If you just looked at that, you would think we shouldn't be worried too much about what is happening in America; things look pretty
good.

Out of the glare of Wall Street, far from the floor of the New York Stock Exchange, sort of silently and quietly, American farmers
and ranchers are losing their businesses. They are at the end of their rope. Our small towns and communities that dot our
countryside are facing a bleak winter, with the prospect that things will get even worse after the harvest is in and the snow falls.

The situation facing American agriculture today--according to bankers, farm economists, and agricultural economists from many of
our universities--is the worst it has been since the Great Depression. We have to respond to that. We have to respond in a way
that is meaningful. That is what our first-degree amendment does.

I listened to my friend from Mississippi describe this amendment. I guess my response basically would be, `Nice try.' Would it help
farmers? Would the Republican amendment help farmers? Why, sure. Any little bit would help. Does it get to the underlying
problem? Does it really help get our farmers through this winter and into next year? The answer is no. It is hopelessly too short.

While I appreciate the effort by my friends on the Republican side to come up with a last-minute amendment to perhaps put out a
smokescreen on what is really happening in agriculture and what we need to do to respond to the crisis, it is a nice effort, but it
really doesn't do it. Our hard-working, dedicated, progressive farmers and ranchers across this country don't just need a little bit of
a handout that the Republican amendment will give them. What they need is a package of help that will not only get them through
this summer and this fall but through next winter so they can get back on their feet again next year.

You will hear a lot of talk about how one of the problems is our lack of exports. I just want to point out that even though the United
States has a trade deficit, one sector that earns us money and that has a positive trade balance is agriculture. But there are those
who would have you believe it is because of the lack of  exports that our farmers are in such bad shape. Here is the chart that puts the lie to that.

For wheat, rice, corn, and soybeans--the major commodities we export--the exports are fully up this year over what they were in
the previous couple of years. We are exporting more. If we are exporting more, what is the problem? The problem is, there is no
price and farmers aren't getting anything for their commodities.

Here is what has happened to soybeans just in my State of Iowa since the fall of 1997: Basically about a 45-percent decrease in
the value of that crop. The same is true with corn. There have been precipitous drops just in the last year and a half. It is not a lack
of total exports. It is a lack of the money and the price that farmers are getting.

While we need to get an emergency package of money out to farmers, we need to do it now. We also have to be about changing
the farm policy. We cannot go on another year under the Freedom to Farm bill and be back here again next year looking at another
package of several billion dollars. The Freedom to Farm bill has failed miserably. It has failed our Nation. It has failed our farmers.
It has failed our rural communities.

 have an article that was in the Kansas paper back in 1995 when we passed the Freedom to Farm bill by my friend from Kansas,
Senator Roberts. He said:

Finally, Freedom to Farm enhances the farmer's total economic situation. In fact, the bill results in the highest net farm income over
the next seven years of any proposal before Congress.

I hate to say it to my friend from Kansas, but net farm income in key farming areas is down dramatically. For the principal field
crops, net farm income is going to be down about 29 percent this year from the average of the last 5 years. That is why we are
facing one of the greatest depressions in agriculture since the 1930s. That is why halfhearted measures are not going to work. That
is why the bill we have come up with really does address the magnitude of the problem. It is deep, and it is a very large problem
and one that has to be addressed efficiently.

The amendment that Senator Daschle and I, along with Senator Dorgan, Senator Kerrey, Senator Johnson, Senator Conrad,
Senator Baucus, Senator Durbin, Senator Wellstone, Senator Lincoln, and Senator Sarbanes have just sent to the desk
provides for a total of $10.79 billion to farmers and ranchers for this next year.

There is a great gulf of difference between what the Republicans have set up and what we are proposing. First, the Republicans
are proposing that we send all of this money out in a direct payment to farmers; an AMTA payment, it is called, a market transition
payment. Our payments go out in supplemental loan deficiency payments, which means they are based upon a farmer's
production--what that farmer actually produced this year, not what they did 10 or 20 years ago. In that way, it is more fair and it is
more direct to the actual farmers this year. We include $2.6 billion for disaster assistance.

We include a number of other measures such as $212 million for emergency conservation. We have had a lot of floods and a lot of
damages in a lot of States. We need to repair the damage to farm and ranch land and enhance our conservation. For emergency
trade provision, we have $978 million for purchases of commodities for humanitarian assistance. We have people starving all over
the world. We have a Public Law 480 food assistance program and related programs. Our bill provides about $1 billion to take the
surplus food we have and send it around the world to starving people. The Republican proposal does not include that.

We include money for emergency economic development for our rural towns, small towns, and communities that are hit hard. Our
total package of $10.79 billion addresses the magnitude of the problem. It is that big.

I say to the people who think $10.79 billion is a lot of money, we passed a tax break bill last week for $792 billion, most of which
goes to upper-income people in this country. Very little will ever go to our farmers and our ranchers around America.

This point in time is going to decide what happens to rural America this winter. That is why it is so important to act now. That is
why it is so important that we get the money out that is needed--not some halfhearted measure in a way that doesn't address the
real and devastating economic problems that farmers have all over America.