Greg Ganske: “I am for the rule, but after listening to and learning from many of Iowa's leading farmers, I will vote against this…”

“I am for the rule, but after listening to and learning from many of Iowa's leading farmers, I will vote against this farm bill conference report. It is fair to say that many farmers in Iowa have deep reservations about this bill. This farm bill conference report is not in the Nation's or my State's best long term interest. We need to go back to the drawing board. This bill fails in many ways. The conference payment limitations provision is a sham. The Grassley proposal would have brought the limit down to $275,000 and have eliminated the 3-entity rule. The conference report favors the large southern producers of cotton and rice and is so full of loopholes that it does not even qualify as a step forward. For instance, a 25,000-acre cotton farm could receive as much as $8.4 million in total annual payments because of loopholes. In 2000 and 2001, 85 percent of the 2 billion certificates went to farmers in large agribusinesses in just 4 States: Arkansas, Mississippi, Texas and California. Riceland Foods of Arkansas alone collected $221 million, and that continues under this bill. The Grassley proposal for a ban on the packer ownership of livestock was endorsed by the Iowa Farm Bureau, the Iowa Pork Producers, the Iowa Cattleman's Association, the Iowa Farmers Union and the National Farmers Union. It is not usual for all of these groups to agree on farm policy, but on this they were unanimous, and the conference completely ignored this important issue.”