HOT STUFF

International Agribusiness Consultants
Serving Clients World-Wide Since 1991

HOT STUFF

Monday, January 28, 2002 Steven Goldstein with the Cuba Policy Foundation

Cell (917) 449-8918

AMERICA’S FARMERS BEARING

HEAVY BURDEN FOR U.S. EMBARGO

AGAINST CUBA: NEW REPORT

The embargo’s cost to farmers? Up to $1.24 billion annually.

Agriculture-related costs to the entire U.S. economy?

Up to $3.6 billion more annually.

Chart of the top 20 states whose agriculture sectors are most

affected by the embargo: At the end of this release.

The chart includes numbers for each state.

Reagan and Clinton Ag Secretaries write President Bush today,

saying the report shows necessity of lifting the embargo

Monday, January 28, 2002, Washington - The U.S. economy is losing up to $1.24 billion annually in agricultural exports because of the embargo against Cuba - and up to $3.6 billion more annually in related economic output. That’s the finding of a new report by two of America’s top agricultural economists, released today by the Cuba Policy Foundation, the Washington-based organization led by senior diplomats in Republican Administrations.

“If the embargo were lifted, the average American farmer would feel a difference in his or her life within two to three years,” says the report’s co-author, C. Parr Rosson, professor of agricultural economics at Texas A&M University. The report, “Economic Impacts of U.S. Agricultural Exports to Cuba,” was written by professor Rosson and his colleague at Texas A&M, Flynn Adcock.

Based on the report, two former U.S. Secretaries of Agriculture, the Reagan Administration’s John Block and the Clinton Administration’s Dan Glickman, today wrote to President Bush: “Current U.S. policy has not given relief to the Cuban people. And now it's just as clear: Our policy is also harming American farmers during these tough economic times. Mr. President, the sooner we lift this failed embargo, the better.”

Today’s report ranks all U.S. states from 1 to 50 in terms of the potential impact of the embargo on their respective agricultural sectors. The subcategories include annual potential agricultural exports, and additional potential economic output stemming from the new agricultural exports.

An overview chart of the top 20 states, with dollar estimates in both categories, is included in this press release. Charts of all 50 states in a whole range of categories - including by commodity - is in the report itself.

The top 20 states are, in order: #1 Arkansas, #2 California, #3 Iowa, #4 Louisiana, #5 Texas, #6 Illinois, #7 Mississippi, #8 Minnesota, #9 Nebraska, #10 Missouri, #11 Kansas, #12 North Dakota, #13 North Carolina, #14 Washington State, #15 Indiana, #16 Georgia, #17 Florida, #18 South Dakota, #19 Ohio and #20 Alabama.

“With the numbers in today’s report,” said Ambassador Sally Grooms Cowal, president of the Cuba Policy Foundation, “I challenge the pro-embargo lobby to tell farmers that it’s right to make them bear the economic burden of a policy that has failed for 40 years. That argument won’t pass moral muster, and now it won’t pass political muster either - not when the farmers hurt most by the embargo are in states like California, Texas, Illinois and, of course, Iowa.

“Today’s report will accelerate the momentum on Capitol Hill, which is already significant, for changing U.S. policies toward Cuba,” Ambassador Cowal said. “These numbers are an economic and political double-whammy of a kind that the pro-embargo lobby has never faced before.”

The Cuba Policy Foundation, founded in early 2001, is a nonpartisan, decidedly centrist organization led by senior diplomats in Republican Administrations. The Cuba Policy Foundation believes changing U.S. policies toward Cuba would be in America’s national and economic interests, and would bring democratic reform to Cuba at last.

The president of the Cuba Policy Foundation, Ambassador Sally Grooms Cowal, spent 23 years in the U.S. Foreign Service working for a series of pro-embargo Republican presidents, beginning with President Nixon. She rose to become Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Latin America under first President Bush, who later appointed her Ambassador to Trinidad and Tobago. The chairman of the board of the Cuba Policy Foundation is William D. Rogers, Assistant Secretary of State for Latin America and Undersecretary of State for Economic Affairs under President Ford.

Top 20 states whose agricultural sectors are affected

by the U.S. embargo against Cuba

Source: Economic Impacts of U.S. Agricultural Exports to Cuba,

a report for the Cuba Policy Foundation by C. Parr Rosson and

Flynn Adcock, Professors of Agricultural Economics at

Texas A&M University, January 2002.

RANK	STATE	ANNUAL POTENTIAL AGRICULTURAL EXPORTS	ADDITIONAL POTENTIAL ECONOMIC OUTPUT STEMMING FROM NEW AGRICULTURAL EXPORTS
1	Arkansas	$167,263,000	$503,353,000
2	California	$98,119,000	$287,830,000
3	Iowa	$70,634,000	$206,012,000
4	Louisiana	$65,634,000	$187,037,000
5	Texas	$53,857,000	$162,501,000
6	Illinois	$52,939,000	$148,813,000
7	Mississippi	$50,932,000	$154,729,000
8	Minnesota	$45,880,000	$127,903,000
9	Nebraska	$40,843,000	$117,438,000
10	Missouri	$39,826,000	$116,280,000
11	Kansas	$38,770,000	$105,387,000
12	North Dakota	$37,771,000	$96,213,000
13	North Carolina	$31,097,000	$98,818,000
14	Washington	$29,326,000	$80,439,000
15	Indiana	$29,139,000	$82,109,000
16	Georgia	$28,743,000	$95,208,000
17	Florida	$28,554,000	$79,220,000
18	South Dakota	$25,998,000	$73,386,000
19	Ohio	$25,085,000	$68,790,000
20	Alabama	$22,382,000	$74,699,000

From the House Ag Committee

President's Farm Budget Commitment Solid
Ag Chairman Combest hails Bush support for ten-year $73.5 billion funding

December 21, 2001 – House Agriculture Committee Chairman Larry Combest issued the following statement after releasing a letter Friday from the President's Office of Management and Budget Director Mitch Daniels:

"President Bush has made an unquestionable commitment for producers, and the Senate must act to deliver a farm bill as soon as senators return in January."

The text of the December 21 letter to Agriculture Chairman Combest from OMB Director Mitch Daniels follows: (see a copy of the signed letter)

Dear Representative Combest:

Thank you very much for coming by the White House to talk to Secretary Card, Secretary Veneman, and me about the best way to proceed in producing a good, bipartisan farm bill that the President can sign into law early next year. The Administration appreciates your efforts this session on getting a strong, bipartisan farm bill through the Congress. As we discussed, the Administration shares your commitment to our nation's farmers and ranchers, and to generous funding for the farm bill.

The President has been very clear about the policy we need to build long-term prosperity for America's farmers and ranchers. A sound, bipartisan farm policy will provide a solid safety net for all farmers and ranchers, expand markets abroad for American agricultural products, and increase resource conservation in ways that enhance our environment. The President has also been clear about the need for a generous farm bill in order to help farmers and ranchers through this difficult period. As a result, you have our commitment that the Administration will continue to support additional ten-year program funding of $73.5 billion in accordance with the Congressional Budget Resolution.

It was regrettable that the Senate failed to reach the kind of bipartisan agreement that characterized the House action. We look forward to working with Congress early next year to produce a bipartisan final farm bill.

Sincerely yours,

Mitchell E. Daniels, Jr.
Director
Office of Management and Budget

Senate Presented with Path to Speedy Farm Bill Conclusion
Arkansas Senator Tim Hutchinson moves for vote on House-based bill

December 19, 2001 – House Agriculture Committee Chairman Larry Combest commended Arkansas Senator Tim Hutchinson for giving farmers a real prospect of getting a finalized farm bill this year by urging the Senate to pass the House-based farm bill. The Hutchinson provision already has the bi-partisan support of Senators who cosponsored the measure when it was introduced in the Senate November 9. Ag Chairman Combest noted the Hutchinson provision is more than 95 percent identical to the October 5th House-passed "Farm Security Act of 2001," and Senate passage of the Hutchinson provision is the only chance to finalize a farm bill this year.

"Senator Tim Hutchinson has worked for producers in a positive, practical manner each step of the way to move the Senate to completion of a farm bill, and today is holding forth a light for Senators on the path to a speedy conclusion of the farm bill," said Combest. "Farmers and their lenders need the certainty of a new farm bill as they prepare now for the coming crop year. Senators can do a lot to ease farmers' worries now and help our rural communities by passing the Hutchinson provision today."

Like the House-passed Farm Security Act, the bill introduced by Senators Hutchinson, Blanche Lincoln (D-AR), Jesse Helms (R-NC), Zell Miller (D-GA), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), and John Breaux (D-LA) not only provides for a strong safety net, but it maintains planting flexibility and avoids harmful market distortions. Also, like the House-passed bill, the option offered for Senate vote today complies with WTO commitments and with the Budget Resolution passed by Congress while increasing investment in conservation programs to the highest levels ever.

Ag Chairman Combest: House-passed farm bill is farmers' best option

December 14, 2001 – House Agriculture Committee Chairman Larry Combest (R-Texas) said Friday that with the still-unfinished Senate farm bill growing to nearly a thousand pages while the end of the year is growing near, the farmer's best option of seeing a finalized farm bill this year is to adopt the bi-partisan, broad-based "Farm Security Act" (H.R. 2646), passed by the House more than two months ago. Ag Chairman Combest noted the Senate has stopped voting on the farm bill until December 18, with the end of the year looming. The Senate's version is already 926 pages, compared with the 380-page House farm bill.

"We want to deliver a farm bill for America's farmers this year – that is why the House brought forward a balanced bipartisan farm bill on October 5, before the Senate got around to its version. Senate leaders now sound pessimistic on a final farm bill this year, while at the same time delaying votes until December 18. With time slipping away, the Senate should bring forward the House-passed Farm Security Act of 2001 as the only sure way for Congress to finalize a farm bill for the president to sign this year."