data-driven, customer-focused
decisions. And that is what we hope to do. That is a balance,
obviously. As you know, today, we have used science in a way
that sometimes comes from an ideological perspective, and the
sound science definition is in the eye of the beholder. We have
to make sure at USDA we have an agenda-less investigation, and
things that come out without a predetermined conclusion over
our scientific discovery that help us lead. I am not smart
enough to create, intuitively, programs and policies without
data, without science, without facts to do that. I agree with
you.
The other part about that, when you talked about the agency
that promulgated that, Secretary Price and I served in the
state Senate. We have already talked about some interagency
working between delineating FDA's role and USDA's role in some
of these areas. The good news about the President's interagency
task force over rural prosperity was, we get to talk about with
different people how your rules affect my people, and how my
rules may affect your people in that regard. We want to
collaborate in a holistic approach to government, I think like
I have not seen before; that is the Secretary of the Interior,
FDA, HHS, Commerce and Energy, and those working together, the
EPA Administrator. I told Scott Pruitt, I said my guys are much
more excited about you than they are me, those folks are
interagency.
Mr. Comer. We like you both.
Secretary Perdue. Well, that is very reassuring, and I
appreciate that and, again, look forward to working with you on
that.
Mr. Comer. Back on that, the FDA's proposed rule on NNN
invites the USDA, pursuant to the Tobacco Control Act, to
submit an economic impact statement on growers for the record.
Does the USDA intend to submit such a report?
Secretary Perdue. If that is what the requirement is on
this rule, again, I am not knowledgeable specifically about
that. We will get you the specifics on it. But if that is what
we are asked to do, our economists certainly will talk about
the impact of that rule. And that is where we need to look at
risk rewards on here, irrespective of how we feel about
tobacco.
Mr. Comer. Yes.
Secretary Perdue. My father convinced me it was unhealthy
when I was in the sixth grade, but nonetheless, we know it is
an industry and it is important to your district.
Mr. Comer. Well, and thank you. One quick question. When I
am back in Kentucky, one question that always comes up in
talking with the ag groups is when will we have a state FSA
director. Do you have any idea of a timeline for the nomination
of state FSA directors?
Secretary Perdue. I would love to say as soon as possible.
Obviously, we are collating and collecting all those names now.
Mr. Comer. Right.
Secretary Perdue. You all have an awesome role in helping
to recommend who those people are, because you know your people
in your state better than we do. And as we start to roll those
out, as soon as possible, we understand those state offices and
Rural Development, and the FSA, we need those as quickly as
possible. And we will commit to doing it as expeditiously as we
possibly can.
Mr. Comer. Great. And I will close with this. You don't
have to reply to this, my time is about out, but when I was the
Kentucky Ag Commissioner, we had two new crops come online in
Kentucky because we had processors. We had canola, which you
are familiar with, and another one which you may not be as
familiar with, industrial hemp. After the last farm bill,
Kentucky implemented an industrial hemp program that has been a
great success, and I am looking forward to working with the
House to advance policies that continue to grow on that and
bring industrial hemp forward as a legal, viable commodity. I
am working with Senator McConnell on that. I look forward to
working with you and the USDA to find a reasonable, responsible
path forward for industrial hemp to give our farmers another
tool in the toolbox. And I just wanted to----
Secretary Perdue. Both of your Senators have made sure I
knew about the industrial hemp, and we have just got to figure
out the policies of how that is corralled in a way that it
doesn't get abused.
Mr. Comer. Exactly. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. O'Halleran.
Mr. O'Halleran. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you,
Secretary, for being here today.
First, a couple of comments. Mr. Kelly brought up the issue
of cotton. You have heard that a number of times today. I would
be incorrect by not making sure that I highlighted that Arizona
grows a lot of cotton also, and some of the best in the world,
and that my farmers are having the same problems as have been
expressed here across this Committee today. And the other issue
with a lot of them is they want to be able to pass their farms
on to their children, and current conditions might not allow
that to occur. And the immigration issue has been brought up in
each and every one of the roundtables I have had with the
agriculture community within the state.
Getting to a couple of other issues though, broadband
technology is so critical to rural Arizona. My district is
about 1,000\2\ miles smaller than Georgia, so I have a lot of
small towns in there. I have a lot of Native American Tribes,
actually, 12 of them. The Navajo Nation is the largest in
landmass in the country. We are not going to be able to
compete, unless we have broadband, high-capacity broadband, we
have to be able to compete with those sectors that are outside
of rural Arizona to be able to create an opportunity for a
knowledge-based economy.
The other area that I have real concern in is rural
economic development, and some of the programs that are going
on there. The water and the infrastructure issue is critical.
The skinny budget calls for elimination of water and waste
water programs. I would like to hear from you how we are going
to address these issues in a meaningful way, because they have
been issues decade after decade, and we still aren't making
sure that rural America and our Tribal Nations, just to give
you an idea, the Navajo have 48 percent unemployment, the Hopi
have 60 percent unemployment, and my White Mountain Apaches,
where I can't get a cell signal in the middle of their town,
has an unemployment rate of 80+ percent.
And so, Mr. Secretary, I would just like to get a rounded
opinion of how you are going to get there.
Secretary Perdue. Well, again, I am a former Governor, and
sometimes I didn't like what the revenue estimates were but we
dealt with it. Now, the other thing I learned as Governor was,
I proposed a budget but there was another group that had some
input into what the budget was going to finally be. They were
called the appropriators. I understand that very well. I think
you all have a collective wisdom regarding from your
constituents over where these things need to be placed. And my
commitment to you is whatever comes out of that, I am going to
make it work to the best of our ability. I hope you all have
the wisdom to know where those needs are, and I trust that you
will, but at this point, I am not a proposer, I am an
administrator, and I am going to take what comes out, and we
will see what the President's budget is next week. You all will
have your shot at it, and whatever you determine, I am going to
make sure we get as much value from that budget as we possibly
can.
Mr. O'Halleran. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
My constituents expect leadership out of me, in the
Executive Branch of government it is necessary to find that
leadership. I believe you have the capability to have that
leadership, and have proven that in the past, so I will look
forward to working with you on these issues.
The last issue I have is forest fires and the type of
funding that is coming out and being dealt with from forest
fires. It takes a huge amount of money away from the ongoing
maintenance of our forests, and the preventative issues that
will help us out in not only maintaining a critical natural
resource, but in clearly identifying the need, going forward,
of lessening the impact of forest fires. If you can give me an
idea of what direction you might be going in there.
Secretary Perdue. We want to get the Federal fire budget
corrected, and not from being upside down, as soon as possible.
I know that its appropriators are in a different section than
the ag appropriators, but we are working with them on the House
and the Senate side to help get that corrected, because for
renewable resources, we have a great asset out here in the U.S.
Forest Service lands out there that ought to be productive,
revenue-generating, jobs-creating, and that is my goal is to
get the U.S. Forest Service right sized, where we are in the
prevention business and not the suppression business. And the
prevention part of that means economic activity, it means jobs.
That means we have to have the money to restore roads and make
sure that loggers can get in here and get that out. That means
we have to do some regulatory work over getting the litigation
issues out. And the ultimate goal is to be good neighbors. I
would love for our U.S. Forest Service to manage our public
forestlands just as well as our private landowners are across
the land.
So that is my goal. It is a big challenge. It requires your
help in the fire budget, and maybe policy-wise in getting
forest fires treated like natural disasters, like floods,
hurricanes, tornadoes. That may be one part of the solution. It
is a challenge I look forward to, and I hope that in 2 to 3
years you will see we have a much more productive U.S. forests
than we have now.
Mr. O'Halleran. Thank you, Secretary.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Marshall.
Mr. Marshall. Mr. Secretary, welcome.
Secretary Perdue. Thank you.
Mr. Marshall. And on behalf of all the hardworking farmers
and ranchers that make the big First District of Kansas the
largest agriculture-producing district in the country, welcome.
As Congressman Lucas mentioned, Kansas has faced more than
her fair share of natural disasters this year. Early in March
we lost about 600,000 acres of grass, 10,000 head of cattle,
and hundreds of miles of fence to the biggest wildfire on
record. We thought we had enough, and then Mother Nature gave
us 15" to 20" of snow on that laid headed wheat fields flat.
Disasters like these are prime examples of the need for a
strong farm safety net, and I greatly personally appreciate all
your Department has done to help work with us in an efficient
manner. They were gentlemen, professionals, every one of them,
and we appreciate their help.
One hole in the safety net that we have seen is the
challenge though of current payment limits and their impact on
average-size Kansas family farms. I understand that most of
these payment limits are statute, and I am interested what
authority the USDA might have to modify its limits on the
Emergency Conservation Program. ECP is the primary program
producers are used to, to replace fences and the watering
facilities destroyed by the fire. Replacement of fence costs
$10,000 a mile, making a $200,000 payment limit a major barrier
to families trying to recover. Raising that to match the
Emergency Forest Restoration program of $500,000 would go a
long ways in helping our producers rebuild.
Secretary Perdue. Thank you very much. And whenever you see
these kind of tragedies it is heartbreaking to know these are
people, they are families, their livelihoods, and that matters.
The problem as you mentioned, most of it is statutory regarding
those limits. I can assure you we will use the resources of
USDA. I appreciate your kind comments about the indemnity
program, how quickly that was done. Oftentimes in some of these
programs we have said, the government is here to help you, and
it is a year or 18 months later, and they are out of business
by then. I appreciate the work of our FSA people there on the
ground, and the indemnity providers, both from fencing and from
livestock replacement and others.
There are limits, and that is in your bailiwick to address.
The ECP program, it is my understanding that we have exhausted
the revenue in that as well, but I will commit to you any
flexibility we have in helping restore these people and
mitigate their loss, we will execute.
Mr. Marshall. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
We are excited to hear your tone about trade, and making an
Under Secretary dedicated to trade is a critical step. I want
to echo that I feel like we have very successful Market Access
Program and the Foreign Market Development program, that they
are doing a great job, and we want to accentuate the positive
that the government is doing. To that end, several of us have
authored a program called the CREATE Act, which will also help
fund that even further.
In the meantime, we are hoping, and based on your words,
you are going to be a champion for these programs as well. And
I am sure you are familiar with them. What can we do in
Congress to help you do your job better to help promote trade?
What do you need from us to work with you side by side?
Secretary Perdue. I have some ideas, but we are formulating
that right now. Specifically, I don't know that I am prepared
to go there this morning, but I can assure you by the time the
budget comes around, the farm bill comes around, we will have
specific requests over that, and looking at the barriers that
we feel are to international trade. The ability to have this
Under Secretary for Trade is one step that we can go, and
travel and be on their doorstep, knocking on their door saying
what can we sell you today. We will have a better, as I get
into it, we will have a better idea of where the specific areas
that we need help in, and we are not going to be very bashful
about asking for it.
Mr. Marshall. I am sure that all your jobs you have done
before, you are pretty familiar with the Market Access Program
and the Foreign Market Development Program, and I just want to
know what your assessment of them is. I know you are very
early, so I apologize for asking that so early in the process.
Secretary Perdue. No, they are important, and that is one
area where the Foreign Agricultural Service, our acting Deputy
Secretary there now has been immensely helpful in the sugar
negotiations, and our Secretary of Commerce would love to hire
him away. He has been really helpful in the beef issue and
other things, because he has just been like a right arm for
them and helping them understand these markets on trade. I am
really proud that we have people like that, career people there
who understand that, know that, the Market Access Program and
helping people otherwise in the AMS is really important as
well.
I will have more specific ideas about the needs and what we
can ask for later on.
Mr. Marshall. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
I yield back.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
Ms. Plaskett, 5 minutes.
Ms. Plaskett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, Mr.
Secretary, for being here, and congratulations on your
confirmation last month.
Secretary Perdue. Thank you.
Ms. Plaskett. We are very pleased to have you working with
us on the issue of agriculture.
First, of course, I have to touch on a local issue, since I
only have 5 minutes, I want to make sure that I take care of my
people first.
Secretary Perdue. Thank you. That is what representative of
the government is all about.
Ms. Plaskett. Well, let me, of course, first let you know.
Everyone has invited you to their districts, but I have the
best district to invite you to; the Virgin Islands. And we have
extended that invitation as well to the Chairman. Chairman
Conaway, with your additional responsibilities, I am sure you
need a field trip now to the Virgin Islands more than ever.
Mr. Secretary, one of the things that our local farmers are
concerned with, and I spoke with our Commissioner of
Agriculture just recently about this, the USDA has many offices
that service the Virgin Islands, but not in the Islands
themselves. For example, the Farm Service Agency support is
funded and administered through Florida, and our NRCS services
depend on the USDA staff housed in Puerto Rico. That is of
particular concern to us because we are having a growing and
burgeoning agriculture sector, and we want our farmers to have
the technical support and the assistance that are needed. We
rely heavily on staff from Puerto Rico to travel to the Virgin
Islands to provide that assistance. And we have had problems
getting them to come to the Virgin Islands often enough, due to
travel restrictions, budget shortages, and for other reasons.
For example, one of the key irrigation engineers has not been
in the Virgin Islands in over 2 years, and there are others who
have not been to the Island of St. Thomas in over 3 years.
If NRCS' Puerto Rico budget is further cut, the Virgin
Islands stands to be set back even further from where we are in
our rural economy and our rural growth. And I am asking for a
commitment from you and your office to work with me and our
local agriculture office on issues of deficiencies and where we
can meet the needs of access to USDA services for our farmers,
and also for our cooperative extension services at our
university, which does an amazing job but also lacks that
support.
And so I would love to be able to call on you and those
within your office to assist us in that.
Secretary Perdue. I hope we can learn more about the
specific issues and how we can maybe build a team to come and
to assess that.
Ms. Plaskett. Yes.
Secretary Perdue. I can't commit right now to redeploying
assets there, not knowing where they are currently, but I can
assure you that the burgeoning agriculture in Virgin Islands is
really just as important as it is Puerto Rico or other places,
and the technical expertise that you know is needed there,
whether it be irrigation technology or other things, we look
forward to providing. I would love to get more specific
information about those specific needs, and look at deploying a
team there to maybe hear from your people about how we can do a
better job that way.
Ms. Plaskett. Great. I would appreciate that.
I know that there has been much discussion about the
position in terms of Rural Development and how it is going to
be administered. When you say, this is probably the lawyer in
me asking for specifics, if you say that the Assistant
Secretary who is going to be dealing with Rural Development,
that it will be a Senate-confirmed, will that be below the
Under Secretary or is that reporting directly to you? How would
that structurally be done?
Secretary Perdue. Right. It is a good question. An
Assistant Secretary will be a direct report to me. It will
manage the three mission areas of Rural Development, both
utilities and community facilities, water, and other areas
there. They will report up to here. It will not be reporting to
an Under Secretary. The reason I wanted to elevate that
because, as I indicated earlier, I don't consider myself a
micromanager, but I do consider myself a hands-on manager.
Ms. Plaskett. Got you.
Secretary Perdue. And this was an area of Rural Development
with a lot of resources, the ability to leverage a lot of
resources out to communities, with, frankly, a good deal for
the American taxpayer. It is negative subsidies in most of
these cases. I am very, very impressed with the banking
experience of our Rural Development people in that regard.
Ms. Plaskett. Excellent.
Secretary Perdue. I am just curious enough and jealous
enough I wanted to be involved in that, and that was the best
way I knew how to do that.
Ms. Plaskett. Excellent. And will that Assistant Secretary
have other areas in their portfolio outside of Rural
Development?
Secretary Perdue. No, just that Rural Development piece.
Ms. Plaskett. Okay.
Secretary Perdue. That is a pretty big chunk and a big
responsibility. I am just going to be their assistant.
Ms. Plaskett. Thank you. And then the last thing was
regarding rural broadband. When we talk about the Minority
Leader in the Senate talking about an allotment for rural
broadband deployment, and under the Senate proposal rural
broadband funding is going to be available to projects
currently eligible under existing programs in the Department of
Agriculture. Is your office going to be advocating for
inclusion of supplemental rural broadband in the infrastructure
package, or do you see an area in which we can support that?
Secretary Perdue. Well, as I indicated, in the
infrastructure meeting we had yesterday rural broadband is at
the top of the list, inland waterways, ports. They know that
broadband enhances economic development. The connectivity out
here in rural areas, and the Executive Order the President
signed for rural prosperity. That is just as important as
roads, water, sewer, and other things for economic development
in today's society. Plus the sociological impact of just
keeping kids there where they are connected.
Ms. Plaskett. Yes. Thank you so much. And thank you for
your indulgence, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. The gentlelady's time has expired.
Ms. Plaskett. I yield back.
The Chairman. Mr. Bacon.
Mr. Bacon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, thank
you for being here. Congratulations on your confirmation, and
we look forward to your leadership. And I am not only a fellow
veteran with the Air Force, I am a fellow veteran picking
watermelons, sweet corn, all that on the farm as a kid, too. It
is a great upbringing. It was a good way to grow up.
Secretary Perdue. It is a great way to grow up.
Mr. Bacon. If I had to put the top issue in Nebraska for
economic is trade. We are very dependent on our soybean trade,
beef cattle, pork, and so forth. And with prices down 50
percent, supply high, and demand being suppressed, the best
thing we can do is open up those doors in China, Japan, perhaps
Great Britain, after Brexit, getting a trade deal with them.
I do hear a lot of concern talking to our agriculture
community in Nebraska with some of the statements that have
come out of the Administration, whether it be NAFTA, TPP, and
so forth. And I know there is a commitment to bilateral trade,
but can you just give some confidence to the Nebraskans that
our Administration is boresighted on this, that they know the
importance of agriculture and the trade of our agriculture
products overseas. Thank you.
Secretary Perdue. I really hope that has already been
demonstrated with the President's decision on NAFTA, knowing
that NAFTA is very important to Nebraska and that middle part
of the country, and how agriculture has benefitted from that
NAFTA agreement, as well as the agreement with China. You grow
a few cows in Nebraska.
Mr. Bacon. We have a lot.
Secretary Perdue. They are going to benefit from opening
that market as well. Hopefully, we are on the right end. And as
Secretary Ross likes to say, we have just only just begun.
Mr. Bacon. Yes.
Secretary Perdue. I take him at his word on that. And we
have a lot of things that we do very well, and I hope we can
get those things done as well. I am an outcome kind of guy,
again, show me rather than tell me kind of thing, so hopefully
we are showing.
Mr. Bacon. Well, thank you on that. And I do believe that
is our number one economic issue for Nebraska.
If I had to put a top three issue for like our cattlemen
and our pork producers, it is foot-and-mouth disease. I want to
thank you for your commitment here today already, saying that
you want to make sure that we have the right safety plan in
place, and a precaution that could prevent a catastrophe if
that breaks out. That would put us back for years if that
happened. And I hear a lot about it from our cattlemen and our
pork producers.
But the last thing I just want to ask you is concerning the
SNAP program. I probably know about 100 different employers of
different industries in the Omaha area, and their top concern
is to be able to hire full-time employees. They get a lot of
part-time requests, but they are having a hard time filling
their employment rolls with full-time work. And they think, or
many of them think it is the cliff effect with a lot of the
programs that we have that, if you earn over a certain amount
all of a sudden you lose all of your benefits. They would like
to see a more tapered decline as you earn.
Do you think our SNAP program has that built in, or do we
need to do more work on that to ensure a more gradual decline
as you earn more? Is there more work that we could do there, in
your opinion?
Secretary Perdue. I think that is a good point, and many
people have talked about that. We know that the SNAP benefits
are not that large anyway, but what we tried to do in Georgia
was get people to step out with using some of our resources
over training and transportation, childcare, in order for them
to get a job. But, I would welcome the consideration of a
tiered pathway down, rather than jumping off a cliff in that
way. And that could have the effect of being more encouraging
for people looking for work and doing that, knowing we have had
some anecdotes about people not wanting to take a job because
they would lose benefits, and if we had a tiered approach of
doing that it would make more sense.
Mr. Bacon. Well, thank you. As I mentioned, I have had
three different roundtables with probably around 100 employers,
and that was the consensus as being the number one issue that
they are facing, at least in the urban area.
Secretary Perdue. Right.
Mr. Bacon. I appreciate your consideration on that.
Secretary Perdue. Okay.
Mr. Bacon. With that, I just want to commit to you that
this Committee and I, we look forward to working with you.
Secretary Perdue. Thank you.
Mr. Bacon. Your position and what you do has a tremendous
impact on our state, and we thank you for your leadership.
Secretary Perdue. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Bacon. Mr. Speaker, I yield back.
The Chairman. The gentleman yields back. I appreciate the
promotion, but I am the Chairman.
Ms. Adams, 5 minutes.
Ms. Adams. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And congratulations,
Mr. Secretary, and thank you for being here.
Secretary Perdue. Thank you.
Ms. Adams. I want to get back to HBCUs. I am a proud
graduate twice of North Carolina A&T, and taught for 40 years
on the campus of Bennett College in Greensboro, and so I know
that we have a unique relationship with the Department of
Agriculture with the 1890 land-grants. And in the next farm
bill and through other legislation that comes through Congress,
I want us to focus on the things that we can do to help prepare
these universities, which in many of the places where they are
located, they are the economic engines in their communities.
And one issue I want to raise with you today is a level of
state-matching funding that 1890s receive for grants from USDA.
Currently, North Carolina A&T, which is an 1890 institution,
receives less state-matching funding for grants from NIFA than
their fellow 1862 institutions in the state, like North
Carolina State University. And so while North Carolina State
University receives well above a one to one match from the
General Assembly, I served there for 20 years, A&T receives .8
to 1 in funding that it needs to meet the Federal matching
requirements. It is my understanding, Mr. Secretary, that the
states have to submit a work plan to NIFA that outlines how
1890s and 1862s will use the funding that they receive from
USDA and from the state.
My question is, would you support your Department publicly
disclosing how much total funding by state that 1890s and 1862s
receive, so that we can determine what state governments are
doing to match the Federal commitment and hold them accountable
for the level of funding that is provided to the land-grant
schools?
Secretary Perdue. I think that constituency has done a good
job promoting their issue to the President, and I have heard
his commitment as well, and obviously from USDA's perspective
we believe in transparency if you are going to be facts-based
data-driven, you need to share those information and let people
know what facts and data you are making decisions on.
Certainly, we would be happy to disclose that. That is within
every person's right to know.
Ms. Adams. Okay, thank you. Let me ask a question about
SNAP. And so as we approach the next farm bill, we have had
continuous discussion from key Congressional leaders that the
SNAP program could be reauthorized separately from the farm
bill. Do you support a 5 year farm bill that includes the SNAP
program in its current form, and does not convert SNAP to a
block grant program?
Secretary Perdue. It would be very unwise for Congress to
try to promote a separate farm bill without SNAP included. I
just think that the coalition between advocates for food
nutrition as well as agriculture is a strong coalition to do
that, and it would be unwise to do otherwise.
Ms. Adams. Thank you. I support that.
Hurricane Matthew was devastating to cotton farmers in
North Carolina last fall, who were already struggling from
losses in 2015. What is the status of proposed changes by the
Risk Management Agency for the quality loss adjustment standard
for cotton?
Secretary Perdue. In my opinion, that is one of the areas
they missed the mark on. As I have told you, those 2017
contracts are already issued and we can't change that because
that is an insurance product, and you are dealing with other
people's money, but I can assure you I will have my voice heard
in the 2018 contracts regarding the quality loss on crops.
Ms. Adams. Okay.
Secretary Perdue. Cotton being treated like other crops are
with degradation of quality.
Ms. Adams. Great. And one last point. A strong rural
economy is necessary for healthy economic growth in urban
communities like Charlotte. I represent Charlotte. Should we be
expecting additional cuts to rural programs, specifically those
that promote food access?
Secretary Perdue. I missed that. If that was a question,
please restate.
Ms. Adams. Well, in terms of should we be expecting
additional cuts to rural programs, specifically those that
promote food access.
Secretary Perdue. I hope not.
Ms. Adams. I hope not too. Thank you, sir. I appreciate it.
And I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. The gentlelady yields----
Secretary Perdue. You and I have a bond, Congresswoman. My
grandmother's name was Alma.
Ms. Adams. All right. That means soul. Good woman. Thank
you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
The Chairman. The gentlelady yields back.
John Faso, 5 minutes.
Mr. Faso. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Governor,
congratulations. I look forward to working with you.
I represent a district in upstate New York in the mid-
Hudson Valley in the Catskills. Goes from Hyde Park to
Cooperstown, from Vermont to Pennsylvania. It is a large rural
area. And I very much appreciate your nomination and
confirmation, and I hope that you won't forget places like
upstate New York. Sometimes folks from other parts of the
country think New York, and they think New York City and urban,
well, we have a lot of rural areas in upstate New York.
Secretary Perdue. It is beautiful upstate.
Mr. Faso. And your agency has been helpful to us on certain
flood mitigation projects and rehab projects with the Natural
Resources Conservation Service, and also your recent issuance
of a guideline on food nutrition allowing flavored milk in
school lunch programs. Vitally important in a part of the
country where our dairy farmers look perplexed at the fact that
the USDA will restrict certain milk products in school lunch
programs. And I have always thought it is unusual that the same
USDA that says you can't sell whole milk or flavored milk, or
have it in a lunch program, allows us to purchase $3 billion of
soda in the SNAP program. I have yet to hear anyone say that
soda has any nutritional benefit, and yet we do that.
My farmers keep, and many of the apple growers and other
farmers, keep raising with me is the difficulty in getting the
seasonal agricultural workers into the country. And there are a
lot of complaints about the time and the effort and the expense
of dealing with the Labor Department, and I am wondering if you
have an opinion on how we could expedite these H-2A visas and
that process because my farmers trying to harvest apples in the
fall this year are not going to be able to hire locals because
locals, as you alluded to previously, will not do that work.
And it is vital that we are able to bring seasonal agricultural
workers who have experience and knowledge to work on these
farms throughout our region. Could you respond to that?
Secretary Perdue. I would be happy to. I am aware,
obviously, personally and through my briefing here that the H-
2A program has been essentially unworkable with recent
additions in that way. We are familiar. We have a lot of H-2A
utilization in Georgia, and I know from growers that it has
become much more burdensome, much more expensive to comply with
that. This person I mentioned earlier that we had hired with
farm labor experience has been directed by me to look at the H-
2A program, see if that is the vehicle we need to go through
currently before we can get maybe a broader farm labor
resolution. We are going to be working on that, presenting the
Administration and you all some ideas on, from a regulatory
perspective, how we can streamline H-2A to be a more dependable
source, a more reliable source, of immigrant labor to harvest
those crops.
Mr. Faso. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, because this is truly
vital. I talked to an apple grower in my area in Columbia
County, in Kinderhook, my hometown, just yesterday, who told me
that the prospects of a great harvest this year are looking
well and they are very encouraged, but if they can't get the
workers to help harvest this crop, it is going to be for
naught. And so I hope you will take this back to the
Administration and to the President and tell them it is vitally
important that we have a stream of workers who can come into
the country and perform these seasonal tasks. It is critical to
our economy in my district, and I know in districts all across
the country.
Secretary Perdue. I agree wholeheartedly. And the good news
is I do think that is the President's heart, and we will
continue to be very strong, voracious advocates in that regard.
Mr. Faso. Right. Thank you so much. And if we can just
remind folks here in Washington, D.C., that September and
October are just around the corner. We need these workers here
in this country. We can't wait until the last minute. We have
to give certainty to our farmers.
I very much appreciate your service as Governor of Georgia,
and your service now to our country as Secretary of
Agriculture, and I look forward to working with you and your
Department. Thank you so much.
Secretary Perdue. Thank you.
Mr. Faso. I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
Ms. Kuster.
Ms. Kuster. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And I want
to echo the words of my colleague, welcome. Thank you very much
for your service to our country. I hope you will find this to
be one of the bipartisan committees on Capitol Hill, and in
particular, so many of the things that both of my colleagues
have mentioned on both sides of the aisle, I echo in my
district in New Hampshire.
I want to focus in, I see that in this skinny budget a 21
percent funding reduction to USDA, so I imagine a lot of the
discussion today has been taken up by that. In particular, one
program was eliminated that has been very, very effective in
northern New England, and the name of that is the Northern
Border Regional Commission. Are you familiar with that, Mr.
Secretary?
Secretary Perdue. Does that have to do with the restoration
projects or northern, I am not sure that I am.
Ms. Kuster. It is, frequently we use it in my district,
communities do in conjunction with Rural Development funding,
and it has the same kind of leveraging impact. It is a grant
program for primarily economic development. I represent in the
northern part of my district a region that was heavily
dependent on paper mills, furniture, that kind of thing,
manufacturing, that has left the area. And just to give you a
sense of this, the former Groveton Mill in a very small town
called Northumberland, received funding from the Northern
Border Commission to repurpose the mill into an industrial park
that is now attracting new manufacturing jobs; many of them
companies from Canada moving to the United States to make
products in America, and help the middle-class make it in
America.
I would just ask you if you would go back and talk to your
team about the Northern Border Regional Commission, and urge
you to support funding. The leveraging impact alone is really
extraordinary. I am just looking at the awards in 2016, $1.8
million awarded, $19.5 million in matching funds. A small
amount of money goes a long way, and I know you are frugal with
our tax dollars, as I am.
Secretary Perdue. I do understand more now. I didn't
recognize the name, but it is very similar to what we have done
in the South with the Appalachian Regional Commission.
Ms. Kuster. Yes. Yes.
Secretary Perdue. I have been very involved, and I chaired
that Governor part of that issue and I can tell you the good it
has done through that area. I am not familiar with the
northern, but it sounds like a very similar commission.
Ms. Kuster. Very similar.
Secretary Perdue. I am very familiar with the impact and
effect of it.
Ms. Kuster. It is modeled after the Appalachian----
Secretary Perdue. What states are impacted by the northern
border?
Ms. Kuster. Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and New York
State.
Secretary Perdue. Well, I am very familiar with the good
that can be done through those commissions.
Ms. Kuster. It has really been an incredible program, so I
urge your support.
I also wanted to focus and continuing that line on the USDA
Rural Development program, and I note in my briefing that this
is being moved around somewhat in your organization, and I
won't spend a lot of time on it because I need to get to two
other questions, but I would urge you that the Rural
Development program is critical. And right now, I am the
bipartisan co-chair of what we call the Heroin Task Force. We
have 85 Members of Congress working in a bipartisan way. Rural
America is just being slammed by loss of manufacturing jobs, by
this influx of heroin and opioids, and we cannot do without the
economic development, the health care, all of the different
types of development from Rural Development, including an
amendment that I was able to get on the farm bill that those
funds can be used for community colleges. I can get back to you
offline with that because my time is very limited.
I am going to submit a letter to the record in support of
the Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices rule, signed by 334
certified organic beef, pork, dairy, and poultry producers,
representing $2 billion in sales. We made great progress in the
last farm bill for organics in a bipartisan way, and I hope we
can work with you.
[The letter referred to is located on p. 72.]
Secretary Perdue. Certainly. The question?
Ms. Kuster. Just I hope we will be able to work with you,
going forward, in the farm bill in support of organic trade.
Secretary Perdue. No question. It has been a great consumer
win for a lot of people, and the smaller organic farmers have
given them an opportunity to get in the marketplace. And
sometimes now we may see, and that is the issue over making
sure they are certified, we see some of them maybe crowded out
with larger operations as well.
Ms. Kuster. Well, I look forward to working with you.
I will yield back, but I do want to submit that letter for
the record. Thank you very much.
The Chairman. The gentlelady's time has expired.
Mr. Arrington.
Mr. Arrington. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Congrats, Mr.
Secretary----
Secretary Perdue. Thank you.
Mr. Arrington.--on a distinguished career in public
service, and thank you for your willingness to serve our
country and make the sacrifices. I noticed you have 14
grandchildren, so you do have other things you could do.
Secretary Perdue. That is right.
Mr. Arrington. Thanks for choosing to continue to serve and
being the chief advocate for the ag industry in the United
States. And I am proud of our President who has put the
overarching philosophy on his decision-making of America first.
American manufacturers, American producers.
And I was giving my colleague a hard time in the hallway, I
said if he enjoys the Virgin Islands, he is going to love west
Texas. There is just an ocean of cotton out there, as you know.
And thank you for being so gracious about taking my call the
other day.
Secretary Perdue. Yes.
Mr. Arrington. I am just going to repeat some things,
because it is too important. It is life and death for my
region, and that is our cotton producers. West Texas and
agriculture is life, it is our identity, but cotton is king.
And all ag producers are struggling, you know that, for all the
reasons that you already know, but cotton is the only commodity
out of title I, just completely exposed to the market risks and
volatility, and market manipulation that we have seen from
China and others. And it is a crisis, and I am just asking you
and pleading with you, Mr. Secretary, move with the speed of
the crisis and the sense of urgency that our producers, our
economy, cotton ginners, farm implement dealers, ag lenders. It
is devastating. Devastating.
One of the most sobering and enlightening experiences I
have had is when we had a panel here of experts, ag policy, ag
economists, and I asked the question, could you use the same
rationale that the World Trade Organization, with the Brazil
case, could you use the same rationale, or could someone make
the case for other commodities using the same rationale, that
would ultimately lead to pulling corn or sorghum or wheat, and
the answer was unequivocally yes. Someone could make the same
case on how we support other commodities in this country, and
could cause us to pull them from title I. If we are not willing
to do that to all commodities, we shouldn't be willing to do it
to one.
And I apologize because I had another hearing, I would like
to hear your thoughts about cotton and the devastation and the
crisis, and what you can do, and I know that there are
different avenues, and I implore you to look at all strategies
to save cotton production as we know it in America.
Secretary Perdue. Thank you very much. As I told you on the
phone the other day, we are well aware of that. Certainly, the
best thing is that cotton prices continue upward. That is the
ultimate solution. The good news is supply and demand is
improving, with more consumption and production recently. All
those are good news, but that doesn't necessarily negate the
fact that producers are already hurting.
I know that as I understand it there was a decision among
the integrated cotton industry based on the WTO adjudication
earlier that they would prefer not to poke that in the eye
regarding being in title I. Unfortunately, the STAX program was
not as successful as Congress had hoped it would be, and that
brought some issues.
The disappointing part is the final deliberations of the
budget reconciliation bill limited my options severely. But I
will commit to you that within the statutory authority, within
the budgetary authority of the USDA Secretary, I am going to do
everything I can. The problem is I don't want to give false
hopes because those options are really limited, and we talked
about those.
Mr. Arrington. Yes. Yes. Thank you for that response. And
if I achieve anything as the representative from west Texas,
District 19, I hope it is working with you to find relief for
our cotton farmers, and equity in the treatment of cotton as a
commodity relative to the others.
I was at a Texas and Southwest Cattle Raisers event the
other day when China announced they were opening up their
markets to our U.S. beef. Could you comment on that and kind of
the next steps please?
And I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Secretary Perdue. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Go ahead.
Secretary Perdue. We are obviously optimistic and excited
about the potential of getting our beef back into China. That
is important to Texas as well and much of the Southwest. We
don't want to exalt too much just yet, exalt in that we have
still some work to do from a protocol perspective, we have some
work to do from technical, but I believe that we and they are
very serious about this, and we will do the victory dance
hopefully pretty soon.
Mr. Arrington. Thank you.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Davis, 5 minutes.
Mr. Davis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And welcome, Mr.
Secretary.
Secretary Perdue. Yes.
Mr. Davis. As we know, there is never any geographical turf
battle when it comes to agriculture, but as somebody who comes
from the Midwest, I have heard nothing but compliments about
your appointment as Secretary of Agriculture. There is a lot of
optimism, a lot of hope out there that your experience and what
you can bring to the position is going to be very beneficial
for our farmers in the Midwest, and also agriculture as a
whole.
I want to say thanks again. And as the Subcommittee
Chairman of the Biotechnology, Horticulture, and Research
Subcommittee, I am especially interested in the research title
among the other issues that we deal with on that Subcommittee,
because I represent the land-grant university, I call it the
best land-grant university ever, the University of Illinois,
but also non-land-grant universities like the Illinois State
University that rely upon a very robustly funded ag research
program.
It is my belief too that investing in research today will
save us cost tomorrow, especially when it comes to agriculture.
And I saw that the President's 2018 budget blueprint indicates
that it supports farmer-focused research and extension
partnerships at land-grant universities, and requests $350
million for AFRI. And furthermore, it indicates that the
Agricultural Research Service's funding should be focused on
high priority agriculture and food issues.
Mr. Secretary, I know that my colleague, Austin Scott, and
my other colleague, Jimmy Panetta, mentioned ag research
earlier in the hearing. Can you expand on your responses there
and give us even more perspective of how you feel research
should be funded when it comes to agriculture?
Secretary Perdue. Well, as an advocate for agriculture
generally, and I am also aware that research, extension, the
transfer of applied and basic research to the field has been
the reason for the wonderful productivity in Illinois and other
parts of the nation regarding that. We have produced our way
into a surplus that we are suppressing prices, now we have to
sell it. But the fact is we can't stop research because the
challenge of feeding nine billion people by 2050 will be
insurmountable if we don't have the new technology, the
genetics, and other things it will take to feed a hungry world.
We are going to be an advocate for research, basic
research, applied research, the applied extension of those best
practices out in the field to help preserve the environment and
help to produce more.
I don't know how else to expand on it to let you know that
as a product of public education, from the high school to the
public land-grant university, I am a big believer.
Mr. Davis. Well, thank you. And I know that you have been
here a long time. I have shuttled back and forth between two
different hearings today, and you have sat there answering
every question, and I know how difficult that is and I
appreciate that and I appreciate your candor.
I am glad you mentioned biotech. It is another one of the
areas that my Subcommittee has jurisdiction over. Technology is
approved in the United States but not approved internationally.
As we know, they face serious risk and uncertainty when we try
and operate in agriculture in the global marketplace, and that
sometimes prevents some of my farmer in Illinois from gaining
access to that global marketplace.
Last week, the Administration released a statement
detailing the priorities of the 100 day action plan with China,
and it contained a commitment to review pending agriculture
biotechnologies. And many of these pending applications have
been waiting for more than 5 years for Chinese approval. Is
there anything you can do or anything you are planning to do to
ensure that China is held accountable when they review these
products in this 100 day plan?
Secretary Perdue. Well, the biotech issue is right up there
with beef, and working out these issues that we are looking for
clearance into that. We have demonstrated on our part the
science that confirms these are safe products, and beef and
biotech go hand in hand. For the assurance our U.S. producers
can have that these are exportable, they won't be embargoed,
they won't be denied, as we are having right now, into some
markets. When we get that done with China we can persuade other
markets over the safety and the efficacy of these products into
their food chain supply.
Mr. Davis. Well, I look forward to working with you to
address these very important issues in the next farm bill. And
obviously, the Midwest is very concerned about who is going to
be the administrator at the RMA, so I look forward to working
with you there too.
I yield back.
Secretary Perdue. Thank you.
The Chairman. The gentleman yields back.
Mr. Allen, 5 minutes.
Mr. Allen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And first, Secretary,
congratulations. It is great to have a fellow Georgian sitting
here at this table. And, of course, we go way back. I was with
you in Georgia, I was working in a small business environment,
under your leadership as Governor. And, boy, all I can say is
you like a challenge, because from my colleagues' benefit,
Georgia lost, in 2008, something like 360,000 jobs, because we
were very dependent on the homebuilding industry, we lost over
41 banks. It was a critical, critical economic time in Georgia,
much like we have in this country today, and we have in
agriculture today.
Now, Georgia has been named as the best state to locate
your business for 4 years in a row, and we have had a growth of
about 500,000 jobs. Because of your leadership, that is why
Georgia is where we are today. We do have a number of
challenges, I mean we have all talked about that, but you are
certainly up to the challenge.
You and I had a good time at the airport while we were
waiting for a flight, to talk a little bit about why we were
doing this. I have 12 grandchildren, so I know what you are
missing. And I may get to 14, I don't know, but I hope so. I
know the great sacrifice that you are making. And also, you,
like me, we are still in the business. You have to have good
folks back home taking care of that. But thank you for what you
are doing for this country.
Agriculture, and to talk about the 12th District, the 12th
District we can't have peanuts without cotton. I mean one is
totally dependent on the other. We have a great program in
peanuts, PLC program. Everybody likes that program. We have
nothing in cotton. And we have some real challenges that you
know well, I don't need to, and we have talked about that at
length here today. Obviously, thank you for your help as far as
the freeze with our blueberry crop, and also with some of the
storm damage we have had down there and the USDA. And, of
course, we have talked about the importance of rural broadband,
and those are probably similar in every district.
But the one thing I thought I might share with you is a
couple of things that our office has been working on here is
the BARN Act, which would move the H-2A program from the
Department of Labor to the Department of Agriculture. And you
might comment on that as far as what your thoughts are. We have
also introduced legislation on the WOTUS rule, although the
President has rescinded that and it has been tied up in the
courts. We want to codify that in a law so that that law is
understood exactly what a navigable waterway is. And the other
thing I have observed, and, frankly, I didn't realize, I mean
when you walk in a grocery store, it is just like turning on
the light switch, you just expect the food to be there. And we
have this tremendous tension in the country between our metro,
urban, and really our rural areas, particularly among
taxpayers, particularly when it comes to helping sustain our
farmers.
And so we have the farm bill coming up. It is always
contentious. It divides a lot of the country. And somehow from
an education standpoint, people need to understand that that
food just doesn't appear, and that quality of food doesn't
appear. I mean the strides that this country has made in what
we have done in agriculture is enormous, and, frankly, the
farmers have very little influence because they are such a
small part of the population now. One hundred years ago we were
97 percent of the population, today we are two percent.
So your thoughts on that. And, again, thank you for taking
on this challenge.
Secretary Perdue. Well, thank you, Congressman. I
appreciate your patience, and sitting here and listening to the
conversations. But all these things are important certainly,
and trade is important. You mentioned the difference between
the different programs. We will have to address that in the
next farm bill. But food safety, all those things are
important. This is an awesome opportunity that we are looking
forward to, and how we do, you represent a lot of educational
opportunities in your district as well, and we want to make
sure that research continues. But these are all challenging
things, but the education part that you talked about between
urban and rural, we are really all in this together, and the
more we can help people understand that food literally is a
national security issue, the insurance program helps it to be
more palatable to the public out there as an insurance rather
than a direct payment, the mantra of, ``Being paid not to
farm,'' that does away with that. I think we have made progress
in the 2014 Farm Bill. Can we do better? Yes. Will we do
better? Yes.
Mr. Allen. Great.
Secretary Perdue. Thank you.
Mr. Allen. Thank you, and please know that you have my full
support. Any way that I can help you, I would be glad to do it.
And I yield back.
The Chairman. The gentleman's time has expired.
Ms. Lujan Grisham, 5 minutes.
Ms. Lujan Grisham. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And, Secretary,
it is an honor to have you here, and I am lucky to have a
gracious Chairman who makes sure that I always have an
opportunity to weigh-in, and I am grateful for that. Thank you.
Secretary Perdue. Thank you.
Ms. Lujan Grisham. I want to talk about a bill and an
issue. The issue is lunch shaming. It has gotten lots of
national attention, Mr. Secretary, and it may be something that
you are already aware of. And last week, I introduced a bill in
Congress with my colleague and good friend, the Chairman of the
Biotech Subcommittee, Rodney Davis. And I am the Ranking
Member, and so we have great opportunities to work together.
And in a nutshell, basically, it is getting at schools who are
having trouble, clearly, with the number of students whose
families can't afford the lunch, and instead of figuring that
out and working with the parents, or looking at programs, or
making sure that it is a SNAP benefit, or whatever else it is,
many districts around the country engage in lunch shaming,
which means they throw away those lunches for those kids, and I
will just do it, actually, right now. I have an article, Mr.
Chairman, in The New York Times, and a photo of a stamp placed
on one such student's arm that says I need lunch money, and the
school was stamping all of these kids. I would move that we put
this into the record, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Without objection.
[The article referred to is located on p. 74.]
Ms. Lujan Grisham. Thank you. And there are other and very
similar, very draconian practices around the country. New
Mexico is the first state in the country to now ban lunch
shaming at a state level. I certainly want to ban lunch shaming
at a Federal level. And given that I know that your desire,
based on your earlier testimony, even though I wasn't in the
hearing, paying attention to the hearing, so thank you, that
you are concerned about poor Americans and making sure that the
SNAP program is available, and really looking at strategies
that shore those up, and others. I am interested in what your
personal opinion is and/or knowledge about lunch shaming in
this country.
Secretary Perdue. I would be very interested,
Congresswoman, to work with you over maybe some technology that
we can help with our lunch programs around the country to
figure out how the reasonable expectation of payment versus the
inability to pay could be dealt with, rather than confronting
kids in a line or else humiliating them in some way. Middle
school is tough enough as it is that we want to make sure our
adults, or those in authority in particular, are not
contributing to those issues in that way.
I don't know if there is a technological answer or what the
ultimate answer is to balance the, again, the expectation of
whatever contribution is, rather than being confronted in a
public way, in a shaming or humiliating way to do that.
Ms. Lujan Grisham. And I don't know----
Secretary Perdue. I look forward to----
Ms. Lujan Grisham.--whether there is direct authority at
USDA. I would encourage you to look at it. I would love to have
the Department's support on the Lunch Shaming bill, and I don't
disagree that making sure that schools are better equipped to
look at what their lunch program costs, and to look at what is
occurring with families who aren't paying or can't afford,
which is a combination. But to make it the students' problem,
and to do two things, I mean two things occur in this
environment that are very troubling to me. One, that you would
force these kids to work in the cafeteria, that you would throw
away their food, that you would stamp them, that you would
highlight that they are kids who aren't paying for their lunch,
who are poor, and then you don't give them a lunch. Both things
happened to these kids in school. There is no reason, it seems
to me, that we should allow any school to make this the problem
of the child. We are just creating more problems in our school
system. I understand that we have to deal with the money
aspects, but I agree with you, that seems to me to be
completely and entirely separate. And what is really shocking
for me is that it is such a prevalent problem. I am embarrassed
to admit to my colleagues on this Committee that in addition to
my own state that was engaged in lunch shaming, I had no idea
that it was a national phenomenon. And part of it is we are so
strict, I guess, in terms of making sure that schools account
for the lunch program in a way that, instead of dealing with
parents and finding creative solutions, that they feel
perfectly justified in treating their students in this way.
And, in fact, it has led to the loss of jobs where food workers
have refused to come to work and have quit because they are
told they have to lunch shame.
I would love a partnership to say we are not going to stand
for that as a country.
Secretary Perdue. Well, again, as no respect to persons
with our motto of do good and feed everyone, I think that also
means you treat everyone with respect, irrespective of their
economic ability. How we figure out direction to our lunchroom
professionals over technology of things that work, I would
welcome the opportunity to work with you on solutions about
that.
Ms. Lujan Grisham. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. The gentlelady's time has expired.
Well, Governor, you survived your first one. I don't
remember a full Committee hearing in which every single Member
showed up for some period of time, and almost everybody used up
their 5 minutes. Thank you. Your stamina is well admired.
We are going to have, hopefully, a long time together
working on a variety of issues that we have all talked about
this morning, ad infinitum.
G.T. Thompson was here. He has a couple of questions
submitted for the record. I will submit those.
Secretary Perdue. Sure.
The Chairman. If you could get back to G.T. on those.
I am also looking forward to the 180 day window on your
rural task force. All of us are anxious to see that report as
you begin to draw all those other agencies together to take a
look at things that can be done to affect positively, or things
we can do to address the negative effects that are out there.
Clearly, Jodey, Rick, and I have an issue with cotton. Thank
you very much. I would like to take one last shot across the
bow at our Senate colleagues. We had an elegant solution for
cotton. It should have been in the omnibus bill. And just
because you don't represent cotton farmers in Michigan and
Vermont, there is no reason for you to have taken them hostage
to get something that you knew would never work, and that was a
dairy solution that was unpaid for to the tune of $800 million.
I don't know what it is in the Senate, but in the House
Agriculture Committee you are required to represent all of
agriculture, not just the folks who directly vote for you. And
while that is happening right now with Jodey and I, that did
not happen when the Senate stabbed our cotton farmers in the
back, because they couldn't come up with their own solution for
dairy. And pitting one segment of our industry against the
other has never worked, except when you want to use it as a
tool to get your own way, which is what happened in the Senate
with Senators Stabenow and Leahy. Shame on them. But other than
that, I don't have any real strong feelings about that issue.
But, Governor, thank you so very much.
Secretary Perdue. Well, Mr. Chairman, from my perspective,
our first date went very well, splendidly, as a matter of fact.
And you have my number, I hope you will call again.
The Chairman. Well, I do have one thing. You sent me an
emoji message, and I don't savvy emoji, so I am going to have
to get with you and ask you so I can figure out what you were
sending me.
Under the Rules of the Committee, today's hearing will
remain open for 10 calendar days to receive additional
materials and supplementary written responses from the witness
to any questions posed by a Member.
This hearing is adjourned. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 1:18 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
[Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:]
Submitted Report by Hon. Cheri Bustos, a Representative in Congress
from Illinois
Understanding Economic Challenges in Rural America
U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee
Ranking Member Martin Heinrich
Minority Staff Report, May 2017
The 2016 presidential election brought renewed and welcome interest
in the social and economic challenges facing rural
communities.i Additional awareness of the unique challenges
facing communities in rural and remote locations can help support
policies that promote economic growth and generate new opportunities in
these communities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\i\ See, for example, Sorgel, Andrew, ``In America's Rural-Urban
Divide, Age, Earnings and Education are Prominent.'' U.S. News and
World Report, December 8, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In recent years, rural and urban communities experienced
developments in the U.S. economy in vastly different ways.ii
For example, the Great Recession hit harder and lasted longer in rural
communities, and many predominately rural states still have yet to
recover from the depths of the recession nearly 8 years after the
country entered into recovery. Since the 2007-2009 Great Recession,
economic recovery in rural communities has not matched that in urban
areas.iii Employment in rural communities still has not
returned to its pre-recession levels while metro area employment
surpassed its pre-recession peak in 2013.iv As rural job
growth lagged behind urban areas, rural residents looked increasingly
outside their communities to find new work and
opportunities.v Moreover, the education gap between urban
and rural America widened substantially over the past fifteen
years.vi
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\ii\ For the purposes of this report, we use metropolitan and non-
metropolitan breakdowns in the data to refer to rural and urban trends.
Metropolitan counties are defined by the U.S. Department of Agriculture
as counties with one or more urbanized areas (densely settled areas
with 50,000 or more people) and outlying counties that are economically
tied to counties with urbanized areas. Non-metropolitan areas are
defined as all other counties. For more information, see https://
www.ers.usda.gov/topics/rural-economy-population/rural-classifications/
what-is-rural/.
\iii\ U.S. Department of Agriculture, ``Rural America at a Glance
(file:////JECD/Share/Reports/Rural%20Economy/,%20),'' 2016 Edition.
\iv\ U.S. Department of Agriculture, ``Rural Employment and
Unemployment (https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/rural-economy-population/
employment-education/rural-employment-and-unemployment/),'' accessed
May 2, 2017.
\v\ U.S. Department of Agriculture, ``Rural America at a Glance
(https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/eib162/eib-162.pdf),''
2016 Edition.
\vi\ JEC Democratic staff calculations based on data from the
Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplement, 2000-
2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Declining population, limited employment opportunities, and lack of
public investment pose significant challenges to the economic vitality
of rural communities. Rural communities face a variety of structural
challenges constraining growth. The geographic remoteness of rural
areas makes routine economic interactions more difficult and costly.
Rural economies are more likely than urban ones to heavily rely on a
single industry or employer, which leaves them vulnerable should the
employer leave town. Insufficient rural infrastructure--roads, water
systems, and access to broadband--limits growth in countless ways. Even
opportunities to access Federal funds can be more difficult for rural
communities since often they do not have professional staff to prepare
and submit competitive grant applications.
Addressing the economic challenges facing rural communities
requires a comprehensive strategy that takes stock of the
existing assets and needs in rural America.
Addressing the challenges facing rural communities requires a
comprehensive strategy that takes stock of the existing assets and
needs in rural America. Congress's work on economic development,
infrastructure, and education must tailor approaches to meet the unique
challenges facing rural communities.
Economic Obstacles for Growth in Rural America
On their own, any one of the factors described below would present
a major problem for economic recovery in rural America. Taken together,
they present serious constraints on economic growth in rural America.
Little To No Population Growth
Rural America's population has been declining since 2011 (Figure
1), both an effect and cause of the lack of employment opportunities in
rural communities. America's population in rural counties stood at 46.1
million in 2016, a reduction of 0.4 percent since 2010. In contrast,
metropolitan counties experienced a five percent population increase
over the same period.vii
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\vii\ JEC Democratic staff calculations based on data from USDA on
populations of metro and non-metropolitan communities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 1: Annual Population Growth, by Metro and Non-Metro Residence
Percent
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Source: USDA ERS calculations based on data from Census
Bureau.
Note: Metro and Non-metro designations are based on the 1974
USDA designations.
Catastrophic Job Losses for Those At the Lower End of the Pay Scale
The recession hit rural workers particularly hard. Not only did the
recession hit non-metro counties harder than their metropolitan
counterparts, with rural employment falling a whole percentage point
more than urban employment, but employment growth since 2010 has also
remained weak (Figure 2). Moreover, nominal weekly wage growth in rural
communities has been sluggish, at only 3.8 percent over the past year,
compared to growth of up to 5.5 percent in metropolitan communities
(Figure 3). Seven years out from the Great Recession, rural areas still
have not benefitted from the recovery in the same way as their urban
counterparts.
Figure 2: United States Employment, Metro and non-metro Areas
100=2008 Q1
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Source: USDA ERS Calculations based on data from the Bureau
of Labor Statistics Local Area Unemployment Statistics.
Note: Gray shading denotes recession. Data are indexed to the
first quarter of 2008. Data is measured quarterly.
Figure 3: Weekly Wage Growth by Residence, 2015
Q3-2016 Q3
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Source: Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, Bureau of
Labor Statistics.
Note: Metro and non-metro delineations based on the USDA 2013
Urban-Rural Continuum Code.
A Growing Education Gap
In the 21st Century economy, a college education is increasingly
necessary for achieving economic prosperity. Rural America consistently
lags behind urban communities in educational attainment, and this gap
has increased in the new century. Even while the share of individuals
with a bachelor's degree or higher has increased in both rural and
urban communities, the gap between the two has increased by 25 percent
from 2000 to 2016 (Figure 4).
In an environment where there exists a growing higher education gap
between rural and urban populations, Congress should support policies
that ensure rural populations receive preparation and have equal access
to opportunities for post-secondary education.
Figure 4: Percent with Bachelor's Degrees or Higher, by Metro and non-
metro Residence
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Source: JEC Democratic Staff calculations based on CPS ASEC,
2000-2016.
Note: Data are for individuals 25 years or older.
Structural Challenges to Long-Term Prosperity
Rural America's economic difficulties in the new century are rooted
in the role that rural communities have traditionally played in the
broader economy.viii In order for Congress to adequately
address the issues that rural America faces, it must understand how
many of rural America's problems differ from those of urban America.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\viii\ John M. Quigley, Rural Policy and the New Regional
Economics: Implications for Rural America.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geographic Remoteness
By definition, rural communities are located far from, and are not
closely connected with, dense population centers.ix Routine
economic interactions are more frequent, carry lower costs, and leads
to more economic activity when individuals live closer
together.x Rural communities are disadvantaged in this
regard. Currently 39 percent of Americans in rural areas lack access to
broadband, compared to just four percent of urban
Americans.xi
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\ix\ Michael Ratcliffe, Charlynn Burd, Kelly Holder, and Alison
Fields; Defining Rural at the U.S. Census Bureau.
\x\ Joseph Cortright, Making Sense of Clusters: Regional
Competitiveness and Economic Development.
\xi\ Federal Communications Commission, ``2016 Broadband Report
(https://www.fcc.gov/reports-research/reports/broadband-progress-
reports/2016-broadband-progress-report),'' January 29, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technological innovations that promise increased information and
communications have the potential to bridge this divide. Efforts are
underway to help rural communities take advantage of the instant
communications facilitated by the Internet, including through the use
of telehealth programs, which bring patients and doctors together
through smart phones and computers to provide immediate access to
medical advice and care.xii
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\xii\ Madore A., Rosenberg J., Weintraub R. Project ECHO: Expanding
the Capacity of Primary Care Providers to Address Complex Conditions
(http://www.globalhealthdelivery.org/case-studies/north-america/
project-echo-expanding-capacity-of-primary-care-providers). Harvard
Business Publishing. 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limited Economic Diversification
Some rural economies were built around one or a few industries,
often reflecting the wealth of natural resources or agricultural
potential in a given area.xiii This limited economic
diversification makes these communities especially vulnerable when
economic shocks adversely affect specific industries.xiv
Across the United States, once vibrant rural communities are now
struggling to survive because an anchor employer left town or are
facing structural change in the industry forcing a dramatic
reorganization of business practices.xv
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\xiii\ Michael Porter, Competitiveness in Rural U.S. Regions:
Learning and Research Agenda.
\xiv\ Office of Sustainable Communities, Smart Growth Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, ``Framework for Creating a Smart
Growth Economic Development Strategy: A Tool for Small Cities and
Towns.''
\xv\ J.R. Logan and Elizabeth Cleary, Shutdown of molybdenum mine
hits Questa hard (http://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/business/
shutdown-of-molybdenum-mine-hits-questa-hard/article_1bc7fca2-178b-
5222-bee6-30c8a219ce53.html), Santa Fe New Mexican; compare Office of
Sustainable Communities, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, ``How
Small Towns and Cities Can Use Local Assets to Rebuild Their Economies:
Lessons from Successful Places (https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/
files/2015-05/documents/competitive_advantage_051215_508_
final.pdf),'' May 2015, (demonstrating that communities must use
innovative strategies in overcoming the loss of a central employer).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While additional entrepreneurship can help bring economic diversity
to rural communities, in many of these places entrepreneurship alone
can't solve the problem. Rather, limited opportunity brought on by a
lack of competitive or financially viable economic options present a
larger hurdle for economic development in rural communities. Congress
has the ability to utilize direct investment to match private industry
with specific communities through the use of tax credits, training
programs, and grant funding designed for rural economic development.
Underinvestment in Rural Infrastructure
Rural America is in need of infrastructure investment and
development in other critical areas. Small rural communities
desperately need money to fund wastewater projects, new roads, and
other infrastructure needs. Specifically, rural leaders, in testimony
before Congress, identified the following areas as their areas of
greatest need for infrastructure investment:
Lane widening and repairs for the highways that connect
distant towns and makes cross country trucking shipping safer
and more efficient.
Repairs for bridges that have begun to show the signs of age
and wear.
Water infrastructure necessary to meet rural community needs
while maintaining requirements under clean water laws.
Conservation funding to preserve natural habitats for
hunters and fishers.
Public transportation that helps the elderly and disabled in
rural communities.xvi
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\xvi\ Witness written testimony, ``Oversight: Modernizing our
Nation's Infrastructure (https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/
hearings?ID=82518667-E24B-4CB5-BAFC-35B3FAE0D372),'' Committee Hearing,
U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, February 8,
2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rural Barriers To Accessing Federal Funding Opportunities
While there are often numerous Federal grant opportunities aimed at
spurring rural economic development, many small rural communities do
not have staff on hand that can draft and submit competitive
applications. As a result, leadership in small rural communities may
find difficulty meeting the requirements for proposals due to a lack of
time, resources, and expertise.
In order to help rural communities become stronger players in
the economy, Congress must continue to support efforts to
ensure that every rural community has the ability to access the
Internet and the opportunities interconnectivity creates.
Call for Congressional Action
Many complicated forces are weighing down on the economy in rural
America. Congress has the opportunity to play the defining role in how
rural communities develop and thrive.
In order to help rural communities become stronger players in the
economy, Congress must continue to support efforts to ensure that every
rural community has the ability to access the Internet and the
opportunities interconnectivity creates. Likewise, Congress should
support programs that direct workforce development to rural communities
that are still struggling to recover from the Great Recession.
Infrastructure renewal in small rural communities is must be a top
priority for Congress. Public-private partnerships--focused on
generating a significant profit for their private investors--will not
deliver the infrastructure so urgently needed by sparsely populated
rural areas.xvii *
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Editor's note: there was no corresponding endnote numbered xvii
in the submitted report. The report has been reproduced as submitted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small rural communities must be able to compete on a level playing
field for Federal grant opportunities, particularly for programs
specifically designed to generate economic activity in rural America.
To do that, Congress must promote measures to allow the smallest rural
communities to compete for competitive grants. Further, Congress must
invest in developing the next generation of grant writers and civil
servants to serve in small rural communities.
______
Submitted Letter by Hon. Ann M. Kuster, a Representative in Congress
from New Hampshire
April 28, 2017
Hon. Sonny Perdue,
Secretary,
U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Washington D.C.
Dear Secretary Perdue,
We the undersigned, 334 certified organic beef, pork, dairy, and
poultry producers representing approximately $1.95 billion in annual
organic sales, express strong support for the recently published
Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices rule and urge you to let it
become effective, in its entirety, on May 19, 2017 without further
delay. The industry-developed standard enshrined in the rule represents
over a decade of discussion, feedback and support from our industry and
ensures that we operate on a level playing field and meet a consistent
standard, regardless of our operation size.
The organic industry overall has experienced double-digit growth
annually over the last 5 years, achieving over $43 billion in sales in
2015. The organic livestock and dairy sector represents over 17% of
total organic sales and the organic dairy sector alone represents the
second-largest and fastest-growing food segment in the industry.
Consumer demand for our products still outpaces domestic production,
creating opportunities for continued expansion of our farms.
As organic farmers, our very survival is dependent upon the trust
that we have built with the American consumer. We are proud to be
delivering a product that meets the highest standards possible and is
in line with consumer expectations of what the USDA organic label
means. A recent Consumer Reports survey found that 83% of consumers who
frequently purchase organic products believe that organic eggs should
come from hens that have access to the outdoors.
The decision to become certified organic is voluntary, if consumers
lose confidence in the organic seal it will have catastrophic impacts
throughout the industry. We believe that the rule strikes the right
balance between meeting consumer expectations and the reality of
commercial scale food production. We look forward to working with you
on implementation of the rule and are available to answer any questions
you or your staff may have.
Sincerely,
Holcroft Farm, Summers, Matthew Hostetler, Elam Horning, Leola,
AR Buffalo, MO PA
Roy Hostetler, Marion Hostetler, Wilmer Horst, Mt.
Clarksville, AR Buffalo, MO Pleasant Mills, PA
Vernon Hostetler, Ernest Doug Hottenstein,
Clarksville, AR Schwartzentruber, Elizabethtown, PA
Buffalo, MO
Pleasant Pastures Brian Blosser, Buffalo, Carl Hurst, Robesonia,
Poultry, Pocahontas, MO PA
AR
Alexandre EcoDairy Jeff Blosser, Buffalo, Lavern Kauffman,
Farms, Crescent City, MO Millerstown, PA
CA
Chino Valley Ranchers, Shane Blosser, Buffalo, Mike Kurtz, McClure,
Colton, CA MO PA
Doodlebug Ranches, Pete Blosser, Buffalo, Terry Lehman,
Paicines, CA MO Myerstown, PA
Harvest Fields Organic Chad Headings, Buffalo, Wanda Lehman, Willow
Farm, Fresno, CA MO Hill, PA
Leavitt Lake Ranches, Maynard Eigsti, Wayne Martin,
Vina, CA Buffalo, MO Bernville, PA
Sol Seeker Farm, Frank Blosser, Buffalo, John Martin,
Salinas, CA MO Elizabethtown, PA
Aurora Organic Dairy, Gaylord Hostetler, Lamar Martin,
Boulder, CO Buffalo, MO Elizabethtown, PA
Henry Miller, Cisne, IL Lester Hostetler, Gary Musser, Bethel,
Buffalo, MO PA
Jeff Wuebbels, Clark Hostetler, Mike Musser, Bethel,
Germantown, IL Buffalo, MO PA
Sam Zook, Geff, IL Matt Rogers, Mtn. Harold Nolt,
Grove, MO Mifflinburg, PA
Ulrich, Harmon, IL Dwayne Schartzentruber, Dennis Nolt,
Buffalo, MO Millerstown, PA
Blosser, Tampico, IL Jesse Hostetler, Justin Oberholtzer,
Buffalo, MO Lititz, PA
Hostletler, Tampico, IL Dave Blosser, Buffalo, Darrell Ranck,
MO Strasburg, PA
Nelson Blosser, Andrew Hoover, Downing, Landis Reiff,
Tampico, IL MO Mifflinburg, PA
Baker Brothers, Hillcrest, El Dorado Daryl Sensenig,
Tampico, IL Springs, MO Newmanstown, PA
John Hostetler, Hominy Creek, Halfway, Nelson Sensenig,
Tampico, IL MO Newmanstown, PA
Ernest Blosser, Hoover Farm, El Dorado Neal Sensenig,
Tampico, IL Springs, MO Newmanstown, PA
Dennis Kropf, Tampico, Lost Valley Farms, El Bill Shepperson,
IL Dorado Springs, MO Sunbury, PA
Doug Baker, Tampico, IL M&S Farm, Seymour, MO Mark Siegrist,
Fredericksburg, PA
Edwin Blosser, Tampico, Mockingbird Hill, El Dale Slaymaker,
IL Dorado Springs, MO Washington Borough,
PA
Elmer Ulrich, Harmon, Riverside, El Dorado Mervin Stauffer,
IL Springs, MO Mifflinburg, PA
Eric Hostetler, Avoca, Sandy Top Farm, El Jonathan Stauffer,
IL Dorado Springs, MO Elizabethtown, PA
Darwin Hostetler, Scenic View, El Dorado Duane Swanger,
Harmon, IL Springs, MO Bainbridge, PA
Lynn Kropf, Tampico, IL Schneider Farms, Alvin Weaver,
Walker, MO Myerstown, PA
Virgil Garretson, Scrambled Acres LLC, Clyde Wenger, Manheim,
Sheffield, IL Versailles, MO PA
Theresa Westaby, CR Darin Hostetler, Chris Willhide,
View Organic Dairy, Buffalo, MO Dincannon, PA
Delmar, IL
Marlin Kauffman, Kevin Blosser, Buffalo, Maynard Zimmerman,
Creston, IA MO Milmont, PA
Maynard Hostetler, Shady Lane, El Dorado Lee Zook, Middleburg,
Creston, IA Springs, MO PA
Tim Maibach, Sunnyside Up, Seymour, Chris Pierce, Heritage
Bloomfield, IA MO Poultry Management
John Brunquell, Egg Sunset Acres, El Dorado Services, Annville,
Innovations, Warsaw, Springs, MO PA
IN
Chris Beechy, Triple Z Farm, Tunas, John G. Stoltzfus,
Dillsboro, IN MO Willowstreet, PA
Dan Bontrager, John Weaver, Knox City, Ephraim Beiler, Bird
Shipshewana, IN MO in Hand, PA
Lavern Eash, Jonathan Diller, Ron Bennick, Sunbury,
Middlebury, IN Rutledge, MO PA
DeWayne Eash, New Kenneth Hoover, Gorin, Jay Bomgardner,
Paris, IN MO Ephrata, PA
Joe Gingerich, Valley View, Collins, Benjamin E. Kauffman,
Shipshewana, IN MO Gratz, PA
Mahlon Graber, Wild Rose Hills, Daniel Kauffman,
Woodburn, IN Buffalo, MO Spring Glen, PA
Matthew Graber, Windmill Acres, El Jerry L. Lay II, Muddy
Grabill, IN Dorado Springs, MO Water Farm
Alvin Graber, Macy, IN Rocking M Ranch, El Madisonville, TN, Matt
Dorado Springs, MO O'Hayer
Amos Hochstetler, Clayton Garretson, Vital Farms, Austin,
Topeka, IN Shelbina, MO TX
Jay Dee Lehman, Curvin Nolt, Hurdland, Miller, Lyndonville,
Shipshewana, IN MO VT
Mike Lehman, David Hostetler, Leon L. Corse, The
Middlebury, IN Shelbina, MO Corse Farm Dairy LLC,
Tod Lemier, Bourbon, IN Nevin Horning, Arbela, Whitingham, VT
MO
David Lengacher, Seth Garretson, Henry and Allison
Harlan, IN Hunnewell, MO Pearl, Hill View
Earl Lengacher, Leonard Burkholder, Farm, Danville, VT
Woodburn, IN Edina, MO
Jonas Lengacher, Vernon Brubaker, Tyler and Melanie
Grabill, IN Arbela, MO Webb, Stony Pond
Paul Lengacher, Harlan, Hickory Creek Poultry, Farm, Fairfield, VT
IN LLC, Jamesport, MO
Amos Lengacher, Floyd Hostetler, Ayrshire Farm,
Spencerville, IN Jamesport, MO Upperville, VA
Amzie Martin, Jonas Hostetler, Jubilation Farm,
Rochester, IN Jamesport, MO Purcellville, VA
Everett Martin, Goshen, Joseph Hostetler, Mt. Gap Farm,
IN Jamesport, MO Leesburg, VA
Marlin Miller, Nate Powell-Palm, Andy Wilcox, Wilcox
Dillsboro, IN Bozeman, MT Farms, Roy, WA
John Miller, Casey Bailey, Fort Maynard Mallonee,
Middlebury, IN Benton, MT Mallonee family farm
Rufus Ramer, Rochester, Mark Smith, Lavina, MT LLC, Curtis WA
IN
Chad Ramseyer, Poneto, Bob Herdegen, Chinook, Andrew Dykstra,
IN MT Dykstra Farms
Kevin Ramseyer, Poneto, Clay McAlpine, Valier, Burlington, WA, Dean
IN MT Wesen
Albert Schrock, Jody Manuel, Havre, MT Wesen Organic Dairy,
Pennville, IN Bow, WA
Stephen Stalter, Rob Knotts, Lambert, MT Organic Valley/CROPP
Wakarusa, IN Cooperative,* La
Farge, WI
Sam Stalter, Wakarusa, Jess Alger, Stanford, Gary Achenbach,
IN MT Eastman, WI
Laverne Stutzman, Etna Dave Anderson, Belt, MT Tony Bomkamp, Muscoda,
Green, IN WI
John Wengerd, Geneva, Wes Henthorne, Big Kevin Hall,
IN Timber, MT Livingston, WI
Daniel Yoder, Topeka, Audra Parker, Ogalala, Loras Kilburg, Cuba
IN NE City, WI
Lonnie Yoder, LaGrange, Jesse Laflamme, Pete & David Martin,
IN Gerry's Organics, LLC, Bloomington, WI
Miller, Goshen, IN Monroe, NH Jerry Nolt, Boscobel,
WI
Schlabach, Goshen, IN Giavagnoli, Boscowen, Randy Nolt, Boscobel,
NH WI
Beechy, Topeka, IN Ward, Monroe, NH Michael Shirk, Thorp,
WI
Freeman Fry, Topeka, IN Applegate Natural and Matt Teunissen, Cedar
Kevin Packnett, Afton, Organic Meats, Grove, WI
IA Bridgewater, NJ Edwin Weaver, Loyal,
WI
Larry Nightingale, Art Schaap, Native Nelson Weaver,
Pulaski, IA Pastures Dairy, Curtiss, WI
Clovis, NM
Arlyn Kauffman, Weldon, Latremore, Chazy, NY Dan White, Mt. Hope,
IA WI
Gary Kauffman, Lorimor, Burkholder, Fort Ammon Zimmerman,
IA Covington, NY Stitzer, WI
Jacob Klassen, Stanton, Sensening, North Miller, Blue River, WI
IA Bangor, NY
Jake Kropf, Reiff, North Bangor, NY Betsy Babcock,
Spragueville, IA Paul & Maureen Knapp, Handsome Brook Farm,
Dennis Headings, Cobblestone Valley Franklin, NY
Lorimor, IA Farm, Preble, NY David Bontrager,
Duane Headings, Sparta, WI
Bellevue, IA Ervin Miller,
Hillsboro, WI
Ronnie Kauffman, David Hardy, Hardy William Yoder, La
Creston, IA Family Farm, LLC, Farge, WI
Mohawk, NY
Stacy Bushman, Fort Doug Burbaugh, Melvin Yoder, Ontario,
Atkinson, IA Harpster, OH WI
Royal Hostetler, Perry Clutts, Dennis Bontrager,
Spragueville, IA Circleville, OH Cambria, WI
Blake Family Farm, C.W. Harting, Convoy, Allan Miller, Cashton,
Waukon, IA OH WI
James Frantzen, Elma, Doug Poling, Convoy, OH Andy Kauffman,
IA Cashton, WI
Tom Frantzen, New Raber, Baltic, OH Andrew Schwartz,
Hampton, IA Ontario, WI
Ron Rosmann, Harlan, IA Piskac, Medina, OH Chester Kauffman,
Cashton, WI
Ryan Wangsness, Petersheim, Mt. Vernon, Daniel Yoder, Ontario,
Decorah, IA OH WI
Rick Hellman, Burt, IA Troyer, NW Sugarcreek, Henry Hochstetler,
OH Hillsboro, WI
Mark Kruse,Lansing, IA King, Rushsylvania, OH Joe Kauffman, La
Farge, WI
Andy Bishop, Raber, Sugarcreek, OH John Troyer, Cashton,
Willisburg, KY WI
Justin Dorris, Mast, Walhonding, OH Joseph Schwartz,
Morgantown, KY Pardeeville, WI
Darren Gordon, David R. Ring, Shiloh Levi Miller, La Farge,
Clarkson, KY Acres Dairy, Conneaut, WI
OH
Austin Hostetler, Alvin Bowman, Michael Miller,
Auburn, KY Fredricksburg, OH Wonewoc, WI
Colten Hostetler, Scott Stoller, Ben Miller, South
Auburn, KY Stollers' Organic Wayne, WI
Rich Pemberton, Beaver Dairy, Ltd., Sterling, Norman Miller,
Dam, KY OH Pardeeville, WI
Larry Ryker, David Osterloh, Iv-Ann Bryan Kauffman, Blue
Bonneville, KY Farms, Maria Stein, OH River, WI
Marvin Sauder, Owenton, Menno Farm, Welch, OK David Packnett,
KY Boscobel, WI
Leon Sauder, Liberty, Suzanne Willow and Jeff Eigsti, Blue
KY Lanita Witt, Willow- River, WI
Roy Sauder, Liberty, KY Witt Ranch, Ashland, Eric Miller, Blue
OR River, WI
Norman Schlabach, Common Treasury Farm, Morris Zimmerman,
Auburn, KY Alsea, OR Muscoda, WI
Keith Taul, Cecilia, KY David Breckbill, Willow Randy Kauffman,
Street, PA Monroe, WI
Kenny Thomas, Dick Burchfield, Port Trent Hostetler,
Morgantown, KY Royal, PA Avoca, WI
Elmwood Stock Farm, Jay Burkholder, Peach Marissa Taylor,
Georgetown, KY Bottom, PA Lonetree, WY
Martin, Brownfield, ME Jeff Cook, Selinsgrove, Kevin Mahalko, Mahalko
PA Dairy, Gliman, WI
Douglas Hartkopf, Hart Tim & Joel Crouse, Douglas Delling,
to Hart Farm, Albion, Myerstown, PA Ontario, WI
ME
Joe Bontreger, Holten, Jeff Daniels, Halifax, Jeff Galstad, Coon
MI PA Valley, WI
Aaron Keilen, Portland, Matt Dersham, Milmont, Lucky H Acres, Coon
MI PA Valley, WI
Fred Callens and Randy Dunkelberger, Michael G. McCarty,
Family, Minneota, MN Middleburg, PA Stoddard, WI
Loretta and Martin James Eby, Gap, PA Paul & Judy Olson,
Jaus, Jaus Farms Inc., Nevin Ehst, Bernville, Taylor, WI
Gibbon, MN PA Donna & Larry
Mikshowsky, Bangor,
WI
Montana Organic John Fisher, Loganton, Bear Creek Organics,
Producers Cooperative, PA La Farge, WI
Bozeman, MT Allen Glick, Alan Seelow,
Elizabethville, PA Chaseburg, WI
Willie Shrock, Buffalo, Darren Good, Lititz, PA Jane Siemon, Viroqua,
MO WI
Kent Hostetler, Dale Greiner, Maheim, Joel Goede, Genoa, WI
Buffalo, MO PA
Jeremy Bosser, Buffalo, Gerald High, Richfield, Roger Peters, Peters
MO PA Farm, Chaseburg, WI
Jake Hostetler, Lester Hoover, Arne Trussoni, Genoa,
Buffalo, MO Millersburg, PA WI
Ervin Hoover, Keith Wilson, Wilson Dan Pearson, River
Miffinburg, PA Organic Farm, Cuba Falls, WI
City, WI
Carl Hoover, Myerstown, Max Flaig, Flaig Farms
PA LL, Sparta, WI
* An 1,800 member organic farmer owned cooperative.
______
Submitted Photo and Article by Hon. Michelle Lujan Grisham, a
Representative in Congress from New Mexico
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Jon Bivens' son after being stamped (Photo courtesy of Jon
Bivens) (Ivana Hrynkiw D [email protected]).*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Editor's note: the article, `I need lunch money,' Alabama school
stamps on child's arm, is retained in its entirety in Committee file;
it is also available at: http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/
2016/06/gardendale_elementary_student.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The New York Times
Shaming Children Over School Lunch Bills
The Opinion Pages D Editorial
By The Editorial Board.
May 5, 2017
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Students filling their trays at an elementary school in
Kingston, N.Y., where all meals are now free under the Federal
Community Eligibility Provision. Credit Mary Esch/Associated
Press.
The humiliation inflicted on children whose parents are late paying
school lunch bills--or are too poor to pay them at all--is a national
disgrace. Cafeteria workers berate the children for being unable to
pay, rather than allowing them to eat, or stigmatize them by stamping
their arms with messages like ``I need lunch money.'' An article in The
Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/30/well/family/lunch-shaming-
children-parents-school-bills.html) on Monday recounted the painful
experience of one student whose meal was dumped in the garbage.
The Department of Agriculture, which oversees the school lunch
program, drew attention to this last year (https://www.fns.usda.gov/
sites/default/files/cn/SP46-2016os.pdf) when it required school
districts to establish a written policy for dealing with children who
are unable to pay for food. It encouraged districts to work out payment
plans with families and to find ways to continue providing meals, but
did not explicitly bar them from humiliating children over outstanding
bills. Three-quarters of school districts ended the 2015-16 school year
with outstanding meal bills, some totaling millions of dollars. The
districts argue that shaming is necessary to force families who can
afford to pay to do so.
Federal data shows that nearly \1/2\ of school districts employ
shaming policies--from substituting a cold sandwich for a hot meal to
even worse forms of humiliation. The problem is that many families
struggling with outstanding bills are in fact eligible for free or
reduced-price meals but either don't know it, because of language
barriers, or have fallen through the cracks of the registration process
for some other reason.
The Food Research and Action Center, a national nonprofit group
that works on policies to combat hunger, has proposed stronger
recommendations (http://www.frac.org/research/resource-library/
establishing-unpaid-meal-fee-policies-best-practices-ensure-access-
prevent-stigma). It calls on schools to reach out to families who
qualify for free or reduced-price meals to make sure they get certified
to receive them.
It rightly urges schools that serve poor students to register for
the Federal Community Eligibility Provision program, under which
schools serve free breakfast and lunch to all children and are
reimbursed by the government based on the poverty level of its
students. Beyond that, districts need to make payment arrangements with
struggling families directly, instead of turning to collection agencies
that push them toward financial collapse with onerous fees.
States across the country are finally taking steps to end the
stigmatization of hungry children. New Mexico, for one, outlawed
(https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/07/well/family/new-mexico-outlaws-
school-lunch-shaming.html) the use of shaming and directed schools to
sign up for Federal meal assistance and work with families to pay
debts.
Schools have to find ways to collect meal debts without
stigmatizing vulnerable children who have nothing to do with the debt
and no means of paying it off.
______
Submitted Questions
Response from Hon. Sonny Perdue, Secretary, U.S. Department of
Agriculture
Questions Submitted by Hon. Glenn Thompson, a Representative in
Congress from Pennsylvania
Question 1. Mr. Secretary, congratulations on your recent
confirmation. Thank you for your early action to help get flavored milk
back into schools that has long been a priority of mine as a senior
Member of the Education and the Workforce Committee. Here on this
Committee, we're very eager to get to work on the next farm bill for
the benefit of all of agriculture. As you mentioned in your testimony
dairy farmers have been struggling and we need to make some
improvements to the Margin Protection Program.
In the near-term, I'm interested in an idea that some in the dairy
industry have floated to see if we can develop some additional risk
management products that would recognize milk as an agricultural
commodity that is separate and distinct from coverage developed for
livestock. Current law does not indicate that Congress intended for
livestock products like milk to fall under the same category as
livestock, so we're hopeful that USDA can look closely at this and see
if this may be a way to provide some interim options for dairy farmers.
I'm interested in any comments you have and I'd be grateful if you can
commit to working with us to get this problem solved for our dairy
producers
Answer. We are exploring all options to provide relief to America's
dairy farmers and I am committed to working with the Committee and
stakeholders in finding solutions. We are fully engaged on the issue of
whether milk should fall outside of the livestock cap on crop
insurance, and I hope to have an answer in the near future.
Question 2. America's family woodland owners--tree farmers--supply
over \1/2\ of the timber used to make forest products here in the U.S.
These landowners put in their own hard work-sharing in the stewardship
of our nation's great forest resources. Just like we help farmers with
technical assistance to supply us with food, USDA has tools to help
forest owners supply us with fiber that fuels a significant domestic
industry. These tools, found in both the U.S. Forest Service and NRCS
and often implemented in partnership with state agencies like the
Pennsylvania DNR, help landowners learn how to produce timber while
also managing water and wildlife habitat. Will you work with me and
other Members of the Committee to ensure that both NRCS and USFS State
and Private Forestry programs work better for these Tree Farmers--
providing them with technical assistance and financial help where
necessary to keep our nation in timber while conserving other important
natural resources?
Answer. Yes, I will commit to working with you to provide
assistance to our private tree farmers, in order to ensure that we are
being good stewards of our forests while providing the timber used to
make forest products here in the U.S.
Question 3. Even while the nation's agriculture markets are
struggling, we see opportunities in the forest industry, as home starts
on the rise, and other market indicators show improvement. I
introduced, along with several of my colleagues, the Timber Innovation
Act, to ensure that we have the research and technical support to drive
innovation in the forest sector--just like we help our farmers and
ranchers with innovation. The Forest Products Laboratory--within the
U.S. Forest Service--is a huge asset when it comes to this research and
is also working very closely with the industry to leverage their
investments in research--a true public-private partnership. Will you
support the Timber Innovation Act and work with me to ensure the Forest
Service focuses on such research?
Answer. I agree that the Forest Products Lab conducts important
research that helps promote new uses and markets for wood. In addition,
the Forest Service currently manages a Wood Innovation Grant program
that supports wood products and wood energy markets throughout the
United States to fund forest management needs on National Forest System
and other forestlands. USDA is still in the process of reviewing the
mentioned legislation.
Question 4. Mr. Secretary, this Administration through several
Executive Orders, has made the responsible use of our domestic energy
resources and the development of energy infrastructure a major
priority. Untying the bureaucratic knots that have stalled energy
projects while complying with permitting rules and regulations will
provide consumers with lower cost, cleaner energy and will create
thousands of jobs.
One such project that holds great potential for our economy is the
Atlantic Coast Pipeline which will bring needed natural gas from the
Marcellus shale region to states in the Southeast. Because this project
must cross two National Forests, there has been active engagement with
the Forest Service for over 2 years in an effort to secure the
necessary permits to move forward. I am concerned about reports of the
Forest Service local and regional offices continually changing
requirements and conflicting requests for information.
I would ask respectfully that you look into this matter and have
your staff provide the Committee with a response and prompt update on
this important project.
Answer. I share your concern with meeting our domestic energy goals
and ensuring the environmental review process moves efficiently. At
this time, the Forest Service is meeting the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission timeline for all project submissions and environmental
review. The Forest Service issued a draft record of decision on July
21, 2017 to authorize the use and occupancy of National Forest Systems
lands for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, and approve project-specific
amendments for the Monongahela National Forest and George Washington
National Forest Plans. The draft decision, jointly issued by the Forest
Service's Eastern and Southern Regional Foresters, would allow Atlantic
Coast Pipeline LLC (Atlantic) to construct and operate 21 miles of the
pipeline route that would cross National Forest System lands. Keeping
this project moving forward efficiently is a top priority for the
Department, and the Forest Service continues to hold regular meetings
with Dominion Resources and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to
discuss and understand information requests, document review and
timelines. The work should be completed according to the published
timeline.
Questions Submitted by Hon. Vicky Hartzler, a Representative in
Congress from Missouri
Question 1. School Lunch--I appreciate the recent steps USDA has
taken to provide flexibility in the school lunch program, and I believe
this is a good step in the right direction but more needs to be done.
Maintaining the Washington-based sodium and whole grain, and caloric
requirements continues to be a problem for my local schools. I support
their desire to regain control over decisions on what food is served in
their schools. Can you tell me the steps USDA is taking to return
decision making control to local schools and your willingness to
support full control to local school officials?
Answer. For the upcoming school year (SY) 2017-2018, based on
appropriations actions and consistent with my proclamation signed on
May 1, 2017, USDA offered flexibility for sodium, whole grains and
flavored 1% milk. To affirm Congress' ongoing direction, USDA is also
in the process of issuing a rule to provide flexibilities consistent
with those currently available to Program operators participating in
the Child Nutrition Programs beginning in School Year 2018-2019. These
flexibilities include: (1) providing operators the option to offer
flavored, low-fat (one percent fat) milk in the Child Nutrition
Programs; (2) extending the state agencies' option to allow individual
school food authorities to include grains that are not whole grain-rich
in the weekly menu offered under the National School Lunch Program
(NSLP) and School Breakfast Program (SBP); and (3) revising the sodium
reduction timeline for the NSLP and SBP.
USDA will be accepting public comments on these actions. After
taking those comments into account, we will move to provide clarity for
future school years. Further, I am reaffirming my commitment to work
with school districts, school leadership, and school food service
professionals to ensure the program meets its central goal of offering
nutritious meals that students want to, and actually will, consume.
USDA will also continue to offer a number of other opportunities
for local schools and districts to operate a school meal program that
works best in their communities. For instance, schools and districts
continue to have full discretion over their menu planning decisions,
food product purchasing, and recipes. USDA will continue to develop and
provide numerous technical assistance resources to support menu
planning, including the Food Buying Guide, standardized recipes, and
sample menus that help schools meet the broad general requirements of
the meal components while allowing for flexibility in offering items
tailored to local or cultural preferences, seasonal considerations, and
student input.
Question 2. SNAP Tax--Recent state and local moves to levy various
food and beverage taxes at the wholesale level could lead to Federal
nutrition funding through the SNAP program being diverted from feeding
hungry people to funding local communities through various tax schemes.
I know SNAP law prohibits the collection of any sales tax on SNAP
program benefits. Is the USDA currently working with municipalities or
state governments to address these concerns? Is there any additional
statutory authority the department needs to ensure all Federal funding
through the SNAP program goes to its intended purpose of feeding hungry
people?
Answer. USDA works with state and local governments to address
concerns as these tax issues arise. If a store is required to charge
sales or a distributor's tax on SNAP-eligible food items, and that tax
is normally charged at the point-of-sale or it appears separately on
the receipt, then stores cannot include the charge in sales to SNAP
clients. If stores are instead required to pay a distributor's tax for
beverages or other SNAP-eligible food items, and that tax is included
in the shelf price of the beverage or food item, then stores can charge
the full shelf price (including the distributor's tax) to SNAP clients
at the point-of-sale. Currently, USDA is not seeking additional
legislation on this issue.
Question 3. Meat Processing--In recent conversations with meat
processing businesses in my district, I have heard of a variety of
concerns ranging from conflicts in USDA-FDA labeling requirements to
confusing humane handling standards to business limiting overtime
regulations. These onerous regulations and unclear guidance is stifling
their ability to grow their business and create jobs in rural America.
What is the USDA doing to streamline FSIS regulations to ensure high
standards of food safety that U.S. consumer demand in a way that still
provides the flexibility processors need to thrive in a competitive
global market?
Answer. As directed by the President under Executive Order 13777--
Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda--we are examining regulations
across USDA to identify rules that, among other things, inhibit job
creation, are ineffective, impose costs that exceed benefits, or create
a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with regulatory reform
initiatives and policies. As part of this effort, I am committed to
modernizing our FSIS inspection system to streamline regulations, while
continuing to ensure the safety and wholesomeness of meat, poultry and
egg products.
Question 4. ECP Funding & Waiver--Recent flooding in Missouri has
caused much devastation to agriculture lands and personal property in
my district. I want to ensure that all Federal resources are available
to those in need following major severe weather events. The Emergency
Conservation Program (ECP) is a very useful tool for returning ag lands
back to productive use following major disasters. I understand there is
an ECP backlog even after the most recent appropriation bill passed
last month included an additional $28 million in funding. Can you
provide to me the current level of funding necessary to address the
backlog and what it would take to provide certainty to any Missouri
farmers who may qualify and need this type of assistance? In addition,
a few regions in the state have received multiple major flood events in
the past 5 years. I understand ECP rules may prevent farmers in these
areas devastated areas from participating in the program. Can I get a
commitment from you to look at the data and determine if additional
flexibility is warranted in these circumstances?
Answer. The request for ECP implementation by Missouri was made and
approved in May 2017 with an estimated need of $8 million. The start of
signup was delayed to May 30th because of the need for water to recede
before producers could assess the extent of damage. Because of the
number of producers impacted, signup does not end until July 30th. At
that time, we will have a clearer view of how much funding is needed
and work to provide available funds quickly. We believe that the
available funds will be sufficient funds to cover Missouri farmer needs
related to this event unless signup results are much higher than
anticipated, but we do still have a growing backlog, which currently
totals $42 million nationally as of July 21st and changes daily due to
unforeseen natural disasters. FSA Headquarters Office is working with
the Missouri State office and has encouraged the state to submit any
applications that need to be reviewed due to frequent damage
provisions.
Additionally, the provision associated with frequently damaged
areas being eligible for ECP funds is specific to the actual area, or
land unit damaged and not applied generally to a county or community.
Therefore, even if a particular Missouri county has been impacted by
recurring damaging floods, specific areas within that county may still
qualify for ECP funding, as the rule is applied to site-specific land.
FSA is currently evaluating waiver options to the frequent damage
policy in response to the request from the Missouri State FSA Office.
Question 5. USDA Policy Statement on Free Speech and Right to Free
Religious Exercise--In 2015, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
threatened to shut down the family-owned West Michigan Beef Company for
religious materials on marriage found in the company's breakroom. The
owner, Donald Vander Boon, had included an article supporting marriage
between a man and a woman amongst other materials available to
employees. USDA inspectors immediately alerted Mr. Vander Boon of
USDA's anti-harassment policy that prohibits communications USDA
considers disrespectful or insulting based on sexual orientation. The
owner was forced to remove the materials or close his doors. USDA's
actions were an affront to free speech and the ability of individuals
to exercise their faith unhindered.
I appreciate your timely May 8, 2017 policy statement upholding
First Amendment protections for all Americans and ensuring ``the right
to free speech and the right to free religious exercise.'' I am
particularly encouraged by USDA's commitment to ``continue to uproot
and eliminate discrimination, harassment, and retaliation and ensure
our employees and customers work in an atmosphere of dignity and
equality--a place where the rules are known, respected, and fair to
all.''
The meat inspectors treatment of the West Michigan Beef Company was
intolerant and counterproductive to First Amendment protections. Is
USDA preparing agency guidance to implement the May 8, 2017 statement?
Will this guidance protect all companies from future harassment and
retaliation based on marriage or religious beliefs?
Answer. The Food Safety and Inspection Service issued guidance to
its District Managers on June 16, 2017, providing further guidance to
implement my Policy Statement on the First Amendment. We will also
follow any future guidance provided by the Department of Justice on the
President's Executive Order promoting free speech and religious liberty
and how those rights are implemented along with existing anti-
discrimination laws.
Question Submitted by Hon. Doug LaMalfa, a Representative in Congress
from California
Question. Mr. Secretary, we have in the past year heard of several
instances in which school food authorities purchased foreign peaches
and other foreign products rather than domestic products, as is
required by current Buy American requirements. Would you agree that
USDA could do more to ensure that the Buy American requirements are
strengthened?
Answer. Yes, USDA should do more to ensure that we Buy American
first. We are currently reviewing the options to reinforce the Buy
American provisions. We also will continue to work with states to
ensure school compliance with these requirements.
Questions Submitted by Hon. Mike Bost, a Representative in Congress
from Illinois
Question 1. Mr. Secretary, in your written testimony, you mentioned
natural challenges producers are facing such as damaging floods. My
district is along the Mississippi River and we are still waiting for
the waters to recede so producers assess the damage and replant. I
would like to invite you to my district to tour the flood damaged areas
and see how vitally important USDA services and Crop Insurance is to
Southern Illinois producers.
I have heard from my producers, especially younger ones, about
Guaranteed and Direct Loan limits not being in line with the current
cost of production. Previous witnesses in front of this Committee have
echoed the same.
Do you believe there is sufficient funding in the FSA loan programs
in order to modernize the program and do you believe that there is
adequate staff and technology at FSA to administer the loan programs?
Answer. FSA has completed analyses showing that increasing the
limits to the extent that many have proposed would increase the demand
for funding. Increasing the loan limits without a commensurate increase
in funding would reduce the number of producers that may be assisted
through FSA's farm loan programs. Although FSA's loan portfolios have
increased by over 40 percent since 2012, loans continue to be processed
within established guidelines. I will prioritize customer service every
day.
Question 2. Do you feel that it is necessary for prime and
productive farm ground to be enrolled in CRP as compared to more
environmentally sensitive areas along waterways that need continuous
dredging? Also, do you see CRP payment rates competing with the next
generation of producers who are looking for quality ground to rent?
Answer. CRP has unarguably provided agricultural landowners an
incredible opportunity to voluntarily protect vital natural resources
with various enrollment options suitable to their farming operation.
All land enrolled in CRP is environmentally sensitive and must meet the
statutory eligibility criteria. USDA announces general sign-up
periods--typically no more frequently than once a year--where
landowners submit bids and compete for entry. In contrast, continuous
sign-up, which was initiated in 1996, is not based on competitive entry
(if a landowner and the land offered for enrollment qualifies, the land
is enrolled) and focuses on high priority conservation practices like
filter strips, riparian buffers, and wetland restoration.
Lands enrolled under the general signup (currently 16.1 million
acres) must be: highly erodible (HEL), located in a conservation
priority area, or be under an expiring CRP contract. A limited
enrollment period is typically announced every year or 2; bids are
competitively selected based on an environmental benefit index (EBI).
The EBI captures the wildlife value of covers selected; water, air, and
soil quality; and cost in determining the score and consequent ranking
for enrollment. Even though many offered lands may meet the eligibility
criteria, they may not be accepted if the EBI score is too low.
Lands enrolled under continuous signup (currently 6.2 million
acres) targets the most environmentally sensitive lands and includes
the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP), wetland,
conservation buffer, and wildlife initiatives. If land meets
eligibility requirements, landowners can enroll at any time of the year
without competition.
Annual rental rates vary by county based on dryland soil rental
rates and are typically updated every other year using NASS survey
data. They are set to reflect what a producer would pay in cash rent
for non-irrigated cropland. Contract-specific rates are further
adjusted by the relative productivity of the soils offered; thus,
marginal lands--such as those targeted by CRP--receive a lower payment
compared to more productive lands. There is an inherent lag in these
rates. As land prices go down over time, rates may be temporarily
higher than the market, and conversely, as land prices go up, rates may
be temporarily lower than the market. We try to minimize this lag by
updating rates as soon as better data is available.
We have an opportunity in the next farm bill to re-examine the CRP
program. At that time, we will offer our thoughts to Congress on the
best way ahead for CRP and other conservation programs. That analysis
will be based on the best science and data available.
Question 3. Secretary Perdue, sustainability, the need for American
farmers to compete on a world export stage, and the task of feeding
nine billion people are all critically important problems this
Committee can help address. In your view, how important are working
lands conservation programs to achieving each of these goals?
Answer. Working lands conservation programs are critical to
achieving both important environmental benefits and producing food for
our growing population. NRCS' suite of working lands conservation
programs help our producers remain the most productive and competitive
in the world without sacrificing the land and water resources we all
depend on. Working lands programs put conservation practices on the
ground by providing planning, technical solutions, cost-sharing
assistance and agricultural use retention. While the practices
available within our programs may require some initial investment, they
tend to increase long-term productivity and contribute to profitability
down the road.
By ensuring that our nations' producers are not forced to choose
between sustainable agriculture and profitable, productive agriculture,
working lands programs are uniquely designed to address the twin goals
of sustainability and productivity at the same time. NRCS's working
lands programs ensure farmers and ranchers can do right and feed
everyone.
Question 4. Mr. Secretary, Foot-and-Mouth Disease is one of the
most devastating diseases of livestock. A FMD outbreak in the U.S.
would be disastrous to our livestock industry with serious implications
to our whole agriculture economy. I continually hear from our producers
that the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is not prepared to
effectively deal with a FMD outbreak due to shortage of vaccines and
other resources. Will you commit to working with Congress to improve
the Department's preparedness to handle an FMD outbreak?
Answer. I can assure you that USDA takes the threat of FMD very
seriously, and we will work with Congress, states and industry to
ensure that we are all prepared for this disease or any other foreign
animal disease.
Questions Submitted by Hon. David Rouzer, a Representative in Congress
from North Carolina
Question 1. Mr. Secretary, this Administration through several
Executive Orders, has made the responsible use of our domestic energy
resources and the development of energy infrastructure a major
priority. Untying the bureaucratic knots that have stalled energy
projects while complying with permitting rules and regulations will
provide consumers with lower cost, cleaner energy and will create
thousands of jobs. One such project that holds great potential for our
economy is the Atlantic Coast Pipeline which will bring needed natural
gas from the Marcellus shale region to states in the Southeast. To do
so, this project must cross two National Forests and has been actively
engaged with the Forest Service for over 2 years in an effort to secure
the necessary permits. I am concerned about reports of the Forest
Service local and regional offices continually changing requirements
and conflicting requests for information. I would ask respectfully that
you look into this matter and have your staff provide the Committee
with a response and prompt update on this important project.
Answer. I share your concern with meeting our domestic energy goals
and ensuring the environmental review process moves efficiently. At
this time, the Forest Service is meeting the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission timeline for all project submissions and environmental
reviews. The Forest Service issued a draft record of decision on July
21, 2017, to authorize the use and occupancy of National Forest Systems
lands for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, and approve project-specific
amendments for the Monongahela National Forest and George Washington
National Forest Plans. The draft decision, jointly issued by the Forest
Service's Eastern and Southern Regional Foresters, would allow Atlantic
Coast Pipeline LLC (Atlantic) to construct and operate 21 miles of the
pipeline route that would cross National Forest System lands. Keeping
this project moving forward efficiently is a top priority for the
Department, and the Forest Service continues to hold regular meetings
with Dominion Resources and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to
discuss and understand information requests, document review and
timelines. The work should be completed according to the published
timeline.
Question 2. Would a companion program for animal health mirroring
the Plant Pest and Disease Program administered by APHIS be helpful in
managing disease threats?
Answer. I will direct APHIS to undertake a study of this proposal
and will report back on the findings.
Question 3. Mr. Secretary, there is a regulation that dates back to
1982, and it is the source of great concern among many who care about
charter schools. At that time the Department of Agriculture adopted the
Title IX ``Common Rule'', as did most agencies, except that USDA added
an additional provision to the rule that prevents discrimination based
on appearance. This specific provision has been used as the hook for
the ACLU to sue charter schools due to their dress code requirement of
students. Specifically, the ACLU has brought lawsuits against charter
schools that participate in the free and reduced price lunch program
because they require students to wear uniforms. These lawsuits have
cost charter schools in my district more than $315,000 in legal fees
over the course of the last 3 years. Would you be willing to take at
look at this particular provision and let me know if the Administration
would be willing to repeal it, or at least modify it to clarify that
this particular provision does not apply to charter schools?
Answer. The USDA Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights
is in the process of updating our regulations to harmonize its
provisions with the Title IX common rule issued by the Department of
Justice in 2000. Thus, USDA will bring its regulations in line with
other Federal department regulations.
Questions Submitted by Hon. Ralph Lee Abraham, a Representative in
Congress from Louisiana
Question 1. I have been hearing reports from my Sugar farmers that
RMA is imposing a 45% premium rate increase over 3 years on Sugar. This
massive increase is costly to our growers, and will suppress
participation in the crop insurance program. Our Farm Bureau can find
no actuarial reason for such a large increase and I was wondering if
you help me understand what has happened here and why such a large jump
is warranted?
Answer. Although the average premium per acre has decreased since
2014, premiums are expected to increase for 2017 due to several
factors. For 2017, new coverage has been added to the sugarcane policy
that addresses overwinter damage. Also, the method used to measure
production for loss adjustment purposes has been revised in a manner
that is likely to increase insurance payments. These changes were
privately developed and proposed by the sugarcane industry, and then
approved by the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Board of Directors.
To maintain actuarial soundness, an increase in premium rates was
recommended to account for the added coverage. Other factors that
affected premium rates for 2017 were regular updates of the premium
rates to reflect recent loss history and an increase in the insured
price of sugarcane.
Question 2. I wanted to thank you for your Agency's work towards
permitting Louisiana's rice farmers to take advantage of planting
furrow irrigated rice as an insured crop. Furrow irrigation using blast
resistant seed produces competitive yields while saving water and
drastically reducing harvest costs. Approval of this practice will
provide Louisiana's farmers and producers yet another tool to provide
strong and reliable harvests. Can you give me an idea of how long this
approval process will take?
Answer. RMA has engaged in numerous discussions regarding the
furrow irrigated rice growing practice that Louisiana and other rice
growing areas are beginning to utilize and looks forward to working
with Louisiana's rice producers in providing insurance coverage for
these rice growing practices. RMA is aware that some groups may be
interested in developing furrow irrigation practice coverage under the
authority provided by Section 508(h) of the Federal Crop Insurance Act.
Once a complete submission is received, the Federal Crop Insurance
Corporation (FCIC) Board of Directors (Board) and the RMA will work
expeditiously through the FCIC Board approval process. Once the private
entity completes its developmental work and submits the private
submission under Section 508(h) to the FCIC Board, the approval process
can vary depending on the complexity and issues that may arise during
the FCIC Board's statutorily required review process.
Questions Submitted by Hon. Collin C. Peterson, a Representative in
Congress from Minnesota
Biotech
Question 1. The Administration's announcement of the 100 Day Action
Plan of the U.S.-China Comprehensive Economic Dialogue and the
inclusion of their commitment to address the current backlog of new
biotechnology traits for import into China is welcomed news. However,
there's concern that China's National Biosafety Committee may be
looking to use EU approval of varieties as a factor in determining
approval. This is troubling news. What assurance can you provide that
the Administration will find ways to hold China accountable to the
agreement they made to use only safety-based criteria in determining
the approvals?
Answer. Your question underscores the importance and value of the
new Under Secretary for Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs that I
announced last month. As directed by Congress under the 2014 Farm Bill,
this newly created position will bring unified high level
representation for agriculture to key trade negotiations with senior,
foreign officials and within the Executive Branch. It will also allow
the Administration to recruit an Under Secretary who has extensive
experience in international trade negotiation and policy issues. USDA's
Under Secretary for Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs will work
tirelessly to hold other countries to their trade commitments,
including those addressed with China in the 100 Day Action Plan.
Conservation
Question 2. Under the President's budget outline, encouraging
private-sector conservation planning is recommended. What does private-
sector conservation planning look like to you? Do you think this can be
accomplished without conflicts of interest and adequate oversight?
Answer. I do believe that private-sector conservation planning can
be successful. The Technical Service Provider (TSP) program, authorized
by the 2002 Farm Bill, and the authority to fund the Conservation
Activities Plan (CAP), established by the 2008 Farm Bill, have already
provided many opportunities for the private-sector to assist in
conservation planning activities through NRCS conservation programs,
especially the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP). NRCS
has also utilized TSPs through agreements to accomplish specific
conservation planning projects.
We encourage the expanded engagement from the private-sector in
conservation planning, enabling the Agency to provide increased
leadership to ensure NRCS and partner staff technical efforts are
concentrated where they are most needed by our customers. With the
proper resources, standards, guidance, and oversight in place, NRCS can
enhance plan quality, increase the number of conservation plans being
developed, and boost the acres covered by conservation plans.
Question 3. There is concern that Members' priorities for
conservation will be put on the backburner given the new restructuring
of USDA and with NRCS moving under the Under Secretary for Farm
Production and Conservation. How will you ensure that Conservation and
NRCS remain a priority? Will you have a Deputy Under Secretary for
Conservation?
Answer. At this time, we do not have plans for a Deputy Under
Secretary for Conservation. I am still in the process of evaluating
USDA's reorganization but fully intend to notify Congress if we decide
to take such a step. I feel as though conservation and NRCS will
actually be elevated in the reorganization as it becomes housed within
the Farm Production and Conservation mission area with FSA and RMA,
which are farmer-focused agencies that provide critical customer
service in the field. In addition to my personal assurances, this is
the first time one of our mission areas has included ``conservation''
in the title, and nobody should be able to forget where NRCS is now
housed.
Question 4. Have you already been briefed on the requirement for
conservation program participants to sign up for DUNS nos. and get SAM
registrations? Hopefully you will do what you can administratively to
eliminate this requirement that is frustrating program participants
through requirements that were never meant for conservation title
payments.
Answer. The requirements you identify are pursuant to the Federal
Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (the Transparency Act)
implementing regulations at 2 CFR part 25, which includes the
government-wide requirement that entities meet two basic conditions in
order to receive any award of Federal financial assistance, including
NRCS conservation program assistance. First, the entity must have a Dun
and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number and have a
current registration with the System for Award Management (SAM) at the
time of fund obligation in order for there to be a valid conservation
program agreement. Second, the entity must maintain an active
registration in SAM for the duration of the conservation program
agreement.
NRCS does not have authority to waive these government-wide
requirements under the Transparency Act, and thus NRCS cannot eliminate
the requirements administratively. However, NRCS continuously works
with affected program participants to explain the mandates and, if
issues arise at the time of payment, assist participants to resolve
their compliance issues.
Question 5. The Department recently shut down the enrollment of
acres into the Conservation Reserve Program. Given that there are 2.5
million acres coming out of the CRP at the end of September, is there a
reason why you aren't allowing landowners to continue to sign up for
contracts that would be enrolled after October 1st of this year?
Answer. We temporarily paused FY 2018 contract approvals in order
to evaluate what types of offers--continuous, general, or grasslands--
should be prioritized and accepted to best utilize the limited number
of available acres. Enrollment in CRP is currently at 23.5 million
acres, just below the 24 million acre enrollment cap established in the
2014 Farm Bill. Decisions on how to manage the strong demand for CRP
acres given the limited acreage availability under the cap must be
made. On September 30, 2017, 2.5 million acres of CRP will expire.
Counting against the 2.5 million acres that will expire at the end of
FY 2017 are CRP-Grasslands and continuous signup offers that have an
October 1, 2017 (FY 2018) start date. Currently, we anticipate only
about \1/2\ million acres will be available for CRP enrollment in FY
2018, depending on final CRP-Grasslands and continuous signup
enrollment numbers in FY 2017. I am considering options regarding the
distribution of future CRP acreage enrollment, and look forward to
working with Congress in developing a path forward.
Crop Insurance
Question 6. We know the positive impacts provided by cover crops.
There is an important opportunity to streamline and improve NRCS and
RMA rules. The last Administration left office before solving the
problems around RMA's overly burdensome guidelines on cover crops or
making changes to the Good Farming Practices list. How do you plan on
addressing this issue?
Answer. I am committed to ensuring that rules make sense for both
America's farmers and taxpayers. We will look at this issue as part of
our larger effort to streamline and create more efficiencies throughout
the Department.
Dairy
Question 7. During your confirmation process, you spoke with
interest, about a proposal by industry, on the need to develop crop
insurance options for dairy producers, both through changes to the LGM
program and through the normal insurance submission process. What are
your thoughts today and what actions has USDA taken to this end?
Answer. We are actively exploring all avenues available to provide
more crop insurance options for dairy farmers. We are committed to
working with any submitter to expand risk management options to dairy
farmers and will work to make sure the review process moves as
expeditiously as possible. In addition, we will work with private
submitters to improve already existing products and will explore
internal development of polices as well.
Department Administration
Question 8. Have you been briefed on the status of claims in the
Office of Civil Rights, including those under the Equal Credit
Opportunity Act? Hopefully you will avoid what has taken place during
other changes in Administrations, which is a walking away from the
processes in place to ensure that farmers and employees are treated
fairly and have a system in place if they feel they have not been.
Answer. With regard to Civil Rights at USDA, my goal is that all
customers will receive fair treatment and high quality service, no
matter their gender, race, religion, or other personal characteristics.
In saying that the Department should ``Do Right and Feed Everyone,'' I
expect that the Department and its employees will do right by everyone.
The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights issued a
memorandum on June 23, 2017, to the Acting Deputy Under Secretary for
Rural Development and the Acting Administrator for the Farm Service
Agency providing data and explanations for complaints and ``non-
complaints'' filed under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act. The
memorandum details the status and disposition for 1,101 program
discrimination complaints filed with the Department between 1998 and
2009 which comprised the Statute of Limitations list for administrative
closure.
Question 9. The Office of Advocacy and Outreach was created to
serve a varied, but growing--and increasingly important--sector of
agriculture. Do you believe that there is a need for an effort to
coordinate and ensure that the needs of small, beginning, veteran, and
minority producers are being addressed, especially given the increasing
budget pressure on USDA?
Answer. Improving customer service, whether those customers are
small, beginning, veteran, minority, or another category, is a primary
focus for me. We are reviewing the effectiveness of service delivery
and the role that the Office of Advocacy and Outreach plays in ensuring
that USDA customers receive the information and support they need. USDA
will continue to develop tools that help small, beginning, veteran, and
minority producers access our services and programs.
Question 10. The President has made it a priority to limit Federal
hiring. Could you provide a general outlook on the state of USDA's
workforce? What is the percentage breakdown between age divisions, how
many employees are approaching retirement age, and what steps are being
taken to educate new hires and prepare for retirements in order to
ensure a high level of customer service for farmers and
ranchers?Regulatory Reform
Answer. In USDA's current permanent workforce, our highest
concentration of employees is in the age group 51-60 years of age
(32%). This is followed by employees in the age group 41-50 (25%), 31-
40 (22%), 61-70 (12%), 21-30 (9%), 71 and older (1%) and 20 and under
(less than 1%). Of these employees, 21% are eligible to retire in 2018,
25% in 2019, and 29% in 2020. However, our overall attrition
representing people who are leaving USDA, including those who are
retirement eligible, is 7%. USDA has a very robust training and
development program to ensure that employees recognize that the Agency
is committed to their growth and development at all stages of the
career life cycle. USDA has a policy, resources, and tools that help
every employee and their supervisor annually develop an individual
development plan to ensure employees are continually learning and
growing in their careers. Additionally, USDA has development programs
that are open to all employees designed to build the pipeline of
leadership at every level, including the Team Leader Program, the
Aspiring Leader Program, and the Leadership Essentials Certificate
Program. In December 2016, USDA was ranked 5th out of 19 large agencies
in the category of training and development, demonstrating that
employees are highly satisfied with the training they receive at USDA.
Regulatory Reform
Question 11. You recently named a ``Regulatory Reform Officer'' on
your staff. What's on your list of regulations that you believe are
impacting agriculture and rural America in a negative way?
Answer. I wanted to make removal of barriers and unworkable
regulations a top priority for the Department as it was named a top
priority for President Trump's Administration. USDA is committed to
operating efficiently, effectively, and with integrity, while
minimizing the burdens on individual businesses and communities who
participate in and comply with USDA programs. Shortly after my
confirmation, and at the direction of Executive Order 13777--Enforcing
the Regulatory Reform Agenda, I appointed a Regulatory Reform Officer
(RRO) to lead the planning, coordination and ultimate implementation of
the regulatory reforms and operational improvements at USDA. The RRO
has already brought together leaders from the mission areas and staff
offices inside USDA to form the Regulatory Reform Task Force required
by EO 13777. This internal group is well into identifying reforms and
opportunities for the department--regulatory, policy-based and
operational--for the dual purpose of easing the regulatory burden on
the American people and improving service delivery to USDA customers.
USDA also just announced the request for public input into this reform
effort and will review those submissions and take action where
appropriate.
Reorganization USDA
Question 12. If the Rural Development agencies will now report
directly to the Secretary, who within the Secretary's office will be
the main point of contact/advocate for Rural Development?
Answer. The Assistant to the Secretary for Rural Development will
be the primary point of contact within the Secretary's office.
Question 12a. Will this individual have the same influence as an
Under Secretary when it comes to making key decisions within the
Department? For example, who will represent the RD programs when the
budget is formulated? Doesn't this have implications for the RD program
budgets--and if not, why not?
Answer. The Assistant to the Secretary for Rural Development has
the same influence, if not more, than the previous Under Secretary for
Rural Development position in making Departmental decisions. There are
no budget implications associated with the creation of the new
position.
Question 12b. Who will testify for the RD programs at budget
hearings?
Answer. The Assistant to the Secretary for Rural Development will
be the senior policy official to testify on behalf of Rural
Development.
Question 12c. To whom will the State Directors of the RD programs
report?
Answer. The State Directors will report to the Assistant to the
Secretary for Rural Development.
Question 12d. Will the RD programs continue to have the same kind
of staffing needed to carry them out effectively?
Answer. USDA's reorganization plan does not call for changes in the
staffing levels for Rural Development.
Question 13. The new USDA organization chart showing Rural
Development reporting directly to the Secretary leaves off listing
Rural Utilities Service, Rural Housing Service and Rural Business--
Cooperative Service compared to the old organization chart. Are RUS,
RHS and RBS being eliminated, consolidated or is this an oversight?
Answer. The organizational chart previously provided to the
Committee did not appropriately portray the alignment of the RD
agencies to the Assistant to the Secretary. As a result, the chart has
been updated to accurately reflect the three agencies within Rural
Development reporting the Assistant to the Secretary for Rural
Development. A corrected version of the report was distributed to the
House Agriculture Committee and posted online on June 16, 2017.
Question 14. State RD directors currently report to the Under
Secretary for RD. Access to the Under Secretary can be important for
them in helping break into the USDA bureaucracy. Who will the state
directors report to, going forward?
Answer. The State Directors will report to the Assistant to the
Secretary for Rural Development.
Research
Question 15. During a hearing earlier this year, the Subcommittee
on Biotechnology, Horticulture, and Research learned that the United
States is being outpaced with regards to investment in agricultural
research. China has increased its research investments exponentially
while India and Brazil are making significant investments as well. This
in turn has potential implications on the U.S. food supply and
availability of qualified agricultural scientists and researchers. How
is USDA responding to this trend given the current fiscal forecast and
what is this Administration doing to close this investment in the
research delta?
Answer. New discoveries, new technologies, and new skill sets
(e.g., precision agriculture, artificial intelligence, machine
learning, robotics, photonics, remote sensing, computational biology,
etc.) applied to agriculture and forestry, are needed to greatly
increase agricultural productivity and profitability sustainably in
order to provide for a population expected to expand to 9.7 billion
people worldwide by 2050. Further, another challenge is attracting the
brightest minds to sustainably increase food and fiber production and
to solve tough problems. Despite these challenges, USDA is looking
towards the future to meet the demands of providing food, fiber, and
fuel to a growing population. This will require focus on the growth and
development of the physical infrastructure, human capital, and big
science capabilities within USDA and the agricultural research
enterprise.
Through NIFA, we are focusing on a comprehensive Education and
Literacy initiative to address the shortfall between professions with
food and agriculture degrees and the available jobs in the United
States. This approach will enhance agricultural literacy by supporting
secondary schools through institutional grants for in-service training
to develop and improve curricula that will enhance agricultural
literacy; and to community colleges to retrain rural workers needed to
enhance value-added enterprises in the agricultural sector. In
addition, NIFA will support efforts in workforce development by
offering institutional grants that will enable development of technical
knowledge in the agricultural disciplines along with critical thinking
skills, problem solving, digital competency, international experience,
agricultural technology and communication skills via domestic and
global internships, externships, and practicums in research and
extension.
Outcomes from this program will eventually bridge the current 40
percent annual gap in available workforce with more graduates
possessing the exceptional skills and expertise in agriculture or
allied disciplines needed for entering employment and/or higher
education. NIFA also supports graduate and post-graduate education in
agriculture and related disciplines. The NIFA Graduate and Post
Graduate Fellowships programs will continue to train pre- and post-
doctoral scholars, and offer opportunities to interested trainees to
obtain international experiences on issues relevant to U.S.
agriculture. A new training grant program will offer disciplinary or
theme-based training priorities to recruit and retain cohorts of
talented new graduate students in disciplines where acute shortages of
expertise exist. These well thought out education and training
programs, which span across K through 20 educational pipeline, will
provide a talented workforce and visionary leadership that will be
crucial in maintaining agricultural preeminence of America in food,
agriculture, natural resources, and human science dimensions.
In addition, USDA's Science Council facilitates cross-Department
coordination and collaboration among all USDA agencies to ensure that
science informs policy and program decisions as well as to advance the
scientific discovery, technological breakthroughs and innovation
required to achieve the Secretary's science and technology priorities.
The Council's Education Coordinating Committee cultivates the robust
partnerships across the Department needed foster the next generation of
workers in university teaching and research; meeting the needs of the
private-sector; addressing societal and scientific challenges through
citizen science and crowdsourcing; and improving public awareness of
the important role that the food, agricultural, and natural resource
sectors play in promoting our country's physical and economic health
and security.
Rural Development
Question 16. One way it's clear you and the President intend to
reduce the rural development workload is by flat out cutting rural
development programs. The President's budget recommends eliminating the
Rural Business--Cooperative Service because this program is,
``duplicative and under-performing.'' However, these programs are
important in many rural areas. Can you explain the duplicative and
under-performing reasoning for eliminating these programs? Or is this
Administration against business development and job training for our
rural communities?
Answer. Rural Development is an exceedingly important mission area
at USDA, which is why I have elevated the agency to report directly to
me, through an Assistant to the Secretary for Rural Development. I look
forward to working with you to identify innovative, more effective
policies that ensure the unique needs of rural communities are met.
Question 17. In the President's budget proposal, the Water and
Wastewater Loan and Grant program is eliminated. Do you support this
proposal?
There is currently around a $2 billion backlog for this program for
projects that rural communities need so people can have clean and safe
drinking water. How is eliminating this program in the benefit of any
of these communities? Do you have another plan for them, some that may
even be facing regulatory action if they can't get new systems?
Answer. Thank you for your interest in this issue. The
Administration is in the process of taking a closer look at the proper
role and size of Federal Government. As Secretary of Agriculture, it is
important to me that rural communities have clean and safe drinking
water, and I will continue to work with Congress and others in the
Administration to identify how best to serve our rural communities.
Question 17a. The skinny budget proposal from the President says
that these communities can be served by the private-sector or by other
programs like the EPA's State Revolving Funds. Do you think if these
were reasonable alternatives they already would have been used by these
communities? How do you suggest these communities move forward with
these projects with this program being eliminated?
Answer. As I previously noted, it is important to me that rural
communities have clean and safe drinking water, and I will continue to
work with Congress and others in the Administration to identify how
best to serve our rural communities.
Question Submitted by Hon. David Scott, a Representative in Congress
from Georgia
Question. It is important to me and many of my colleagues on this
Committee that the office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights
has all the resources it needs to be effective, as not to repeat the
errors of the past that resulted in unequal access to staff and
programs by minority groups and minority farmers. What are your goals
for the office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights under your
leadership?
Answer. With regard to Civil Rights at USDA, my goal is that all
customers will receive fair treatment and high quality service, no
matter their gender, race, religion, or other personal characteristics.
In saying that the Department should ``Do Right and Feed Everyone,'' I
expect that the Department and its employees will do right by everyone.
Question Submitted by Hon. Ann M. Kuster, a Representative in Congress
from New Hampshire
Question. Mr. Secretary, I wanted to ask you about trade relations
and the impact on our farmers. From past experiences, is it fair to say
that any time there are disputes at the WTO and the United States
loses, that our farmers are the first ones to face retaliation? If the
proposed Border Adjustment Tax goes through and is found to be non-
compliant with the WTO, which of our ag groups would be hardest hit?
Answer. I am confident that as Congress moves forward on tax
reform, that Congress, and in particular the leadership of the House
Committee on Ways and Means and the Senate Committee on Finance, will
carefully develop tax legislation with consideration for WTO
obligations. If legislation were advanced that were non-WTO compliant,
it would likely be harmful to a number of agricultural commodities and
producers, not any one in particular. Exports are important across the
board for U.S. commodities so I encourage policies that will increase
our sales and not those that may put our markets in jeopardy.
Question Submitted by Hon. James P. McGovern, a Representative in
Congress from Massachusetts
Question. As you may know, Cranberries are Massachusetts' number
one agricultural food product, and the cranberry industry is a vital
part of the environment and economy of southeastern Massachusetts
comprising over 13,000 acres. However, over the past 5 years, the U.S.
cranberry industry has struggled with an oversupply of cranberries and
low prices resulting from consistently high yields across major
production areas and the expansion of the cranberry industry in Quebec,
Canada. Consequently, following the record 2016 harvest, cranberry
inventories are at an all-time high and farm prices are very depressed.
Significant new plantings in the U.S. and particularly eastern Canada
have now come into full production and the 2016 crop exceeded any
previous harvest by 10%.
It is my understanding that the Cranberry Marketing Committee has
requested that USDA consider a USDA Section 32 purchase to allow
ongoing marketing and health promotion efforts to create additional
demand. With the large number of cranberry producers in Massachusetts
struggling to sustain their farms at the current pricing, I am hopeful
that you will expeditiously and carefully review the industry's request
and continue to work with me as well as bipartisan Members of the
Congressional Cranberry Caucus to address the oversupply. I along with
other Members of the Congressional Cranberry Caucus support appropriate
actions to fully utilize Section 32 purchase to reduce the current
cranberry over supply in cranberry concentrate. Can you provide the
Committee with a status of USDA's review of this request as well as any
other actions being considered to address the oversupply?
Answer. USDA is currently conducting an economic assessment to
determine whether additional support is warranted. In addition, USDA
has also been actively assisting the cranberry industry as it seeks to
develop new markets in the school lunch program and expand the product
forms and packaging available to schools, food banks and other markets.
The introduction of dried cranberries to the school lunch program is
one example of these efforts.
Questions Submitted Hon. Cheri Bustos, a Representative in Congress
from Illinois
Department Reorganization
Question 1. In the hearing, you indicated that Rural Development
programs would be headed by a Senate Confirmed Assistant Secretary.
Later, you clarified that the position in fact would be led by an
Assistant to the Secretary who would not require Senate Confirmation.
Can you explain how eliminating a position that requires Congressional
input to fill with an unconfirmed appointee will improve Congressional
oversight of the programs or improve program delivery?
Answer. By eliminating the Under Secretary for Rural Development
and creating an Assistant to the Secretary for Rural Development I have
not only reduced an additional layer of government bureaucracy but I
have provided a direct link to my office. The Assistant to the
Secretary has walk-in privileges to my office with my direct oversight
over all of the Rural Development programs. As this individual will
represent Rural Development as the senior policy official during
interactions with Congress, I fully believe that the oversight process
will be enhanced due to their direct interactions with me.
Question 2. Understanding that reorganizations are designed to
better deliver programs and services, what type of analysis or metrics
were used in evaluating options for reorganization?
Answer. The National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA)
produced a report in 2015 outlining potential options for a
reorganization that would result in the creation of an Under Secretary
for Trade for USDA. Based upon that report and other internal analyses,
several reorganization options were considered based on their potential
costs and benefits and were thoroughly vetted by me and my team. At the
conclusion of this process, it was determined that the proposed
reorganization would better align USDA program activities while
limiting the disruption that could result for broader organizational
changes. As a result, the reorganization that we announced on May 11th
will improve service to USDA customers and agricultural stakeholders
throughout the nation.
Question 3. Specifically, how will Rural Development program
delivery be improved under the new structure?
Answer. The Assistant to the Secretary for Rural Development is
already on board and has already begun to work directly with the
Secretary on issues affecting rural America. This includes working with
the Secretary to host the inaugural meeting of the Interagency Task
Force on Agriculture and Rural Prosperity on June 15, 2017. The Task
Force is working to improve the quality of life for people living in
rural areas, develop a reliable workforce, spur innovation and
technology development, and roll back regulations to allow communities
to grow and thrive.
Question 4. The Department only sought comments on the proposal
after the proposal had been formally submitted to Congress. For what
purpose did you seek comment on a proposal that was already submitted
to Congress? Will you consider changes to the proposal based on
comments received from stakeholders?
Answer. The Department met its statutory requirement contained in
our annual appropriations Act to notify Congress of our intent to
reorganize the Department. We have received comments from the public as
a result of the notice published in the Federal Register and from the
public comment opportunity provided by the White House on its website.
The Department will consider those comments as we continue to implement
the reorganization announced on May 11, 2017, and with the development
of the USDA Reform Plan that will be released with the Fiscal Year 2019
Budget next year.
Question 5. Are there current responsibilities or activities
currently undertaken by the Under Secretary for Rural Development that
the new ``Assistant to the Secretary'' will not have the authority to
assume?
Answer. Generally, authorities provided to the Secretary by
Congress are all provided to the Secretary and almost all are re-
delegated through the Under or Assistant Secretaries down to the agency
or staff office heads. Accordingly, the Secretary will exercise all the
authorities of the Under Secretary for Rural Development. The few
exclusive authorities of the Secretary that have not been previously
delegated to the Under Secretary for Rural Development or that have not
been previously re-delegated by the Under Secretary for Rural
Development to the Rural Development agency administrators (see 7 CFR
2.17(b), 2.47(b), 2.48(b), and 2.49(b)) will be exercised by the
Secretary. The 31 authorities that have been re-delegated can be found
in the statute, here: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2017-title7-
vol1/pdf/CFR-2017-title7-vol1-sec2-17.pdf. [See Attachment.]
Question 6. Can you confirm there is not a statutory requirement
that limits you to seven Under Secretaries?
Answer. There is not a statutory requirement limiting the number of
Under Secretaries.
Rural Infrastructure Fund
Question 7. The FY18 President's budget included the creation of a
new Rural Infrastructure Fund that is, as I understand it, designed to
add additional flexibility to program funds to target projects that
will have the most impact on the communities. What particular
flexibilities are needed to fund these types of projects and can you
provide examples of projects that could receive funding under the new
program that cannot already receive funds from any of the programs
eliminated to support the new Rural Infrastructure Fund?
Answer. The Budget proposes $162 million for this new program to
support initiatives under the following program authorities: Distance
Learning and Telemedicine, Broadband, Community Facilities, and housing
repair for very-low-income residents. The combined account provides the
flexibility to place resources where significant impact can be made for
economic infrastructure development. Priority for funding projects will
be based on what will provide the best return on investment.
FY18 Budget
Question 8. During the hearing you repeatedly assured the Committee
of your personal support for Rural Development programs. In fact this
was cited as part of the basis for eliminating the Under Secretary for
Rural Development. However, the FY18 budget included significant cuts
to the existing programs, including the near complete elimination of
RBCS, and an elimination of nearly 1,000 staff years. How do you
envision the Department increasing or maintaining the same level of
service to Rural America with these proposed cuts and reductions?
Answer. President Trump promised he would realign government
spending, attempt to eliminate duplication or redundancy, and see that
all government agencies are efficiently delivering services to the
taxpayers of America. To ensure that all of the Federal Government's
resources are achieving the high results, the President established the
Agriculture and Rural Prosperity Task Force. The Task Force will
strengthen interagency cooperation to achieve a broad range of goals
aimed at improving the quality of life for people living in rural
areas, develop a reliable workforce, spur innovation and technology
development, and roll back regulations to allow communities to grow and
thrive. I am confident in the future of rural America and see
opportunities for us to continue to strengthen this outlook and create
opportunities for rural America.
Question 9. The FY18 budget included a proposal to close 17
Agricultural Research Service locations, including the National Center
for Agricultural Utilization Research in Peoria, Illinois. Innovation
has been a key driver of the rural economy; do you believe the research
undertaken by these facilities is no longer necessary or useful? And
how do you think this lost capacity at Federal labs will be made up
elsewhere within the research community?
Answer. I recognize that agricultural research is the basis of our
agricultural productivity today. I look forward to working with
Congress to ensure that we have a research program that is focused on
developing solutions and providing state-of-the-art technologies to
improve management decisions on farm and on forest lands. In reality,
priorities must be established when resources are tight. Tough
decisions have to be made about facilities and staffing.
Questions Submitted Hon. Dwight Evans, a Representative in Congress
from Pennsylvania
Question 1. HFFI was a public-private partnership that worked to
address food deserts. How do you seek to address food insecurity and
food deserts?
Answer. Adequate access to food, especially healthy food, is a
national problem. Working together with Federal, state, local and
private partners, USDA is committed to addressing the issue of food
deserts. Our programs support the development of not only physical
grocery and other food delivery stores, but the entire food chain.
The Department will utilize the funds allocated directly to HFFI
through its agreement with our National Fund Manager, the Reinvestment
Fund, for HFFI, and will continue to utilize our other grant and loan
programs to support HFFI objectives.
Question 2. Research has shown that you are what you eat, and that
the neighborhood you live in has a profound impact on the food choices
you make. In partnership with PolicyLink, The Food Trust published a
report that provides an up-to-date review of the research, a report
that illustrated the lack of access to healthy food and the grocery
gap. Can you share how you intend to improve healthy food access in
low-income communities and communities of color?
Answer. USDA, through the Food Insecurity Nutrition Incentive
(FINI) Grant Program, funds and evaluates projects intended to
``increase the purchase of fruits and vegetables by low-income
consumers participating in SNAP by providing incentives at the point of
purchase.'' FINI projects focus on low-income communities, with many of
the applications from nonprofits that ensure FINI reaches low access
areas. These projects bring together stakeholders from the distinct
parts of the food system to foster understanding of how they might
improve the nutrition and health status of participating households
receiving incentives to purchase fruits and vegetables.
With regard to food access, the Section 6015 of the 2008 Farm Bill
created a set-aside in Rural Development's (RD) Business and Industry
Loan Guarantee program of at least five percent of budget authority for
local and regional food systems, with priority for projects benefiting
under-served areas.
The USDA Healthy Food Financing Initiative (HFFI) provides funding
for multi-year healthy foods, healthy neighbors initiative that will
increase the availability of affordable, healthy foods in under-served
rural communities to create and preserve quality jobs and revitalize
low-income communities, particularly through the development or
equipping of grocery stores and other healthy food retailers. Through
loans, grants and technical assistance, RD can provide assistance to
low- and moderate-income communities to support market planning and
promotion as well as infrastructure and operational improvements
designed to stimulate consumer demand, enhance marketing, expand demand
and retail outlets for farm products, and increase availability of
locally and regionally produced foods.
Question 3. In your testimony, you mention the 50 million Americans
that the USDA interfaces with every year in food and nutrition services
alone, stating that it is not even counting the children who benefit
from school, summer and child care nutrition programs. What are you
plans to strengthen and continue school, summer and child care
nutrition programs?
Answer. The central goal of the Child Nutrition Programs is to
provide healthy food to children through the National School Lunch
Program, School Breakfast Program, Child and Adult Care Food Program,
Summer Food Service Program, Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, and
Special Milk Program. These programs help fight hunger and obesity by
funding healthy meals for kids in the places where they spend ``away-
from-home time''--including schools, child care centers and homes,
after-school programs, and summer recreation or enrichment programs.
Going forward, USDA will continue to work with our state and local
partners to provide strong oversight and program integrity, technical
assistance and up-to-date resources, and, where possible, identify
program efficiencies and opportunities for streamlining program
requirements, and provide the flexibilities needed for food service
operators to provide meals that are both nourishing and appealing to
children.
Question 4. I always say that Food Policy is Foreign Policy. We
know that food is a bipartisan issue because we all have to eat. What
will you do to ensure that everyone on the spectrum--from neighborhoods
to the global food economy--prioritize the importance of food policy?
Answer. As Secretary, I will maximize the ability of the men and
women of America's agriculture and agribusiness sector to create jobs,
to produce and sell the foods and fiber that feed and clothe the world,
and to reap the earned reward of their labor. We want to remove
obstacles and give them every opportunity to prosper. The United States
is blessed to be able to produce more than its citizens can consume,
which implies that we should sell the bounty around the world. The work
of promoting American agricultural products to other countries will
begin with those relationships and will benefit us domestically, just
as it will fulfill the moral imperative of helping to feed the world.
As Secretary, I commit that USDA will be guided by our new motto ``Do
Right and Feed Everyone.''
Question 5. I know that you are a veterinarian by trade and
Pennsylvania is home to great rural agriculture and farmers across the
state. We also have one of the leading veterinary schools in the nation
in the University of Pennsylvania Veterinary School. Can you share the
importance of veterinarians and programs that you look to strengthen as
it relates to our nation's veterinarians?
Answer. Having an adequate number of veterinarians in rural America
is vital to safeguard the health of agricultural animals and in
directly supporting the viability of our rural communities (including
jobs), as well as our nation's food security, food safety, public
health, and emergency preparedness against foreign animal diseases. I
will work to support and strengthen USDA programs that aim to help
educate veterinarians and improve veterinary services, especially in
those areas where there is currently a veterinary shortage.
Question 6. How do you plan to strengthen our land-grant colleges?
Answer. I believe partnerships are integral to USDA's mission.
Within USDA, the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) is
the Federal partner in a vast network of scientists, educators, and
extension staff that address critical issues about agriculture, food,
the environment, and communities. NIFA's key partner is the nation's
Land-Grant University (LGU) System, which includes the 1862
universities; the 1890 historically black land-grant institutions; and
the 1994 tribal land-grant colleges and universities. I will ensure
that NIFA will look for innovative new ways to partner and continually
strengthen collaboration with land-grant universities and other
institutions across the nation to ensure that USDA's resources extend
to all Americans.
Question 7. What is your plan for diversity in agriculture?
Answer. Throughout my career in the public and private-sectors, I
have learned the importance of getting different opinions and
perspectives when making decisions that affect the lives of customers
and constituents. As Secretary, I will continue to value those
differences and intend for the Department to benefit from the diversity
of a workforce that represents the people and places that we serve
every day in USDA.
Questions Submitted by Hon. Al Lawson, Jr., a Representative in
Congress from Florida
SNAP Benefits
Question 1. In my District, one in every four Floridians has been
on SNAP at some point over the last 12 months. That is twice the
national average. Almost 70 percent of SNAP participants are in
families with children; more than \1/4\ are in households with seniors
or people with disabilities; and many of these individuals work in low
wage jobs, or turn to SNAP during spells of unemployment or fluctuating
pay. Given these facts, could you describe the impact that cuts to SNAP
in the farm bill would have on beneficiaries? Also, please elaborate on
how you plan to respond to food banks such as the Second Harvest of the
Big Bend and Feeding Northeast Florida, which rely on the Emergency
Food Assistance Program, when they have an increased demand if SNAP
benefits are cut?
Answer. Both the House and Senate Agriculture appropriations bills
under consideration fully fund SNAP for Fiscal Year 2018 based on
current law and anticipated needs for all eligible people who wish to
participate. Participation is expected to continue to decrease due to
economic factors. The 2018 Budget makes legislative proposals aimed at
targeting SNAP benefits to the neediest households, and encouraging
work among able-bodied adults without dependents. More specifically,
these proposals will target benefits to households most in need. I look
forward to working with Congress as you consider these and other
proposals to strengthen SNAP during the reauthorization of the farm
bill.
USDA's food assistance programs are intended to provide nutritious
foods to supplement the diets of eligible participants. They are not
designed to provide for total dietary needs. Some individuals and
families experiencing food hardship are referred to various nutrition
assistance programs to ensure they are receiving adequate benefits to
help them reduce hunger and have access to a well-balanced diet.
USDA is committed to continuing support for food banks, food
pantries, and other charitable organizations through The Emergency Food
Assistance Program, or TEFAP, and other USDA food assistance programs.
TEFAP is designed to serve low-income people in need of short-term
hunger relief through food providers like food pantries, food banks,
soup kitchens, and shelters across the country. The President has
requested $288.75 million for FY 2018 budget for the purchase of TEFAP
food alone. TEFAP has also historically received bonus foods through
USDA's agricultural marketing programs. USDA purchased $306 million in
bonus foods for distribution through TEFAP in FY 2016. To the extent
practicable by law and as needed, USDA will continue to make bonus
purchases through our marketing programs. As much as possible, USDA
will direct these foods to TEFAP.
Question 2. The fifth District has benefitted a great deal from the
Food Insecurity Nutrition Incentive (FINI) grants. We are encouraged by
your comments at the hearing indicating support for incentive programs
like FINI. We have four Fresh Access Bucks markets: Frenchtown Heritage
Market (2014) in Tallahassee, and Berry Good Farms On the Go (2015),
White Harvest Farm & Market (2016), and Riverside Arts Market (2016) in
Jacksonville. Since these markets' involvement, SNAP recipients have
been incentivized to purchase healthy and local produce to the tune of
$20,462. Statewide, the program is responsible for over 24,000 SNAP
transactions and it increased the income of more than 440 farmers. Will
you continue to support the use of SNAP and SNAP incentives at farmers'
markets and other farm-direct healthy food retailers?
Answer. Yes, I will continue to support SNAP and SNAP incentives,
such as the Food Insecurity Nutrition Incentive (FINI) Grant Program,
which provides locally or regionally produced and culturally
appropriate fruits and vegetables.
Food Access and the Healthy Food Financing Initiative
Question 3. In north Florida, access to food is a real concern.
Food deserts often leave vulnerable families shopping in convenience
stores or resorting to fast food options. For instance, Winn Dixie is
set to close stores in Jacksonville and Tallahassee, in neighborhoods
that already struggle with easily accessing healthy foods. The Healthy
Food Financing Initiative (HFFI) is a program critical in food insecure
areas. In FY 2016, HFFI provided the Northwest Jacksonville Community
Development Corporation with an $800,000 grant to invest in the
development of the North Point Two Grocery store in Jacksonville,
Florida. In the hearing, you mentioned that USDA has very little money
to operate the HFFI program. What is your plan to eradicate food
deserts and what is your level of commitment to programs like the HFFI?
Answer. Adequate access to food, especially healthy food, is a
national problem. As I have said, the Department should do right and
feed everybody. USDA is committed to being a part of that solution.
Question 4. We are excited to see that USDA has finally designated
a National Fund Manager to manage the HFFI at Rural Development. How
does your agency plan to support this new program and integrate its
efforts into the suite of important rural financing programs such as
the Rural Business--Cooperative Service, which will go a long way in
serving the rural stretches in my district?
Answer.*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* There was no response from the witness to Question 4 by the time
this hearing was published.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trade and Dumping by Mexico
Question 5. In my district and much of Florida we have a serious
issue with Mexico's dumping into our country's agriculture market. This
problem of dumping is with both specialty crops and sugar, causing some
Florida farmers to go out of business. With the newly created Under
Secretary of Trade, how will you work to help solve this problem?
Answer.*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* There was no response from the witness to Questions 5 and 6 by
the time this hearing was published.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Florida Peanut Farmers and Inclusion in USDA Programs
Question 6. In north Florida, there is a serious concern among some
peanut farmers who would like to have base acres in order to be more
competitive in the peanut market. What are your plans to address this
issue in the broader peanut policy?
Answer.*
Able-Bodied Adults Without Dependents (ABAWDs) and Florida's Commitment
to Uphold Work Requirements
Question 7. ABAWDs are individuals between the ages of 18 and 49
without dependents, who are not disabled. ABAWDs are only eligible for
SNAP for 3 months out of 3 years, if they are not working or in a
training program for at least 20 hours a week. The challenge in Florida
is that in the state's FY 2016 and FY 2017 Employment and Training
Plans, state have not pledged to guarantee that all ABAWDs are offered
placement in qualified training. In the latest data that is available
from the USDA, as of 2015, the State of Florida had 521,000 individuals
who fall under the ABAWD designation; that is over \1/2\ million
Floridians who either are not receiving the training they need, or are
not aware that they need to take it. In the hearing, referencing SNAP,
you noted that there are some disparities in how states are
implementing and executing the program, going as far to say that there
is some room for unanimity in various aspects of the program. Can you
promise my constituents that you will work with each state,
particularly Florida, to make sure that states are holding up their end
of the bargain when enforcing this requirement by making every effort
to properly notify individuals that it exists, and that states will
have the support and resources from your agency to offer sufficient
employment training?
Answer. Yes, USDA will work with states to ensure they make efforts
to connect SNAP recipients with meaningful work; including ABAWDS
facing time limits. SNAP provides important benefits to help families
get through tough times. SNAP enrollment grew to historic levels during
the recession, but despite the improvements in the economy,
participation is declining slowly. I look forward to working with
Congress in the coming months as you consider ways to strengthen the
program to target benefits to those in need, support work by SNAP
recipients, and improve SNAP through reauthorization of the farm bill.
Questions Submitted by Hon. Tom O'Halleran, a Representative in
Congress from Arizona
Question 1. Many rural, Native American Reservations are behind the
curve on the deployment of broadband Internet. In fact, on Tribal lands
in the lower 48 states 72% of people lack access to broadband,
sometimes even lacking access to Internet, phone and electricity all
together. How do you plan to use USDA's rural utility experience to
address this disparity?
Answer. As part of the efforts of the Agriculture & Rural
Prosperity Task Force (ARPTF), for which I am the chair, the
Department, along with partners from across the Federal Government will
be identifying opportunities for improving the quality of life in rural
America. One such opportunity that is receiving significant attention
at this time is the development of and investment in robust, modern
infrastructure. Through the ARPTF and the President's call for an
infrastructure plan, the Department will utilize all of its existing
authorities to make investments that create reliable and available
broadband networks for the benefit of rural areas, especially those in
Tribal areas that are under-served.
Question 2. The skinny budget calls to eliminate the water and
wastewater loan and grant program. This program is designed to help
rural Tribes and towns build the critical infrastructure necessary for
clean water, the most basic need. On the Navajo Nation, the water and
wastewater funds have helped the communities of Ganado, Dilkon and
Lower Greasewood drill new wells and run new pipelines, so the
residents of these communities have access to safe water: 43% of
Navajos live below the poverty line and $8 of the $14 million invested
were USDA grants. If the USDA does away with the water and wastewater
loan and grant program, where in USDA should small, rural communities
turn to find funding for systems for safe drinking water?
Answer. The Administration is in the process of taking a closer
look at the proper role and size of Federal Government. As Secretary of
Agriculture, it is important to me that rural communities have clean
and safe drinking water, and I will continue to work with Congress and
others in the Administration to identify how best to serve our rural
communities.
Question 3. Arizona's First Congressional District includes four
National Forests. The skinny budget calls for funding of forest fire
operations based on an average of the past 10 years. What do you intend
to do if this fire season is worse than the past 10 years and more fire
expenditures are needed? How will this impact the Forest Service's
other mission areas?
Answer. The Forest Service has total budget authority for wildfire
suppression in this fire season of over $1.8 billion. This resource
level is well above the 10 year average and is projected to be
sufficient. This budget authority includes resources appropriated to
the Wildland Fire Management account and to the FLAME Act account. If
conditions warrant additional resources, the Forest Service will
transfer funds from non-fire programs to support wildland fire
suppression operations. Although these transfers do not occur every
year, both expected and actual transfers cause uncertainty in planning
and implementing projects. Notably, the type of work delayed by the
rising cost of suppression can include the restoration work needed to
reduce the risk of wildland fire on National Forest System lands.
Question 4. The run-away 10 year average wildfire costs are
draining the budget year after year for all other Forest Service
programs. You and I both know that what needs to happen is Congress
needs to pass a comprehensive budget fix to address the run-away costs
and uncertainty for the agency year after year. Do I have your support
and commitment in working to help a comprehensive wildfire funding fix
get passed through Congress? If so, does the Administration have a
preferred wildfire funding fix?
Answer. I share your concerns regarding the impacts the rising cost
of fire suppression places on the Forest Service to carry out the
breadth of its mission.
The ongoing erosion of the agency's non-fire budgets due to the
increasing 10 year average cost of fire suppression, causes an ongoing
shift in resources from land management to fire management. We are
committed to working with Congress to develop a solution that addresses
the growth of fire programs as a percent of the agency's budget, and
also ends the practice of transferring funds from non-fire programs
when suppression funds fall short before the end of the fiscal year.
Question 5. The 2014 Farm Bill includes the Extra-Long Staple (ELS)
Competitiveness Program and gives the Secretary of Agriculture the
authority to determine which foreign growths of ELS cotton are used to
determine competitiveness. Currently, the largest producer of ELS
cotton in the world is China, and it has not yet been included in the
USDA price calculation. To date, USDA has indicated that they believe
they lack the authority to use the Chinese quote. Would you commit to
working with the industry and those of us who represent ELS producers
to ensure that the program is working as intended by Congress?
Answer. Although China is a large producer of ELS cotton,
specifically the Chinese Variety 137, it is not traded internationally
according to Chinese government trade statistics, there is no export
price quote, and the cotton does not ``compete'' in the international
market. Currently, Israeli Pima is the only competing quote used in
calculations for the ELS Competitiveness Program. These prices are
quoted daily by the publication Cotton Outlook--the only widely-
accepted source for the prices at which ELS cotton is traded globally.
Additionally, in contrast to the Egyptian long staple cotton that was
dropped from the Competitiveness program calculations due to quality
concerns, the quality of Israeli ELS cotton is not in question. If
accurate and consistent trades and prices for Chinese ELS cotton, or
ELS from other origins, become available, USDA will be in a better
position to consider additional competing quotes.
Questions Submitted by Hon. Jimmy Panetta, a Representative in Congress
from California
Question 1. Mr. Secretary, the organic agriculture industry has
grown from a niche program to a $47 billion industry where demand often
outpaces supply. In 1990, the National Organics Standards Board (NOSB)
was given the responsibility to advise the Department on issues
important to the industry and to propose recommendations to the
National Organic Program (NOP), potentially leading to Federal
regulations. I am concerned that, over time, the growth of the organic
sector has left the NOSB unable to adequately provide views of a mature
industry and is often not geographically representative of the
industry. For example, while California is home to 40 percent of
organic production, only three of the members are from California and
none are actual growers. Will you commit to examining best practices
for utilizing the NOSB moving forward? Please share with the Committee
your goals for strengthening the NOSB to fully reflect the growth of
organic production and the challenges organic farmers face.
Answer. Appointing people to the National Organic Standards Board
(NOSB) with diverse perspectives that represent the growing organic
industry is important to me. NOSB diversity comes in many forms,
including a diversity of experience in organic production and handling,
a diversity in geographic representation, and diversity in the sizes
and types of farms and businesses represented. We are currently
inviting applications for the seat designated for someone with
expertise in the areas of environmental protection and resource
conservation. Applications are due to USDA on August 7, 2017, we hope
for a strong set of applicants for consideration.
Question 2. Mr. Secretary, the recently announced Interagency Task
Force on Agriculture and Rural Prosperity is charged with ensuring that
``regulatory burdens do not unnecessarily encumber agricultural
production, constrain economic growth, hamper job creation, or increase
the cost of food for Americans and our customers around the world.'' I
am concerned that a proposal from the National Organics Standards Board
(NOSB) could be working counter to those goals. The proposal would seek
to exclude currently approved hydroponic, aquaponic, and other
innovative growing techniques from organic certification. This could
hurt farmers and producers around the country who are currently
certified organic producers while also driving up prices for consumers
whose demand is rapidly growing for this produce. Please examine this
NOSB proposal to ensure that it does not hurt farmers, producers, and
consumers around the country, and report back to the Committee on how
the Department will address these concerns.
Answer. The National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) Crops
Subcommittee is currently studying the issue of hydroponics,
aeroponics, and aquaponics. The NOSB has explored this topic for the
last few meetings, and it may again be discussed at its fall 2017
meeting. We look forward to carefully reviewing any recommendation that
the NOSB passes, and will evaluate next steps accordingly. Any changes
to the regulations would require a rulemaking and public comment
process. USDA will keep you updated on any further developments.
Question Submitted by Hon. Lisa Blunt Rochester, a Representative in
Congress from Delaware
Question. As the Member of Congress from Delaware, one of the
largest economic drivers in my state is the poultry industry-coming
from Georgia, I know this is an industry you are very familiar with.
One of the issues I hear most about from my constituents is the
potential impacts, both positive and negative, of the Department's
proposed GIPSA rule. I understand you have extended the implementation
date on this rule.
Could you give me an update on where things stand and what
direction you may take this policy issue?
Answer. I appreciate your concern regarding the Grain Inspection,
Packers and Stockyards Administration's (GIPSA) Interim Final Rule
(IFR) and the impact this rule could potentially have on the poultry
industry. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) delayed the
effective date of the IFR, also referred to as the GIPSA rule, until
October 19, 2017. USDA also requested additional comments from
stakeholders on the disposition of the IFR--whether the IFR should
become effective, indefinitely suspended, delayed further, or
withdrawn. Interested persons were invited to submit comments on or
before June 12, 2017, and GIPSA is currently analyzing the comments
received to determine the rule's disposition.
I look forward to working with you on developing sound policy for
all of agriculture, including in the 2018 Farm Bill. Future policy must
have a sound factual, economic, and scientific basis. It must consider
all segments of the agriculture industry and consumers. While these
decisions may be difficult, USDA will do its very best to make sure we
are making the best possible policy decisions for all of agriculture.
[attachment]
Code of Federal Regulations Title 7_Agriculture
Subtitle A--Office of the Secretary of Agriculture
Part 2--Delegations Of Authority By the Secretary of Agriculture and
General Officers of the Department
Subpart C--Delegations of Authority to the Deputy Secretary, Under
Secretaries, and Assistant Secretaries
2.17 Under Secretary for Rural Development.
(a) The following delegations of authority are made by the
Secretary of Agriculture to the Under Secretary for Rural Economic and
Community Development:
(1) Provide leadership and coordination within the Executive
Branch of a Nationwide Rural Development Program utilizing the
services of Executive Branch departments and agencies and the
agencies, bureaus, offices, and services of the Department of
Agriculture in coordination with rural development programs of
state and local governments (7 U.S.C. 2204).
(2) Coordinate activities relative to rural development among
agencies reporting to the Under Secretary for Rural Economic
and Community Development and, through appropriate channels,
serve as the coordinating official for other departmental
agencies having primary responsibilities for specific titles of
the Rural Development Act of 1972, and allied legislation.
(3) Administer a national program of economic, social, and
environmental research and analysis, statistical programs, and
associated service work related to rural people and the
communities in which they live including rural
industrialization; rural population and manpower; local
government finance; income development strategies; housing;
social services and utilization; adjustments to changing
economic and technical forces; and other related matters.
(4) Work with Federal agencies in encouraging the creation of
rural community development organizations.
(5) Assist other Federal agencies in making rural community
development organizations aware of the Federal programs
available to them.
(6) Advise rural community development organizations of the
availability of Federal assistance programs.
(7) Advise other Federal agencies of the need for particular
Federal programs.
(8) Assist rural community development organizations in
making contact with Federal agencies whose assistance may be of
benefit to them.
(9) Assist other Federal agencies and national organizations
in developing means for extending their services effectively to
rural areas.
(10) Assist other Federal agencies in designating pilot
projects in rural areas.
(11) Conduct studies to determine how programs of the
Department can be brought to bear on the economic development
problems of the country and assure that local groups are
receiving adequate technical assistance from Federal agencies
or from local and state governments in formulating development
programs and in carrying out planned development activities.
(12) Assist other Federal agencies in formulating manpower
development and training policies.
(13) Related to committee management. Establish and
reestablish regional, state, and local advisory committees for
activities under his or her authority. This authority may not
be re-delegated.
(14) Related to defense and emergency preparedness.
Administer responsibilities and functions assigned under the
Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended (50 U.S.C. App.
2061, et seq.), and title VI of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5195, et seq.),
concerning rural development credit and financial assistance.
(15) Related to energy. (i) Provide Department-wide
operational support and coordination for loan and grant
programs to foster and encourage the production of fuels from
agricultural and forestry products or by-products.
(ii) Participate as a Department representative at
conferences, meetings and other contacts including liaison with
the Department of Energy and other government agencies and
departments with respect to implementation of established
Department energy policy.
(iii) Serve as Co-Chairperson of the Energy Coordinating
Committee of the Department.
(16) Collect, service, and liquidate loans made, insured, or
guaranteed by the Rural Utilities Service, the Rural Housing
Service, the Rural Business--Cooperative Service, or their
predecessor agencies.
(17) [Reserved]
(18) With respect to land and facilities under his or her
authority, exercise the functions delegated to the Secretary by
Executive Order 12580, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193, under the
following provisions of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (``the
Act''), as amended:
(i) Sections 104(a), (b), and (c)(4) of the Act (42
U.S.C. 9604(a), (b), and (c)(4)), with respect to
removal and remedial actions in the event of release or
threatened release of a hazardous substance, pollutant,
or contaminant into the environment;
(ii) Sections 104(e)-(h) of the Act (42 U.S.C.
9604(e)-(h)), with respect to information gathering and
access requests and orders; compliance with Federal
health and safety standards and wage and labor
standards applicable to covered work; and emergency
procurement powers;
(iii) Section 104(i)(11) of the Act (42 U.S.C.
9604(i)(11)), with respect to the reduction of exposure
to significant risk to human health;
(iv) Section 104(j) of the Act (42 U.S.C. 9604(j)),
with respect to the acquisition of real property and
interests in real property required to conduct a
remedial action;
(v) The first two sentences of section 105(d) of the
Act (42 U.S.C. 9605(d)), with respect to petitions for
preliminary assessment of a release or threatened
release;
(vi) Section 105(f) of the Act (42 U.S.C. 9605(f)),
with respect to consideration of the availability of
qualified minority firms in awarding contracts, but
excluding that portion of section 105(f) pertaining to
the annual report to Congress;
(vii) Section 109 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 9609), with
respect to the assessment of civil penalties for
violations of section 122 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 9622),
and the granting of awards to individuals providing
information;
(viii) Section 111(f) of the Act (42 U.S.C. 9611(f)),
with respect to the designation of officials who may
obligate money in the Hazardous Substances Superfund;
(ix) Section 113(k) of the Act (42 U.S.C. 9613(k)),
with respect to establishing an administrative record
upon which to base the selection of a response action
and identifying and notifying potentially responsible
parties;
(x) Section 116(a) of the Act (42 U.S.C. 9616(a)),
with respect to preliminary assessment and site
inspection of facilities;
(xi) Sections 117(a) and (c) of the Act (42 U.S.C.
9617(a) and (c)), with respect to public participation
in the preparation of any plan for remedial action and
explanation of variances from the final remedial action
plan for any remedial action or enforcement action,
including any settlement or consent decree entered
into;
(xii) Section 119 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 9119), with
respect to indemnifying response action contractors;
(xiii) Section 121 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 9621), with
respect to cleanup standards; and
(xiv) Section 122 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 9622), with
respect to settlements, but excluding section 122(b)(1)
of the Act (42 U.S.C. 9622(b)(1)), related to mixed
funding agreements.
(19) With respect to facilities and activities under his or
her authority, to exercise the authority of the Secretary of
Agriculture pursuant to section 1-102 related to compliance
with applicable pollution control standards and section 1-601
of Executive Order 12088, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 243, to enter
into an inter-agency agreement with the United States
Environmental Protection Agency, or an administrative consent
order or a consent judgment in an appropriate state,
interstate, or local agency, containing a plan and schedule to
achieve and maintain compliance with applicable pollution
control standards established pursuant to the following:
(i) Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, as further
amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments,
and the Federal Facility Compliance Act (42 U.S.C.
6901, et seq.);
(ii) Federal Water Pollution Prevention and Control
Act, as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251, et seq.);
(iii) Safe Drinking Water Act, as amended (42 U.S.C.
300f, et seq.);
(iv) Clean Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 7401, et
seq.);
(v) Noise Control Act of 1972, as amended (42 U.S.C.
4901, et seq.);
(vi) Toxic Substances Control Act, as amended (15
U.S.C. 2601, et seq.);
(vii) Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide
Act, as amended (7 U.S.C. 136, et seq.); and
(viii) Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended by
the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of
1986 (42 U.S.C. 9601, et seq.).
(20) Related to rural utilities service. (i) Administer the
Rural Electrification Act of 1936, as amended (7 U.S.C. 901, et
seq.) except for rural economic development loan and grant
programs; (7 U.S.C. 940c and 950aa, et seq.): Provided,
however, that the Under Secretary may utilize consultants and
attorneys for the provision of legal services pursuant to 7
U.S.C. 918, with the concurrence of the General Counsel.
(ii) Administer the Rural Electrification Act of 1938 (7
U.S.C. 903 note).
(iii) Designate the chief executive officer of the Rural
Telephone Bank.
(iv) Administer the following sections of the Consolidated
Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1921, et seq.):
(A) Section 306 (7 U.S.C. 1926), related to water and
waste facilities.
(B) Section 306A (7 U.S.C. 1926a).
(C) Section 306B (7 U.S.C. 1926b).
(D) Section 306C (7 U.S.C. 1926c).
(E) Section 306D (7 U.S.C. 1926d).
(F) Section 306E (7 U.S.C. 1926e).
(G) Section 309 (7 U.S.C. 1929) and 309A (7 U.S.C.
1929a), relating to assets and programs related to
watershed facilities, resource and conservation
facilities, and water and waste facilities.
(H) Section 310A (7 U.S.C. 1931), relating to
watershed and resource conservation and development
(I) Section 310B(b) (7 U.S.C. 1932(b)).
(J) [Reserved]
(K) Administrative Provisions of subtitle D of the
consolidated Farm and Rural Development act relating to
rural utility activities.
(L) Section 379B (7 U.S.C. 2008p).
(v) Administer section 8, and those functions with respect to
repayment of obligations under section 4 of the Watershed
Protection and Flood Prevention Act (16 U.S.C. 1006a, 1004) and
administer the Resource Conservation and Development Program to
assist in carrying out resource conservation and development
projects in rural areas under section 32(e) of the Bankhead-
Jones Farm Tenant Act (7 U.S.C. 1011(e)).
(vi) Administer the Water and Waste Loan Program (7 U.S.C.
1926-1).
(vii) Administer the Rural Wastewater Treatment Circuit Rider
Program (7 U.S.C. 1926 note).
(viii) Administer the Distance Learning and Medical Link
Programs (7 U.S.C. 950aaa, et seq.).
(ix) Administer Water and Waste Facility Programs and
activities (7 U.S.C. 1926-1).
(x) [Reserved]
(xi) In coordination with the Assistant Secretary for
Administration, issue receipts under section 2501A(e) of the
Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7
U.S.C. 2279-1(e)).
(xii) Administer section 6407 of the Farm Security and Rural
Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 8107a), relating to a rural
energy savings program.
(xiii) Administer section 6210 of the Agricultural Act of
2014, Public Law 113-79, relating to funding of pending rural
development loan and grant applications.
(21) Related to rural business--cooperative. (i) Administer
the Rural Economic Development Loan and Grant Programs under
the Rural Electrification Act (7 U.S.C. 940c and 950aa, et
seq.).
(ii) Administer the following sections of the Consolidated
Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1921, et seq.):
(A) Section 306(a)(110(A) (7 U.S.C. 1926(a)(11)(A)),
relating to grants for business technical assistance
and planning.
(B) [Reserved]
(C) Sections 309 (7 U.S.C. 1929) and 309A (7 U.S.C.
1929a), relating to assets and programs related to
rural development.
(D) Section 310B (7 U.S.C. 1932), relating to various
Rural Development programs, except for subsection (b)
of that section.
(E) Section 310H (7 U.S.C. 1936b), relating to an
intermediary relending program.
(F) Administrative Provisions of subtitle D of the
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act relating to
rural business--cooperative activities.
(G) Section 378 (7 U.S.C. 2008m) relating to the
National Rural Development Partnership;
(H) Section 379E (7 U.S.C. 2008s) relating to the
Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Program.
(I) Section 379F (7 U.S.C. 2000t) relating to the
Expansion of Employment Opportunities for Individuals
with Disabilities in Rural Areas Program.
(J) Section 379G (7 U.S.C. 2008u) relating to Health
Care Services.
(K) Section 382A, et seq. (7 U.S.C. 2009aa, et seq.)
relating to the Delta Regional Authority.
(L) Section 383A, et seq. (7 U.S.C. 2009bb, et seq.)
relating to the Northern Great Plains Regional
Authority.
(M) Section 384A, et seq. (7 U.S.C. 2009cc, et seq.)
relating to the Rural Business Investment Program;
(N) Section 385A, et seq. (7 U.S.C. 2009dd, et seq.)
relating to the Rural Collaborative Investment Program.
(iii) Administer Alcohol Fuels Credit Guarantee Program
Account (Pub. L. 102-341, 106 Stat. 895).
(iv) [Reserved]
(v) Administer loan programs in the Appalachian region under
sections 203 and 204 of the Appalachian Regional Development
Act of 1965 (40 U.S.C. App. 204).
(vi) Administer section 601 of the Powerplant and Industrial
Fuel Use Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95-620).
(vii) Administer the Drought and Disaster Guaranteed Loan
Program under section 331 of the Disaster Assistance Act of
1988 (7 U.S.C. 1929a note).
(viii) Administer the Disaster Assistance for Rural Business
Enterprises Guaranteed Loan Program under section 401 of the
Disaster Assistance Act of 1989 (7 U.S.C. 1929a note).
(ix) Administer the Rural Economic Development Demonstration
Grant Program (7 U.S.C. 2662a).
(x) Administer the Economically Disadvantaged Rural Community
Loan Program (7 U.S.C. 6616).
(xi) Administer the assets of the Alternative Agricultural
Research and Commercialization Corporation and the funds in the
Alternative Agricultural Research and Commercialization Fund in
accordance with section 6201 of the Farm Security and Rural
Investment Act of 2000 (note to 7 U.S.C. 5901 (repealed)).
(xii) Administer programs authorized by the Cooperative
Marketing Act of 1926 (7 U.S.C. 451-457).
(xiii) Carry out the responsibilities of the Secretary of
Agriculture relating to the marketing aspects of cooperatives,
including economic research and analysis, the application of
economic research findings, technical assistance to existing
and developing cooperatives, education on cooperatives, and
statistical information pertaining to cooperatives as
authorized by the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C.
1621-1627).
(xiv) Work with institutions and international organizations
throughout the world on subjects related to the development and
operation of agricultural cooperatives. Such work may be
carried out by:
(A) Exchanging materials and results with such
institutions or organizations;
(B) Engaging in joint or coordinated activities; or
(C) Stationing representatives at such institutions
or organizations in foreign countries (7 U.S.C. 3291).
(xv) Administer in rural areas the process of designation,
provision of monitoring and oversight, and provision of
technical assistance for Empowerment Zones and Enterprise
Communities pursuant to section 13301 of Public Law 103-66,
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (26 U.S.C. 1391, et
seq.)
(xvi) Work with Federal agencies in encouraging the creation
of local rural community development organizations. Within a
state, assist other Federal agencies in developing means for
extending their services effectively to rural areas and in
designating pilot projects in rural areas (7 U.S.C. 2204).
(xvii) Conduct assessments to determine how programs of the
Department can be brought to bear on the economic development
problems of a state or local area and assure that local groups
are receiving adequate and effective technical assistance from
Federal agencies or from local and state governments in
formulating development programs and in carrying out planned
development activities (7 U.S.C. 2204b).
(xviii) Develop a process through which state, sub-state and
local rural development needs, goals, objectives, plans, and
recommendations can be received and assessed on a continuing
basis (7 U.S.C. 2204b).
(xix) Prepare local or area-wide rural development strategies
based on the needs, goals, objectives, plans and
recommendations of local communities, sub-state areas and
states (7 U.S.C. 2204b).
(xx) Develop a system of outreach in the state or local area
to promote rural development and provide for the publication
and dissemination of information, through multi-media methods,
relating to rural development. Advise local rural development
organizations of availability of Federal programs and the type
of assistance available, and assist in making contact with
Federal program (7 U.S.C. 2204; 7 U.S.C. 2204b).
(xxi) Administer the Value-Added Agricultural Product Market
Development Grant program (note to 7 U.S.C. 1621).
(xxii) Administer the Agriculture Innovation Center
Demonstration program (note to 7 U.S.C. 1621).
(xxiii) Administer the renewable energy programs authorized
in sections 9003, 9004, 9005, 9007, and 9009 of the Farm
Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 8103, 8104,
8105, 8107, and 8109).
(xxiv) Implement the information disclosure authorities of
section 1619(b)(3)(A) of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act
of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 8791(b)(3)(A)).
(xxv) In coordination with the Assistant Secretary for
Administration, issue receipts under section 2501A(e) of the
Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7
U.S.C. 2279-1(e)).
(xxvi) Administer the Healthy Food Financing Initiative under
section 243 of the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act
of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 6953).
(xxvii) Administer section 6209 of the Agricultural Act of
2014 (7 U.S.C. 2207b), relating to the collection and reporting
of program metrics.
(22) Related to rural housing. (i) Administer the following
under the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C.
1921, et seq.):
(A) Section 306 (7 U.S.C. 1926), except with respect
to financing for water and waste disposal facilities;
or loans for rural electrification or telephone systems
or facilities other than hydroelectric generating and
related distribution systems and supplemental and
supporting structures if they are eligible for Rural
Utilities Service financing; and financing for grazing
facilities and irrigation and drainage facilities; and
subsection 306(a)(11).
(B) Section 309A (7 U.S.C. 1929a), regarding assets
and programs relating to community facilities.
(C) Administrative Provisions of subtitle D of the
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act relating to
rural housing activities.
(D) Section 379 (7 U.S.C. 2008n) relating to the
Rural Telework program;
(E) Section 379A (7 U.S.C. 2008o) relating to the
Historic Barn Preservation program; and
(F) Section 379C (7 U.S.C. 2008q) relating to the
Farm Workers Training Grant program.
(ii) Administer title V of the Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C.
1471, et seq.), except those functions pertaining to research.
(iii) [Reserved]
(iv) Administer the Rural Housing Disaster Program under
sections 232, 234, and 253 of the Disaster Relief Act of 1970
(Pub. L. No. 91-606).
(v) Exercise all authority and discretion vested in the
Secretary by section 510(d) of the Housing Act of 1949, as
amended by section 1045 of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless
Assistance Amendments Act of 1988, Pub. L. 100-628 (42 U.S.C.
1480(d)), including the following:
(A) Determine, with the concurrence of the General
Counsel, which actions are to be referred to the
Department of Justice for the conduct of litigation,
and refer such actions to the Department of Justice
through the General Counsel;
(B) Determine, with the concurrence of the General
Counsel, which actions are to be referred to the
General Counsel for the conduct of litigation and refer
such actions; and
(C) Enter into contracts with private-sector
attorneys for the conduct of litigation, with the
concurrence of the General Counsel, after determining
that the attorneys will provide competent and cost
effective representation for the Rural Housing Service
and representation by the attorney will either
accelerate the process by which a family or person
eligible for assistance under section 502 of the
Housing Act of 1949 will be able to purchase and occupy
the housing involved, or preserve the quality of the
housing involved.
(vi) Administer the Rural Firefighters and Emergency
Personnel Grant program (7 U.S.C. 2655).
(vii) Implement the information disclosure authorities of
section 1619(b)(3)(A) of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act
of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 8791(b)(3)(A)).
(viii) In coordination with the Assistant Secretary for
Administration, issue receipts under section 2501A(e) of the
Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7
U.S.C. 2279-1(e)).
(23) Related to hazardous materials management. (i) Serve on
the USDA Hazardous Materials Policy Council.
(ii) Recommend actions and policies that enable USDA agencies
under his or her authority to comply with the intent, purposes,
and standards of environmental laws for pollution prevention,
control, and abatement.
(iii) Consult with the United States Environmental Protection
Agency and other appropriate Federal agencies in developing
pollution prevention, control, and abatement policies and
programs relating to agencies under his or her authority.
(iv) Recommend actions and policies of the loan and grant
programs under his or her authority concerning compliance with
the Asset Conservation, Lender Liability, and Deposit Insurance
Protection Act of 1996, Subtitle E of Public Law No. 104-208.
(24)-(25) [Reserved]
(26) Related cooperative agreements. Enter into cooperative
agreements with other Federal agencies, state and local
governments, and any other organizations or individuals to
improve the coordination and effectiveness of Federal programs,
services, and actions affecting rural areas, including the
establishment and financing of interagency groups, as long as
the objectives of the agreement will serve the mutual interest
of the parties in rural development activities (7 U.S.C.
2204b(b)(4)).
(27) Exercise the authority in section 10101 of the Disaster
Relief and Recovery Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008,
Public Law 110-329, div. B., regarding the Rural Development
Disaster Assistance Fund.
(28) [Reserved]
(29) Implement section 14218 of the Food, Conservation, and
Energy Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 6941a).
(30) Related to biomass research and development.
Administer section 9008 of FSRIA (7 U.S.C. 8108) with
respect to biomass research and development, including
administration of the Biomass Research and Development
Board and Biomass Research and Development Technical
Advisory Committee, and submission of reports to
Congress, except for the authority delegated to the
Under Secretary for REE in 2.21(a)(1)(cci) to carry
out the Biomass Research and Development Initiative;
consult and coordinate, as appropriate, with the Under
Secretary for REE and other mission areas within the
Department as deemed necessary in carrying out the
authorities delegated herein; and serve as the
designated point of contact referenced in 7 U.S.C. 8108
for the Department, except for purposes of
administering the Biomass Research and Development
Initiative as provided in 2.21(a)(1)(cci).
(31) Carry out prize competition authorities in section 24 of
the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15
U.S.C. 3719) related to functions otherwise delegated to the
Under Secretary for Rural Development, except for authorities
delegated to the Chief Financial Officer in 2.28(a)(29) and
authorities reserved to the Secretary in paragraph (b)(2) of
this section.
(b) The following authority is reserved to the Secretary of
Agriculture:
(1) Related to rural business--cooperative. Submission to the
Congress of the report required pursuant to section 1469 of
Pub. L. No. 101-624.
(2) Approval of prize competitions that may result in the
award of more than $1,000,000 in cash prizes under section
24(m)(4)(B) of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act
of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3719(m)(4)(B)).
[60 FR 56393, Nov. 8, 1995, as amended at 65 FR 12427, Mar.
9, 2000; 66 FR 31107, June 11, 2001; 68 FR 27436, May 20, 2003;
74 FR 3402, Jan. 21, 2009; 75 FR 43368, July 23, 2010; 76 FR
52851, Aug. 24, 2011; 78 FR 40937, July 9, 2013; 79 FR 44106,
July 30, 2014; 80 FR 58336, Sept. 29, 2015]
[all]