Advocate Summary

Issue:  US Farm Bill
Advocate:  Independent Bakers Association – Robert Pyle
Date of Interview: 7/1/02

Basic Background
Generally speaking we favored the 1996 bill which was essentially Dick Lugar and Pat Roberts who was then chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, and they proposed gradually eliminating farm supports for basic crops and they did this by giving it a seven year payment, to lessen the blow they had a descending seven year payment to the former recipients of farm subsidies. And we favored that, unfortunately they did well the first couple of years – the farmers did, and then because of the growth of production in other areas, particularly in India for grains and China and some of the countries around the Black Sea, the export of US crops went down, so the prices went down, so the farmers simply weren’t getting enough money, so then the government turned around and started giving them additional money to maintain income at the high levels. So the new farm bill has taken those levels of support and put them into permanent subsidy programs, and we oppose this. The only part of the bill that we really favored was the new reform in the peanut program. The peanut program had been a quota program and you got the quotas in 1941, and the purpose was to supply adequate food for the United States during the war time effort. Well, for 60 years those same quotas applied, if you didn’t have a quota you couldn’t grow and sell peanuts in the United States, and they got into 3 and 4 generations of people supporting those quotas. The problem is they passed the NAFTA treaty, the North American Free Trade Agreement, and under that the Mexicans had the right to start bringing peanuts into the United States. Of course the world price of peanuts is approximately 300 to 350 dollars a ton, in Antwerp and Belgium, and the US price because of these price supports were 610 dollars a ton. They had been 668 dollars a ton but the reforms by Roberts and Lugar in 1996 had reduced that by 10 percent so we’re down to 610. At the same time American producers that did not have quotas, such as those in Texas, produced peanuts in the United States, sold them overseas for 300 dollars a ton and made money. They were just making a killing and had for years, quotas rented for as high as 250 dollars a ton people lived in Florida with quotas, only a quarter of them ever farmed. They never did any actual farming, so it was an absolutely disgraceful program. So the programs under the new bill are disgraceful, some of the things we eliminated years ago, mohair, and honey, the honey program was a national disgrace, they’ve put them all back in again.  And our allies are upset our trading partners are upset, and it seems to have been led by a group of farmers primarily from North Dakota and South Dakota led by Tom Dashcle (D-SD) almost exclusively Democrats in the Midwest plus all of the Democrats and Republicans in the South. But it was a democratic measure and the whole purpose of the farm bill was to through money into the Dakotas and some of those upper plains states. 

Prior Activity on the Issue 
None mentioned. 

Advocacy Activities Undertaken
None mentioned. 

Future Advocacy Activities Planned
None mentioned. 

Key Congressional Contact(s)/Champions
Well Senator Pat Roberts (R-KS) and Dick Lugar (R-IN), these are people that we look up to for leadership on these issues. Rick Santorum (R) from Pennsylvania he supports sensible farm programs, none of this nonsense. 

Targets of Direct Lobbying
We were trying very hard to influence the people from the cities and the suburbs, which should be very supportive. It used to be years ago that we could get the corn people to support us on some of these things, but they’re in lock step now with the high support people from Illinois and Indiana and those places. 

Targets of Grassroots Lobbying
None mentioned. 

Coalition Partners: Names/Participants
Most all the food manufacturing companies and trade association, the Grocery Manufactures Association, National Food Processors Association. 

We have a peanut group, we have a sugar groups, we work closely with all of them. 

Other Participants in the Issue Debate
Well for the bankers, if you destroy the peanut program and the sugar program all the little banks in Georgia and Louisiana and Florida would all close, they kept the communities alive. But I haven’t heard that the bankers were all that involved. And yes there were environmental groups involved and Senator Lugar wanted to give more of the payment to farmers for environmental activities for setting aside some of the lands that weren’t as productive and that could be hurt by too much production – but now everything is off, the more you produce the more money you get. It has nothing to do with markets anymore it is pretty outrageous. 

Cargill and Conagra and ADM they tend to be neutral, they kind of work with the farmers and they take whatever price they give them. And they are so big and they’re working in all the other countries, they could just as easily shift production to Australia, they’re involved in all these countries so it’s a question of where they sell and where they export.

I’m not familiar with any food aid groups. There used to be a section 418 under the farm bill which committed the government to send crops in oversupply to disadvantaged countries, for years we used to send wheat to India, and then we improved, an American professor perfected wheat to be grown in India and now India has a surplus. 

You also had people like Citizens Against Government Waste and Common Cause and some of those people, they were all outraged by it, they had all the newspapers, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, everybody, the one thing that everybody could agree on is that this is an absolute outrage. Here everybody is asking you to sacrifice and the farm bill is up 76 million dollars, it is unbelievable. 

The administration had a position this time last year, essentially the same as we have, and then the realities of the politics were brought home and they tended to lose their courage. It was about number one getting a farm bill because they were late. And they had to get a farm bill because the farmers didn’t know what to plant. 

Ubiquitous Argument(s) and Evidence
Well, we told them how bad the sugar program was and how bad the peanut program was because some of the peanut producers, especially in Georgia realized they had to do something or all the American people would be buying Mexican peanuts. The average jar of peanut butter had 40 cents added to the cost because of the peanut program so the consumers are paying for it. The sugar program was not reformed and that’s a national disgrace. Sugar sells for 5 cents a pound in Canada and in Europe and in this country it costs about 28 cents a pound. And all the candy companies in Chicago are moving to Mexico, Lifesavers announced the day after the farm bill was signed that they were going to move from New York to Canada where they can get 5 cent sugar. So you have all these jobs going overseas all because we’re going to take care of the “farmer comes first.” Anybody that had any interest in any program just added it on to the farm bill. I just read an article that said that the Senator from Vermont that just switched parties had a bill put in the farm bill that created a 25 million dollar fund to start painting barns in Vermont. It’s disgraceful, why should we paint barns? I mean we represent bakers, bakers don’t get government help. Now we’ve got a problem in New York City, Canadian bakers have just built a warehouse in New York City and are starting to ship bread in from Canada, because the Canadian Wheat board subsidizes flour cost and the Canadian railroads is owned by the government and they subsidize rail transportation so they’re paying for sugar, which is 2 percent of a loaf of bread they’re paying what 20 percent of what we pay in this country. They can produce bread in Canada, truck it all the way to New York City and sell it cheaper then an American baker’s stock cost at the bakery – that’s no overhead, no transportation. We have created all of these ridiculous situations, so the bread that our people bake and the flour and the ingredients from this country are at a tremendous disadvantage. 

Secondary Argument(s) and Evidence
None mentioned. 

Targeted Arguments, Targets, and Evidence
None mentioned. 

Nature of the Opposition
The farmers and their champions, particularly in the Senate, we did a little better in the House, but the Senate has a Democratic majority and Daschle and the two people from North Dakota and Johnson also from South Dakota, and all these guys from the plains states. They’re losing population and they’re saying all the small towns are dying out, therefore what we’re going to do is give these people federal money, throw money, and hope these people will stay on the farms. That’s what they’re trying to do. 

Ubiquitous Argument(s) and Evidence Articulated by the Opposition 
They were saying that we’re not getting enough for our commodities, and without government aid, which is now 50 percent of their income, do you realize that? – 50 percent of their income! What other industry in the United States gets that kind of support. The only question is how they are going to throw money into those states you think they gave it to the poor farmers? No, they gave it all to the rich farmers. So much for the Democrats being for the poor people, they gave it all to the big corporations and partnerships. It’s an absolute outrage. 

Secondary Argument(s) and Evidence Articulated by the Opposition
None mentioned. 

Targeted Argument(s) and Evidence Articulated by the Opposition (and Targets)
None mentioned. 

Described as a Partisan Issue
Yes, he described the bill as a Democratic measure.

There were 20 Republican Senators from the Plains states that were overwhelmingly against the Farm Bill in the Senate. The Democrats all supported it almost entirely I think there were 5 or 8 that opposed.  

Venue(s) of Activity
Agriculture Committee

Action Pending or Taken by Relevant Decision Makers
The bill passed and was signed into law.

I think one of the few ways we’re going to get any changes is action by the WTO, World Trade Organization, hopefully they’ll find a lot of flaws that it’s anti-trade and they’ll want it repealed. I think that’s they only way it’s going to happen.  

Policy Objective(s) and Support for/Opposition to the Status Quo
The Bakers and the food processing and manufacturing industry were against subsidies to farmers which result in hirer prices on farm commodities. 

Advocate’s Experience: Tenure in Current Job/Previous Experience
With the Bakers Association, I’ve been them since 1975, before that I was with the American Bakers Association and was their lobbyist. 

Reliance on Research: In-House/External (Code for Organizational Advocates Only)
We do it in house, we do fact sheets. What we try to do is work with the suburban congressmen. Now one of the big problems with peanuts and sugar is the Black Caucus, now peanuts are the cheapest form of protein that you can have, and the government buys a lot of peanut butter for its feeding programs for the poor, because it is the cheapest form of protein. And here are all these black congressmen almost without exception supporting these programs which were increasing the costs for food aid for their people. And they used to bring the black farmers up peanut farmers from the south and parade them around Congress and then they had money, they had a lot of money that they dispersed and the Black caucus was almost solidly against agricultural reform, even though less than 3 percent of farmers, certainly in the peanut side, were black. Never got any place with them, argued with them, argued with them, they would always say, well it would cut out these aid programs and they’ll just keep the money it won’t lower the price. Well that’s not true, that’s not true. Our markets are too competitive for that kind of thing.  

Number of Individuals Involved in Advocacy (Code for Organizational Advocates Only)
Two

Units in Organization Involved in Public Affairs/Policy (Code for Organizational Advocates Only)
I do some of the lobbying and my son Nicolas does a lot of the lobbying. And we do mailings and we bring people in. We just had a convention last week. I’ve been doing this for years I don’t need counsel. But the farm lobby is very powerful, powerful as the Jewish lobby. And we have the Bake PAC.

Advocate’s Outstanding Skills/Assets (Code for Organizational Advocates Only)

Type of Membership: None, Institutions, Individuals, Both (Code for Organizational Advocates Only)

Membership Size (Code for Organizational Advocates Only)

Organizational Age (Code for Organizational Advocates Only)

Miscellaneous