Metavid

Video archive of the US Congress

Senate Proceeding on May 4th, 2011 :: 8:10:10 to 8:42:35
Total video length: 8 hours 58 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Download OptionsEmbed Video

Views:267 Duration: 0:32:25 Discussion

Previous speech: Next speech:

Chuck Grassley

8:09:56 to 8:10:21( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: the senator will suspend. mr. grassley: mr. president, i'd like to ask permission to speak for 45 minutes. i may not use all that time but i'd like to have permission to speak that long. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. grassley: okay. mr. president, it's not going to surprise any of my colleagues or the public at large that a lot of times i come to the senate

Chuck Grassley

8:10:10 to 8:42:35( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Chuck Grassley

Chuck Grassley

8:10:22 to 8:10:42( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: floor to speak about agriculture and to speak about ethanol. and what brings me to the floor today is the ongoing crusade by the "wall street journal" to, in an intelly dishonest way -- intellectually dishonest way put

Chuck Grassley

8:10:43 to 8:11:05( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: out fact that resident true. and the latest -- way put out facts that are not true. and the latest barrage that occurred last saturday in the "wall street journal" interview with c. larry pope, c.e.o. of smithfield food. and in this article, there's a lot of misstatements about

Chuck Grassley

8:11:06 to 8:11:26( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: ethanol and about ethanol causing the price of food to rise dramatically. and i take the floor now to rebut some of those misstatements and also to set the record straight so that when a very fine c.e.o. l mr. pope, even though i disagree

Chuck Grassley

8:11:27 to 8:11:48( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: with him on this article, he is a decent person and he is a good corporate executive. but so next time he speaks, he won't speak. but i can also say that -- that i don't like to have confrontations with smithfield food because they do provide a

Chuck Grassley

8:11:49 to 8:12:10( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: lot of good-paying jobs in the middle west and they do do a good job of -- of adding value to agriculture and things of that nature. but there's been a tradition within smithfields to kind of not really appreciate american

Chuck Grassley

8:12:11 to 8:12:31( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: agriculture and it goes back to some conversations i had with the previous c.e.o. by the name of joe leuter. and i remember joe leuter coming my office to tell me som things -- try to explain some things to me that he thought i had some misinterpretation of

Chuck Grassley

8:12:32 to 8:12:53( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: what he was really talking about the family farmer and about the production of hogs and whether or not he was or wanting to put the family farmer out of business. but i remember very -- just as if it was said to me yesterday, a statement to me he made when

Chuck Grassley

8:12:54 to 8:13:16( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: he said you're running the family farmer, the family producer, the independent producer out of the hog business and you want to control everything. and he said to me something along the lines that i don't want to put your farmers out of business, i just want them feeding my pigs.

Chuck Grassley

8:13:17 to 8:13:37( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: so he was basically saying that he wanted the family farmer to be a employee of smithfields and not be really an independent producer. another thing that he tried to argue with me -- and i'm

Chuck Grassley

8:13:38 to 8:14:00( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: referring to mr. pope's predecessor, mr. leuter -- he also argued that iowa farmers in a sense weren't smart enough to run a packing plant and, in fact, he offered to give a plant to a group of farmers and guaranteed that it would be out of business within six months. so i don't know whether i'm -- i

Chuck Grassley

8:14:01 to 8:14:22( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: have fault with mr. pope as c.e.o. of smithfield and ethanol in this case as opposed to leuter and who's going to raise pigs in the case of his predecessor, mr. leuter, but there may be an institutional bias within the corporate -- the corporation of smithfield.

Chuck Grassley

8:14:23 to 8:14:43( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: so anyway, with that as background, i want to go to this article that i pointed out was in the "wall street journal." the article says, "it's getting harder to bring home the bacon." basically what he's saying in that headline, or the paper is saying in that headline, is that we're raising the price of corn because so much corn is used for

Chuck Grassley

8:14:44 to 8:15:04( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: ethanol that it's driving up the price of food. and i'm on the floor to say that that's a bunch of hogwash. this article was in the april 30 addition of the "wall street journal," so if people want to read it and check it with what i've got to say, i'm happy to do

Chuck Grassley

8:15:05 to 8:15:25( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: that. the article was based on an interview with c. larry pope, c.e.o. of smithfield food, the largest pork producer and the large pork processor. the opinion piece was intended to share mr. pope's view on rising food prices.

Chuck Grassley

8:15:26 to 8:15:47( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: and also on the price of pork. mr. pope puts much of the blame on the federal ethanol program. i'd like to address a number of the claims made by mr. pope and claims made in the opinion piece, presumably based on statements by mr. pope. mr. pope claims -- and i

Chuck Grassley

8:15:48 to 8:16:08( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: quote -- "now, 40% of the corn crop is directed to ethanol" -- let me -- i want to start that quote over again. "now, 40% of the corn crop is directed to ethanol, which equals the amount that's going into livestock food."

Chuck Grassley

8:16:09 to 8:16:29( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: well, right there, statistically he's wrong. let me point out how he's wrong. in 2010, 4.65 billion bushels of corn were used to produce 13 billion gallons of ethanol. but ethanol production uses only

Chuck Grassley

8:16:30 to 8:16:51( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: the starch from a corn kernel. so i want to hold up a bag of -- of corn kernels. it would be better if i would bring in an ear of corn but this is the best way to transport it. these are corn. now, when -- when ethanol uses

Chuck Grassley

8:16:52 to 8:17:12( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: only the starch from the corn kernel, the result is that more than one-third or 1.4 billion bushels of corn -- and it's dried distillers grain -- and this is what dried distillers grain is -- is available as a

Chuck Grassley

8:17:13 to 8:17:33( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: high-value livestock feed. in fact, what's left over after you produce ethanol really is of much more value than if you'd take the original corn kernels and use that by itself for animal feed. so, then i want to say, when he says that -- go back to that

Chuck Grassley

8:17:34 to 8:17:54( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: quote. now 40% of the corn crop is directed to ethanol, which equals the amount that's going into livestock food. well, then on a net basis now, ethanol production used only 23% of the u.s. corn crop, far less than the 40% that ethanol

Chuck Grassley

8:17:55 to 8:18:15( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: detractors claim. so once again, you have a bushel l of corn, 56 pounds. out of that 56 pounds of corn, you get 2.8 bushels of ethanol. when you get done make the

Chuck Grassley

8:18:16 to 8:18:36( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: ethanol, you have a got 18 pound much drietd distiller grain that's left over, that i don't think anybody that's ignorant about ethanol understands that there's still a food product left over and soy you're making ethanol out of corn and using it all for ethanol and nothing for food

Chuck Grassley

8:18:37 to 8:18:59( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: because this is a very efficient production. and by the way, let me say this. you can tell about the ignorance of for example million to in this town because a lot of people pronounce it eethanol. it's ethanol. but people that are ignorant about it don't even know thousand prownnounce it.

Chuck Grassley

8:19:00 to 8:19:22( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: i don't know if mr. pope pronounced it right or not. according to the usda, feed use consumes 37% of the u.s. corn supply, much more than the 23% consumed by ethanol. -- ethanol production. so i hope mr. pope will put that in his pipe and smoke it, because he's wrong on that point.

Chuck Grassley

8:19:23 to 8:19:44( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: ethanol is not diverting corn away from feed use. next mr. pope claims, and i quote, "ethanol policy has impacted the world price of corn. " i'm glad mr. pope raised this issue. i clearly has no idea how little an impact ethanol has on global grain market.

Chuck Grassley

8:19:45 to 8:20:06( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: in fact, represents a mere 3% of the world's supply of grain. in addition, the global grain supply in 2010 to 2011 is 11%

Chuck Grassley

8:20:11 to 8:20:32( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: larger than in 200 2000-2001 supply. since 1975 farmers have doubled u.s. corn production from under 6 billion bushels to over 12 billion bushels last year. and they've done it using essentially the same number of acres. corn farmers today grow five

Chuck Grassley

8:20:33 to 8:20:53( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: times as much corn as they did in 1930 on 20% less land. so for all these people out there that enough productivity in the american farmer or in our land or in the efficiency of producing, i hope you understand

Chuck Grassley

8:20:54 to 8:21:15( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: that we're producing five times more corn than we did in 1930 but doing it on 20% less land. or let me explain it another way. in 1910, you know what powered agriculture: horses and mules. and in that day, it took 90 million acres of land just to

Chuck Grassley

8:21:16 to 8:21:38( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: grow the food that the animals that powered agriculture used to stay alive and to be productive animals and the power for agriculture. that 90 million acres is equal almost to the 92 million acres that'll be planted to corn in the united states this year. farmers are continuing to meet

Chuck Grassley

8:21:39 to 8:21:59( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: the growing demand then of ethanol, livestock feed, and exports. so i hope that mr. pope will put that in his pipe and smoke it, because he needs to understand how productive the american grain farmer. the author of the opinion piece then makes a claim that

Chuck Grassley

8:22:00 to 8:22:21( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: absolutely no basis in fact, so i guess i can't attribute this to mr. pope. it states that -- quote -- "the e.p.a. has found ethanol production as a neutral to negative impact on the environment." well, i've always said that ethanol is good for the environment.

Chuck Grassley

8:22:22 to 8:22:42( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: but here we've got e.p.a. being quoted that it's a negative impact on the environment. neutral-to-negative impact on the environment. the fact is under the renewable fuel standard created in 2007, corn ethanol was required to reduce greenhouse gas emissions compared to gasoline by at least

Chuck Grassley

8:22:43 to 8:23:05( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: 20%. corn ethanol has exceeded that threshold. nerksdz the law -- in other words, the law says such and such, and ethanol exceeds what the law even rimplets a reduction of more than 20%

Chuck Grassley

8:23:06 to 8:23:28( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: compared to gasoline is not neutral. so e.p.a. has found ethanol production has neutral-to-negative impact on the environment. not soavment if you remove e.p.a.'s use of murky science surrounding emissions from what is called "indirect land use" dhearntiondz kind of complicated, so i won't go into

Chuck Grassley

8:23:29 to 8:23:50( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: that -- ethanol reduces greenhouse gas emissions by 48% compared to gasoline. now, i've heard senators in the last two months on the floor of the united states senate telling all of us that ethanol was bad for the environment. a recent peer review study

Chuck Grassley

8:23:51 to 8:24:13( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: published by yale journal of industrial ecology -- now all the ivy league people in the senate ought to have some allegiance done by yale university. this is what that yale journal said, that ethanol reduces greenhouse gas emissions by up

Chuck Grassley

8:24:14 to 8:24:36( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: to 59% compared to gasoline. mr. pope also asserts that pilgrim pride went bankrupt because of ethanol. pilgrim pride was a food processor. he stated -- quote -- "the largest chicken processor in the united states, pilgrim's pride, filed for bankruptcy.

Chuck Grassley

8:24:37 to 8:25:01( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: they couldn't raise prices, so their cost of production went up dramatically." end of quote. again, facts are stubborn things. on december 1, 2008, analys analysts cited the primary cause of bankruptcy was their large debt load, the result of the

Chuck Grassley

8:25:02 to 8:25:23( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: acquisition of $1.3 billio billionrrivabillionrival -- the result of a $1.3 billion rival that they purchased in 2007. other actor factors including low chicken demand and prices resulting from the recession and poor commodity hedging, but not

Chuck Grassley

8:25:24 to 8:25:47( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: anything about the price of ethanol and corn production being high. so i hope that mr. pope will put that in his pipe and smoke it. another statement by mr. pope seems to place all the blame on corn farmers for rising food prices. he said -- quote -- "you eat

Chuck Grassley

8:25:48 to 8:26:08( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: eggs, you drink milk, you get a loaf of bread, and you get a pound of meat. all of those are based on grain." the last part of that at the same time is accurate but let me tell you what's wrong with the relationship between rising food prices and the price of grain. now let's look at the u.s. department of agriculture. the food value of every food

Chuck Grassley

8:26:09 to 8:26:32( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: dollar is 19 cents. in other words, if you spend $1 on food at the supermarket, only 19 cents that have goes into the pocket of the farmer, and those -- and of those 19 cents, the corn value of that farmer income is 3 cents.

Chuck Grassley

8:26:33 to 8:26:58( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: so let's look at some of these prices. you buy a box of cornflakes, 12.9 ounce, 5.6 cents goes to a corn for bushel an acre -- or $4

Chuck Grassley

8:27:00 to 8:27:21( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: bushel a. soft drinks: $4 a bushel. the farmer gets 6.6 cents. if it is $6 a bushel, get gets 10 cents. beef: farmer gets 18 moi 2 cents at the low end of corn prices.

Chuck Grassley

8:27:22 to 8:27:45( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: now, i could go on with pork and chickening and turkey and eggs and milk, but the point is, don't blame the farmer when you buy a box of cornflakes, because the farmer gets a little over a nickel or at least, if corn is higher-priced, 8.6 cents.

Chuck Grassley

8:27:46 to 8:28:07( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: so the farmer gets 19 cents in a global way. corn only gets 3 cents. out of $1 of food you buy. the other 81 cents of that dollar goes to labor, goss energy, goes to transportation, going to marketing, and going to packaging.

Chuck Grassley

8:28:08 to 8:28:29( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: the world bank in 2008 stated that biofuels were large contributor to rising food prices. and you know what? taboo two years later they release add more thorough analysis in 2010 that essentially dismissed the idea. so i want to quote from the world bank report.

Chuck Grassley

8:28:30 to 8:28:50( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: quote -- "the effect of biofuels on food prices has not been as large as originally thought and that," continuing to quote, "the use of commodities by financial investors may have been partly responsible for the 2007-2008 spike." end of quote. so, for mr. pope, i hope, you'll

Chuck Grassley

8:28:51 to 8:29:12( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: put that in his pipe and smoke it because he's wrong about the amount of corn and the price of corn and the impact on food prices and the world bank dismisses that as well. we even have the united kingdom -- i like to say great britain instead of united kingdom -- but

Chuck Grassley

8:29:13 to 8:29:33( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: their department for environment food and rural affairs concluded in 2010 that -- quote -- "available evidence suggests that biofuels had a relatively small contribution to the 2008 spike in agricultural commodity prices. in 2009, the congressional budget office evaluated the

Chuck Grassley

8:29:34 to 8:29:55( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: increasing demand for corn to produce ethanol on food prices. they estimated that -- maybe i better start with the 5.1% increase in food prices for the year 2009. now, of that 5.1%, just .5 -- i

Chuck Grassley

8:29:56 to 8:30:16( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: better say, one half of one percent -- between that and .8% dish better say it more accurately. we got .5% increase in food prices.

Chuck Grassley

8:30:17 to 8:30:37( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: only .5% and maybe up to .8% points of that five and 1/10th percent was due to the demand for ethanol. and 10% of the increased price of food was because of ethanol. in 2007 informal economics

Chuck Grassley

8:30:38 to 8:30:58( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: concluded -- quote -- "it is statistically unsupported to suggest that high and or rising corn prices are the causative reason behind high and rising meat, egg, and milk products." another point raced in this article by mr. pope needs to be addressed.

Chuck Grassley

8:30:59 to 8:31:19( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: he said -- quote -- "over the last several years the cost of corn has gone from a base o of $2.40 a bushel, today $7.40 a bushel. while true this all needs to be put in context. over that same period of time

Chuck Grassley

8:31:20 to 8:31:42( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: crude oil prices went from $50 a barrel to nearly $150 a barrel. and today are over $110 a barrel. gold prices went from $50 a -- $500 an ounce to ove over $1,500 an ounce today. mr. pope would rather pay $2.40

Chuck Grassley

8:31:43 to 8:32:04( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: a bushel for corn rather tha than $7.40. i understand that. but does he know what impact that would have on agriculture if corn were only $2.40 a bushel every farmer today would be out of business because the cost of production is around $4 a bushel. oh, i can see.

Chuck Grassley

8:32:05 to 8:32:25( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: he wants the farmers to subsidize smithfield if he wants to continue getting corn fo for $2.40 a bushel. but a farmer can't subsidize the big corporations. perhaps mr. pope would rather have us through government subsidies so long as they allow

Chuck Grassley

8:32:26 to 8:32:47( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: him to buy corn below the cost of production. and i can tell you this, a lot of people say, well, ethanol's the reason corn prices are high. it might be part of the reason. but let's suppose you didn't have any ethanol and you had $2.40 a bushel for corn. you know darn well that a lot

Chuck Grassley

8:32:48 to 8:33:10( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: more would be coming out of the treasury to make sure that the safety net for the family farmer was working than we give for an ethanol subsidy. now, regardless at $7.40 a bushel the corn costs in a

Chuck Grassley

8:33:11 to 8:33:32( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: gallon of polling is about 40 -- one pound of beef takes about 92 cents worth of corn and the -- and relative to smithfield, because they're big in pork, one pound of pork requires about 39 cents of corn. so if that $4.54 a pound for

Chuck Grassley

8:33:33 to 8:33:55( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: bacon in the grocery aisle contains only 39 cents worth of corn, perhaps mr. pope should explain to all of us, and most importantly, to people that buy it, the consumer, where the other $404.15 or 91% of the

Chuck Grassley

8:33:56 to 8:34:19( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: retail cost is going. in addition after the steep rise in commodities in 2008, prices of corn and other commodities retreated very significantly. i don't recall seeing from people like smithfield that when corn was $7 three years ago and

Chuck Grassley

8:34:20 to 8:34:40( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: it went down to $3.58, i didn't see a very dramatic drop in prices at the grocery store after the corn prices dropped, which leads me, like i've so often said on the floor of the senate, that these food processors need to scapegoat

Chuck Grassley

8:34:41 to 8:35:02( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: something to increase the price of the product to the retailer and the consumer. and -- and then when the price goes down, they've increased their price, but the price doesn't go down accordingly. mr. pope claims rising prices are -- corn prices are hurting his business.

Chuck Grassley

8:35:03 to 8:35:25( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: he said rising prices are squeezing food producers 2% to 3% earnings margins. that's his quote. the statement is rather surprising given the contradictory earning report for smithfield's food that came out march 10, 2011. smithfield reported net income

Chuck Grassley

8:35:26 to 8:35:48( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: for the quarter -- for the quarter of $202 million, an increase of $165 million over the same quarter in 2010. mr. pope stated at the time of the earnings report -- quote -- "we are extremely pleased with the record performance of our company in the third-quarter. year to date our earnings have

Chuck Grassley

8:35:49 to 8:36:09( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: suppressed that of our record year." the reality of smithfield's record profits failed to validate the -- the rhetoric. according to the article, and here i'm quoting the article and not mr. pope, "mr. field's

Chuck Grassley

8:36:10 to 8:36:31( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: economists estimate corn prices would fall by $1 a bushel if ethanol blaming wasn't subsidized." if it's smithfield's economists, it must be coming directly from the company. smithfield may want to invest then in better economists. according to an april 2011

Chuck Grassley

8:36:32 to 8:36:52( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: studied issued by the center for agriculture rural development at iowa state university, only 14 cents or 8% of the increase in corn prices from 2006 to 2009 was due to ethanol subsidies. the study also found that without the ethanol subsidy corn prices would have averaged only 4% less over the same period of

Chuck Grassley

8:36:53 to 8:37:13( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: time. finally, the article calls into question the value of ethanol to our nation's energy supply. it states -- quote -- "the ethanol industry would supply only 4% of the nation's annual energy needs even if it used

Chuck Grassley

8:37:14 to 8:37:35( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: 100% of the corn crop. " this is a strawman. no one is arguing that ethanol will replace our nation's entire energy needs. using 23% of the corn crop we're displacing nearly 10% of our nation's foreign oil dependence. domestic ethanol production

Chuck Grassley

8:37:36 to 8:37:56( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: ranks behind only the united states and canadian oil production in terms of domestic transportation fuel supply. it's obvious that saturday's opinion piece in "the wall street journal," was just another coordinated effort to undermine and scapegoat

Chuck Grassley

8:37:57 to 8:38:17( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: homegrown ethanol. and america's corn farmers to help deflect criticism from big food producers. make no mistake that smithfield's c.e.o. larry pope is concerned about only one thing, smithfield's bottom line. while companies like smithfield

Chuck Grassley

8:38:18 to 8:38:40( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: perpetuate a smear campaign to boost their profits, american farmers and alternative fuel producers are working hard to produce a reliable and safe supply of food, fiber, and feed for the nation and the world. that's the end of my reaction to

Chuck Grassley

8:38:41 to 8:39:01( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: what he said -- mr. pope said. but i would like to just end by saying that the marketplace will take care of this. you know, 30 years ago when we started an ethanol program, we produced about 100-bushel of corn to the acre on average.

Chuck Grassley

8:39:02 to 8:39:26( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: today nationally i think it's about 155-bushel of corn to the acre, in iowa it's probably about 168, and the year before it was 182. people that are experts in genetics can say that we'll able to double the production of corn

Chuck Grassley

8:39:27 to 8:39:51( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: over the next 50 years. that's one way that we can solve this problem. the other way is that there's a massive amount of land a lot of places on this earth and a great part of it is in west africa, south africa, parts of east

Chuck Grassley

8:39:52 to 8:40:12( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: africa where if people would establish law, guaranteeing property rights, title to land, there wouldn't be governmental disincentives to growing food. there wouldn't be a cheap food policy. there would be a massive

Chuck Grassley

8:40:13 to 8:40:34( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: production of food stuff in this world. and in the united states we're going to continue to produce more. there's going to be four million more acres of corn brown this year than last -- grown this year than last year and there's even some odd things being done

Chuck Grassley

8:40:35 to 8:40:56( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: because the price of corn is $7. from "the des moines register," this headline from a northern small community of iowa, the whiten-moore golf club, the golf course is going to be plowed up and planted with corn.

Chuck Grassley

8:40:57 to 8:41:18( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: so there's some extreme measures being taken here to respond to the demand for food or fiber or fuel. and just rember agriculture in america has -- has the

Chuck Grassley

8:41:19 to 8:41:39( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: capability and the demonstrated capability to produce all. we don't grow food -- or we don't grow crops just for food. we've always grown for food and fiber. and for the last 30 years food, fiber, and fuel. and we can continue to do it and

Chuck Grassley

8:41:40 to 8:42:02( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: we're going to do it successfully and the consumers of america aren't going to pay for it. in fact, if we don't continue to do that and keep the family farmer of the united states healthy and strong and ethanol's a contribution to that, then we're not going to be able to meet the needs of our society.

Chuck Grassley

8:42:03 to 8:42:20( Edit History Discussion )

Chuck Grassley: i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. mr. grassley: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk

Personal tools

MetaVid is a non-profit project of UC Santa Cruz and the Sunlight Foundation. Learn more About MetaVid

The C-SPAN logo and other servicemarks that may be found in video content are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Metavid