Pat Roberts

I certainly hope that does not happen in the United States.

What does make sense is a national production standard that is fair to everybody, that treats everybody the same, and that reflects our country's ideas of fairness and humanity.

If you control 90 percent of the market and you have a welfare standard that should be available, knowledge to all consumers, why do you need the Federal Government to set a new standard?

If this bill is enacted into law and cage size is increased, what is the benefit to human, to human health from a food safety standpoint?

I am sure the committee stands behind you in your endeavors.

I do not like user fees, but under the circumstances, there is not any real alternative.

It is going to be the public that pays the user fees.

Senator Pat Roberts and his staff have been working on behalf of the Commission's Executive Committee to encourage, arrange, and schedule Eisenhower family meetings at the Commission's expense with Frank Gehry and other pertinent parties.

I hope we can expedite that, and I hope we can be of help to you.

The Department of Labor actually proposed new regulations for how our young people can work and learn about agriculture, and there is not anybody on this Committee or anybody in this room that does not care or have the utmost concern for…

I just want the record to show that we cut--'we.' I did not. We did cut in the farm bill in 2008 $6 billion.

I want to acknowledge that you have already submitted for the record the letter we received from the lending community.

crop insurance, as Senator Roberts pointed out, is a key component for managing risk today.

I am not sure the lender really appreciates that.

Thank you for being so proactive in tackling all the challenges we face.

That budget proposal cut the premium assistance to farmers and ranchers, and that is right out of the producers' pocket.

We are hoping that Mother Nature will be kinder to us.

Federal crop insurance is paramount to the success and longevity of our farm.

I think, bottom line, we both know that if we do not work together in a bipartisan way, we may not get the best possible bill but the best bill possible.

I hear time and time again, just as you have said, that our producers and their lenders, especially important in regards to stressing lenders, that crop insurance is the cornerstone of the farm safety net.

I especially liked your comment on different pathways. Everybody does not have to be on the farm.

There seems to be this myth floating around that if we just eliminate the direct payments, conservation compliance mysteriously disappears as well.

I have not had a single farmer tell me that they prefer a disaster program to crop insurance.

Maintaining a strong safety net in the next farm bill is critical.

the idea that the administration would ask for nothing and use as an explanation that we really need more money than Congress has appropriated to date is self-defeating.