Dick Lugar: “Therefore, I do not want to dwell on the committee product in its entirety because I support, as I recall, eight of the…”

“Therefore, I do not want to dwell on the committee product in its entirety because I support, as I recall, eight of the titles, if I remember how many we dealt with. But all of us around the table knew we would have some differences on policy and results with the commodity title, and we did. So this is a part of that extended argument. At the time of the adoption of the nutrition title, I offered an amendment in the committee which was narrowly defeated that, in fact, traces the additions I wish to offer today. In essence, for those who are attempting to keep some scoring as to how this is paid for without breaking out of the budget balance, the savings I obtain in my commodity title are more than are required to do the additional things I have chosen to do in the nutrition title. In the proposal that I make, beginning in the year 2003--and I stress that; not this year or the next year, 2002, but in 2003--a farmer or rancher with at least $20,000 in annual gross farm income, and who provides 5 consecutive years of Federal tax return information related to his or her farm business, regardless of commodities produced--that is a very large ``regardless''--for Senators or staff who may be listening to this debate, the question would be, for example, Does that mean strawberries? Yes, it does. Sheep and wool? Both. In essence, it means just what it says, all returns from farm business.”