LEGISLATIVE REPORT: AGRICULTURE TOUR 1999: EVENING THE PLAYING FIELD

There are politicians and officials in Washington, D.C., who argue that it is too expensive to provide emergency assistance to our family farmers and ranchers. But as your Member of Congress representing our heavily agricultural district of Southern Missouri, I know that it is too expensive not to provide emergency assistance to our nation's producers.

American producers have been under significant financial strain because of the low prices they are being paid for their crops and livestock. With an abundant domestic supply of agricultural products and a stable U.S. population rate, expanding existing market access and opening new export markets for American agriculture is more important than ever for our farmers and ranchers. And when you consider the facts that global food demand is expanding rapidly and that more than 95 percent of the world's consumers live outside of our nation, it is clear that exports are the key source of future growth in sales and income for our producers.

In fact, the 1996 farm bill promised farmers and ranchers a free global market in exchange for the government getting out of the price support business. Unfortunately, the Administration has not been aggressive in keeping this promise to our producers. While eight rounds of trade negotiations since the end of World War 11 have reduced average tariffs on industrial goods from 40 percent to 4 percent, agricultural tariffs abroad remain at an average of over 40 percent and even as high as 50 percent. U.S. agricultural tariffs average about eight percent.

In addition to high agricultural tariffs, many countries far out-spend the U.S. in assisting their domestic producers. The European Union continues to spend 20 times more on their agriculture export subsidies than the U.S. spends on our export enhancement programs. And while we fight to provide our American producers an average of $6 billion on the farm program each year, Japan spends $30 billion on its agriculture community and the EU spends $60 billion.

American fanners and ranchers are the most efficient and productive producers in the world. And they can out compete any other producer in the world if they are allowed to compete on an even playing field. But it is painfully clear that the playing field is not even. Fortunately, the next round of multinational trade negotiations set for November and December 1999 in Seattle, Washington will provide the U.S. a unique opportunity to reduce agricultural tariffs, open new markets, and address unfair trade practices around the world. The administration must make it clear to the world that we are committed to expanding export opportunities for U.S. agriculture. We must stand strong on this issue, and we must ensure that our farmers and ranchers have a place at the negotiating table.

Even if the U.S. is successful in negotiating a more even playing field for our farmers and ranchers, the trade talks will last three years, and the agreement would not be implemented until 2004. In the meantime, our producers are faced with an uneven playing field. If our farmers and ranchers are to survive today to take advantage of new trade opportunities in the future, Congress and the administration must be committed to providing some much-needed relief to our farmers and ranchers as quickly and efficiently as possible. This is the right and necessary thing to do.