But I wish my colleague would give credit to the Committee on Agriculture for doing that which we recognize we had to do, and that is move the program more into the market orientation side. And we did that. But it is never enough for those that want to kill the program. Those that want to go in and eliminate the total program and would love to pay $400 a ton for peanuts and buy all the peanuts for 1 year until you break the farmers, I understand that. It makes good sense.
Charles W. Stenholm: “But I wish my colleague would give credit to the Committee on Agriculture for doing that which we recognize we had to…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing agricultural price controls and farm program reforms during a floor debate.
Share
More from Charles W. Stenholm
You are mischaracterizing my amendment. We are suggesting that the tax cuts be extended through next year. You are describing something that is not going to happen in my amendment, leaving a wrong impression with the people that might be…
I personally do not believe we should pay for tax cuts by borrowing money against our children's future. That is why I support the Tanner substitute, which will extend the 10 percent tax bracket without increasing the deficit. This debate…
I rise in deep sadness about the way this House is being run. A rule which denies the ranking member of the Committee on Ways and Means an opportunity to offer a serious, responsible amendment on an issue as important as this is should…
We did it in 1997. It was Democrats like me that stood up with Republicans and got it done.





