Kent Conrad

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Madam President, I have been asked to yield back the rest of our time on our side.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to Jacob J. Chestnut and John M. Gibson, Capitol Police officers who were tragically killed in the line of duty on Friday. Officers Chestnut and Gibson were decent and highly capable law enforcement professionals. On Friday, their selfless devotion to duty saved countless lives. Their deaths were not in vain. The service of these Capitol Police officers will not be forgotten by the Congress. In particular, I will always remember the spirit and good humor brought to this job by J.J. Chestnut, whom I knew personally from years of working together here at the Capitol. This institution has known few, if any, who were more friendly and able protectors. On this day of reflection, I think it is important to note that incidents such as occurred on Friday do not happen every day precisely because Gibson, Chestnut, and other Capitol Police officers have done their jobs so well. Even as they stood their ground and gave their lives, Gibson and Chestnut demonstrated that attacks on this building and the Members and staff who work here will simply not succeed. Mr. President, every day of their careers here on the Hill, Chestnut and Gibson provided a unique and important service to every American. By protecting the United States Congress, they made it possible for our Nation's legislature and our county's greatest public building to be open and accessible to the American people. American democracy could not function as it does in the sunlight of public scrutiny, engagement, and participation if not for the safety provided by Gibson and Chestnut. If for this reason alone, every American owes these officers--and everyone serving in the United States Capitol Police--a deep debt of gratitude. It is difficult for those of us who knew these officers to let them go easily, but certainly nowhere as trying as this loss has been for their families. With our friends and colleagues here in the Senate and millions of Americans throughout our country, my wife Lucy and I will be sure to keep the families of Chestnut and Gibson in our thoughts and prayers. It is my understanding that a scholarship fund is being established in their honor, and I would urge every Member and staff member to contribute. Mr. President, I think the most important message we can deliver here today is one of thanks. Officers John Gibson and Jacob Chestnut made the ultimate sacrifice: they laid down their lives so that others could live. For that, they deserve our unending gratitude and respect. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. I join my colleague, Senator Dorgan, in congratulating Dean Odegard on this exceptional and well deserved honor from the FAA. Dean Odegard and the Odegard School, which this year was named in his honor by a grateful state, are true national assets. John's work building the School at the University of North Dakota is one of the great accomplishments in North Dakota in my lifetime. His vision and ability to make his dreams a reality sets him apart in all of higher education and aviation. He began his career in 1968 with two small planes and a dozen students and transformed this fledgling operation into the premier aerospace training facility in the world with 1400 students, a fleet of 85 aircraft and 16 flight simulators. The contributions of John Odegard and his staff and faculty to aviation safety in the development of new pilot training programs is a major achievement. His leadership in the creation of university-based air traffic controller training is providing our country with superior new young controllers that our country's air space system desperately needs. As the Administrator noted in her citation, UND's work in FAA- sponsored atmospheric research has resulted in the Terminal Doppler Weather Radar that is now making air travel even safer in the United States. It is also important to note that the contributions made by the Odegard School to improvements in national aviation safety are a direct product of the investment the Federal government made almost 20 years ago. It was the FAA's Airway Science Program, begun in the early 1980's, that helped build the Odegard School's facilities on the University of North Dakota campus. Those investments, of which we are very proud, are paying dividends today in lives saved. That's what the FAA award recognizes.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I want to express my strong support for the amendment offered by the Senator from Minnesota to restore veterans' disability benefits for smoking-related illnesses. Earlier this year, the Senate made a mistake. In order to help pay for the highway bill, it reduced veterans' disability benefits. Specifically, it overturned a decision by the General Counsel at the Department of Veterans' Affairs that smoking related illnesses were service connected and could qualify a veteran for VA disability and health benefits. As I said, the Senate made a mistake when it did this, but I want the record to show that I strenuously opposed this mistake. Throughout the budget process and deliberations on the highway bill, I consistently opposed efforts to pay for the highway bill by reducing VA disability benefits. In fact, during consideration of the Senate Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 1999, I voted against the Domenici amendment that cleared the way for this raid on veterans' benefits. And during consideration of the tobacco bill, I cosponsored the McCain amendment to use a portion of tobacco revenues to fund veterans' health benefits. I took those actions and I support this amendment for one very simple reason. It's the right thing to do. We all know that the U.S. military encouraged the use of tobacco products by young service members. We all know that the tobacco companies provided cigarettes to the Pentagon free of charge. In return, the military for years distributed free cigarettes in C-rations and K-rations. Military training included smoking breaks. And until very recently, cigarettes were available on military bases at vastly reduced prices. Mr. President, it could not be more clear that the Federal government has a responsibility to our veterans to help them cope with illnesses that they acquired after the government encouraged them to get hooked on tobacco products in the first place. The Federal government should not walk away from this responsibility. It should not deny veterans' benefits for smoking related illnesses. This amendment rights the wrong we did to veterans earlier this year. It restores benefits to those who put their lives on the line for our country. When the Senate passed the highway bill, I assured veterans in my State that I would work to correct the injustice that it contained. This amendment does exactly that. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I thank the chairman of the committee for his help with this amendment, and the many others who participated in these deliberations. I especially thank my colleague, Senator Dorgan, and the Senator from Idaho, Senator Craig, who helped us with this amendment. I think we are moving in the right direction. Obviously, we will have additional opportunities to fashion a final package, as we all understand this will have to go to conference. Again, I thank, very much, the chairman and ranking member and all those who helped. Mr. CRAIG addressed the Chair.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, we are ready for any additional debate, and we are ready to move, after people have had a chance to speak, to a vote at a time that the chairman of the committee thinks is appropriate.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Mississippi, the chairman of the Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee, for the gracious way he has allowed us to work through this. He has been very patient, and we thank him very much for his patience. We also thank him very much for his open-mindedness. I think he does recognize there are real problems around the country. Unfortunately, we do not have the perfect tools to deal with them. The Senator from Mississippi raises questions that are absolutely legitimate questions: What kind of system would be used to use these funds? This is not a new program in the sense that this is replenishing a program and an authority that the Secretary has had. This is a program that the Secretary has utilized. And those funds are now depleted. The way it was done in the past was to use actual commodities, but one thing we have learned is, it is really much more efficient to use money in that fund rather than commodities, because when we use commodities, we find that about 25 percent of what is used is used up in distribution costs, in handling charges, and the rest. So USDA, in examining this, has said it would be much more taxpayer friendly, really, to have money in this fund that is now depleted rather than to have commodities. We are using the same model we used for the Livestock Indemnity Program last year; that is, to give the Secretary broad discretion, because when you sit down and try to write the specifics here on the floor with this relatively short period of time, we have discovered there are a series of problems. One of them is, we would probably become subject to a budget point of order. So we find doing it this way, with the general authority of the Secretary that he already has, which is recognized, but we restore the fund, we replenish the fund that has been depleted so the Secretary has the ability to respond to these various circumstances around the country. It is not one set of events that is affecting us. We have one set of events in North Dakota and Minnesota and South Dakota, and the Senator is exactly right, we would get a significant portion of this. But other parts of the country as well--in Texas and Oklahoma it is a drought; in North Carolina, where they have been so badly hit, and Virginia, it is hurricanes. In Pennsylvania, the Senator from Pennsylvania tells us, it is a combination of factors. In Idaho, it is much the same thing that has been happening in these northern-tier States; they have, in many cases, overly wet conditions. But combining it all, we have a natural disaster and we have price collapse. What is happening is, we are left with dramatically reduced farm income that is forcing people off the land. The question is, Do we act? Do we do something? Do we provide the tools to respond? I think the will of the Senate will be, as it has been in the past: Yes, we should respond. We have a chance to do that. I also will indicate, in the amendment I sent to the desk, the original cosponsors are Senator Dorgan and Senator Cleland. I welcome other Senators. I am very hopeful this is a bipartisan enterprise. I have been talking to Republican Senators over the last several weeks about this matter, and I very much hope they join in and we make this a fully bipartisan effort. They certainly have contributed thoughts to what we could do here. So I hope, before we reach conclusion here, we have a healthy number of Senators on both sides of the aisle who cosponsor this legislation, that we join together and say, ``Yes, there are problems out there. Let's address them. Let's provide some assistance.'' This does not mean we are voting on overturning agricultural policy. We have differences there. We recognize those differences. This is one case where we are rising above those differences to march together and try to help those who clearly are in need. I yield the floor.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a letter I have sent to the desk be printed in the Record. It is from farm organizations endorsing this amendment.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, would the Senator from Idaho like to be included as an original cosponsor?

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from Idaho, Mr. Craig, be added as a cosponsor.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Daschle, Senator Harkin, Senator Baucus, Senator Hollings, and Senator Wellstone all be added as original cosponsors.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I also thank my colleague who is in the Chair, Senator Roberts, for his good advice to us as we proceeded with this effort. I want to tell him that we look forward to working with him as we try to craft a bipartisan, long-term solution to the problems that we face. I thank the Chair and yield the floor.

Mr. CONRAD. I thank my colleague, Senator Dorgan, who has been with us every step of the way in developing this amendment, in offering it to our colleagues and persuading others to support it, and in convincing the White House that this is an emergency matter. I am very pleased with the outcome of the meeting we had yesterday. I think there is a real sense of urgency not only by the President but by the Secretary of Agriculture and others in the administration who recognize that in many parts of the country we are simply faced with a collapse of income as a result of badly depressed prices, and in addition, a loss of production because of natural disasters that have taken many forms in many places--as I described earlier, monsoon conditions in North Dakota and Minnesota and parts of South Dakota, but, on the other hand, terrible drought in Oklahoma and Texas; and then perversely in the eastern part of the United States, hurricane activity that has had a devastating effect on North Carolina and Virginia. And I was just talking to a Senator from Pennsylvania; they have also been hard hit. So this amendment would move to provide resources to provide assistance to those areas. Now, some may say, gee, I thought we put crop insurance in place so we didn't have to have this kind of program. And that is precisely right. Unfortunately, what we have discovered is the Crop Insurance Program we put in place does not work when you have multiple years of disaster. And the reason for that is the formula. The formula in crop insurance looks at your last 5 years of production. If you have had 3 to 5 years of disasters, whether it is drought, whether it is overly wet conditions, whether it is a terrible disease outbreak as we faced in North Dakota, or hurricanes as they have faced in the East, your base for crop insurance is so badly depressed it does not provide the risk management tool that all of us intended. I was just talking to the Senator from Idaho, who is one of the most knowledgeable members of the Agriculture Committee with respect to this matter, and he was saying what we see is that when the base goes down, crop insurance cannot provide the coverage we all intended. We are not going to get crop insurance reform this year, as much as many of us would like to do; that simply takes a longer effort. And so, Mr. President, until crop insurance gets fixed, something has to be there to allow farmers to survive. If we do not, we are going to have a calamity of staggering proportions. USDA tells us in North Dakota that we are going to face potentially the loss of 30 percent of our farmers in 2 years--30 percent. That is a disaster by any description. So what we have tried to do is work in a way that is not subject to a budget point of order, that does provide assistance to these farmers all across the country. We have now received a letter from the Executive Office of the President, the Office of Management and Budget, which indicates that this amendment would not be subject to a point of order, that this would qualify for an emergency designation, and the President supports an emergency designation for this legislation. We will submit that for the Record when we have a chance to actually submit the language. It is being typed now. We have it. The final provision is here. We will send that to the desk. We need to get copies distributed to our colleagues. The Budget Committee of the Senate has informed us this would not be subject to a budget point of order. I ask unanimous consent that there be printed in the Record the letter from the Office of Management and Budget, the Executive Office of the President, indicating that they, too, agree that this qualifies for an emergency designation and would not be subject to a budget point of order.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. I am happy to.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I say to my colleagues, I will relinquish the floor at this point and await the word from the Budget Committee. We are expecting it momentarily. So I relinquish the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I am going to begin discussing the amendment that we have been working on, on a bipartisan basis here, for a number of days, awaiting final determination from the Budget Committee on the question of a budget point of order. That is being discussed now by their legal people and the chief of staff of the Budget Committee. While we are awaiting that determination, I would like to take this opportunity to talk about the circumstances we find ourselves in and why the amendment that we have been discussing is needed. The basic idea is that we have enormous economic distress out across farm country. Certainly, in my own State, we have seen a triple whammy of bad prices, bad weather, and bad policy. The result has been collapsing farm income, and the result of that is thousands of farmers being forced off the land. This chart shows North Dakota farm incomes being washed away in 1997. According to the Government's own figures, from 1996 to 1997, farm income reported to the Commerce Department, reported by the Labor Department, went down 98 percent in North Dakota from 1996 to 1997. We all know there are many factors here. Low prices are a chief culprit. In addition to that, dramatically reduced production as a result of unusual weather patterns that have led to a massive outbreak of disease, so-called scab, which is really a fungus, which cost us a third of the crop in North Dakota last year. Let me just say it is not just North Dakota that is affected. USDA has informed us that many States would benefit by such an indemnity payment; that North Dakota, South Dakota, and Minnesota would be key beneficiaries, but so, too, would Texas, Oklahoma, North Carolina, South Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama, and the State of Idaho, and many other States as well. In a few moments I will show a map of the United States and show the States affected. What is happening is, in addition to all of those things, the so- called Asian flu is costing us our most important export market. And on top of that, our own Government is sanctioning other countries and, as a consequence of those sanctions, removing us from being able to sell into those countries. So the fundamental problem is a dramatic loss of income in many States in the country. This chart shows that farm income has dropped in a majority of the States. We can see those that are over a 40-percent drop are in red. That is North Dakota, at 98 percent; Missouri, I think their loss is in the 40-percent range. You can see New York, Maryland, Virginia and West Virginia. These States have all suffered very dramatic income declines in the agricultural sector. In addition to that, in orange are those States that have seen a 20- to 39-percent reduction in farm income: Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Kentucky, Tennessee, Pennsylvania, Maine and Connecticut are in that category, as well as Washington, Nevada and Utah out West. Those that are in the zero to 19-percent decline: Montana, Idaho, South Dakota, Iowa, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, New Jersey, Rhode Island, New Hampshire and Vermont. Farmers are suffering in silence. It has not gotten a lot of attention, but it is nonetheless real and it is nonetheless urgent. We can see the change in income by major industry from 1996 to 1997. All of these major industries saw increases with one exception--agriculture saw a $3.4 billion decline. But we saw increases in mining--theirs were modest; in forestry and fishing, in transportation and public utilities, in construction, in wholesale trade, in government services, in retail trade, in finance, insurance and real estate, in manufacturing and services. Services, by the way, saw an enormous increase of over $100 billion as we move increasingly towards a service economy. One of the key reasons that we have seen the steep drop in North Dakota and some of the other States is these very unusual weather patterns. In Texas and Oklahoma it is drought. In North Carolina it is hurricanes. In North and South Dakota and Minnesota it is overly wet conditions. This is a picture of the North Dakota farm country. This picture, if you can see it, shows not the kind of dry landscape one would associate with North Dakota, but one sees water everywhere. We are swamped in North Dakota. When I say farm income has been washed away, that is exactly what has happened. Farmland can't be planted. That which has been planted is drowned out. That which isn't drowned out is suffering from a massive outbreak of disease that has cost a third of the crop last year, to this dreadful scab outbreak. I wish we could say it was restricted to scab, but in addition to that we have white mold, now, attacking the canola crop. That will affect not only our State but Minnesota, Montana, and South Dakota as well. These are an extraordinary set of circumstances with which our farmers are dealing, and it is forcing them off the land. We anticipate losing 2,000 farmers in North Dakota this year out of 30,000. The Secretary of Agriculture came to North Dakota 3 weeks ago and he had a disaster team that briefed him before the meetings. They told him, ``You could lose 30 percent of the farmers in North Dakota in the next 2 years''--30 percent. If that is not a disaster, I don't know what is. It is not just North Dakota, although we are one of the hardest hit, but certainly Minnesota, South Dakota, Montana, and the other States I mentioned, Oklahoma and Texas, all were hard hit by drought, continuing drought; of course Florida with their fires, North Carolina with hurricanes, and we saw other States affected as well. This is another picture of North Dakota. Again, everywhere you look-- water. I was just in the southeastern part of our State, six counties. I met with a young farmer there. He had planted corn twice this year. Both times it drowned out. For mile after mile, we saw land under water, land that is not going to be planted again this year, land that has been not planted for 2 or 3 years. In that particular farmer's case, he had land he hasn't been able to farm for 4 years. These exceptionally wet conditions in North Dakota, Minnesota, and parts of South Dakota are leading to perfect conditions for the breeding of this fungus disease--scab. That is not only reducing the production--as I indicated, we lost a third of the crop last year--but in addition to that, what you do harvest is then badly discounted when you go to the elevator to sell. It is this combination of factors that is putting such a crunch on North Dakota agricultural producers. Again, as I say, it is not just our State but other States as well. It is very much related to a collapse in prices, very much related to natural disasters, very much related, in addition to that, to what is happening abroad. The collapse of the Asian financial markets is reducing demand for our products. That is where we sell most of our agricultural production. That is the fastest growing market for the United States, in Asia, and they don't have the funds to buy. As a result, we are seeing sharp reductions, sharp restrictions in agricultural exports. This chart, I think, tells the story very well. It shows a 50-year pattern of spring wheat prices. These are all stated in 1997 dollars so we are comparing apples to apples. You can see we are about at an all- time low at the end of 1997. You see a long-term trendline of wheat prices coming down, but we are now at virtually an all-time low. If you then look at 1998, you see the pattern continuing. By June of this year, we are at a 50-year low for spring wheat prices. Wheat prices in North Dakota are now about $3.20 a bushel. To put that in some perspective, it costs about $4.50 to produce wheat, so you have an invitation to lose money if you are planting wheat. Of course, the upper Great Plains are dominated by wheat production. It is not just wheat. We see exactly the same pattern with respect to barley. Here is a 50-year trendline of barley prices, and you can see by the end of 1997, we were near a 50- year low. If you go to this year, you can see what has happened this year-- further price collapse--so that we are at a 50-year low. Prices for wheat and barley have not been this low in 50 years. When you then couple that with reduced production because of the massive outbreak of disease, what you have is an income collapse--as I showed in the first chart--an income collapse in my home State of North Dakota. What does that mean? That means we are seeing record auction sales, as the little house on the prairie is auctioned off. That is what is happening in my State. It is a disaster. It is a calamity and something must be done. We can debate at great length overall farm policy. We have differences on the question of long-term farm policy. I don't think we have differences on the question of responding to an emergency, and that is what we have. We have an emergency. It is a dire emergency, but we have very little ability to respond to it. We did away with disaster programs for agriculture during consideration of the last farm bill and actually before that. We decided to do away with disaster programs and use crop insurance. The problem is, crop insurance does not work where you have multiple years of disaster. Even the head of the risk management agency has agreed with that proposition. In testimony before the Senate Agriculture Committee, he made very clear: Crop insurance, as currently constituted, does not work when you have multiple years of disaster. Unfortunately, all across America, we see multiple years of disaster. This chart shows where the losses have been most severe. As you can see on the chart, those areas that are in red are the parts of the country that have been hardest hit over the last period of time. You can see, yes, North Dakota and South Dakota and Minnesota hard hit, but we also see Oklahoma and Texas very hard hit and, of course, we go east and North Carolina and Virginia are very hard hit as well. Interestingly enough, Pennsylvania; that is because they have been hit by tornadoes and have repeated losses as a result. But it is not just those States. You can see South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi--all of those States are badly affected. Go out west and the State of Idaho has been hard hit. This map doesn't reveal it, but there are parts of Montana hard hit as well. This map doesn't reveal the individuals. This reveals the counties that are hardest hit. We also have many individuals, especially in the State of Montana, who have been hard hit by this same set of unusual conditions: Precipitous drop in prices, coupled with sharp drops in production because of natural disasters, weather disasters of one kind or another, and combined, they have led to an income collapse for many farmers in many parts of the country. The question is, How do we respond? The idea has been we wouldn't have disaster programs for agriculture because we are going to use crop insurance. The problem is crop insurance doesn't work where you have multiple years of disaster. Some who are viewing may ask, Why is that? Why wouldn't crop insurance work if you have multiple years of disaster. Nobody knows better than the occupant of the Chair what the problem is. The problem with crop insurance is it is calculated based on your last 5 years of production. If you have 5 years of disaster, your production base erodes, it evaporates, and then you don't get much help from crop insurance. That is the fundamental problem that we have identified. So how do you address it? What we are recommending is an indemnity program that will help make payments to those farmers who have had multiple years of disaster, who have had a sharp income decline, sharp losses in income so that they can get some assistance to carry over so that they will live to fight another day, so they can get through these depressed times and get on to better times. Mr. President, we have worked with our colleagues on both sides of the aisle in terms of crafting a program that we think will be of assistance. Before I send that amendment to the desk, we are waiting for an evaluation on which one of the amendments best meets the budget requirements that the U.S. Congress is under. We are hoping for word on that very soon. To sum up, this is a calamity. This is a disaster. This is an emergency. By the way, the President yesterday said he will support an emergency designation for an answer to what we are seeing across the country. The Secretary of Agriculture indicated he, too, will support an emergency designation, and that is critical so that we don't violate the budget caps. The chairman of the Agriculture Appropriations Committee, Senator Cochran, and the ranking member, Senator Bumpers, are under very sharp strictures with respect to what they can spend. They have allocations made to them. If we are going beyond that, we have to have an emergency designation. The President has indicated he is willing to make such a designation. I am hopeful that we will find the Budget Committee agrees as well. We are awaiting their word on that matter. Mr. President, these sharp drops in farm income are certainly not isolated. It is not just North Dakota. The State of Missouri saw a very sharp drop, 72 percent drop there; Maryland, 44 percent drop; New York, 44 percent drop; West Virginia, 44 percent; Virginia, 42 percent; Minnesota, 38 percent; Wisconsin, the same; Nevada, 35 percent; Pennsylvania, a sharp drop, again, because of natural disasters with what is happening with tornadoes. We also know that producers, on this map provided by USDA, in North Carolina have been very, very hard hit by a set of hurricanes. Of course, Oklahoma and Texas is burning up with this drought, and so many of their producers are under extreme economic pressure as a result. I will enter into the Record a letter from the President. I will read from it before I send it to the desk. This is a letter sent to Leader Daschle yesterday. The President says: I am very concerned about the financial stress facing farmers and ranchers in many regions of the country. Natural disasters, combined with a downturn in crop prices and farm income, expected by the Department of Agriculture to remain weak for some time, cause me to question again the adequacy of the safety net provided by the 1996 farm bill. In some areas of the U.S., as many as five consecutive years of weather and disease-related disasters have demonstrated weaknesses in the risk protection available through crop insurance. I think all of us who represent farm country certainly understand that. That is because of the formula. It is going to take us time to fix crop insurance. It is going to take a bipartisan effort to do that, but that takes time. Those of us who serve on the Agriculture Committee understand the complexities of reforming crop insurance. That is not going to happen this year. That is not going to be done in time to help these people who have been hit by repeated years of disaster and for whom the crop insurance system does not work. What we are saying together is we ought to move and fill in the difference, provide some assistance while we are waiting for crop insurance to be fixed. The President said: Therefore, I am instructing the Secretary of Agriculture to redouble his efforts to augment the current crop insurance program to more adequately meet farmers' needs to protect against farm income losses. In the interim, to respond to the current unusual situations, I urge the Congress to take emergency action to address specific stresses now afflicting sectors of the farm economy. He goes on to say: I agree with the intent of Senator Conrad's amendment and recommend that funding to address these problems be designated as emergency spending. A supplemental crop insurance program for farmers who experience repeated crop losses, a compensation program for farmers and ranchers whose productive land continues to be under water, and extended authority for the livestock disaster program are examples of the type of emergency actions that could help farmers and ranchers. Well, amen to that. I certainly thank the President for recognizing the extraordinary economic stress our farmers and ranchers are under. The President concludes by saying: I am confident that you and your colleagues share my concern for American farmers and ranchers who are experiencing financial stress from natural disasters and low prices, exacerbated by the global downturn in agricultural trade, and I encourage the Congress to take emergency action quickly. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the letter from the President be printed in the Record.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. On July 9, 1998, Major League Baseball selected Bud Selig as its ninth Commissioner in the history of baseball. After serving as the Chairman of Baseball's Executive Council for the last six years, the owners picked from their own ranks and bestowed the formal leadership mantle on Alan H. ``Bud'' Selig. For the last 28 years, Bud has been the driving force behind major league baseball in Milwaukee, from bringing baseball back in 1970 to building a new convertible stadium to open in 2000. In September of 1992, Bud was picked to fill the void created by the departure of Fay Vincent. From the day he took the reins of the Executive Council, he was faced with serious issues that had eluded solutions. The first task was securing a new collective bargaining agreement with the Players Association. That agreement is an essential element in the growing trust and cooperation that is now visible between the players and the owners. If labor peace was not a big enough challenge, Bud was instrumental in securing a revenue sharing agreement, and in implementing the popular wild-card playoff system and interleague play that the fans have found very exciting and enthusiastically attend. All of these improvements have helped bring back fans in numbers that reflect a healing of the game after the strike. Those accomplishments are truly important but they merely set the stage for the agenda items that await the ninth Commissioner of Baseball. Most people who follow baseball believe Bud will have to address several tough issues: realignment and scheduling; elimination of payroll disparity; and marketing and promotion of baseball both at home and internationally. This last issue is one that also provides an avenue to continue to work with the Players Association to grow the game in a way that the fans, the players and the owners benefit. Bud was responsible for bringing Paul Beeston from the Toronto club into the management ranks of baseball as the Chief Operating Officer. With Paul to tend to the day to day operations in the new and reorganized New York offices, Bud will be free to focus on the important tasks that lie ahead. The challenges that Bud now faces will require him to draw on the legendary consensus building skills that he has so effectively used in the past to continue to provide the unified leadership that will put baseball on a path to move into the next century. As a life long baseball fan, I wish him well.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I have just returned after spending a week in my home State of North Dakota. On six previous occasions, I have come to the floor to describe to my colleagues what is happening there. I have described it as a stealth disaster. Last year, we faced a remarkable set of disasters, with the worst winter in our history, followed by the most powerful winter storm in 50 years, followed then by the 500-year flood, and, in the midst of all that, an outbreak of fire that destroyed much of downtown Grand Forks. Those disasters received enormous attention. Daily, the national news media covered what was happening, so people all across America saw what was happening in North Dakota, and the people of the United States moved to respond. They responded with extraordinary generosity. We deeply appreciate what the people of this country did for North Dakota last year. Mr. President, the disaster continues this year. Only this year, it is attended by almost no national news coverage and there is very little understanding of the depths of the crisis. This is a disaster nonetheless. This disaster is not as visible because it is a disaster occurring on the 30,000 farms of the State of North Dakota. From 1996 to 1997, according to the Government's own figures, farm income in North Dakota dropped 98 percent. That is not a misstatement, that is what the Government's own figures reveal, that farm income from 1996 to 1997 dropped 98 percent in the State of North Dakota. We led the Nation in farm income decline. And, by whatever measure one takes, this is a disaster. It is a disaster caused by bad prices, bad weather, and bad policy. We have the lowest prices on record when adjusted for inflation. We have a continuation of the weather cycle that led to the incredible storms and flooding of last year. Now we are caught up in a wet weather cycle that has led to an outbreak of disastrous disease--scab infects the crops of North Dakota. Last year, it cost about a third of the crop. But not only did it damage the crop, it also reduced the grade of the grain that we produce, so that farmers got a lower price. That, in the midst of the weakest prices, adjusted for inflation, that we have seen in the grain markets for 30 years. The result is, farmers cannot cash-flow. The result is, farmers are being forced off the land. The result is, we have massive auction sales all across the State of North Dakota. The result is, farmers coming to me and bankers coming to me and Main Street business people coming to me saying, ``Senator, there is something radically wrong, and something has to be done or we are going to lose a vast number of our farmers.'' Mr. President, we now start to see that prophecy unfold. I brought with me upcoming auctions that appeared in the local newspaper. These auctions tell a story. These auctions are of farm after farm after farm being put up for sale because the farmers cannot cash-flow. This starts on Monday, March 9, at 11 a.m. and runs right through March. Every day there is sale after sale after sale of farms in North Dakota. I just had farmers tell me that for the first time in 100 years, there is land that will not be farmed. Some say, ``Well, North Dakota is a marginal State. North Dakota has marginal weather to begin with.'' That is true in part of North Dakota, but this is happening in the richest part of North Dakota. This is happening in the Red River Valley of North Dakota. This is the richest farmland in the world. I grew up being told there had never been a crop failure in the Red River Valley. Never in history had there been a crop failure. For the last 5 years, farmers have not had a normal crop in the Red River Valley of North Dakota. I just went through the southeastern corner of our State. What I saw in six counties was extraordinary. They are under water. They have 2 and 3 feet of water in the fields. They have had more rain in the first 6 months than they normally get in a year and a half. There is not going to be a normal crop in those six counties, and that is the southeastern part of the State. It has been the northeastern part that has been so hard hit in the last year. This weather pattern seems to be expanding, taking in more and more land, more and more farms inundated, more and more farmers who aren't going to have a crop or going to have a badly diminished crop and, on top of that, are going to have very weak prices. The result will be even more auctions. Already we anticipate losing one in every 10 of our farmers this year. Experts that we met with when the Secretary of Agriculture came to North Dakota 3 weeks ago told us next year we might anticipate losing one of every three farmers. This is a disaster of enormous scope, Mr. President, and I hope I can convince my colleagues that it is critically important that we respond. This chart shows 141 farm auctions scheduled between the beginning of March and the end of June. That is nearly two auctions every day for 4 months. Who are these farmers who are advertising auctions? I am very sorry to report to my colleagues that these are not farmers of retirement age. Many of these farmers are young farmers who simply can't take the debt load; they simply can't take being in a circumstance of bad weather, bad prices and bad policy. The result is they are leaving farming. One has to ask, Who is going to farm this land in the future? Who is going to provide the food stocks for the American people, because if there is ever a breadbasket State, it is North Dakota. We are No. 1 in the production of crop after crop after crop. We are No. 1 in durum that goes to produce pasta. Over 65 percent of the durum wheat produced in the United States is produced in North Dakota; No. 1 in barley; No. 1 in sunflower; No. 1 in canola; No. 1 in many of the other wheat categories. North Dakota literally is a breadbasket State, and North Dakota is in disaster. There is no other way to describe it. The result is going to be a calamity unless there is a response. We see these auctions. This is a typical one: April 14, 1998. This fellow is going to have an auction. It says: Darryl has rented out the farm and, therefore, will liquidate the following large line of top quality equipment by public auction. If you look at what is being auctioned, it is very revealing: A 1995 row crop drill; 1996 row lifter; 1996 cultivator; 1997 field sprayer. What does that tell us? Farmers thinking they are going out of business are not buying new equipment in 1997. They are not buying new equipment in 1996. They are not buying new equipment in 1998. They have been hit by a calamity, a calamity that is forcing them off the land and out of business. No one who is planning to quit in 1998 buys a sprayer in 1997. Another auction advertisement states that two farmers have discontinued their farming operations. Again, we see new equipment being sold. Again, we find that this is, as described in the ad, single-owner equipment, and yet they have equipment purchased as recently as 1997. These are not small investments. Many of these pieces of equipment cost $50,000, $60,000, $70,000, and they just bought them last year and they are going out of business this year. Not one, not two, but hundreds and hundreds and thousands, and it is because there is a collapse of farm income. There is a collapse of production, and we don't have a safety net in place. It is very interesting if you compare what we are doing in this country to what our chief competitors are doing. Our chief competitors are the Europeans. They are spending $50 billion a year supporting their farmers--$50 billion, 10 times as much as what we are spending. We spend $5 billion a year. As I have said to my colleagues many times, the Europeans have a plan, and they have a strategy. Their plan and their strategy is to dominate world agricultural markets. Why? Because the Europeans have been hungry twice, and they never intend to be hungry again. They understand full well the importance of agricultural dominance, and they are ready to do what it takes. They are doing it the old-fashioned way: They are buying the markets. We are sending our farmers out saying, ``You go compete against the French farmer and the German farmer.'' Fair enough. We are ready to compete against any farmer anywhere, anytime. But in addition, we are saying to our farmers, ``While you are at it, you go compete against the French Government and the German Government and good luck,'' because those countries have decided they are going to stand with their producers, and they are going to fight, and they are going to win. If you look at what is happening in world agriculture, you can see that strategy and that plan is working, because the Europeans are on the ascent while the United States is descending. They are going in the right direction; we are going in the wrong direction, and we wonder why.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I would be glad to enter an agreement right here with my colleague so that the Senator from South Carolina would have time before the cloture vote and so my colleague from New Jersey would have time. I would be happy to wrap up very quickly so they can have sufficient time before the cloture vote.

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, let me reclaim my time, and let me just end so the Senator from South Carolina has as much time as he can remaining. My understanding was that I had 15 minutes this morning. But I would be glad to wrap up and simply say that what I have described this morning is an ongoing crisis in my State. And I am going to be asking my colleagues to respond, as they so graciously responded last year. Let me say, it is just not my State, because what is happening in my State is an early warning signal to others as to what can happen. We are headed for a calamity in my State. Others will experience the same thing unless we find a way to fix it. I thank the Chair and yield the floor so that my colleagues can have the remaining time. Mr. TORRICELLI addressed the Chair.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. CONRAD

Mr. CONRAD. I thank the Senator from Delaware. Mr. President, in my home State of North Dakota, we are facing a disaster of stunning proportion. We are losing literally thousands of farm families as a result of what I call a ``triple whammy'' of bad prices, bad weather and bad policy. One part of the bad policy is the sanctions that we place on foreign countries that locks us out of their markets. Mr. President, I have just spent 9 days in my State going from town to town. Everywhere I have gone, farmers have taken me aside, bankers have taken me aside, Main Street business people have taken me aside and they have told me that something is radically wrong. Farmers are not cash-flowing. We have the lowest prices in history, coupled with a dramatic reduction in production because of the outbreak of massive disease--scab and other disease--that is reducing yields dramatically. That combination is absolutely devastating to farmers. In the midst of this, our Asian markets, which are critical to us, are weakening because of a financial collapse there. And on top of it, our own Government is imposing sanctions on countries like Pakistan, which is the third largest buyer of wheat, and we are locking ourselves out of those markets, further weakening prices, creating what is, in effect, a death spiral. Mr. President, what are the consequences? In my State, there are now 30,000 farm families. We are anticipating losing as many as 10 percent--3,000 farm families--this year. We have auctions that are being offered daily--many of them each and every day, as farm families liquidate, leave the land, because they can't possibly make it. These are some of the very best farmers that North Dakota has. Mr. President, it is critically important that we pass this legislation to exempt agriculture from these sanctions to give our farmers a fighting chance. I visit farmsteads frequently in North Dakota. I wish I could explain to my colleagues the depth of despair that is being felt there. I had a farmer say to me this last week that he believes farm conditions are worse than the 1930s. I have had many farmers say to me that conditions are worse than the 1980s. That was an incredibly bad period in North Dakota and, of course, in the rest of the farm country as well. Mr. President, it is time to act. We can take a first important step today by passing this sanctions legislation. I want to especially thank my colleague, Senator Murray of Washington, for her outstanding leadership on this legislation; Senator McConnell from Kentucky, who has taken a strong interest in getting this legislation passed--my hat is off to Senator McConnell as well; Senator Biden, who has played a critical role in advancing this legislation and keeping it together in the difficult hours this morning; and Senator Roberts from Kansas, who has also played a leading role. My thanks to each and every one of them. I can tell you, we face a desperate situation in my State. It is truly a disaster. I just went through six counties, and in every one of them they are literally under water. There are 2 and 3 feet of water on the farm fields. There won't be any crops there this year. Coupled with the very low prices on crops they had last year, we face a deepening of the disaster that is already occurring. This is an important step. I urge my colleagues to support it. I yield the remainder of my time.