I only want to point out again, which I think is the most relevant counter-argument to the amendment being offered: There is no restraint on production of peanuts. The market is the one that has to react. If the market chooses to pay $800 a ton, peanut farmers will be happy. If they choose to pay $610, they will not be so happy. Some will be very happy with $610. I have got growers that make good money at $500, $400 a ton. I have got others that struggle to make it at $610. We tried to balance that constituent interest because I happen to represent both quota and nonquota. I happen to represent some of the theory that the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Kolbe] is trying to put forward here.
Charles W. Stenholm: “I only want to point out again, which I think is the most relevant counter-argument to the amendment being offered…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the impact of market prices on peanut farmers during a debate on an amendment.
Share
More from Charles W. Stenholm
I appreciate that. I hope that the chairman and ranking member understand the concern here. As I said before, I have always followed the recommendations of the Air Force. We have some concerns, we are standing down the 13th bomb squadron…
3 years ago is when this debate began and those of us that believed that we had a little better plan, we lost that battle; and today, we are still fighting the same battle we did 3 years ago. We were told if we instigated the tax cuts that…
No, with all due respect, well, if you want to fight the war by shortchanging the troops in order that you can have your rhetorical answers on that, fine. I will be happy to yield for a simple discourse, but every time you start that…
I hope everyone caught the significance of the exchange between the chairman and me, because I am not disagreeing with anything that he offered in opposition to this amendment, because what he said is 100 percent true. I hope everyone in…





