April 10, 1978
Page 9396
Mr. MUSKIE. I do not want to interrupt the present thought of the Senator's discourse, but I thought it might be useful to indicate for the record that section 904, which is the section to which the Senator refers, providing suspension of the Budget Act, was not designed as a routine act. It was designed to avoid depriving us of the opportunity to change the Senate rules, and if we had not had that provision written in the Budget Act into law with respect to the Senate rules, our hands might be tied.
That is why section 904 was written in, not as a routine way to put the Budget Act aside, but it had a very specific purpose.
The Senator is free to make his argument, of course, but I thought that legislative history would be important.
Mr. TALMADGE. Of course, the Senator is entirely correct.
We work with the Budget Committee and the Budget Committee works with the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. I appreciate that relationship.
But when time is of the essence, when the emergency is upon us, when relief is needed today, it is time for the Senate to act, and the Senate is the parent of the Budget Committee, not the other way around.
That is the reason I made the motion under the terms of the act creating the Budget Committee, so we can act today.
We have had a lot of talk about inflation and inflation is a reality. But where is that inflation, Mr. President?
About 33 cents of the housewife's food dollar goes to the farmer and about 66 cents plus goes to everyone else, those dealing with transporting, manufacturing, processing, and selling agricultural commodities.
The truth of the matter is that agricultural income for farmers today is about 65 percent of parity.
That is the lowest it has been since the depression years of the 1930's. That is the reason we see farms going on the auction block throughout the country, because they cannot pay their debts.
That is the reason we see farmers crying for emergency aid and disaster funds, because throughout the length and breadth of this country they are selling commodities below the cost of production.
This shirt I have on is a cotton shirt. Do you know what it cost, Mr. President? About $20. Do you know how much cotton it has in it? Less than 50 cents worth.
The Senator from South Dakota and the Senator from Kansas pointed out that a loaf of bread that sells for about 75 cents has only about a nickel's worth of wheat in it.
How can we expect farmers to carry the whole burden of inflation? Inflation has hit farmers harder than any other segment of our society.
Fuel oil that cost 15 cents a gallon about 4 years ago is now about 45 cents a gallon. Fertilizer, machinery, insecticides and pesticides, and everything else the farmer buys have gone up accordingly.
We hear a great hue and cry that we cannot do anything to help farmers, because it will create more inflation. But the inflation, Mr. President, is not on the farms, the pressure is on the farmers themselves.
Tractors that cost $2,000 and $3,000 4 or 5 years ago now sell for $7,000, $8,000, $9,000, and $10,000.
The same thing is true of all the other agricultural equipment.
Mr. McGOVERN. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. TALMADGE. Yes. I yield to my distinguished colleague, the able Senator from South Dakota.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. President, is it not a fact that most foods are not price supported at all, they are not under the price support program?
Most things we buy in the supermarkets have nothing to do with the support of grain and wheat.
Mr. TALMADGE. The Senator is entirely correct.
Mr. McGOVERN. Sometimes it might leave the impression that we are supporting everything. We are not. That is a very small part of the total food budget. It has nothing to do with most of the things we buy in the supermarket.
Mr. TALMADGE. The Senator is entirely correct.
Mr. President, at an appropriate time, I will ask for the yeas and nays on my motion to suspend. We have nine Senators in the Chamber. I ask the aides to check the cloakrooms and the corridors to see if they can produce a few more Senators on the floor, so that I can get the yeas and nays.
We have enough Senators now. I ask for the yeas and nays on the motion to suspend.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a sufficient second.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
Mr. TALMADGE. Mr. President, howmuch time does the distinguished Senator from Kansas desire?
Mr. DOLE. If possible, I would like 10minutes at the close of the debate.
Mr. TALMADGE. How much time remains, Mr. President?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia has 16 minutes.
Mr. TALMADGE. And the Senator from Maine?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Four minutes to the Senator from Maine.
Mr. DOLE. Does the Senator from Maine wish to take his time now?
Mr. MUSKIE. I will reserve my 4 minutes.
Mr. TALMADGE. I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished Senator from Kansas.
Mr. DOLE. I thank the distinguished chairman.
Mr. President, since most of the thrust of the attack has been against the bill that bears my name — and I might add that it bears the names of 21 other Senators, Democrats and Republicans, including the distinguished Presiding Officer at this moment, the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. ZORINSKY) — I want to set the record straight very early that it is not a partisan effort by Senator Dole. It is an effort by 22 Senators, Democrats and Republicans, about equally divided, who are concerned about the American farmer.
I say to my distinguished friend from Iowa, and my distinguished friend from Maine that I checked the record, and I note that both voted for the Emergency Act of 1975. That was called inflationary by then President Ford. He indicated to the Senate that if it came to him, he would veto it, and he did. But I did not hear the Senator from Iowa make a speech that we should have low farm prices, because President Ford might veto that bill. The Senator from Iowa said a few moments ago that he would not vote for a bill if the President said he would veto it. Well, the Senator voted for that bill in 1975.
So I remind my distinguished colleague, who apparently is satisfied with low farm prices, that that is a choice he can make.
There have been some comments that the Dole bill would take out all this production in States such as Iowa. According to CBO estimates, which we are asked to accept as the gospel in this Chamber, title II, which was the Dole bill, would take out about 22 million acres, as compared with so-called title I, the retirement bill, which would take out not less than 31 million acres.
I predicted at a quarter after 9 that someone would stand up and say that this bill is going to cost $6 billion. They never told us where that figure came from, and we have not heard yet where the $6 billion figure came from, how it was arrived at. That is just for press consumption. That is so the press will understand that this $6 billion—
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?
Mr. DOLE. I yield.
Mr. MUSKIE. The Senator overlooks the fact that I put in the record a table of CBO estimates which produced this in the RECORD. If I had more time, I would be glad to read the table. It is in the RECORD.
Mr. DOLE. We will not have the RECORD until tomorrow.
Mr. MUSKIE. I would be glad to send a copy to the Senator now.
Mr. DOLE. What about the other 98 Senators?
Mr. MUSKIE. I am sorry. We have a unanimous consent agreement, to which both sides agreed, which limits each side to an hour. By definition, it limits the scope of the argument. I am sorry that I did not happen to touch the particular point, but the Senator did not touch a lot of points I would like him to discuss.
Mr. DOLE. I am going to do it right now.
Mr. MUSKIE. The Senator has not succeeded yet.
Mr. DOLE. The Senator from Maine had an hour. The Senator from Kansas has had 8 minutes so far.
Mr. MUSKIE. I yielded some of my time to the Senator from Kansas and the Senator from South Dakota.
Mr. DOLE. I appreciate that.
Mr. MUSKIE. I did not use the hour.
Mr. DOLE. The Senator from Maine had control of an hour.
I want to be accurate, because we are dealing with the Budget Committee, and they are always very accurate. I serve on that committee, and I know they are accurate. But I know how you arrive at assumptions. If you are against a proposal, you use the worst possible case.
The CBO figures say there is going to be 90 percent participation by farmers setting aside 50 percent of their wheat production. I do not accept that. But you have to use that low figure to make the costs so bad. The costs, based on CBO estimates, is about $6 billion. You passed that out to the public and the press, who wrote editorials about it.
The USDA has now released some new figures on the cost production for selected crops. The range for production cost on wheat is $3.66 to $3.92 a bushel. The range on cotton is up to 66 cents a pound. The range for corn, I say to the distinguished Senator from Iowa, is now $2.54 to $2.71 per bushel.
Mr. President, I think we should set the record straight for once, because many Senators are very troubled by this bill. The administration is working very hard — the President, the Vice President, and there are lobbyists all over the Capitol — trying to figure a way to defeat this bill in conference, to avoid sending it to the President, because he does not want to have to veto it. So the best way is to kill it in the Senate or in the House.
We should not be flourishing figures of $5.7 billion when there is no proof. We have been told by the Budget Committee that it will cost $5.7 billion, and there is nothing to support that. The same arguments can be raised against the milk bill, too.
Not long ago, a poll was taken of 1,259 adults, and 5 out of 6 were for raising the prices farmers are receiving. This was not a farmers' poll. It was conducted by the Harris organization.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.