Nomination of the Honorable Thomas J. Vilsack — Senate Hearing 117-56 (February 2, 2021)
Summary
Senate Hearing 117-56 records the February 2, 2021, hearing of the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry on the nomination of the Honorable Thomas J. Vilsack, of Iowa, to be Secretary, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Hon. John Boozman and Hon. Debbie Stabenow presided, and statements by Senators Boozman, Stabenow and Grassley precede the nominee's testimony. Senator Boozman's statement refers to the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the supply chain and says CFAP assistance must get to those most in need. The appendix lists the nominee's prepared statement, letters of support from groups such as the National Farmers Union and the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, the committee questionnaire and written responses to senators' questions.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Cite this document
“Nomination of the Honorable Thomas J. Vilsack — Senate Hearing 117-56 (February 2, 2021).”
Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/nomination-of-the-honorable-thomas-j-vilsack-of-iowa-to-be-secretary-u-6fd9195e20/
, SHA-256 70f622d0139f1bf1d080ab8e9e48b4c097dab185e40ca8237fb64eae17032f14.Full text
[Senate Hearing 117-56]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 117-56
NOMINATION OF THE HONORABLE THOMAS J.
VILSACK, OF IOWA, TO BE SECRETARY,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE,
NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
FEBRUARY 2, 2021
__________
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available on http://www.govinfo.gov/
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
45-388 PDF WASHINGTON : 2022
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY
(117th Congress)
DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan, Chairwoman
PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky
AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
MICHAEL BENNET, Colorado JONI ERNST, Iowa
KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, New York CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi
ROBERT P. CASEY, Jr., Pennsylvania MIKE BRAUN, Indiana
TINA SMITH, Minnesota CHARLES GRASSLEY, Iowa
RICHARD DURBIN, Illinois JOHN THUNE, South Dakota
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska
Joseph A. Shultz, Majority Staff Director
Mary Beth Schultz, Majority Chief Counsel
Jessica L. Williams, Chief Clerk
Martha Scott Poindexter, Minority Staff Director
Fred J. Clark, Minority Chief Counsel
(116th Congress) \1\
PAT ROBERTS, Kansas, Chairman
MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan
JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont
JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
JONI ERNST, Iowa AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi MICHAEL BENNET, Colorado
MIKE BRAUN, Indiana KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, New York
CHARLES GRASSLEY, Iowa ROBERT P. CASEY, Jr., Pennsylvania
JOHN THUNE, South Dakota TINA SMITH, Minnesota
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska RICHARD DURBIN, Illinois
KELLY LOEFFLER, Georgia
\1\ Official designations of Membership for the 117th Congress were
passed on February 3, 2021.
C O N T E N T S
----------
Tuesday, February 2, 2021
Page
Hearing:
Nomination of the Honorable Thomas J. Vilsack, of Iowa, to be
Secretary, U.S. Department of Agriculture...................... 1
----------
STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY SENATORS
Boozman, Hon. John, U.S. Senator from the State of Arkansas...... 1
Stabenow, Hon. Debbie, U.S. Senator from the State of Michigan... 3
Grassley, Hon. Charles, U.S. Senator from the State of Iowa...... 5
WITNESSES
Vilsack, Hon. Thomas J., of Iowa, to be Secretary, U.S.
Department of Agriculture...................................... 7
----------
APPENDIX
Prepared Statements:
Vilsack, Hon. Thomas J....................................... 46
Leahy, Hon. Patrick.......................................... 48
Document(s) Submitted for the Record:
Stabenow, Hon. Debbie:
U.S. forest products industry, letter of support............. 50
Forest Sector, letter of support............................. 52
Housing Assistance Council, letter of support................ 54
Hunting, Fishing, Wildlife, and Outdoor Recreation, letter of
support.................................................... 56
Management of Invasive Species Industry, letter of support... 58
National Association of Conservation Districts, letter of
support.................................................... 59
National Association of State Conservation Agencies, letter
of support................................................. 61
National Cattlemen's Beef Association, letter of support..... 62
National Farmers Union, letter of support.................... 63
National Grocers Association, letter of support.............. 64
Outdoor Recreation Roundtable Association, letter of support. 66
The Rural Community Assistance Partnership, letter of support 68
The Fertilizer Institute, letter of support.................. 69
Food and Agriculture Trade Association, letter of support.... 71
Wisconsin Cheese Makers Association, letter of support....... 74
Association of Equipment Manufactures, letter of support..... 75
AFSCME, letter of support.................................... 76
American Sugar Alliance, letter of support................... 77
American Sheep Industry Association, letter of support....... 78
American Seed Trade Association, letter of support........... 79
Ducks Unlimited, letter of support........................... 81
Edesia Nutrition, letter of support.......................... 82
Federal Forest Resource Coalition, letter of support......... 83
Vilsack, Hon. Thomas J.:
Committee questionnaire, Office of Government Ethics
Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosure
Report and 5-day letter filed by Hon. Thomas J. Vilsack ..
Addendum to Committee questionnaire filed by Hon. Thomas J.
Vilsack
Addendum and Supplement to Financial Disclosure Report filed
by Hon. Thomas J. Vilsack.................................. 141
Question and Answer:
Vilsack, Thomas J.:
Written response to questions from Hon. Debbie Stabenow...... 144
Written response to questions from Hon. John Boozman......... 152
Written response to questions from Hon. Patrick Leahy........ 174
Written response to questions from Hon. Amy Klobuchar........ 179
Written response to questions from Hon. Michael Bennet....... 180
Written response to questions from Hon. Kirsten Gillibrand... 187
Written response to questions from Hon. Robert P. Casey, Jr.. 190
Written response to questions from Hon. Tina Smith........... 193
Written response to questions from Hon. Richard Durbin....... 195
Written response to questions from Hon. John Hoeven.......... 203
Written response to questions from Hon. Joni Ernst........... 207
Written response to questions from Hon. Mike Braun........... 208
Written response to questions from Hon. Charles Grassley..... 211
Written response to questions from Hon. John Thune........... 213
Written response to questions from Hon. Deb Fischer.......... 218
NOMINATION OF THE HONORABLE THOMAS J. VILSACK, OF IOWA, TO BE
SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
----------
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 2021
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:30 a.m., via
Webex and in room 301, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon.
John Boozman and Hon. Debbie Stabenow, presiding.
Present: Senators Stabenow, Leahy, Brown, Klobuchar,
Bennet, Gillibrand, Casey, Smith, Boozman, Hoeven, Ernst, Hyde-
Smith, Grassley, Thune, Fischer, and Braun.
STATEMENT OF HON. SENATOR JOHN BOOZMAN, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE
STATE OF ARKANSAS
Senator Boozman. Good morning. The Senate Committee on
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry will come to order.
Today, the Committee will be hearing from former Secretary
Thomas J. Vilsack, President Biden's nominee for the Secretary
of the United States Department of Agriculture.
Secretary Vilsack, you are certainly no stranger to this
Committee or to the Department you have been nominated to lead,
having served as Secretary of Agriculture from 2009 to 2017
under the Obama Administration. You have an excellent
reputation, and we look forward to working with you in the
future. I have enjoyed working with you in the past and look
forward to strengthening that relationship as we do good work
in a very bipartisan nature on this Committee to help our
agriculture community.
Before I begin with my opening remarks, though, I would
like to take a minute to state for the record that this hearing
is a little bit different than we are used to attending in the
past. The Senate has not passed--it is on the verge but it has
not passed a resolution that allows for the Committees of the
Senate to organize. Thus, the Committee has no official
Chairman at the moment with the retirement of Senator Pat
Roberts in 2020, who did an excellent job and we will miss. You
will see that neither us nor Senator Stabenow are sitting in
the Chairman's seat. We hold this hearing as equal partners
today. Senator Stabenow and I, though, have agreed that this is
an important hearing today so that we need to get moving so
that we can get the Secretary confirmed quickly to address the
pressing matters of sending economic relief to those affected
by the ongoing pandemic.
This hearing shall not create any precedent as to how
hearings or markups shall be announced and held when the
Chairman or Ranking Member are not officially appointed by the
Senate. Senator Stabenow and I will share in the
responsibilities of holding this hearing today and later to
consider the nomination with a vote by the Committee.
It is my understanding that you have agreed to return to
the Committee in four to six weeks after arriving at the
Department to give us more time to discuss your priorities and
early activities since we are moving your nomination today very
quickly. We look forward to that discussion.
With that explanation, Mr. Secretary, I welcome you to the
Committee.
I would note that the Committee received a number of
letters in support of your nomination and ask consent to
include these letters of support in the hearing record. I
assume that is without objection.
Senator Stabenow. Without objection.
Senator Boozman. Thank you.
[The letters can be found on pages 50-83 in the appendix.]
Senator Boozman. During your tenure as President Obama's
Secretary of Agriculture, the state of agriculture was affected
by a number of issues and events. These included the Great
Recession, which left far too many of our fellow Americans
hungry and in need of USDA food assistance; a U.S. economy
where agriculture was one of the only bright spots, with strong
prices and exports and implementation of the 2008 and 2014 Farm
Bills.
As your second term came to a close, however, the
agriculture economy started to dip, which has led to seven
years of depressed prices and difficult times in farm country.
Today, we find many more Americans experiencing hunger from the
effects of the pandemic.
I was grateful that Congress and the Department responded
to these situations with trade mitigation assistance, disaster
assistance, and pandemic assistance programs. Without it, I
fear we would have seen even more farm bankruptcies, leading to
less available food for our Nation and the world.
I am a strong believer that past performance is indicative
of future performance, Mr. Secretary, and I know you will work
with us as you did during your previous tenure.
As everyone in this room knows, agriculture is not
partisan, but there are regional differences. I was pleased to
see that in your previous tenure you took the time to learn
about and understand southern agriculture. I hope that if you
are confirmed, you will continue this same attitude throughout
the various regions and commodities in our country.
With that said, I would like to raise a few issues that
need to be addressed by the incoming Secretary of Agriculture.
I am concerned with some ideas being discussed in the
environmental space. If confirmed, I would expect you to work
with your colleagues at EPA to educate them on the strides that
production agriculture has already taken to be more efficient
and environmentally friendly. As we all know, agriculture ought
to be part of the solution, not considered the problem.
The President has announced climate change policy will be a
priority for the administration. It is important that USDA and
this Committee keep producers at the forefront of any
discussion on climate change. Heavy-handed, one-size-fits-all
regulations simply will not work. Just as in a farm bill
debate, this issue must be addressed in a fashion that will
truly benefit all farmers across the country without mandating
specific farming practices.
In Arkansas, our farmers have been conserving water by
implementing innovative irrigation techniques, converting to
surface water irrigation rather than pumping groundwater from
the aquifer. Farmers have also improved soil health with cover
cropping and minimum tillage while our ranchers have taken on
rotational grazing. These efforts should not be ignored during
the policy debate on climate change.
Trade is another active issue where your strong voice is
needed. I urge you to play an active role in any trade
discussions. American agriculture has borne the brunt of trade
disputes in the past few years. Prior to that, our farmers and
ranchers were competing with foreign governments that did not
play by the rules then and that often do not play by the rules
today. Our producers need new markets with more market access,
and I hope you will continue to be an advocate in this area.
We are all aware of the impacts the COVID-19 pandemic has
had on our society. We learned our supply chain is more fragile
and resilient than we thought. The supply chain did not break,
but the marketplace was certainly very challenging. We need to
consider options to make the supply chain even more resilient.
In the future, we need to have the ability to respond to these
types of black swan events. Unfortunately, we must assume that
it is not a question of if another pandemic will occur, but
rather when.
With the latest package of COVID relief signed into law in
December, it is imperative that CFAP assistance gets to those
most in need. The Biden administration has announced a 60-day
review of some of this assistance, while advocating for an
additional $1.9 trillion to be passed by Congress. It seems to
me that time is of the essence, and the Department should move
swiftly to deliver that much-needed assistance that has already
being provided.
I encourage you to carry out this review quickly,
consistent with the clear direction in the law. It is
imperative to deliver this assistance as those who are
struggling in this pandemic are well served now instead of
later.
Again, thank you for joining us today. I look forward to
hearing from you and working with you if you are confirmed.
Now I yield to Senator Stabenow for her opening remarks. I
had the gavel for a little bit, anyway.
[Laughter.]
Senator Stabenow. I think we each have a gavel today.
Senator Boozman. Well, the big gavel is going to you very
shortly.
STATEMENT OF HON. DEBBIE STABENOW, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE
OF MICHIGAN
Senator Stabenow. [Presiding.] First of all, thank you so
much, Senator Boozman. I am looking forward to working with you
as I did with Senator Roberts. We really operated as co-chairs
on the Committee, and even though the Senate is still
finalizing the formal organizing of the committees, as Senator
Boozman indicated, I deeply appreciate your willingness to work
together to move this hearing forward. We know that we need to
put the leadership in place for our farmers, ranchers, families
at the USDA. Once again, we are showcasing the Agriculture
Committee's strong tradition of bipartisanship. I very much
appreciate it.
In the coming year, I am looking forward to learning more
about rice and timber and all the wonderful things in Arkansas,
in addition to hearing more about the fortunes of your Arkansas
Razorbacks. Who knows? Maybe my Spartans and your Razorbacks
will meet in the NCAA tournament at some point.
Our strong relationship is really one of the best things
about our Committee, and it makes it easier to put aside
partisan politics and get things done. Our first job is to
consider the nomination of former Secretary Tom Vilsack, who is
no stranger to the Senate confirmation process or even the role
that he is nominated for.
Mr. Vilsack, welcome and thank you for being here virtually
today. We appreciate it very much. As the former Secretary of
Agriculture during all eight years of the Obama Administration,
you presided over the USDA with a steady hand and decisive
leadership.
As you know, we share a long history together. My last turn
as Chair coincided with your first tenure at the USDA, and I am
so happy we are going to have a chance to confirm you so we
will be able to work together again.
When it comes to food and farm policy, we share many of the
same values; from creating a stable, successful agriculture
economy to providing food for children and families in need, to
making our small towns vibrant places to live, to addressing
the climate crisis.
Your deep knowledge of the Department and understanding of
agriculture and rural communities is needed now more than ever.
I know that you will not only bring experience but also new
ideas and creative approaches to help us address the wide range
of challenges facing our farm and food sector.
Mr. Vilsack, a lot has changed since you were last at the
Department. The COVID-19 pandemic changed the world before our
eyes. Many essential food workers were on the front lines
without adequate protection. Farmers had no choice but to
destroy the crops they could not sell. Millions of families
still do not have enough food to eat, and food banks are
overwhelmed with unprecedented demand.
In the most recent COVID package, Congress provided a new
round of investments, including measures to support farmers,
protect food workers, and boost food assistance. I look forward
to hearing your plans to implement those new provisions and
your overall approach to addressing the COVID-19 crisis-
especially hunger.
The pandemic is not the only challenge we are facing now.
The climate crisis poses the greatest threat to the long-term
viability of our economy and our food supply. Farmers and
foresters are directly affected by climate change. They are
also uniquely positioned to be a part of the solution, to lead,
and to benefit from new streams of income. Exploring these
opportunities will be a major focus of this Committee. I look
forward to working closely with you and the Biden
administration on it.
Both of these immediate challenges come against the
backdrop of an already struggling farm economy. President
Trump's chaotic trade policies destroyed markets that took
decades to build and we have seen staggering levels of farm
bankruptcies. Luckily, we are beginning to see a rebound in
prices for many crops, which we will monitor closely as we work
together and prepare for the next farm bill.
Unfortunately, not all farmers had the same opportunity for
prosperity in good times or farm support during bad times. It
is true that the USDA has a long and sordid history of civil
rights abuses and systematic racism that has created economic
disparities for farmers of color across the country. It is
unacceptable, and it is long past time to address this head-on,
and I know you agree. I know you have committed to improve
fairness and equity for farmers. I am anxious to hear more
about your plans on these issues today as well.
On top of all of this, the previous administration
mismanaged USDA's ability to address all of these crises, from
the destructive relocation of researchers to persistent
vacancies. There is a lot of work to do to rebuild the
Department. Without a strong work force, USDA cannot fulfill
its mission to serve our farmers and our families and rural
communities.
Mr. Vilsack, if confirmed, you have a big task ahead. But I
know you are up to the job. You have a proven track record and
a deep bench of experience to hit the ground running. I am most
impressed by your commitment to embrace new ideas and usher in
a new era for the Department.
Thank you for being with us today. I look forward to
hearing more about your plans and your vision for the USDA.
Now I would yield to my friend, my colleague from Iowa,
Senator Grassley, to introduce our nominee.
STATEMENT OF HON. SENATOR CHARLES GRASSLEY, U.S. SENATOR FROM
THE STATE OF IOWA
Senator Grassley. Thank you, Senator Stabenow. Good morning
to all my colleagues, and welcome and congratulations to our
nominee. It is quite an honor to introduce a fellow Iowan,
Thomas J. Vilsack, former two-term Governor of Iowa and former
Secretary of Agriculture for eight years in the Obama
Administration, well-known to everybody on this Committee.
I have a long relationship with Secretary Vilsack. I cannot
think of a single quarrel that I have had with Governor
Vilsack. I know that he knows agriculture very well. He knows
the importance of maintaining the institution of the family
farm. We have 88,000 of them in Iowa. He knows that the family
farm institution is the foundation of success for American
agriculture. He knows how to faithfully execute the laws of the
Department of Agriculture, eight years of previous actions
doing just that.
Secretary Vilsack became mayor of Mount Pleasant, Iowa, and
at a time that our Nation was recovering from maybe the second-
worst agriculture depression we have had caused by the farm
credit crisis of the 1980's. Much like in the 1980's
agriculture depression, the Nation is continuing to recover
from the impact of the coronavirus and the economic impact that
has.
We have seen higher rates of food insecurity, continued
food supply chain disruptions, and family farms struggling to
balance their books. Should he be confirmed--and I think he
will be--the experience from the 1980's farm crisis will serve
him well at this time of other family farms being under duress.
I remember my first discussion with then-to-be Secretary of
Agriculture Vilsack in 2009. I brought up with him my work and
involvement in the Pigford operations. That was to get civil
rights and equal rights for black farmers of America. At the
time he was going into office, there was still some carryover
that was not being done in the right way by the people who had
won their civil rights through the Pigford cases, and he very
definitely worked hard to see that those people got their
rights delivered to them. It was one of my requests of him at
that time because I was involved in the 1990's in getting
justice for those farmers.
Secretary Vilsack also has a very strong history of
promoting agricultural products both here and abroad, and as a
Governor, Secretary Vilsack expanded opportunities for green
energy, including biofuels, so very, very important for the
43,000 jobs in Iowa. As Secretary, he made investments in the
Commodity Credit Corporation to increase the amount of fueling
pumps that carry E15 and E85 ethanol.
If confirmed, I am looking to him to be a voice of reason
within the administration on the future of biofuels as he was
in the eight years that he was a member of the Obama Cabinet.
Finally, as Governor, Secretary, and most recently as CEO
of the U.S. Dairy Export Council, he knows well U.S.
agriculture is dependent upon access to our foreign markets. As
former Chairman of the Finance Committee, I am committed to
taking down barriers that limit this access and give U.S.
agriculture a level playing field. Any U.S. Secretary of
Agriculture plays a very important role in that, and Secretary
Vilsack in those eight years did that well, too.
I am very encouraged by the success of the China Phase One
agreement and glad that the USMCA helped achieve historic gains
for agriculture. This work is reflected in the fact that corn
and soybeans are the highest they have been since 1913.
By the way, Secretary Vilsack in his position as CEO of the
U.S. Dairy Export Council had a news conference with me in Des
Moines, Iowa, on the necessity of getting USMCA passed. Even as
a private citizen, he was working very strongly for export of
our products.
I am looking forward to working with Secretary Vilsack to
increase foreign market access so that our high-quality crops
and livestock can be sold across the world. I often say that
only two percent of Americans that farm provide for the other
98 percent of Americans, and they do it without a lot of
appreciation. If confirmed, I know that Secretary Vilsack will
continue to work for the family farmer and spotlight their
contributions to agriculture and society. As an Iowan, that is
part of his nature just naturally, going way back to him being
a lawyer in the small county seat town of Mount Pleasant, Iowa.
Please know that you have an open door to my office,
Secretary Vilsack, if you or your staff need a helping hand in
any of the missions that confront you, and particularly those
that confront all Americans because of the coronavirus. I urge
all of my colleagues to favorably report your nomination out of
Committee as soon as possible. It is necessary to get your
confirmation to the floor of the Senate very quickly as well.
Congratulations, Secretary Vilsack.
Senator Stabenow. Well, thank you very much, Senator
Grassley. Mr. Vilsack, I have two things next to address.
First, to administer an oath, which we have to do for all
nominees. Please stand and raise your right hand. Do you swear
or affirm that the testimony you are about to provide is the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you
God?
Mr. Vilsack. I do.
Senator Stabenow. Thank you. Second, do you agree that, if
confirmed, you will appear before any duly constituted
committee of Congress if asked to appear?
Mr. Vilsack. I will.
Senator Stabenow. Thank you very much. Well, welcome again.
We look forward to hearing from you. Your testimony will be
made a part of the record in its entirety. You may proceed as
you desire. Welcome.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE THOMAS J. VILSACK, OF IOWA, TO BE
SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Mr. Vilsack. Thank you, Senator Stabenow, and thanks to you
and Senator Boozman for the opportunity to appear today
virtually and for the Committee's indulgence. I want to thank
my Senator, Senator Grassley, for those kind remarks and
certainly for his long-time service to the people of Iowa and
the country. He is someone that I have a great deal of
admiration for, and I appreciate the fact that he took time to
introduce me to the Committee today.
It is not lost on me, ironically, that this is Groundhog
Day, and I realize that I am back again. I also realize that
this is a fundamentally different time, and I am a different
person, and it is a different Department, and I think we have
to recognize that going into this process.
When I was getting involved in politics, I followed Robert
Kennedy and sort of modeled my views after his, and he often
challenged us to think about, ``why not?'' He use to quote the
quote that, ``Some people look at things as they are and say,
why?'' ``Others dream of things that never were and say, why
not?''
I think we are faced today with a number of ``why not''
opportunities and moments in agriculture, in the food industry,
and in rural America. Clearly, COVID is on the minds of
everyone, as it should be, and the Department of Agriculture
has a responsibility to aggressively promote the nutrition
assistance that you all have provided, and they have begun to
do that in the last week to ten days.
We also, as Senator Boozman indicated, have to review the
additional relief that has been ordered by Congress and try to
get that into the hands of farmers, ranchers, producers, and
those in rural America as quickly, as efficiently, and as
effectively as possible.
We need to make sure that our workers, our essential
workers on the line, in the farm fields, in processing
facilities and the like are protected and recognized as the
essential workers they are. We certainly need to work
collaboratively with the Congress and others to build back the
rural economy in better shape than it was before the COVID
crisis.
There are, I think, four ``why not'' moments that I would
like to briefly address to the Committee before taking your
questions. I think we are at a ``why not'' moment with
reference to climate change. I think there is an opportunity
for us to create new markets, incentives for soil health, for
carbon sequestration, for methane capture and reuse, by
building a rural economy based on biomanufacturing, protecting
our forests, turning waste material into new chemicals,
materials, fabrics and fibers, creating more jobs in rural
America, creating greater farm income stability, and also
reducing emissions.
I think we face a ``why not'' moment with reference to food
security that plagues millions of financially distressed
children, seniors, and families, and also a ``why not'' moment
on nutrition insecurity that causes millions of Americans,
especially people of color, to cope with obesity and diabetes
and other chronic diseases. I think we can create a good system
that makes healthy and nutritious food more available, more
convenient, and more affordable to all Americans.
We are at a ``why not'' moment in terms of the openness and
competitiveness of our markets. The reality is we lack
openness, fairness, and competitiveness, and resiliency, as the
COVID-19 crisis has shown in many of our agricultural markets.
I think we can strengthen the rules and laws designed to
promote openness and fairness. I think we can support more
marketing and processing opportunities in facilities throughout
the country that will help to create jobs, greater resilience
and more competitiveness in our food system.
Finally, as Senator Stabenow has indicated, we need to
fully, deeply, and completely address the longstanding
inequities, unfairness, and discrimination that has been the
history of USDA programs for far too long, to a future where
all are treated equitably, fairly, where there is zero
tolerance for discrimination, where programs actually open up
opportunity for all who need help and lift the burden of
persistent poverty for those most in need. I am happy to talk
to the Committee in great length about the plans to do just
that.
I recognize the unprecedented challenge that we face with
COVID and, while pursuing these ``why not'' opportunities, will
not shirk the duties and responsibilities of the Department
connected to COVID relief and recovery, as well as all of our
other responsibilities. I look forward to working
collaboratively with you on the Committee, if confirmed, with
State and local leaders, the private sector, the philanthropic
sector, and the hardworking and dedicated team at USDA to make
a brighter and better future possible in rural America for
farmers, ranchers, producers, and those who live, work, and
raise their families in rural communities.
It is the faith that President Biden and Vice President
Harris have placed in me, the confidence they have in us
working together that can make a real difference to the
country, and especially in rural America. I look forward to the
opportunity to work with all of you and to respond to your
questions today.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Vilsack can be found on page
46 in the appendix.]
Senator Stabenow. Thank you so much, and we will begin a
round of five-minute questioning, starting with Senator
Boozman.
Senator Boozman. Thank you very much. Again, thank you for
being with us.
I would like to talk a little bit first about trade. Our
farmers and ranchers depend on strong relationships around the
world. Expanding market access, ensuring that our producers
have a level playing field free from non-tariff barriers, is
certainly critical. In the 2014 Farm Bill, Congress mandated
the U.S. Department of Agriculture to generate a plan for, and
implement, a new Under Secretary for Trade and Foreign
Agricultural Affairs. That role has been useful over the past
several years.
What is your vision for the mission of the Under Secretary?
How can USDA work to strengthen trade policies in the coming
years? Lots of discussion already in this meeting about that.
In particular, how will you work with the U.S. Trade
Representative, our lead trade negotiator, along with the other
trade policymakers throughout the executive branch to make sure
that agriculture is a top priority?
Mr. Vilsack. Senator, thanks for the question. First of
all, as it relates to the Trade Representative's Office, I
think the USDA has the responsibility of making sure that there
is a close communication between the U.S. Trade
Representative's Office and USDA. I think we need to make sure
that we work collaboratively with them to implement existing
trade agreements. Specifically, I am talking about USMCA. There
are issues relating to Canada and Mexico with reference to
implementation. I would hope to be able to work closely with
USTR on those issues.
I think we want to provide advice and counsel and direction
and efforts to try to look at additional free trade agreements
that could potentially be negotiated during the course of the
Biden administration. I think it is fair to say that we have
work to do in terms of making sure that we have a competitive
opportunity. Many of our competitors are engaged in free trade
agreements that provide a competitive edge. In many markets, we
need to reduce that competitive edge.
I think the Under Secretary's office is an incredibly
important one to do three things:
One, to have a presence in those export markets, to make
sure that U.S. agriculture is front and center in the minds of
folks who are purchasing in those markets.
Two, I think that office needs to work to create more
partnerships in those foreign market opportunities. I know that
there are universities, there are other ways in which we can
create the kinds of relationships between our agriculture and
our food companies and the consumers in these markets.
Finally, we need to be part of an effort to continue
promotion of U.S. agricultural products. I think if you have
more presence, more partnerships, and more promotions, you will
have more trade.
Senator Boozman. Thank you. President Biden has repeatedly
said that climate change will be one of the administration's
focuses, and he said that climate change is the No. 1 issue
facing humanity.
As you know, changes in Government can have an impact on
the cost of production for producers as well as throughout the
food and ag value chain. Last week, the administration unveiled
a call to action on climate, calling for input from farmers and
ranchers to assess how best to use Federal programs to
encourage adoption of climate-smart agricultural practices that
reduce carbon and create new sources of income and jobs for
rural Americans.
In addition, the Executive Order directed the Agriculture
Secretary and other agency heads to identify actions that could
conserve at least 30 percent of our lands and waters by 2030,
which is a very ambitious goal.
In light of this directive, will you pledge to be a voice
for farmers, ranchers, producers, and agricultural businesses
throughout the food and agricultural value chain? How will you
work with them during your time as Secretary with regard to
climate policy rather than let farmers and ranchers be dictated
to as we tackle this important issue?
Mr. Vilsack. I certainly would make that commitment,
Senator, and I share the President's vision of a net zero
emission opportunity for U.S. agriculture. I think it would
provide us a competitive edge in the world in terms of trade
and would respond to the increasing domestic demand for greater
sustainability.
I think there are a number of ways in which the Department
can create efforts to incent and to create new market
opportunities that will provide resources and income for
farmers and help to create jobs in rural places. I mentioned in
my opening statement the bio-based manufacturing opportunity of
turning agricultural waste into a variety of products. We know
that the success of that with reference to biofuels, that can
be expanded dramatically. I think there are ways in which we
can invest and create incentives for farmers to continue to
expand significantly the work that they are already doing, as
you mentioned, with cover crops, no-till, and other soil health
efforts. We know more about soil health. We know we need to
dedicate ourselves to a more regenerative effort in terms of
soil health. I think there are ways in which we can incent,
create market opportunities.
I think Senator Braun and Senator Stabenow recognize this.
They have suggested the need for farmer input, as we look at
carbon capture and sequestration, making sure that the systems
that are set up actually have certified results that make
sense, that will support markets, and support the opportunity
for these kinds of investments. I think it is fair to say we
will aggressively pursue an effort to get farmer input to make
sure that programs that we design and programs that we advance
are ones that will work out in the field.
Senator Boozman. Good. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Stabenow. Thank you so much. Welcome again,
Secretary Vilsack. I want to start first with just the farm
economy in general. We have seen such tumultuous years now for
our farmers and ranchers. We have seen government payments
replace markets as the main driver of farm profitability. I
share Senator Boozman's concern about markets and trade, and
what we need to do to get stability back for our farmers and
our ranchers.
We are going to continue to have challenges, because of the
pandemic moving forward. It is good to see bright spots like
corn, soybean, and wheat prices recently hitting their highest
in the last six years. That is good news.
Taking a step back, how can we return to a sense of
normalcy in the farm economy with a focus on responsible risk
management and building markets for producers, which really has
been the foundation of our Farm Bills in recent years?
Mr. Vilsack. Senator, that is an incredibly complicated
question. I will do my best to try to respond in a short period
of time. It indeed starts with markets. Historically, we have
obviously looked at export market opportunities. Anywhere from
20 to 30 percent of what is produced in this country is
exported, so, clearly, a stable, secure trade policy that does
not create havoc in the market, that does not put us at a
competitive disadvantage would be helpful in terms of our
ability to sell product overseas.
Expanding market opportunities in new markets--I think
Southeast Asia is an opportunity. I think eventually over time,
we are going to see potentially opportunities in Africa. One-
half of the world's increased population is liable to come in
the next 15 years in that single continent, so we want to
obviously be engaged in trade opportunities there as they
evolve. Certainly our competitors are doing that.
It is more than just export markets. It is growing markets
here domestically by investing in a robust local and regional
food system that creates market opportunities for small and
mid-sized producers so they can negotiate their own price. We
began that process in the Obama Administration, but I think
there is much, much more work to do down in that space.
It is about creating new markets, markets that have never
been developed before. Carbon sequestration and storage if done
the right way, the opportunity for methane capture and reuse if
done the right way, the development of bio-based manufacturing
that creates new market opportunities for agricultural waste if
done the right way can all create a more stable farm income and
economy and can also help to create and support the jobs that
many farm families need as well in rural places.
It is also making sure that we have a safety net that
operates. Our farmers are definitely more interested in markets
than they are aid, but there are times and circumstances that
it requires significant investment by the Government. We need
to be prepared to do that, and we need policies and programs
that allow and enable that. We need obviously a strong crop
insurance program that provides protection in the event that
mother nature simply will not cooperate.
It is all of that and probably much, much more, but I will
stop there.
Senator Stabenow. Thank you. Very comprehensive answer and
I could not agree with you more on all of those points.
I wondered if you could just take a moment to go into more
specifics in the climate arena. As you mentioned, Senator Braun
and I have bipartisan legislation. Members of our Committee and
others are very interested in moving this legislation. Our
drumbeat is that whatever is done, it needs to be voluntary,
producer-led, and bipartisan. The bill really starts with what
producers have told us about the lack of qualified technical
assistance in this area.
From hearings we did last year in this Committee, we know
that farmers are already doing things that are making a
difference in capturing carbon and lessening carbon pollution.
There is so much more that could be done. The Growing Climate
Solutions Act is really about setting up that structure and the
need to have that support for farmers. Could you speak more to
that?
Mr. Vilsack. With your permission, I think there are many
proposals contained in what you and Senator Braun and others
have proposed that could be essentially implemented
administratively, for example, putting together an advisory
group of farmers that would give us a better understanding and
appreciation of how to structure a carbon sequestration, a
carbon bank effort; making sure that we can, in fact,
adequately measure and quantify the results that can be
obtained by farmers; making sure that the benefits of whatever
program we devise and develop accrue to the benefit of farmers
and not necessarily to third parties; making sure that we
promote the development of ecosystem markets that create those
revenue sources for farmers; making sure that our conservation
programs are structured and designed in a way that encourage
and incent the kind of activities we know make a difference.
Our soil is precious. We need to make sure we are investing
in soil health. We also, frankly, need to up our game on
research. There are ways in which root systems of crops can
potentially be designed in a way that will sequester more
carbon. We ought to be exploring that. We ought to be looking
at ways in which we can increase market opportunities for
greater storage.
I think agriculture has as--it is probably the first and
best way to begin getting some wings in this climate area. I
think our farmers are prepared for it, farmers are anxious to
do it. If it is voluntary, if it is market-based, if it is
incentive-based, I think you will see farmers, ranchers, and
producers cooperate extensively.
Senator Stabenow. Thank you. I could not agree more. I know
there are a number of different bills that we will want to be
looking at as well. Senator Thune and I are looking at
expanding the soil health demonstration project, cover crops,
and a whole range of things. I think that is really an
opportunity for agriculture, forestry, and others to really
lead to show folks how to be able to do this right. Thank you
very much.
Senator Ernst was next on the list. I believe she is not
here. She is not virtual at the moment, correct? Senator Hyde-
Smith.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you, Senator Stabenow. Secretary
Vilsack, congratulations on your nomination, and I look forward
to working with you----
Mr. Vilsack. I cannot hear the Senator.
Senator Stabenow. I think we need to have a button pushed.
Senator Hyde-Smith. I am sorry. Again, congratulations on
the nomination. I apologize. I did not hit the microphone
correctly. I have enjoyed working with you in the past as
former Commissioner of Agriculture in Mississippi, and
agriculture is the No. 1 industry in Mississippi. One of every
four jobs there in my home State is related to agriculture, so,
obviously, it is a very important position that you are
embarking upon.
Mr. Secretary, farmers have had several difficult years, as
you are very aware of: bad weather, low prices, and export
market losses, and now coronavirus. Unfortunately, there is
another growing concern that I am hearing about from my farmers
and ranchers. Last June, a petition was filed in the Department
of Commerce and the International Trade Commission seeking
countervailing duties on phosphate fertilizer imports. Since
that petition, fertilizer supplies have tightened across the
country, and phosphate fertilizer prices are substantially up,
25 percent or more.
How concerned are you about maintaining adequate supply of
these fertilizers? What are your plans for ensuring reliable
markets for this critical ag import for farmers?
Mr. Vilsack. Senator, I had an opportunity recently to
visit with Senator Moran about this issue, and so I am
certainly aware of the importance of it. One of the
responsibilities, I think, as the Secretary of Agriculture is
to communicate to sister agencies the impact and effect of
decisions that they are making, making sure that they fully
understand and appreciate the effect of whatever decision they
are considering as it relates to farmers, ranchers, and
producers, making sure that we have conversation and
communication.
One thing I would expect to do is to reach out to the
Commerce Department to determine whether or not there is
anything that can be done that would put us in a more
competitive circumstance and ensure the supply of fertilizer
throughout the U.S.
I also think it is important for the Department of
Agriculture, when faced with circumstances where for whatever
reason a rule or regulation is impacting and affecting folks on
the farm, looking for ways in which we can utilize the tools of
USDA to provide some kind of transition assistance or provide
some kind of way of mitigating the impact and effect.
Certainly, I would task our team to take a look at whether or
not there is anything we could do at USDA specifically and
directly to address this issue.
Finally, I would say that I think it is important and
necessary to point out that I think there are ways in which we
can help producers utilize fertilizer in the most effective
way, using it at the right time, the right place, the right
amounts, that we not overfertilize, which sometimes is
unfortunately happening in many parts of the country. I think
there are also opportunities, as I said earlier, to convert
agricultural waste into a variety of products, including a
pelletized fertilizer that would be transportable, storable,
and create a new market opportunity for farmers. I think there
are a multitude of ways to address this issue.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you very much for that answer
because it is quite a concern. Another thing I want to mention
while I have a few moments left is that the forest and wood
products industry provides great jobs in rural areas throughout
the country, including Mississippi. In addition to providing
important economic support to rural economies, working forests
obviously also provide for clean air, clean water, and wildlife
habitat. Ensuring growing markets for wood products is critical
for these rural economies and environmental benefits.
One of the other things that concerns me is their
eligibility for programs when they lose timber. We are a
hurricane State; we are a tornado State. Last Easter, we
experienced tornadoes, and there were no programs for the loss
of that timber for individuals.
What are your views on how USDA can strengthen and grow
markets for wood products, including leading on new and
innovative wood products like mass timber?
Mr. Vilsack. Well, first of all, I think it is to take a
look at the procurement position and opportunities that USDA
itself has and that other departments of the Government have in
terms of how they might be able to use wood in construction
opportunities, projects that we have, the Forest Service
projects that the Defense Department has, just to name two.
There are ways, I think, where we can encourage, where it is
appropriate, the use of wood.
When I was Secretary before, we focused and began the
process of trying to encourage the construction of tall
buildings with cross-laminated timber. I think there is still
an opportunity there as well to help spur that new market, look
for ways in which we can incent, encourage, and educate people
about the capacity of using cross-laminated timber as
structural members, not necessarily decorative but structural
members in tall buildings. There are a number of projects that
are taking place in the U.S. and certainly quite a few projects
taking place in other parts of the world that I think showcase
that opportunity. There are also potentially biomass
opportunities in terms of energy production as we look at
renewable fuels.
The challenge here, Senator--and I think it is important--
is that we want to be able to figure out how to use this wood.
We want to be able to preserve the carbon that is in the wood.
As we know, we have had horrific forest fires, which is not
necessarily the issue in Mississippi, but it is in other parts
of the country. To the extent that we can better manage our
forests better to provide opportunities for markets, we can
reduce that risk of forest fires, and we can keep that carbon
stored for a lot longer.
Senator Hyde-Smith. Again, congratulations, and thank you
for answering my questions.
Senator Stabenow. Thank you very much. Senator Hyde-Smith,
I am looking forward to working with you on the issue of
timber. Michigan State University just built its tallest multi-
floor building and is doing a lot of research around this as
well. I look forward to working with you on that.
Senator Klobuchar.
Senator Klobuchar. Thank you very much, Senator Stabenow,
and thank you for your service, Secretary Vilsack, and thank
you for returning to service as well.
I wanted to start by asking about renewable fuels,
something near and dear to the hearts of the people in your
home State of Iowa as well as in Minnesota and just what is
happening. As you know, at the end of last year, in the last
administration, there were some very bad decisions made from my
perspective by the administration about waivers to oil
companies, and we have had 150 ethanol plants that have shut
down in our country or operated in a lesser capacity.
Could you talk about what your plans are in a little more
detail when it comes to biofuels? Also, I introduced the
Renewable Fuel Infrastructure Act in December with Senator
Ernst to buildupon the infrastructure program. We are going to
reintroduce the bill next week, and I think that could be
helpful as well. Your comments on biofuels and what you will do
as Secretary, including about the refinery exemptions and how
the past administration interpreted them.
Mr. Vilsack. There are a number of [inaudible] including
biofuels. First and foremost, our own vehicles, utilization of
biofuels in the vehicle fleet that USDA has, so we want to make
sure that that is occurring, and encouraging our sister
agencies as they look at vehicles, as they look at marine
fuels, as they look at jet fuel, to look at ways in which they
could utilize biofuels appropriately and effectively, and to
spur the industry.
Second, working with----
Senator Klobuchar. I notice, Mr. Secretary, that above
you--or Secretary-to-be--are your four naval hats. Do you want
to describe that to people, what those hats are?
Mr. Vilsack. Well, three of the hats are from ships that I
was on that were being refueled with biofuel, and it was an
amazing experience to be in the middle of the Pacific Ocean and
watch the refueling process. The Navy was basically, with their
new Green Fleet, making a commitment to biofuels. I think
marine and aviation fuel are the future for biofuels, and we
should figure out ways in which we can encourage that.
We obviously
[inaudible] the USDA Secretary closely with his or her
partner at EPA to make sure that folks at EPA fully understand
and appreciate the benefits of this industry in terms of jobs,
in terms of the environment, in terms of life-cycle analysis.
This industry has made great strides in becoming much more
environmentally friendly than it was at the beginning, and
sometimes I fear that we are still working off old research.
New research would suggest and indicate that this is an
industry that is providing environmental benefits, cleaner air,
for example, and making sure that as they make decisions
relative to their renewable fuel standard, that they are
consistent, that they are consistent with the rule, they are
consistent with the law.
The waiver system was designed for small refineries that
were having trouble and difficulty. It was not designed for
large-scale refineries that are owned by Exxon and Chevron to
receive a waiver. I would hope and will certainly strongly urge
EPA to go back to a day when those waivers are very, very, very
infrequently granted.
Then, finally, I think there is a way in which we can
utilize USDA resources and work with Congress to increase those
resources to build out the infrastructure to make it easier for
higher blends to be available to consumers. Why? Because at the
end of the day, consumers benefit. They have less expensive
fuel. They have a cleaner-burning fuel. They have a fuel that
is better for the environment. As we look at the future, I
think biofuels continue to play a role in reducing emissions
and providing job opportunities in all parts of the country.
Senator Klobuchar. Thank you. I just have two last
questions here. You earlier discussed some issues with Senator
Stabenow about climate and environmental issues. I know it is
going to be one of your focuses, and I believe, like so many on
the Committee do, that farmers should be a major part of this.
One of the ways you do that, in addition to the sequestration
that I heard you talk about, is getting the data and making
sure we know how best practices work, things like cover crops.
I happen to know, having spent some time in Iowa, that there
was a pilot program in your State about that. Could you--
Senator Thune and I had this bill called the ``Agriculture Data
Act'' to better get more information and data for our farmers.
Do you agree that research and data are important tools? Can
you commit to finish the pilot program and examining the
additional research opportunities that we could use data? The
USDA is so important on that front.
Mr. Vilsack. Senator, certainly I agree that data and
research is important, and as I said earlier, I think we need
to up our game as it relates to the data and research in this
area. I am happy to take a look at the pilot to figure out ways
in which that can be assisted and ways in which potentially the
benefits or the information from that pilot can be distributed
throughout the countryside and to the extent replicated.
One of the keys with cover crops is creating market
opportunities for those cover crops. It is one thing to ask
farmers to essentially put the cover crop on there for soil
health. It is another thing when we are asking them to incur an
additional expense. I would hope that we would be able to
figure out ways in which we could mitigate the impact
financially, at the same time creating new markets or creating
ways in which they can be incented or encouraged to do more
cover cropping.
Senator Klobuchar. Thank you. Last, Senator Cornyn and I
included a provision in the 2018 Farm Bill creating a National
Animal Vaccine and Veterinary Countermeasures Vaccine Bank and
a program involving preparedness as we have seen from this
pandemic, which has not hit our animals in any big way, but it
sure hit a lot of people. What are your plans for implementing
and improving animal disease preparedness and response policies
at USDA?
Mr. Vilsack. I think it is fair to say there is a
recognition that animal health and human health are connected,
and we have to understand this is a one-health system, and we
need to make sure that we are in a position to, first and
foremost, be able to detect more quickly at the farm gate when
there is a problem so we can respond more quickly. We need to
make sure that we have in place appropriate quarantine efforts.
We have to make sure that we have in place the ability to
identify the problem as quickly as possible. To your point,
there needs to be the capacity to produce a vaccine and/or
store the vaccine to be able to respond quickly, because the
reality is if we do not respond quickly, there is not just the
risk to animals and to the markets, but there is also risk to
people. I think we have to understand the interconnection
between the two.
Senator Klobuchar. Thank you very much, and I will ask my
questions for the record on Cuba. You and I share an interest
in continuing to work on production issues and trade with Cuba
as well as broadband and the CRP program. Thank you very much.
Senator Stabenow. Thank you very much. We will now go to
Senator Hoeven. I do want to indicate, if you step away
virtually, make sure that we know you are back. We do not want
to have you lose the ability to be able to ask your questions.
We want to make sure we know who is with us. Senator Hoeven.
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Madam Chairman, and greetings,
Secretary Vilsack. I appreciate the opportunity we have had to
work together as Governors and during your first stint as
Secretary of Agriculture, and I look forward to working with
you in the future as Secretary of Agriculture on behalf of our
great farmers and ranchers, the best in the world.
Recently USDA froze more than $2 billion of the CFAP
funding. Are you committed to continuing to get that funding
out and then following the directives in the legislation that
Congress included?
Mr. Vilsack. I am, Senator. I hope that you understand and
appreciate the fact that any new administration needs to have
an opportunity to fully understand and appreciate exactly what
is taking place with reference to that fund, what commitments
have been made, what commitments have already been embraced. We
just simply need time to have a better understanding of where
that is. It is not designed for anything other than to give me,
if I am confirmed, a better sense of that program. Obviously,
we are going to follow the directives of Congress. That is
reasonable and appropriate, and that is the way it should
operate.
I would say that we are going to continue to look for ways
in which the tools that USDA has can be utilized in the best
possible way to provide the assistance that people need to help
build the economy back better, to expand opportunities when and
if that presents itself. If there is a directive from Congress,
we will obviously follow it.
Senator Hoeven. Two I particularly worked on are both the
WHIP Plus and making sure that we had follow-on funding to
finish out the full intent of the WHIP Plus funding, and then
also, QLA, Quality Loss Adjustment, something I included both
language and funding for and would ask that in particular as
you work on those, you would coordinate with our office.
Mr. Vilsack. I am happy to work with your office and also
would encourage us to provide input that we can make sure that
the folks at the local level fully understand and appreciate
exactly how these programs are supposed to work. I have
received some indication from folks that maybe there is a
disconnect between what is happening on the ground and what the
intent was. We want to make sure there is consistency there,
and to the extent you can provide help and assistance, to give
us direction and instruction so our local folks know exactly
what they need to do, that would be helpful, Senator.
Senator Hoeven. Thank you. I appreciate that. We will do
that. Also, on precision ag, the RISE Program, something I
mentioned when you and I talked earlier, we have actually
secured two rounds of funding for that. I think there is about
$10 million. That is a new program. It is going to be great for
precision ag, same thing, and if we could have that same
approach on RISE, I would greatly appreciate it.
Mr. Vilsack. Well, absolutely, and I am glad to see that
you all have made the decision to focus and invest in this
area, because as we deal with climate, as we deal with
increased productivity, as we deal with farm income, and as we
encourage soil health, precision agriculture becomes an
important consideration, to the extent that we can invest in
it, learn from it----
Senator Hoeven. Yes, RISE is Rural Innovation Stronger
Economy. I used the acronym. Yes, I think this is exactly the
kind of thing that can have a very big impact, and I know you
share that enthusiasm, and I appreciate that very much.
On the carbon capture, we have talked about it a lot. I
would just like to emphasize--and, of course, I am certainly
willing to work with our Chairman. She is, I know, a strong
leader in that area, and our Ranking Member. He and I work
closely on everything. It has to be farmer-friendly. It has to
be farmer-friendly. Could you respond to that?
Mr. Vilsack. Well, I think there is a concern that a carbon
sequestration bank would potentially benefit investors or
benefit third parties. It has to be structured and devised and
designed in a way that the principal beneficiaries are farmers.
Why? Because we want them to do this. We want to encourage it.
We want to incent it. Why do we want that? Because it is a
quick win in terms of climate change. I think the farm
economy--or the farm community, rather, is really ready for
this. There have been conversations in every major commodity
group about this. There is a commitment to proceed forward.
Farmers know how to do this. We need to embrace them and
encourage them and incent them.
Whatever system we devise, whatever incentive program,
whatever program we put together, there has to be farmer input,
and at the end of the day it has to benefit farmers. If it
does, I think there will be wide adoption.
Senator Hoeven. As formerly Chair on Ag Approps, now
Ranking Member, we work with the CCC, and the first priority of
the CCC has always been funding the farm programs. I guess my
question would be: Do you feel that the CCC is something that
you would want to use for some type of carbon program? Are you
willing to commit that the CCC has to be there to fund the
priorities in the farm program, first and foremost?
Mr. Vilsack. The first responsibility of the Commodity
Credit Corporation is to make sure that the farm bill programs
are adequately, fully, and timely funded.
Senator Hoeven. Good.
Mr. Vilsack. Having said that, Senator, to the extent that
that vehicle is available without compromising the ability to
fund the farm bill programs, it is a great tool for us to
create the kind of structure that will inform future farm bills
about what will encourage carbon sequestration, what will
encourage precision agriculture, what will encourage soil
health and regenerative agricultural practices. To that extent,
there are resources available, I would hope that you all would
provide me the opportunity to utilize that in a way, again,
that does not compromise farm bill programs, but advances and
creates additional markets.
Secretary Perdue had great flexibility, appropriately so,
after the current COVID situation. I would ask for the
opportunity to use that flexibility appropriately, effectively,
and smartly to create the opportunity for you, as you put
together the next Farm Bill, to understand what works and what
would be helpful in terms of programs.
Senator Hoeven. We did use it to help with the trade, and I
am encouraged. We are seeing more trade now, and we have seen
some help there in terms of prices. I hope that continues. We
know our producers want markets, and that is what we are all
after.
Two kind of final questions. I will be quick. One is we
have got to do more for our livestock producers. We have got to
get them more transparency in pricing in the market. We have
got incredible concentration on the processor side. We have got
to find ways to address that. That is a huge priority, if you
could respond to that.
Then one other point. The Forest Service, we do need your
help with the Forest Service. It is, as you know very well,
part of the Department of Ag. We have ranchers out there in the
grasslands. We need your commitment to help with ranchers out
in the grasslands. If you could just finish with responding to
those two points.
Senator Stabenow. In 30 seconds.
Senator Hoeven. I apologize, Madam Chairman, for going
over.
Mr. Vilsack. We will work collaboratively with farmers and
ranchers in terms of access to forest land. You know, in terms
of--gosh, I have now forgotten your question, Senator.
Senator Hoeven. Well, first, help for livestock producers,
and then the Forest Service.
Mr. Vilsack. Look, there is no question we need to
strengthen the laws that are designed to create more openness
and more transparency and more price discovery. No question
about that. That is not enough. I think we need alternative
processing opportunities. Why? Not just from the competitive
standpoint, but also from a resilience standpoint. We have
found that when one or two processing facilities shut down
during COVID, it created havoc in the market. We cannot have
that. We have to have a more resilient food system, and that in
my view requires us to look at ways in which we can incent and
encourage more processing facilities.
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, and then help with the Forest
Service, for our ranchers.
Mr. Vilsack. I thought I had responded to that, but yes----
Senator Hoeven. If you did, okay. Thank you very much.
Again, Madam Chairman, thank you. I apologize for going over my
time. I appreciate it.
Senator Stabenow. Thank you.
Senator Bennet.
Senator Bennet. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you,
Senator Hoeven, for that question about processing. It is an
important issue that we have got to address.
Mr. Secretary, thank you for your willingness to serve and
for your family's willingness to sacrifice. We deeply
appreciate it, and I am very grateful that you are back.
As I think you know, our national forests are an essential
part of infrastructure throughout the West, providing water for
our cities, sustaining agriculture, and driving our outdoor
recreation economy.
I want to say to the members of this Committee, in case you
know him, this infrastructure is as important to our country as
the Lincoln Tunnel is to Chuck Schumer and to New York. As you
noted in your testimony, they also provide some of the best
carbon capture systems that exist. Yet we are still not
managing our forests like the critical infrastructure they are,
and with climate change driving hotter and drier conditions, we
are experiencing more catastrophic wildfires across the West,
including the three largest in Colorado's history last year.
Just in the last three years alone, NOAA tells us that this
country spent--these fires cost our country $46 billion, and
that does not even include the economy; that does not even
include health--$43 billion up in smoke in three years.
Mr. Secretary, that is why I recently introduced a bill
that would set aside $60 billion to partner with our State and
local governments to get this critical forest restoration work
done across the West. I wonder if you could talk a little bit
about what your priorities are going to be for the national
forests ahead, what it would mean to the Forest Service, what
they could achieve in terms of wildfire risk jobs, and avoiding
costs if we actually did what is required, and what we should
honor. These are national forests in our State.
Mr. Vilsack. Senator, when I hear folks talk about
infrastructure, invariably there is a discussion about roads,
bridges, dams, ports, and airports, all of which are incredibly
important, and we absolutely require significant investment in
improving the infrastructure of this country so we remain
competitive in a global market and that we can provide safe and
secure access for the people of this country. I wonder why we
do not also include the forests in that conversation because to
me they represent a major infrastructure for the country.
You mentioned carbon sequestration. The reality is clear
air is directly connected to forests. Obviously, as we deal
with trying to make our kids as healthy as we can, the outdoor
recreational opportunities to the economy, the impact of
forests in terms of outdoor recreation, hunting, fishing,
biking, hiking, et cetera, all very, very significant job
growth connected to it.
I would hope, as the Congress deals with infrastructure
issues and decides to commit significant resources to
rebuilding the infrastructure of this country, that they would
include forests in that conversation because if they do, we can
do a better job of maintaining the forests.
In the meantime, I think it is up to the United States
Department of Agriculture to use the fire budget fix that you
all did enact more effectively and more efficiently and
utilizing that resource to do a better job to make sure that we
are not diverting money away from the important job of
maintaining and managing our forests. I am encouraged by the
President's call for a Conservation Corps. We can put people to
work. We can create new opportunities for folks as we do a
better job of maintaining and repairing our forests.
I think the Forest Service has tremendous opportunities
here, and I look forward to working with you on your bill and
any other way in which we can provide the resources to do a
better job of forest management.
Senator Bennet. I appreciate that, Mr. Secretary, and I
think the Conservation Corps is a really good idea. We could
create two million jobs in rural America in the West and
probably in other places, too. In many communities that are
facing a transition away from fossil fuels, this would create a
real opportunity to drive incomes and drive jobs.
In the limited time I have left, Mr. Secretary, it is my
fault, but as you know, rural communities throughout our
country and in Colorado face many of the same infrastructure
challenges as larger communities, but they often face it with
fewer resources and fewer staff. Too often local staff are left
to navigate the Federal bureaucracy with little help. The
pandemic has only made this problem worse, and I am worried
that it will set rural areas even further behind on broadband
and infrastructure projects. There are steps that agencies can
take to help. For example, simplifying application
requirements, increasing field staff, and improving
coordination would help those rural communities compete for
funding.
You are now going to be in this job a second time, having
the benefit of having been there before. Under your leadership,
how will you make it easier for small and rural communities to
access USDA's rural infrastructure funding?
Mr. Vilsack. It begins by providing the technical
assistance so people actually know what they need to do. We put
together in the previous administration a thing called ``Strike
Force,'' which was designed to provide a partnership between
community building organizations and the USDA to create
opportunities in persistently poor areas of the country for
investment of all of our programs, not just our rural utility
service programs, rural business development programs, all of
our programs. The reality is we first have to teach folks how
to play the game, and that provides technical assistance, and
we have to basically guarantee success. We have to work with
them long enough and hard enough to basically get to yes, and I
think--I am committed to doing that in persistently poor areas
in particular, but across the country. We need to improve the
technical assistance that we provide, and I think if we did
that, we would see better utilization of the resources and get
more help to more people.
Senator Bennet. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I am over time,
but I would say Senator Boozman mentioned that the President's
Executive order directs the Secretary of Agriculture to collect
input from farmers and ranchers to use Federal programs to
encourage adoption on climate-smart agricultural practices. We
have been having a series of meetings in Colorado with farmers
and ranchers over the last several years who are adapting to
drought, communities dealing with reduced snow pack, and local
elected leaders who are facing these rising costs of wildfire
that you and I were just talking about. Mr. Secretary, I would
like to invite you to come to Colorado at your soonest
opportunity to begin to have those listening sessions on
climate. We would roll the red carpet out for you.
Mr. Vilsack. Senator, I look forward to that opportunity.
Senator Stabenow. Senator Bennet, we are not sure exactly
what that means in Colorado.
Senator Bennet. Madam Chair, please come.
Senator Stabenow. Yes, all right. Senator Boozman and I are
going to go to Colorado. They are going to roll out the red
carpet. This is good.
Mr. Vilsack. Senator, I think it means an opportunity for
me to see my grandson, granddaughter, son, and daughter-in-law.
Senator Stabenow. That would definitely be the red carpet,
so thank you.
At this moment I do not believe we have present a
Republican colleague. So Senator Brown is next on the list.
Senator Brown. Thank you, Senator Stabenow, if I can call
you ``Madam Chair,'' and I appreciate the generosity of Senator
Boozman in doing this flip that is inevitable, and I believe
will happen tomorrow, but thank you for doing that.
Secretary Vilsack, good to see you again remotely before
the Committee, and I appreciated our meeting a few days ago.
Thank you for that.
We know this, we have seen this pandemic is the great
revealer in so many ways, how vulnerable people are and how
much suffering is out there and why we need another package to
help the American public. It is not just to fix the economy. It
is to relieve suffering for so many people--the Dayton mother
who needs SNAP benefits to put food on the table, the worker
not too far from your home State, the workers in Sioux Falls at
the meatpacking plant who have to choose between a paycheck and
safety in the workplace. It is always important to understand
these essential workers are people who, as one essential worker
said to me, ``I do not feel that essential. I feel expendable.
They do not pay me much, and they do not protect me on the
job.'' That is up to you and up to the DOL and up to this
Government, something we have not seen happen in a while.
My question is this: How do we improve coordination between
means-tested programs so that women and children already WIC-
eligible are actually seeing the benefit? We know that take-up
is not as high as it should be. I know you struggled with that
before. What do we do to make that work?
Mr. Vilsack. Well, two things. I think that USDA needs to
do a better job of educating people about the existence of the
program, and I think we need to figure out creative ways to get
folks interested in WIC in addition to the nutrition
opportunities. Let me give you an example. There is a program
that is operating in 12 States called ``Count the Kicks.'' It
is a way of basically preventing stillbirths by counting the
kicks. If we have things like this that are also tied--
educational opportunities that are also tied to WIC
participation, maybe we get a broader awareness. This would be
particularly true in communities of color to basically get--
because they have much higher stillborn rates than among white
moms. The opportunity here I think is to create ways in which
people see multiple benefits from programs.
Second, I think it is important to get State and local
leaders engaged in this as well. I think Governors, Mayors, and
State Representatives, State Senators have a responsibility to
make sure that people are aware of programs, aware how to get
involved in programs. We need to look at ways in which we can
create a much easier way of getting into these programs. If you
are qualified for one program, is there not a way in which we
could create--a way to have eligibility to a multitude of
programs without necessarily requiring people to apply three or
four or five different times, answering the same questions
three or four different times, and doing it in three or four
different offices? Making access to these programs more
convenient, I think, educating people about the benefits, and
expanding the benefits would be three ways, I think, for you to
encourage increased participation.
Senator Brown. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. You came out
during your time with the Obama Administration and were very
helpful in helping us combat algae blooms in the western basin
of Lake Erie, the shallowest of the Great Lakes, as you know.
The Congress allows States to pay up to 90 percent of the cost
of ten high-priority EQIP programs. Many States decline to do
so. How do we encourage all States to take advantage of that?
Mr. Vilsack. Well, I think as we begin to have
conversations about issues involving soil health, regenerative
agriculture, new opportunities for farmers and ranchers, it is
going to drive people to the practices that will reduce the
risk of algae blooms or reduce the capacity of
overfertilization that leads to these kinds of situations. It
becomes in the best interest of a Governor and the best
interest of a Secretary or Commissioner of Agriculture to
advocate for this and to utilize those opportunities, because
at the end of the day more productive soil means more profit
for farmers. New market opportunities mean more jobs and more
income for farmers.
I think you make the economic case, and by doing so you
encourage folks to amplify the message. I think with this
climate discussion, Senator, we are going to have a lot of
opportunity to visit with and to work collectively and
collaboratively with State and local governments, because they
are going to see the economic benefit in addition to the
environmental benefit. The joining of those two ideas I think
is very powerful.
Senator Brown. Well, thank you. From my observation, I do
not really know, but people tell me the President of the United
States chose you to be USDA Secretary--well, for your
experience, but in large part your vision and your clear-
sightedness and ability to look into the future on climate
issues. You know, Lake Erie is one component of that. So is Jon
Tester's farm in Montana. So are the lowlands in Bangladesh. We
know all that.
One last question. We talked about the pandemic being the
great revealer. We saw pictures last year of farmers plowing
under crops and dairies dumping milk because of a huge decline
in demand. This past year has served as a wake-up call for many
of us that, while we may have the most efficient food supply in
the world, it is not as resilient as we thought. Improving
local farm systems is a way not only to invest in rural
communities but make our food system more equitable and more
sustainable.
How do you build on previous work that you have done and
others have done to diversify our food supply chain, including
local agriculture, while helping small and medium-sized farms?
Mr. Vilsack. Well, you continue to look for ways in which
you can create market opportunities for the small and mid-sized
operations. You basically expand significantly the farm to
school, farm to university, farm to college, farm to prison,
farm to whatever institutional purchaser may be buying food in
the locality, creating ways in which that institutional
purchaser of food understands what is being grown and raised.
You finance food hubs so that small producers can aggregate the
amount of food that they are producing with other similarly
sized farm operations so that you have uniformity in
processing, packaging, and marketing.
You obviously continue to expand commitment to farmers'
markets. You look for ways in which you create risk management
tools for those small and mid-sized providers so there is more
profit opportunity. You create a transition assistance so
people who are interested in going into organic can do it more
easily.
I mean, Senator, there are a multitude of ways to promote
local and regional food systems. The Department of Agriculture
can utilize existing resources to promote and to provide
expansion for. Frankly, it is in everyone's best interest to
have this.
You also have to expand processing facilities. You have to
give people the opportunity not necessarily to rely on a
handful of large processing facilities. You need to create more
of that. You started that process with the most recent COVID
bill, a small program for processing. It has got to be much,
much bigger than that, in my view. You also have a dairy
donation program which I think is an incredibly good idea
because there is a disincentive now. You have to spend money to
process in order to be able to get it to food banks. You have
to make sure that food banks have the infrastructure to
collect, store, and refrigerate perishable items if you want
more of that to go into the food assistance network if we have
a disruption in food service.
There is an entire supply chain program here that needs to
be put in place, and USDA can impact and affect every single
aspect of that supply chain.
Senator Brown. Madam Chair, thank you. Mr. Secretary, thank
you very much for serving.
Senator Stabenow. Thank you very much.
We will go now to Senator Ernst. I believe we have a vote
that will start at noon, but we will continue on through as
many members as we can. Senator Ernst.
Senator Ernst. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Secretary
Vilsack, for joining us here today. It is great to have you
with us again, and you do bring a unique perspective to this
position. Not only have you had the opportunity to serve as our
Agriculture Secretary before, but, of course, more importantly,
for Senator Grassley and me, you bring a unique perspective
being from Iowa. It is my hope that if you are confirmed to the
position again, you will stand firm for our farmers and
ranchers in Iowa as you work to implement the new policies of
this new administration.
As you know, Iowa--and you know this intimately, but Iowa
is a top producer of our biofuels, both ethanol and biodiesel.
A new report released just last week found that greenhouse gas
emissions from corn ethanol are 46 percent lower than gasoline.
The Executive Order, however, last week establishes a policy to
change the Federal vehicle fleet over to electric vehicles. In
light of this announcement, will you be directing the USDA to
purchase Tesla trucks that run on electricity? Or will you be
supporting our farmers and purchasing Ford F-150's that run on
E85?
Mr. Vilsack. Senator, I do not think it is an either/or
circumstance. I think there is an opportunity to advance both.
The reality is we are going to need biofuels and the biofuel
industry for the foreseeable future, and you mentioned the
study that came out--I think it is a Harvard-based study--that
I underscore the fact that as we educate people about the
environmental benefits of biofuels, we will see, I think, the
opportunity to expand the utilization of biofuels.
I mentioned earlier the importance of marine and aviation
fuel. It is not just transportation, cars and trucks. It is
also jets and ships that will use this fuel. I think we look
for expanded opportunities in a variety of different ways.
At the same time, I think we recognize that there will be
more and more electric vehicles that will be utilized in the
country, and we also recognize that is going to require energy.
Where does that energy come from? Well, I think there are
opportunities within rural America to promote rural renewable
energy, which can also be beneficial to the farmers, ranchers,
and producers that we care about.
Senator Ernst. I certainly hope that you continue to echo
that sentiment very loudly and clearly with the administration,
because my concern is this: As much as my Democratic colleagues
would like to talk about Donald Trump and biofuels, you know,
all day long, but when President Obama, your old boss, came to
Iowa, he made a lot of really significant promises to these
farmers in the biofuel industry, and I would argue that the
reality is he simply was not a champion. We did not see E15
year-round under his administration. He was not that champion.
He put out the WOTUS rule, too, which was an attack on
agriculture.
Let us think ahead; 2022 is coming up. It is a significant
milestone for the RFS. The Renewable Fuel Standard will need to
be reauthorized, and if confirmed, which I anticipate you will
be confirmed, you will be sitting in the Oval Office with
President Biden in 2022. Just imagine yourself there, and you
are there discussing the opportunity for the RFS, but you also
have an electric vehicle advocate sitting across the table.
What will you do in your capacity to make sure we get this
done, get the renewal of the RFS done when we are facing near
unanimous support of Democrats when it comes to electric
vehicles? What is the way you will handle this as Secretary of
Agriculture?
Mr. Vilsack. Well, I would probably say to President Biden,
I would probably remind him that I have a 2006 Ford Focus that
I still own, so I have had it for--what? Fourteen, 15 years--17
years--no, fifteen years. I would remind him that there are so
many Americans like me and my wife who have cars that are six,
seven, eight, ten, and twelve years old. The reality is that we
are going to need both. We are going to need a biofuel industry
that promotes, as you pointed out, the greenhouse gas emission
savings over gasoline. We are going to promote biofuels because
of the octane capacity, so if we are really interested in
expanding mileage over time, one way to do that is by having
biofuels, higher-blend biofuels that will expand mileage with
new engines. The reality is that General Motors and Ford and
all of those other car companies, they are not going to stop
producing combustion engines, cars with combustion engines.
They are not going to stop that process.
We need an alternative fuel source in addition to, add to,
complement our efforts on the electric. I do not see why we
cannot have both. Over a long period of time, we are going to
need both. While we are developing and ensuring that the
infrastructure is in place, something the Obama Administration
did invest in, additional infrastructure to increase the
opportunities for E15 to be utilized in several thousand gas
stations around the country, while we are doing that, we also
need to look for ways in which we can incorporate biofuels, as
I said before, in other forms of transportation. I think there
are tremendous opportunities in aviation and marine fuel as
well.
I think there is a future for this industry. I think there
are jobs connected to this industry. There is stability of farm
income connected to this industry. I do not think I am going to
have to be too persuasive in that Oval Office to have the
President, who committed to the RFS during the course of the
campaign, follow through on that.
Senator Ernst. Thank you, Secretary. I do hope you stand
strong.
I have a question that I will submit for the record, but it
is about the ``30 by 30'' climate proposal. It was a climate
Executive order. It was a proposal to conserve 30 percent of
U.S. land by 2030, and I know that is also very concerning to
our farmers to have a proposal that would limit the opportunity
for them to farm with widespread retirement of farmland. I will
submit that for the record and look forward to your response.
Senator Ernst. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Senator Stabenow. Thank you. As we move forward, Senator
Leahy is next. Then, assuming we have time here, Senators
Grassley, Casey, Fischer, Smith, Braun, and Gillibrand. Those
are the names that I have here. I believe I just saw Senator
Thune enter the room, so welcome.
Senator Leahy, I believe you are with us.
Senator Leahy. Thank you. Is it coming through okay?
Senator Stabenow. It is. Thank you.
Senator Leahy. Thank you very much.
Mr. Secretary, it is good to see you, even though it is
like this. We had a good chat the other day. I know we welcomed
you in Vermont. We cannot provide grandchildren for you the way
my colleague can in Colorado, but, you know, every time you
have been in Vermont, everybody has been happy to see you,
Republicans and Democrats alike. We will see you there again, I
hope.
It is so important, what you do--and, incidentally, I am
glad to see that somebody has cars as old as the cars my wife
and I have. Your Department helps our Nation's farmers and
rural communities, underserved families, and look at the
coronavirus pandemic, what that has done toward hunger and
climate change, economic disruption, and communities all over
the country, certainly my own State of Vermont but everywhere
else. It has also shown us that race and gender and geography
affect how Americans experience crises. I think we have to make
sure that President Biden and you can work to make sure that
not only Vermont but all over the country we have access to the
resources we need.
Madam Chair, I would like to put my full statement in the
record, and I assume that is without objection.
Senator Stabenow. Without objection.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Leahy can be found on page
48 in the appendix.]
Senator Leahy. Last year marked the 30th anniversary of
certainly one of my proudest achievements in passing the
Organic Food Production Act. It is now a $55 billion per year
industry. It has certainly been an economic factor in all parts
of our country. There are several long overdue rulemakings
which you initiated when you were Secretary before that are
critical to maintaining this, the origin of livestock, closing
loopholes and so on.
We had mandated in the Fiscal Year 2020 appropriations bill
that USDA complete the rule by June 17th of last year. Your
predecessor did not. Could I ask that you look at that and see
if the congressional mandate can be met and have those rules
completed?
Mr. Vilsack. Senator, it is my intention to be a supporter
of the organic industry, and I understand that is a rule that
needs to be looked at, and we will certainly do that and try to
get that done as quickly as possible. If things have changed in
the last four years in terms of that rule that may require a
tweak here or there, whatever, we will be happy to take a look
at that. I know that is an important rule, and we are going to
get it done. We are going to support this industry because it
is important. It is an important tool, it is an important
value-added tool for farm income.
Senator Leahy. Thank you very much. The other thing is food
insecurity. You have heard about this all over the country. I
know the University of Vermont found that one in four Vermont
households were food-insecure between March and September 2020.
We have done a number of things in our State to get food to
people, including the creation of the Farmers to Families Food
Box Program, which did a lot. Now, the last administration said
they took that and they contracted it in some of the strangest
ways,
[inaudible] vendors delivered food boxes. There were many
times food boxes were paid for, contracted for, and never
showed up.
We do know that we have local vendors that can work with
local distributors and get local farmers and local food. I want
to get back to that. I know when we tried that in Vermont, we
had something all set to go, and they said, no, we have to go
out of State to do it. It cost a lot more money and did not
work as well.
Please work with us, promise to families and make sure if
there is going to be food assistance, that at least we try,
whatever State it is, to see if the food is available from
local providers. That helps the farmers, but it also gets the
food quicker and usually cheaper to the families that need it.
Mr. Vilsack. That is a fair request, Senator, and it is
also a way by which you can encourage local and regional food
systems as a complement to our more commodity-based system. I
am happy to work with you on that and look for ways in which we
can improve that program, especially as it relates to really
remote areas that are serviced.
Senator Leahy. I know others are waiting so I will submit
any other questions for the record. I must say I am delighted
to have you back. You and I have worked very, very closely
together in the past years. I know Republicans and Democrats
alike in the Senate have appreciated the fact that you have
listened and are knowledgeable. After you have visited your
grandchildren, come and visit mine in Vermont. Just remember
there is a secret power in the Constitution, which is
grandparents must spoil the grandchildren. My grandchildren
believe in that power of the Constitution.
Senator Leahy. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
Mr. Vilsack. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Stabenow. Well, thank you, Senator Leahy, former
Chairman. Thank you for all of your leadership over the years.
Senator Grassley.
Senator Grassley. Thank you, Senator Stabenow.
Congratulations once again to the Secretary for being
renominated for this position.
In your previous position, you used the Commodity Credit
Corporation for E15 and E85 pumps to help increase biofuel
infrastructure. You probably do not know this, but in the CARES
Act No. 1 last March, we put $24.5 billion into it to help
agriculture and food distribution, food supplement for lower-
income people, et cetera, et cetera. We tried to get the
previous Secretary of Agriculture to use some of that money to
help biofuel producers because we had just a lot of plants shut
down or go into partial operation.
We made it very clear, since the previous Secretary said he
did not think he had the authority to do it, in the recent
CARES Act passed before Christmas, we included authority for
the Secretary to do that. I am hoping, if confirmed--I guess
maybe I should say I am really asking you the question. Would
you be able to help us with this authority to utilize your
authority to provide direct assistance to biofuel producers
negatively impacted by COVID-19?
Mr. Vilsack. Senator, I am aware of the fact that the
industry did not get the help that it needed and will certainly
look for ways in which we can be assisting the industry. In
addition to what you mentioned, there is also the opportunity
to take a look at the infrastructure program that Secretary
Perdue did start. Not all those resources, as I understand it,
have been invested, so potentially there is a way that also
could provide opportunities for us to help the industry at this
point in time. We will continue to look for ways to provide
assistance because it is about strong markets for farmers and
it is about jobs in rural areas.
Senator Grassley. Okay. Ensuring an affordable, safe, and
stable supply of food is one of the most important jobs that
you or any Secretary of Ag has. This past April, disruptions in
beef production peaked when nearly 40 percent of the Nation's
beef processing capacity was idle. While the normal spread
between boxed beef cutout value and fed cattle is around $21,
last April the spread was over $279 per hundredweight, the
highest spread ever recorded. Because just four companies
control over 80 percent of beef processing, the concentration
of power in the industry led to beef shortages at grocery
stores and producers out of luck to get bids on their animals.
If you are confirmed, do you plan to reintroduce your Fair
Market Practices Rule that you published the last week of the
Obama Administration? I believe I was very supportive of what
you were doing at that time, but then, you know, Trump came in
and did not move ahead with it. I hope that you would be
willing to go along that same line again.
Mr. Vilsack. Well, Senator, I think we will take a very
close and detailed look at every tool that USDA has available
to it to ensure more openness and more fairness and more
transparency in our markets. We will also look for ways in
which we can work collaboratively with the Department of
Justice if there are issues relating to antitrust that need to
be explored in greater detail. We will also take a look at ways
in which we can provide incentives or resources that could
potentially expand the amount of processing facilities in the
country so that we are not faced with the disruption that we
have seen in the past; we are not faced with market distortions
that we have seen in the past; and we are not faced with what
farmers and ranchers believe they are not getting a fair shake,
as we have seen in the past.
Senator Grassley. We continue to see large farms use
loopholes to maximize crop insurance payments. I have long
advocated for responsible payment limitations on commodity
programs and believe farmers should only receive payments if
they are actually engaged on the farm and running the farm and
working the farm. In 2020, the U.S. Department of Agriculture
announced final rules on the definition of ``actively engaged
in farming'' as part of the 2018 Farm Bill. This rule would
have required additional family members to provide either 25
percent of the total management hours required or perform at
least 500 hours of management each year. However, just weeks
later, the USDA said that they made a mistake; it did not apply
to family run operations.
How would you define ``actively engaged'' as it relates to
commodity program payments? Or put another way, so I really
only have one question, how many hours does someone need to
work to qualify for a farm payment? Now, that may be a
difficult question for you, but it gives you a chance to tell
me how you would approach this so that we do not have a lot of
people that are not really involved in farming to not get the
help that only family farmers should get.
Mr. Vilsack. You know, Senator, I think this is a really
important question, and the reason it is an important question
is because so few people in this country farm. People that you
work with in the Congress and the Senate may represent
districts or may represent States that are less agricultural
than the State of Iowa. It becomes important for the programs
that are legitimate, that are effective and efficient, and that
are expensive. It makes it more difficult for you to advocate
on behalf of a proper safety net, proper risk management tools,
if those tools are being utilized in a way that provides help
and assistance to people who might be practicing wrong in a
high-rise in some big city as opposed to being on the ground in
a tractor and a combine, as you often are.
My goal here would be to make sure that programs that we
have that provide that safety net are designed to help the
people most affected--the farmers on the ground that are
actually at risk financially, folks that are sweating every
single day in terms of markets, and not necessarily create a
system that can be gamed.
I do not know if that is a direct answer to your question,
but I hope it gives you a sense of where my values are, where
my focus will be. It is on helping farmers. It is not on
helping people who may be part of a partnership or a limited
partnership or general partner structures that are set up to
create avenues for people to take advantage of these programs.
That does not help the program; it does not help you as an
advocate of the program; and it does not help legitimize the
appropriateness of a safety net for farmers.
Senator Grassley. Thank you very much. I yield.
Senator Stabenow. Thank you very much.
Senator Casey.
Senator Casey. Thank you, Senator Stabenow, and I want to
thank you, Secretary Vilsack, in particular for your continuing
commitment to exemplary public service and your willingness to
serve this administration and the American people. Of course, I
am always proud of your Pennsylvania roots.
I have two questions and will submit more for the record. I
want to start with food security or food insecurity. It is an
issue that so many of us have worked on. I know you have in
your work as Secretary, but also I want to thank you for the
work that you did as Secretary of Agriculture and, of course,
the work done by Senator Stabenow this year and others to
provide more food assistance.
We know the Biden administration has made clear they are
committed to addressing food insecurity by providing more food
assistance. The Executive order to expand nutrition assistance
was an important first step, but as you know, Mr. Secretary,
there are significant additional investments that require
congressional action and that President Biden has called for in
his American Rescue Plan.
I appreciate the Executive Order including direction for
USDA to work with the Department of Justice to review its
authority to allow States to provide extra SNAP emergency
allotments for the lowest-income households. As you know from
our discussion, Pennsylvania has been unable to move forward
with approved emergency allotments because the Department of
Agriculture previously threatened to recoup more than $400
million in additional benefits. The relevant legal challenge
was put on hold for 30 days, providing USDA an opportunity to
examine and reconsider the decision made by the previous
administration.
First question: As Secretary, would you explore every legal
option and opportunity to maximize emergency allotments to the
States and provide much-needed clarity to enable Pennsylvania
and other States to move forward as quickly as possible?
Mr. Vilsack. Senator, I am heartened by the fact that there
are conversations taking place between the Department of
Justice and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to try to get this
resolved in a way that is appropriate and is acceptable to the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. I have encouraged those
conversations and hope that they ultimate end up in a place
that you find satisfactory. We certainly encourage that
conversation and appreciate the fact that there is still time
to get this thing resolved in a way that makes sense.
Let me just simply say as a practical matter or as a
philosophy, I think whatever we can do to provide as much help
as we possibly can to people in need, we should do. I think
however we can make benefits most conveniently utilized, we
should do. I think we should figure out additional ways to make
qualification for and access to these programs. I think in my
conversations with Senator Boozman, we talked about getting rid
of the hassle that can sometimes be connected with these
programs. I think he is absolutely right about that. There are
ways that you could do this without minimizing the integrity or
without disregarding the integrity of the programs. If we can
expand access, if we can increase benefits, if we could make
them more convenient, I think more people would be helped. I
think that is what I would hope we would be able to do, if I am
confirmed at USDA. That would be the goal, more access, more
convenience, and I frankly think at some point we need to take
a look at the level of benefits. It is great that it is being
extended for six months, the 15-percent increase, but the
reality is I think you will find that the way in which we
calculate that benefit does not make sense today. If you create
a benefit that is tied to the way things are today,
[inaudible].
Senator Casey. Mr. Secretary, thank you for working with us
on this issue. My last question is about water quality and
climate change. We know that the same practices and programs
that we worked to improve through the last Farm Bill for water
quality also offer enormous climate benefits, as you know as
well as anyone. We know the adoption of best management
practices for water quality like forested riparian buffers and
filter strips can also provide long-term carbon storage and
emission reductions.
The Department has an important role to play in not only
providing the financial and technical assistance, but also in
terms of measuring and evaluating the benefits they provide.
I have got a bill, the Farmer-Driven Conservation Outcomes
Act, which would direct the Department to establish a process
through which USDA can measure, evaluate, and report on these
conservation benefits. If confirmed, would you support efforts
to stand up such measurement, evaluation, and reporting systems
at USDA to help us quantify the benefits of climate-smart
agriculture and water quality co-benefits?
Mr. Vilsack. Senator, if you want to have a functioning
ecosystem market that supports water quality, and encourages
more investment in water quality, you need to be able to
certify, measure, and quantify the results. I would be happy to
work with you and anyone else who is interested in figuring out
ways in which we can do a better job of that to make sure that
those markets are as strong as they possibly can be.
I am convinced that, compared to new income opportunities
for farmers, we need to do everything we can to create those
additional market operations.
Senator Casey. Mr. Secretary, thank you very much.
Senator Stabenow. Thank you very much.
Next we have Senator Fischer, and just for everyone's
knowledge, Senator Boozman has stepped away to vote. When he is
back, I will do that. He will conclude the meeting. We will be
able to have everyone who wishes to be able to question
Secretary Vilsack.
Senator Fischer.
Senator Fischer. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Secretary Vilsack, I know that my colleague Senator Hoeven
touched on this a bit, and I appreciate your comments on the
need for additional slaughtering capacity. Are you concerned
that negotiated trade levels in the fed cattle market may have
diminished to the point that price discovery is not sufficient
to enable the cow-calf and cattle feeding segment to benefit
from our current market conditions?
Mr. Vilsack. The quick answer to that is yes, I think we
need more price discovery, Senator.
Senator Fischer. Have you thought about different ideas on
how that could be achieved? Because I just may have a bill for
you.
Mr. Vilsack. Well, I am happy to work with you, and I am
sure that you have got very good ideas. Given the important
role that that industry plays in Nebraska, I am not surprised
that you have some ideas, and I would look forward, if
confirmed, to working with you to figure out what works best
for Nebraska and for the country.
Senator Fischer. Great. Thank you. I enjoyed our
conversation that we had before this hearing earlier, a couple
weeks ago, and I do appreciate your interest in that.
As you know, the U.S. is a global leader in the production
of high-quality, sustainable feed because cattle producers
worked hard for decades to improve the quality of our cattle
and build the brands that consumers love and trust. I think
there is a general agreement that the USDA's generically
approved ``Product of the USA'' label has failed to keep up
with the evolving consumer expectations. Many are of the mind-
set that USDA already has the necessary tools and regulatory
power to improve this dated general level label.
Do you believe that the current labeling policy adequately
informs consumers?
Mr. Vilsack. If it is the same policy as it was four years
ago when I left, the answer is no. We made every concerted
effort to try to create better transparency, better information
for consumers, because we understand and appreciate that
consumers want to know where their food comes from; they want
to know when they are buying U.S. and when they are not
buying--or they are buying from someplace else. We attempted on
three occasions to sort of strengthen the country-of-origin
labeling unsuccessfully because of the WTO challenges by our
Canadian friends which would have resulted, obviously, in
retaliation.
I am absolutely willing to listen to anybody and everybody
who has got an idea about how we can circumvent or how we can
get to a point where the WTO does not necessarily slap it down,
that it creates retaliatory impacts on American agriculture. I
am frank to say I need help in that respect. We can ignore the
WTO, but then we have got the retaliation, and then, you know,
that is just not a good situation.
Senator Fischer. No, that would not be a good thing. I hope
that we can work together and bring in a lot of stakeholders
from the cattle industry to be able to look at that and
possibly look at what the USDA can already do, that maybe the
tools that they said earlier--maybe the tools are already
there. Maybe we can strengthen that ``Product of the USA''
labeling so it will work and be accepted by our trading
partners so that we do not have to face sanctions and in the
future as well.
Mr. Vilsack. I am happy to do that, Senator.
Senator Fischer. Wonderful. Thank you.
As you know, Nebraska is the perfect agricultural
laboratory for creating the data-driven farm of the future.
With our seven climate zones and wide variation in soils and
precipitation, we have been leaders on precision livestock and
crop production. Would you expand on how innovations in
agriculture will drive precision livestock and crop production
and continue our Nation's global leadership role in feeding and
fueling the world?
Mr. Vilsack. Well, I am happy to do that. Whether it is our
consumers here in the U.S. or our efforts to try to export
overseas, I can tell you we are facing competition on not just
the quality, not just the safety, not just the taste, not just
the price. We are also now facing competition on whether or not
whatever it is we are selling has been sustainably produced.
To the extent that we can make the case to the world that
what is being raised, what is being grown, what is being sold
outside the U.S. is being raised and grown in the most
sustainable, animal-friendly environments, we can make the case
and provide a market advantage to the U.S. Innovation becomes
critically important. President Biden has a vision of a zero
emission agriculture, and I will tell you, if we reach that
vision by 2050, the goal that he has set, as we are reaching
it, it will give us an incredible competitive advantage in the
world markets because people are hungry for this.
We will not be able to do this without innovation. We will
not be able to do it without precision agriculture. We will not
be able to do it without a true commitment to soil health and
regenerative practices. We will not be able to do it without
organic playing a role. We will not be able to do it without
the technology that converts agricultural waste into a variety
of products so that we move away from an extraction economy we
have had in the past to a more circular or more regenerative
economy. That is the goal. If we do that, Senator, I guarantee
you we will be able to sell our product anywhere in the world.
If we do not do it, we are going to have trouble selling it
anywhere.
Senator Fischer. How important is the role of our land
grant universities in all of this, in trying to complement the
efforts of the USDA?
Mr. Vilsack. Well, it is funny you mention land grant--this
is an 1863 report of the Commission of Agriculture that was
part of the Interior Department, the first report from the
Commissioner of Agriculture to Abraham Lincoln. If you read the
preface of that document, 600 pages about agriculture in the
United States, you would be surprised how much similarity there
is between that period of time in 1863 and now. The critical
role that education, the land grant university system that was
launched in 1862, and the need for research and innovation has
in providing more profitability, more opportunity for farmers,
ranchers, producers, and people who live in rural America.
The land grant university is one of the great gifts that
President Lincoln and succeeding generations have provided to
this country, and it has an important role. I think it has an
essential role. It is not just the 1862s. It is also the
minority-serving institutions that also have that role in
making sure that information gets out to the country. I would
hope that the USDA could work collaboratively, and I believe it
would if I am confirmed, work collaboratively with that land
grant university system. I have spent the last four years
affiliated with Colorado State University, and as a Governor, I
had a very keen understanding of Iowa State University. I can
tell you that it is a tremendous, tremendous treasure, and we
need to utilize it, and we need to invest in it across the
board. If we do not, we are not going to have the innovation
that we need to be competitive.
Senator Fischer. Well, thank you very much. I appreciate
your being here today and your clear answers. Thank you, sir.
Senator Boozman.[Presiding.]
Senator Smith.
Senator Smith. Thank you very much, Senator Boozman.
Secretary Vilsack, it is great to see you again. I will give
you a chance to take a sip of your tea or coffee because you
have had a long morning so far.
I so appreciated the chance to visit with you a couple of
weeks ago, and I really appreciate, as a fellow Minnesotan,
your understanding of the diversity of agriculture in our part
of the country and the importance of family farmers and
ranchers. I really liked also the way you have framed up your
comments today, this morning, in terms of four what-if moments
around climate and food security and competition and inequity.
We have had a lot of great conversations about climate and
biofuels, so I want to just associate myself with those good
questions from Senator Klobuchar and others.
I would actually like today to home in a little bit on this
question of inequity and especially what USDA can do to expand
access to resources, especially access to credit. I am sure you
know that in Minnesota we have Hmong refugees who brought their
farming traditions to Minnesota in the 1970's. We have a
significant community of Latino farmers that are really
integral to our ag sector, led by great organizations like the
Latino Economic Development Center. We also have Native farmers
that are really central to our history, and as they work to
diversify their economies, they are working hard to find
markets for their unique products like wild rice, which is
becoming a very prized product overseas.
In the 2018 Farm Bill, I pushed for provisions that would
help to evaluate access to credit and how well diverse farmers,
farmers of color have access to credit as they work to build
their family businesses. The study came out--and they did that.
The study came out in 2019, and it found that traditionally
underserved farming communities face really significant
barriers to receiving private agricultural credit, and that
traditionally underserved communities are often not even aware
of what their credit options and lending options are.
In the spirit of your opening comments, could you just
expand a little bit on how you see this and what you think the
USDA can do internally and externally to ensure that these
communities are aware of and have true and full access to
credit options as they try to operate their farms?
Mr. Vilsack. There are multiple steps that need to be
taken, Senator. First of all, I think we need to take a much
deeper dive than has ever been taken before in terms of USDA
programs to identify what barriers actually, in fact, exist in
each of those programs. I would anticipate and expect that we
would put together, for lack of a better term, an equity
commission or a task force that would be charged with taking a
look at USDA programs, identifying is there systemic racism
inherent in these programs, are there barriers, maybe
intentional or unintentional barriers, that make it difficult
for people to access the programs; and if so, how do we correct
that. What steps need to be taken, No. 1?
No. 2, I think it is about technical assistance and making
sure that we work with people who are trusted in the
communities. It is very difficult sometimes in those
communities to go in from the Government and say, you know, the
old adage, ``We are from the Government. We are here to help.''
Maybe it is better to say, ``We are from the Government. We
want to affiliate ourselves with a community-building
organization that you do trust, that you do listen to,'' and
then we want to work with that community-building organization
to provide the information and the technical assistance and the
awareness and the steps necessary for you to be successful in
developing these programs.
Then I think it takes a work force that is diverse, that
has the right perspective. Maybe some of those people
themselves have been through this, so that you essentially have
people that are sympathetic and understanding, that maybe the
rules may not be fully understood. It make take a little time,
it may take some patience to get it done.
Then to the extent we have an appeal process, that appeal
process has to be true, has to be a real appeal process. It
cannot be a whitewash, if you will. What we need is to make
sure that we have people on those appeal boards at the county
level and at the State level that also represent that
diversity.
When I was Secretary before, I exercised the power to
enhance the diversity in many of those county committees.
Obviously, I am willing to do that again, but the hope would be
that folks locally understand and appreciate the necessity of
having that voice, that person in the room that can explain why
this appeal should because considered.
Also, I would say it is also accountability and making sure
that I, if I am confirmed as Secretary, and the Under Secretary
and the people who are responsible for administering these
programs are held accountable. That means collecting
information and data to make sure that we are aware if there is
a problem, where the problem might be so we can address it as
quickly as possible.
Those are some of the steps that need to be taken, I
believe.
Senator Smith. I really appreciate your answer. I
appreciate especially what you say about listening to the
people that are on the ground. I think about in Minnesota where
we have got the Hmong-American Farmers Association and the
Latino Economic Development Corporation that know so much about
what their members and their community need to make this work.
I will also just point out that the Minneapolis Fed has
also just recently released some data about underserved
communities in Minnesota and have a really excellent center for
Indian country development that could be really helpful here.
I would love to invite you to Minnesota to have
conversations with some of these really talented and
knowledgeable community members. I bet Senator Klobuchar would
be interested in this as well. I know she is, and I think we
could do some real good here and strengthen the ag economy as
well as create more opportunities for family farmers.
Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
Senator Boozman. Senator Braun.
Senator Braun. Thank you, Senator Boozman.
Secretary Vilsack, I enjoyed our conversation last week. We
covered several topics, and I am going to focus on three of
them, two with some time, and start off with talking about
farmers being great stewards of the land. I have been involved
in the conservation side of farming, been involved in farming
for decades. One thing I see each year that is tougher for
farmers is the stakes go up, the risk is greater financially. I
harken back to 2009 to 2013, the last time until just recently
we had decent profits in especially the grain markets, which
have a ripple effect with poultry, livestock, and so forth.
You know, mentioning anything you can do that is going to
make life less complicated for farmers, if we are going to keep
family farms as the grassroots level of how we produce food in
this country, I think there are a lot of things that need to
kind of work in the right direction.
I am glad that you are interested in and I think there are
benefits to be derived, adding profit per acre by taking the
good stewardship that most farmers exercise anyway, and
matching it up with voluntary markets. I am involved in a bill
to do that. I think that will happen, hopefully maybe this
year.
I want to focus on what since 2009 to 2013, and that was
right after, I guess, the days of LDPs and direct payments,
which will get to the second thing I want to talk about here in
a moment, the heavy involvement of Government over the years
that we have just weaned ourselves away from. Part of the
solution in my mind is to look at the inputs that they use in
their business have doubled, tripled, and sometimes quadrupled
between 2009 and 2013 and the present. I think market
concentration is something that whenever you have too much of
it--we see it in health care now; we see it in tech; we see it
in many other places. Inputs, prices, costs go up, stay up, do
not come down.
Would you comment on what you would do in your unique
position to address the things that farmers need to buy and
purchase increasingly from fewer and fewer and less local all
the time in terms of the major inputs that go into their
business?
Mr. Vilsack. Senator, I think one of the things that we
could do and should do it is for the Secretary of Agriculture
to reach out to the Attorney General and see whether or not the
Attorney General, the Department of Justice, would be
interested in reinvigorating, re-creating the task force that
occurred a number of years ago with the express understanding
of taking a look, a very deep dive into the issues that you
have raised, and perhaps expanding that task force beyond the
Department of Justice to include other players that may have an
impact, whether it is in the Federal Trade Commission or
whether it is the Small Business Administration or whoever
might have an equity, if you will, in this issue of markets
that are working, markets that are competitive, markets that
are open.
I think there are tools obviously within the USDA that we
need to take a look at relative to examining the economic
analysis and deep data of the impact of concentration on the
costs, on the input costs, to create sort of a foundation, a
basis for potential action and rulemaking if necessary. I think
you and I talked about patent laws, whether or not they need to
be looked at and examined to determine whether or not in a day
of rapid, incredibly rapid change, they need to be looked at in
terms of the amount of time that folks have in terms of patent
protection. I think, frankly, we need to research--this is a
bit afield from the input question you asked, but I think we
need to take a look at how we might be able to significantly
increase public research so that the foundation research upon
which new seeds and so forth can be developed is not
necessarily as expensive as our current system where the
private sector basically creates the new technology and then
licenses it to seed companies.
I think there are multitude of ways in which the USDA can
be engaged in this conversation.
Senator Braun. You know, in times like these where
agriculture has been stressed, so often in my two years here,
any industry that gets in trouble generally comes to the
Federal Government to look for help, and I think most farmers,
as I mentioned earlier, were glad to wean themselves from LDP
payments, direct payments, and basically most of the
involvement, other than in a year like going through COVID,
would have been through crop insurance.
A couple things. Government can cost farmers per acre with
burdensome regulations. Again, I believe in conservation. I
believe in saving the resource, treating it well. Waters of the
U.S. had a significant impact on farmers and developers in
terms of, I think, adding undue burdens. I would hope that you
would look at that side of the equation too because I think you
will be in a unique position to weigh in. Regulation where you
need it, make sure it is not in overdrive. Then try to keep a
focus on maybe helping find new markets, do things that are
going to broaden the ability for farmers to sell what they
produce, and keeping costs down, which you mentioned a little
bit ago; and then mostly avoiding Government ending up getting
more involved because I think that is one thing that, first of
all, from a budget point of view, we cannot take on the burden
of doing more when we are running trillion-dollar deficits
structurally.
I would just like your comment on how we keep farmers
healthy without, you know, reverting to the Federal Government
being more involved in a financial way.
Mr. Vilsack. Well, I think, in a word, markets; the ability
to create more local and regional markets, the ability to
create new markets with our emphasis on climate, the ability to
expand on our export activities either by virtue of newer
markets or by more competitive opportunities in existing
markets. It starts with markets, Senator. I think that is
critically important. I do believe that we are on the cusp of
creating a series of new market opportunities that will provide
greater resiliency in the system, that will provide more income
opportunities for farmers, that will do right by the
environment, and I think will create jobs in rural places.
I think we need to seize this moment, and if confirmed, I
would hope that I could work with you and others on the
Committee to make that day happen. I think the President has
got the right vision of zero emission agriculture. I do believe
honestly that it will create enormous new opportunities and
allow the family farm, regardless of size, to stay in business
and to be able to pass it on to the next generation, which is
what I think most farmers are anxious to do.
Senator Braun. Thank you. I do look forward to working with
you on those three topics and others as well. Thank you.
Senator Boozman. Thank you.
Senator Gillibrand.
Senator Gillibrand. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Vilsack,
welcome again to this hearing. I consider you part native New
Yorker, having gone to school at Hamilton and Albany Law. I
hope that you will come and visit New York State as Agriculture
Secretary again. I think it would be very meaningful to a lot
of our producers.
One of the issues I wanted to touch upon is dairy. You know
that New York is No. 3 producing State for dairy in the
country. During this pandemic, and even over the last 10 years,
dairies, especially small, family owned dairies, have continued
to dwindle, and we have seen such extreme hardships that we
have seen bankruptcies and suicides in the dairy industry. It
is a vital interest of mine that we talk about how we can
reform dairy pricing.
You obviously headed a large dairy organization since 2017,
and mid- and small-sized dairy farms will need to know that you
will also be able to look out for them. What assurances can you
give these dairies? Can you please elaborate specifically on
how you intend to help them?
Mr. Vilsack. Senator, I think first and foremost we talked
a little bit about the local and regional food system. I think
there are terrific opportunities for small- and mid-sized dairy
operations to take advantage of being able to sell locally, to
be able to negotiate prices, to be able to also potentially get
assistance and help from the USDA, to create small processing
facilities where they can convert their product into something
more value-added instead of shipping it to a processing
facility where it is value-added someplace else. There are
examples of that. I think there are ways in which we can
provide help and assistance.
I think there are ways in which we can encourage from farm
to school. You know, obviously, in addition to fluid milk
products, there are other products that could potentially be
purchased by a school that is being locally produced and
creating more market opportunities. That is one.
Two, I think what is interesting, you mentioned the milk
marketing system, very complicated, very confusing, very
difficult to understand. One of potentially a number of issues
you could raise about that is that it does not take into
consideration the value that comes from exports. More and more
milk is, in fact, being, if you will, exported in the form of
powder and cheese and so forth around the world. One out of
every seven, one out of every six tankers of milk actually gets
exported. The value of that is not factored into the price
[inaudible] and it needs to be. I do not--you know, I think
that there are ways in which we can work together to make sure
that that process as it unfolds provides a better price for the
farmers, a fairer price that takes into consideration all that
is being currently done with--
Senator Gillibrand. Yes. I think it also needs to actually
take into account the cost of production and what that is
regionally, because many times the reimbursement rate is below
the cost of production. Different parts of the country have
different costs of production. We do not want agriculture for
anyone--fruit, vegetable, dairy product--to be regionalized
because we know that ag should always be looked at through a
national security lens. When trace elements of nuclear fallout
material was found in dairies in California, that raised a huge
alarm because of a nuclear fallout incident in Japan. We want
to make sure that we do not lose areas of the country that are
committed to production because our formulas do not work for
everybody. I would just urge you to work with me on a really
fulsome review of how that milk pricing takes place.
The second issue I would like to talk about is nutrition.
Obviously, the pandemic has left millions of families without a
source of income, and many have turned to Federal programs like
WIC and SNAP for the first time along with pandemic EBT. The
USDA has given many flexibilities and waivers to States to
operate these programs efficiently through the pandemic, making
it easier for Americans to apply for those benefits and getting
more families to be able to feed their hungry kids. Clearly,
much more needs to be done, so I wanted to know what actions
you will take as Secretary to support these programs to further
alleviate the strain. Can you speak to the importance of the P-
EBT program? Do you believe that Congress should permanently
authorize this program?
Mr. Vilsack. Senator, one of the first things we need to be
able to do is to provide the resources that you all voted on
and provided for States to be distributed. I think it is $100
million of assistance to encourage more help at the State
level. A lot of the implementation of these programs occurs at
the State level, so I think it is important for us to provide
the resources so that the States can do a better job, provide
clarity and flexibility so States can do a better job. I think
the Secretary of Agriculture needs to work very directly with
Governors to make sure that it is a priority of every single
Governor, because, frankly, sometimes it is not. Sometimes they
leave it up to their human services folks to take care of these
programs. They need to be engaged personally to make sure that
folks understand it is a priority that these nutrition
assistance programs are available to people, they are
accessible to people, they easily qualify for folks, and that
the benefits get to them.
Second--
Senator Gillibrand. Keep going.
Mr. Vilsack. Second, the reality is we need to figure out
ways in which these benefits can be conveniently used,
especially in the face of a pandemic. I mean, it is all well
and good to give somebody a SNAP card and say, ``Go to your
local grocery store and buy more food.'' That is great,
assuming you have a grocery store. If you do not have a grocery
store, then what? Are there ways in which with the online work,
the restaurants that are closed, is there a way of
incorporating them in an effort to get resources and food? How
do we bolster the capacity of food banks and pantries by
investing in their infrastructure? They are a significant asset
here. They are underutilized because they do not have the
capacity to store or refrigerate. I mean, there are a multitude
of ways in which we need to work at USDA to make this system
much more robust and more resilient.
You mentioned WIC--
Senator Gillibrand. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. My time is
up, and I want to just tell you I have two questions I am
adding to the record for you to answer in your free time. One
is related to food stamps and other programs, about nutrition,
and the second one is about the food supply chain. We have had
horrible disruption because of COVID. I will submit those for
the record so I do not abuse my time and take too much.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary, and you can also finish your--or
Mr. Soon-to-be Secretary, you can finish your answer on that
also in writing.
Senator Gillibrand. Thank you.
Senator Boozman. Senator Thune.
Okay. Senator Thune is having technical problems. Are we
going to resolve those?
Yes, he is not on. I know the Secretary will be glad to
take Senator Thune's call if he has got some questions he would
like to ask.
Secretary Vilsack, thank you so much for your willingness
to be considered for service to agriculture and rural America
as Secretary of Agriculture. This Committee has a history of
working in a bipartisan fashion while crafting legislation and
considering nominations. In that spirit, Secretary Vilsack has
agreed to expedite his responses to Committee members'
questions for the record. As a result of that, as a result of
his cooperation and the Senate Committee's, our Committee's
cooperation, as a result later today we will hold a business
meeting in conjunction with floor votes at a site off the floor
of the Senate. The purpose of the business meeting will be to
consider the nomination of Secretary Vilsack. Normally that is
done 48 hours later, but, again, because of the circumstances
and because we were able to agree to do that, we are going to
do this as quickly as possible.
I am going to yield to Senator Thune, who has solved his
technical problems. You thought you were off the hook,
Secretary Vilsack, but you have got one more. Senator Thune.
[No response.]
Senator Boozman. We are working on it.
[Pause.]
Senator Boozman. Are you there, Senator Thune? Can you hear
us?
The Clerk. Got it. Just one second.
Senator Boozman. These are the trials and tribulations of
COVID times.
[Pause.]
Senator Boozman. Okay. Well, again, as I said earlier, I
know, Secretary Vilsack, that you are quite willing and able
and want to talk to and followup with Senator Thune, so that
should not be a problem at all.
I ask members to submit any additional questions you may
have for the record to the Committee Clerk by 5 p.m. today,
Tuesday, February 2nd. The nominee has agreed to respond
promptly and completely. In addition, the record will remain
open for five business days for members to submit a statement
or additional materials.
Again, I thank everybody today--
Senator Thune. Mr. Chairman.
Senator Boozman [continuing]. for their time today and--
Senator Thune. Mr. Chairman.
Senator Boozman. Yes, Senator Thune.
Senator Thune. Can I get in very quickly here?
Senator Boozman. You can jump in, and then as soon as you
are done, we will just bang the gavel, and we will be out of
here.
Senator Thune. All right. My apology. I was juggling
multiple meetings.
Senator Boozman. We understand.
Senator Thune. Let me just very quickly, Secretary Vilsack,
thank you for your willingness to serve again and welcome back
to the Senate Ag Committee.
Let me just touch on a couple of things that I talked to
you about already, but that I would like to have you speak to
on the record, and some of it has been covered by some of my
colleagues. One of them has to do with volatility in the cattle
market and integrity in that market.
There are a lot of concerns out there about potential
manipulation, market manipulation, lack of competition among
meat packers, and as Senator Grassley pointed out, there are
four packers who have 80 percent of the processing capacity in
the country. I would like to get your thoughts on, if
confirmed, what actions you would take to strengthen the
integrity of the cattle market, your views on packers and
stockyards, and what ideas you might have to address the
consolidation issue. I know I am getting a lot of questions
into one there. Then if you could segue into country-of-origin
labeling, an issue which has already, again, been covered, but
one that continues to be an incredibly important issue to many
producers in South Dakota; your views on the COOL rulings, if
confirmed, you know, whether you would be willing to work with
us and my staff on finding a path forward, preferably a WTO-
compliant path, on COOL to help address the concerns of South
Dakota producers.
That is a lot in one question, but if you could just kind
of give us your views on that, and if we do not get to cover it
all, I can cover it in a followup question for the record.
Mr. Vilsack. Senator, to sort of work in reverse, I am
happy to work with you and your staff on anything that would
allow us to advance country-of-origin labeling. As you know, we
tried. WTO basically suggested that we had not succeeded. If
there is a way to get it to be WTO-compliant, I would be more
than happy to work with you and look forward to that.
As it relates to packers and stockyards, we are going to
look at every vehicle that we have, every capacity we have
within USDA to make sure that we have open, fair, and
transparent markets, where we have appropriate price discovery,
where we have the data and the economic analysis that allows us
to determine whether or not there is a problem in the market,
and if there is, using the tools that we have to try to provide
greater competition, greater openness, greater transparency,
greater fairness.
I think there are ways in which we could also expand
significantly processing opportunities in this country so that
we are not overly reliant on a small number of processors. I
think we saw the penalty of that, if you will, during COVID. It
is not the last time we are going to have COVID-type situations
and major disruptions. We need to make sure we are prepared to
make the system more resilient, and that means having more
capacity.
I would also look to work closely with the Department of
Justice to determine whether or not they see reasons for
additional action on their behalf, and we will certainly work
collaboratively with them. I suggested the opportunity for the
re-creation of the task force that was established sometime
ago, potentially expanding the membership of that task force in
a way that would give us the best opportunity to evaluate.
These are not easy cases. They are not easy issues to
resolve. I think there are a multitude of things that we can
take and steps we can take to help producers to have greater
confidence in the market.
Senator Thune. Well, we look forward to working with you on
those because there is a lot of skepticism out there right now
that an actual free market exists, and so we will continue to
work with you.
Let me ask a quick question here. President Biden and some
of the other Cabinet noms have not been shy about their desire
to invest heavily in electric vehicles, in EVs. We believe
biofuels like ethanol and biodiesel can achieve significant
near-term greenhouse gas reductions using the existing consumer
fleet, vehicle fleet, and a majority of existing fuel
infrastructure. There was a recent Harvard study that found
that the average greenhouse gas reduction of ethanol over
gasoline is 46 percent, with some producers achieving as high
as 61 percent life-cycle reductions.
If confirmed, how will you help leverage the farm economy
and biofuels as part of the administration's climate agenda?
More specifically, how will you provide parity--or I should say
will you provide parity for biofuel blending infrastructure
with respect to EV funding?
Mr. Vilsack. Senator, we are going to look for ways in
which we can encourage and incent and continue to support the
biofuel industry, whether it is utilizing the existing program
that Secretary Perdue established and getting those resources
out the door, whether it is taking a look at the COVID relief
packages and determining whether or not there are ways in which
the industry can be helped today for difficulties they have
experienced during COVID, or whether it is directly working
with my colleagues at EPA to make sure that the Renewable Fuel
Standard is followed, that we do not grant waivers liberally to
entities that do not need them, so that we continue to have a
market.
I think we can make the case, should make the case, and
will make the case that there is a role to play for biofuels in
climate, in reduction of emissions. I think there is a role for
the biofuel industry to play as it relates to marine and
aviation fuel as well. I think there is a terrific opportunity
there. I think there is a role for the biofuel industry to play
in terms of fleet maintenance. We are not going to convert--
there will not be enough electric vehicles to convert all of
that fleet in a relatively short period of time. Obviously,
there is going to be a fairly significant transition.
I mentioned earlier that I am the owner of a 2006 Ford
Focus. I do not think I am any different than a lot of
Americans. They are going to continue to maintain and own those
cars. GM, Ford, they are going to continue to make those cars.
We have to have a fuel system that supplies those cars, and we
might as well have a biofuel system that supplies those cars,
because it is about jobs, it is about income stability for
farmers, it is about better environmental and it is about more
competition for your transportation dollars, and consumers
benefit, and we reduce our reliance on fossil fuels.
I think there are a lot of reasons why this administration
and future administrations will continue to be investing in the
biofuel industry.
Senator Thune. Okay. Thank you. Again, you are hitting all
the right themes there, and I look forward to working with you
on that issue.
I know, Mr. Chairman, my time has expired. I appreciate
your indulgence. I have a couple of questions I would like to
perhaps submit for the record.
Senator Thune. Mr. Secretary, thank you for being with us
today, and we will look forward to engaging you on this and
other issues that impact the economy and farm and ranch
country.
Thank you.
Senator Boozman. Thank you, Senator Thune, and with that, I
want to thank everyone for their time today. I believe that we
will have the confirmation vote between votes at 2:30. That is
my understanding. We look forward to that. With that, we are
adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 1 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
FEBRUARY 2, 2021
=======================================================================
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
=======================================================================
DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
FEBRUARY 2, 2021
=======================================================================
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
=======================================================================
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
FEBRUARY 2, 2021
=======================================================================
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]
File and source
- File
- CHRG_chrg-117shrg45388_chrg-117shrg45388.htm
- Size
- 148,755 bytes
- SHA-256
- 70f622d0139f1bf1d080ab8e9e48b4c097dab185e40ca8237fb64eae17032f14
- Original
- No public link identified.