Increasing Demand and Opportunities for Homegrown Products Here and Abroad

The uh committee will come to order. Welcome and thank you for joining today's hearing entitled "Increasing demand and opportunities for homegrown products here and abroad." After opening remarks, members will receive testimony from our witnesses today, and then the hearing will be open to questions. So uh, once again good morning everyone, and thank you for joining us today as we discuss some of the agricultural programs policies and tools that we have at our disposal for enhancing demand of homegrown agricultural products, both here and across the world. Uh, thank you especially to the expert witnesses joining us today. We look forward to hearing your experiences and perspectives on this vital matter. Everything to we do in on this committee is tied to the principle of supporting American producers. I'm extremely proud of the work this committee has done over the last few years, and I'm grateful for those members on both sides of the aisle who stepped up on behalf the American producer. We passed the largest investment in American agriculture in a generation. Last summer we passed a farm bill from the House of Representatives in April and I look forward to the Senate upholding its end of the bargain soon. We also got the Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act signed into law and the House passed legislation to approve year-round E-fifteen sales. We've stepped up to the plate when economic assistance is needed. And most importantly, we have put thoughtful policies in place to build a stronger foundation for the farm economy over the long term. Uh, just next month producers will begin seeing the modernized commodity payments, which made possible by last summer's working families tax cuts bill. Outside of the agriculture title, this legislation also included historic tax savings for producers. Provisions such as estate tax relief, immediate expensing, and capital gains deferral on land transfers are all designed to keep farms and the family. and support the next generation of producers. The House Committee on Agriculture has done its job in the hundred and nineteenth Congress and I look forward to continuing this work through the end of the year and beyond. Supporting the American producers is inherently linked to the idea of increasing demand largely because American producers are so good at what they do. Over the last hundred years we have seen total farm output in the US triple. Thanks to innovation, investment and the hard work of American producers, our country yields far more agricultural products than we could ever consume at home, even in years of lower harvests. This dramatic increase in supply leaves both producers and lawmakers with different challenges and opportunities that must be addressed. From a national security perspective, American agricultural abundance is one of the greatest assets we have as a nation. Food security is national security, and the simple fact that our farmers and ranchers more than provide for our citizens is a strength, not a disadvantage, and we should all re- all remember that. Even still, American producers need demand to match this exceptional supply. Our policy tools must advance alongside the innovations that have enabled our producers to create a stunning rise in productivity. This has been a guiding principle of this committee. And I'm proud to see this take shape in the policy that we've championed over the last several years. Last summer through the passage of the working family's tax cuts, Congress more than doubled the funding allocated for trade export promotion programs. These are programs that work hard to get American agriculture products on shelves around the world. And this was a state of priority of nearly every single member of this committee on both sides of the aisle. This legislation also included increased funding for technical assistance for specialty crop programs, which helps producers navigate non-tariff trade barriers that threaten the export of US specialty crops. The bipartisan spirit of funding these programs was carried into the Farm Food and National Security Act of two thousand twenty six which included over one hundred bipartisan pieces of legislation within it many of which are focused on increasing demand for homegrown ag products. One of these is the Wood Innovation Grants program, which invests in projects uh producing new and innovative forest products such as wood pellets and mass timber. When foresters have more flexibility in what product can can uh bring to market, their potential for sustainable revenue growth increases dramatically both at home and abroad. Another program we strengthened in the new farm bill is the Bio-preferred program, which works to increase the development and purchase and use of bio-based products, which include everything from biofuels to construction materials to fertilizer. This plays a significant role in expanding markets and creating new revenue streams for American producers. There are also important policy levers available that fall outside of this committee's jurisdiction, such as the Buying American Cotton Act, which would use tax incentives to encourage greater use of US grown cotton and finished products sold to American consumers. While this falls under the jurisdiction of the Ways and Means Committee, I look forward to hearing our witnesses today speak on the potential impact that this proposed legislation would have on American producers. I'm uh well aware that times are tough in the farm economy today. It is a situation that has been years in the making and farmers are feeling the pain. While Congress and the administration have provided us some short-term relief, it's important that we do not lose sight of the policies that can provide for a durable long-term recovery. Again, thank you to each of our witnesses for taking the time out of your busy schedules to join us and share your perspectives on this critical topic of increasing long-term de- demand for American producers with that I now yield to the ranking member, Craig, of uh for her opening remarks.

Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. Uh, good morning to our witnesses. Uh, I wanna begin simply by thanking you for being here today and for being, uh, such great, uh, stalwart supporters of the American farmer. We're here to discuss creating opportunities for America's farm families. I firmly believe that Congress and the current administration should do more to expand market opportunities at home and abroad for American agriculture. For example, and I know I sound like a broken record on this point, making simple policy reforms like allowing year-round E-fifteen would be a big help to the farmers that I represent in Minnesota. The truth is, though, that this administration can't seem to get out of its own way. Earlier this Congress, Republicans and Democrats worked hard to get E-fifteen included in an omnibus appropriations package. only to have that effort fail once again. The administration destroyed USAID, which in previous years purchased roughly two billion dollars worth of US grown agricultural products annually. The administration cancelled the previous administration's programs that resulted in per purchases of food from local farmers for schools and communities. And the Trump administration More recently sold out American cattlemen by prioritizing three hundred thousand metric tons of Argentinian and Brazilian beef, even as our ranchers struggle to rebuild the US herd. The president's governed-by-tweet approach has rattled cattle markets with small producers selling calves at three hundred to four hundred dollars less than they were just a few months ago. That's money taken farmers and handed to our foreign competitors, not exactly America first. Congressional Republicans cut a hundred and eighty-seven billion dollars in nutrition assistance throwing millions of American citizens off SNAP including more than one point five million children, resulting in less American food being bought and more hungry Americans. That represents about twenty-five billion dollars in lost revenue for family farmers. The administration cancelled funding to help young and beginning farmers acquire farmland so they could get into farming. The president declared a worldwide trade war. The American Farm Bureau calculates losses due to Trump's tariffs to be around thirty billion dollars for the twenty-five, twenty-six crop year. And that's before he threw the latest trade grenade at Canada, one of our largest trading partners. Now, I know that a number of my colleagues on the dais today can't Criticizer complained many of the policies that I also know they don't support. The administration began a war with Iran that sent the cost of fertilizer and fuel to record highs. Farm diesel is at six dollars and thirty-one cents per gallon as of this morning. I could go on and on and on, but at some point the chairman would probably ask me to stop. The result of all these actions are lost opportunities and higher costs for farmers. Consequently, Americans' uh America's farm country is in a crisis. Fifteen thousand farms were lost just last year, according to USDA's own data. Farm production expenses are forecasted to increase by seven point one billion dollars this year. Farm bankruptcies were up seventy percent in the Midwest over the past year. The administration brags about reducing the ag trade deficit, but it's not because farmers are exporting more. It's because Americans are importing less because they cannot afford Trump's tariffs. So I say again, if we wanna create opportunities instead of closing them out of markets and putting a bull's-eye on their backs with tariffs and trade wars maybe the administration should start by getting out of its own way. When you're in a hole this deep, the first step to getting out is to stop digging. I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today who represent a wide range of perspectives I hope to hear an honest assessment, not only about what proactive, positive things can be done to improve demand for their products, but also what this administration should stop doing that undercuts those opportunities. I'll conclude with one final statistic, which I think speaks for itself. USDA expects direct government farm payouts will increase by nearly seventy percent this year. If the president or the country was winning, like he says we are, farmers would need seventy percent more government payouts this year than last year. They would be getting it from the marketplace like they want. Trump is running up a tab that hardworking Americans cannot afford. Congress must start standing up for farmers and stop giving the president a free pass at the expense of farm country. With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.

I thank the General Lady, the Chair would request that other members submit their opening statements for the record so the witnesses may begin their testimony and to ensure, that there's ample time for questions. Our first witness today is the Honorable Alexis Taylor, the Chief Global Policy Officer at the International Fresh Produce Association. Prior to this role she served as the Under-Secretary of Agriculture for Trade and Foreign Agriculture Affairs. Our next witness is Mister Patrick Johnson. a farmer in Tunica, Mississippi. Our third witness today is Mr. Carlyle Currier, the president of the Colorado Farm Bureau. Our next witness is Dr. Alex Buck, the chairman of the board of the Plant Based Products Council. Our fifth witness is Mr. Tyler Shields, uh the chief operating officer of the Bingaman and Son Lumber Incorporated. And our final witness today is Mr. Chad Franke, the President of the Rocky Mountain Farmers Union. Thank you to all for joining us today and we're now gonna proceed to your testimony. You each have five minutes. Uh the timer in front of you will count down to zero at which time your point, at which point your time has expired. Under Secretary Taylor, please begin when you're ready.

Thank you. Good morning, Chair Thompson, Ranking Member Craig, and members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today and for holding this hearing to better understand the issues that are critical to the future of American agriculture. As was mentioned, my name is Alexis Taylor. I'm the Chief Global Policy Officer at the International Fresh Produce Association. IFPA proudly represents growers, shippers, distributors, retailers, and food service providers across the fresh produce and floral supply chain. They feed American families, support two million jobs, and contribute more than three hundred and thirty-five billion dollars to the US economy each year. American specialty crop growers have faced a convergence economic pressures over the over the past several years. Input, regulatory, and labor costs have all risen sharply, while farm returns have not kept pace. And these challenges are amplified for specialty crops, which are uniquely labor-intensive and often have limited ability to absorb input cost increases because of their perishable nature. A strong specialty crop sector requires more than productive farms. It requires profitable markets, growing consumer demand, and the ability to compete. For growers that means connecting American production with consumers at home and market opportunities abroad. In the short term, IFPA and the Specialty Crop Farm Bill Alliance are calling on Congress to provide dedicated economic assistance of no less than five billion dollars for specialty crop growers. But the amount of assistance is only part of the equation. Program structure matters just as much. Assistance should be based on actual sales losses, not acreage, to provide a more accurate measure economic harm across a sector with widely varying crops, costs, and market values. This committee took an important step in the farm bill to establish a framework for specialty crop assistance, but stronger language is needed to require this framework to be used. Beyond the immediate need, labor reform would provide critical long-term support for the sector. The H two A program has not been meaningfully updated in decades, which is why IFPA strongly support Chairman Thompson's securing agriculture's Thank you, Chair Thompson, for your leadership on this issue. Beyond these improvements in the long-term viability of the specialty crop sector, Congress also has powerful tools at its disposal to d increase demand for fresh produce here at home. Today, nine out of ten Americans fall far short of the recommended fruit and vegetable intake levels. Strengthening federal nutrition programs to ensure they provide consistent access to fresh fruits and vegetables will not only in uh help Americans improve their through better diets, it also strengthens domestic markets for American farmers. To meet this opportunity, we need systematic solutions to make it easier for everyone to choose fresh fruits and vegetables. This includes fully funding the WIC fruit and vegetable benefit, and modernizing USTA's procurement to prioritize produce. And because convenience and trust drives what people buy, investing in reliable, efficient supply chains, and in maintaining confidence in the safety of fresh produce, deeply matters as well. Finally, we need to preserve access to key trading partners and open real opportunities abroad to strengthen the competitiveness of the US produce industry the US exports over seven billion dollars in fresh fruits, vegetables and florals each year, but our growers face real barriers to competing. Tariffs on critical ag inputs raise costs to farmers who are already economically strained and create uncertainty that makes planning difficult. Non-tariff barriers like shifting pesticide residue limits and unsan uh unscientific sanitary and phytosanitary requirements can shut American products out of foreign markets entirely. Trade also plays an important role in maintaining year-round access to affordable fruits and vegetables for consumers, while also creating new opportunities for American growers abroad. Continued federal investment in market development programs such as TASK, MAP, and FMD provide US growers and businesses with critical tools to address trade barriers and expand export opportunities. Congress has a vital role to play in easing the pressures facing specialty crop growers strengthening their competitiveness and growing demand for American fruits vegetables and florals these are not separate objectives when we invest in nutrition reinforce consumer confidence expand ma- markets at home and abroad we create a stronger demand and a stronger future for US specialty crop producers on behalf of the

Under Secretary Taylor, thank you so much for your your testimony. Mister Johnson, please begin when you're ready.

Chairman Thompson, Ranking Member Craig, and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify here today. My name is Patrick Johnson and I'm a partner in Cypress a family farming operation in Tunica, Mississippi, where we grow cotton, rice, corn, soybeans and wheat. While recent years have been very difficult, let me first state that I'm enormously grateful for all of the things that Congress, USDA and the Trump administration have done to help producers. But significant challenges remain. In the Mississippi Delta, Producers like me are facing the fourth consecutive year with input costs that exceed market prices. Additional short-term assistance is important, but the long-term sustainability of our operation depends on building stronger markets and increasing demand for the crops we grow. In the case of cotton, nothing would be more beneficial to me than the passage of the Buying American Cotton Act or BACA. Under BACA, items fully manufactured in the United States or imported in the U uh into the US would qualify for a tax credit based on the level of US cotton content and US-based processing. Higher credit values would apply to US cotton items produced entirely in the US or in countries with which the US has a free trade agreement or preferential trade program. The opportunities are enormous. American consumers currently purchase about eighteen million bales worth of cotton products each year, of which about four million bales worth of goods contain US cotton. Baca is designed to close that gap and turn the purchasing power of the American consumer into demand for US grown fiber. In addition, the bill would reorient Cotton supply chains by incentivizing manufacturing in the US and with our partners in this hemisphere. BACA is common sense legislation. It is no surprise that congressional support for the bill continues to grow. So far the House legislation has the backing of nearly a hundred cosponsors from both sides of the aisle, stretching uh across the country from California to Maine. In fact, only one other bipartisan tax introduced in this Congress has more co-sponsors. Cotton farmers will also benefit from increased consumer awareness of the virtues of choosing natural fibers over synthetic alternatives. Last year the cotton industry launched the Plant Not Plastic campaign to educate consumers on the environmental harm and adva adverse health impacts caused by micro-plastics from polyester clothing and textiles. So far this camp campaign has reached tens of millions of US consumers. Because cotton is not the only commodity I produce, I'm also encouraged by the increasing support for the Grown in America Act, which would establish a tax credit to incentivize the purchase of US grown crops including rice. The legislation's twenty-five percent tax credit would apply to qualifying businesses including farmer cooperatives, based on the value of the commodities purchased from US growers that are used in domestic manufacturing of food and beverage products. Passage of the Grown in America Act would boost demand here at home, where producers can realise more of the value of their crop, while generating greater economic activity and jobs in our rural communities. Reducing our dependence on foreign markets would also decrease volatility and ease supply chain pressures. Both BACA and the Grown in America Act share the same goal and are parallel in purpose, even though the mechanics of the two bills differ to meet the unique needs of each supply chain. Both bills are essential and I hope that Congress will move to pass these pieces of legislation before the end of the year. We must work to bring our cotton and rice markets back to profitable level levels and strengthen domestic demand. Thank you again for the opportunity to testify, and I look forward to your questions.

Mr. Johnson, thanks so much for your testimony. Much appreciated. Mr. Currier, uh please begin when you're ready.

Good morning, Chairman Thompson, Ranking Member Craig and members of the committee. My name is Carlisle Currier and I serve as President of Colorado Farm Bureau. I'm also here today representing the American Farm Bureau Federation. I want to thank you for the opportunity to join I live and ranch in Colorado's western slope in the rural community of Plateau Valley, home to around fourteen hundred residents. Ranching is the lifeblood of our community, sustaining families like mine since the eighteen eighties. My son Joel is the fifth generation on our ranch. Joel and I raise beef cattle and ship calves in the fall when they come off our US Forest Service permit at around six to seven hundred pounds. Our beef is fed, finished, and enters the supply chain for consumers. Like many other businesses, an ranching return is tied to demand. The return on my investment in my own herd is forever tied to consumer demand for American beef. As an aging rancher, I often run calculations as to how tax liabilities impact today's bottom line and tomorrow's next generation ownership. Fortunately, Congress fortified long-term capital investment into the beef industry by making permanent critical tax provisions in the one big beautiful bill act passed last summer. Provisions like permanent estate tax exemptions and business income deductions will enable farmers to invest back into our businesses encouraging herd rebuilding and empower empowering succession planning. Ranching in the west comes with many challenges. I'd like to thank the committee for including necessary updates to the Livestock Forage Program or LFP, the Livestock Endemony Program, and vitally important animal health programs. Because of these changes, ranchers who experienced a day two or greater drought for more than four weeks are eligible for LFP. More importantly, LIP will now cover unborn livestock losses. Nothing helps a cattle rancher more than strong demand, fair and free trade, and a consistent marketplace. Recently, producers have been receiving record prices for their cattle. This is due in part to the closure of the Mexican border because the New World's crew warm, persistent drought, and ranchers exiting the business while cattle prices are at record levels. These factors and others have led to the lowest cattle numbers in the United States in many decades. We greatly appreciate American consumers' unwavering demand for beef, and we are acutely aware of the sensitivity surrounding the cost of it at a grocery store. Ranchers are no different. Numerous products essential to our operations have also increased in price. The fact remains that the price consumers are paying for beef in the store are the result of supply and demand I'm not alone when I say I was caught off guard by the recent decision to waive the tariff rate quotas on three hundred thousand metric tons of lean beef trimmings for ninety days since the announcement cattle prices have dropped fifteen percent which equates to three to four hundred dollars per head. Furthermore, this is happening when most ranchers are selling their spring calves. To put it simply, the timing of this announcement could not have been worse. I mentioned earlier about premiums. There is no better premium than the USA label. We are thankful that the President and his administration are continuing the voluntary product of the USA label that was proposed and finalized under his predecessor. This vol voluntary label can create increased opportunities for ranchers like me, to capture additional premiums within the market. Under the twenty twenty-six standards and criteria for the voluntary labor, label the Trump administration empowered Americans, producers and consumers alike, to leverage the power of the free market. While consumers often face stick or stock at the grocery store, prices have not discouraged consumers from purchasing muscle cuts of beef. In fact, demand has increased year over year. The improved quality of beef has kept demand strong. Suffice to say, consumers around the world cannot get enough the high quality beef produced by American ranchers. We must continue to pursue open trade opportunities that allow us to supplement our country's demand for beef. Producing high quality American beef and bolstering the market for primal cuts as center plate proteins equips producers to capitalize on premier retail opportunities that are expanding like never before. Durable policy decisions have long been the hallmark of federal egg policy, that has provided much needed sustainability for ranchers in their communities. It is legislation like the Farm Bill that has provided the framework for farm economies and our local food system. As both a rancher and a consumer, I c- certainly recognize that we must carefully balance producers' bottom lines with the for-real affordability of our nation's food supply. Reactionary policy decisions often cause unrealized turbulence rather than realized gain. Thank you for having me here today, and I'm happy to answer any questions the committee may have.

Mr. Currier, thank you so much for your testimony. Uh, Doctor Buck, please begin when you're ready.

Chairman Thompson, Ranking Member Craig, and members of the House Agricultural Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify on this important topic. It's my first time testifying to before Congress and I'm honored to appear before you as the Chairman of the Plant-based Products Council. In addition, I serve as the Director of Industrial Innovation, at the Iowa Corn Growers Association where I direct research and business development projects on behalf of Iowa's corn farmers. The Plant-based Products Council, or PBPC, represents businesses large and small that contribute to the bio-economy supply chain, including farmers, feedstock processors, manufacturers, and companies that use plant-based products. As a feedstock agnostic organization, we are dedicated to policies that expand consumer-driven markets for plant-based products, and advance the adoption of renewable plant-based materials for uses beyond food and fuel. Some plant-based products already on the market today include power tool lubricants, soaps and shampoos, construction materials, textiles, and lightweight packaging to name just a few of the thousands of products on the market today. As a PHD chemist, but more importantly as a husband and a father, I trust plant-based products and use them every day in my home. PVPC launched its annual consumer research program in twenty twenty to better understand how Americans view plant-based products and the broader transition to renewable materials. In twenty twenty five, eighty-six percent of consumers said they are likely to purchase or use plant-based products within the next three months. Plant-based products are no longer a hypothetical market. Consumers increasingly see these products as everyday options, creating demand for farmers and others across the supply chain. PBPC's research also shows more than seventy-two percent of consumers say they support federal laws including tax breaks that would incentivize the build-out of the American ag bio-economy as demand for bio-based products grows, so does demand for the corn, soybeans, wheat, and other crops used to produce them. Every new bio-based product represents a new customer for America's farmers. By supporting the bioeconomy, Congress can help ensure that agricultural production remains connected to a diverse and growing range of markets in the United States. The bipartisan, bicameral, Bio-manufacturing and Jobs Act would strengthen USDA's support for bio-based products, and help modernize federal policies that support market growth. And we appreciate the Ag Committee's leadership to include provisions of this legislation in the House-passed farm bill. Among its provisions, the legislation would modernize USDA's bio-preferred program, and improve federal procurement opportunities for bio-based products. The legislation would also enhance data collection and market visibility, and establish more consistent terminology for bio-based products. Additionally, the bipartisan, bicameral, agricultural, bio-refinery, innovation, and opportunity act, or the AgBio act, would greatly strengthen and improve USDA's bio-refinery, renewable chemical, and Bio-based Product Manufacturing Assistance, also known as section section nine thousand and three. We are again appreciative of Chairman Thompson and the committee's leadership on this issue and glad to see many of these provisions also included in the House Farm Bill language. Simply put, we cannot win the global race for bio-manufacturing if American innovations must leave the United States to scale. The US has world-class farmers, abundant agricultural feedstocks, and outstanding research and innovation. However, we need stronger incentives to ensure that those advantages translate into domestic bio-manufacturing investment. The bipartisan bio-based materials investment and production act would offer tax incentives to expand production capacity for plant-based products in the United States. Let's export valuable plant-based materials, not jobs and technology. The agricultural bio-economy offers an opportunity to expand markets for farmers, create jobs in rural communities, Strengthen domestic manufacturing, improve global competitiveness competitiveness and enhance national security through a stronger domestic bio-manufacturing base. On behalf of the Plant-based Products Council, thank you for holding this important hearing on new markets and the opportunities they create for American agriculture. Thank you for the opportunity to testify, and I'd be pleased to answer any questions.

Doctor Buck, thank you so much for your testimony. Mister Shields, please begin when you're ready.

Chairman Thompson, Ranking Member, and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. My name is Tyler Shields and I serve as Chief Operating Officer of Bingaman and Sun Lumber, a third generation family-owned hardwood products manufacturer headquartered in Pennsylvania. Our company operates five facilities across the Commonwealth and purchases green lumber from more than a hundred and twenty-five saw mills throughout Pennsylvania and neighboring states. We produce a full range of hardwood products. from logs and lumber to chips, pulpwood, and value-added products, serving customers in more than forty states and thirty-five countries, generating more than seventy-five million in annual sales. Today, I come before you as a proud member of an industry facing significant challenges. US hardwood lumber production has fallen from twelve billion board feet in two thousand to roughly four billion board feet in twenty, twenty-five, driven largely by low-cost imports and substitute products, Hundreds of rural saw mills and pulp mills have closed as a result, and in just the last five years the industry has lost more than forty thousand jobs. Despite these challenges, I believe our industry remains optimistic about the future of American hardwoods, because we understand a simple truth. Americans are deeply connected to their forests, and healthy forests are only possible when strong, reliable wood products markets make active management economically feasible. Well-structured federal programs and policies can help rebuild demand for American wood products, while supporting our rural economies and forest health. Federal innovation programs already demonstrate what's possible. Efforts like the Farm Builds, Wood Innovation and Community Wood Grant program help manufacturers modernize equipment adopt advanced technologies, and bring new value-added hardwood products to market. Bingaman is proud to be Pennsylvania's first manufacturer of thermally modified hardwood lumber and we are now a partner in advancing emerging, hardwood, mass timber applications. With assistance from the USDA and the US Forest Service, we've invested over twenty million dollars in modernizing our material handling systems expanding kiln drying capacity and implementing AI-enabled lumber inspection technology. These investments have improved our efficiencies, addressed workforce challenges, and strengthened our ability to remain resilient in rapidly changing global markets. But innovation only reaches its full potential when paired with strong reliable markets, and that's where federal policy plays a critical role. Federal procurement is one of the most direct tools available. When federal agencies build, renovate, or furnish facilities, American hardwoods should be prioritized. This aligns with recommendations advanced by the National Hardwood Lumber Association, sets an example for state, local, and institutional investment, and ensures loc- taxpayer dollars support domestic hardwood manufacturers, our forest landowners, and our rural communities. A targeted tax incentive would further strengthen demand and encourage broader adoption of sustainable domestically produced wood products. Wood innovation grants that strengthen the Real American Hardwood Coalition boost consumer and specifier aw- demand and awareness while abroad the American Hardwood Export Council funded through the USDA's Market Access and Foreign Market Development program expands markets reduces trade barriers and grows global demand for American hardwoods. Research investments should be increased and coupled with a stronger results-driven commercialization strategy to accelerate the transfer of promising forest products laboratory innovations into marketable products. Workforce development also remains essential. Programs like the Jobs in the Woods Act and the RISE program will support training models shaped by employers responsive to modern skill demands and capable of preparing workers for the full forest product supply chain. Bioenergy and renewable fuel markets offer another opportunity to create demand for low grade wood mill residuals and forest restoration material. Updating the renewable fuel standard to allow woody biomass from public and private lands to qualify as RIN eligible feedstock will create exciting new renewable fuel markets while supporting forest resilience. However, as we work to strengthen those long-term foundations, short-term stability also matters. The proposed twelve billion dollar agricultural relief package includes two hundred million dollars designated for hardwood manufacturers. This will provide critical short-term support to businesses as they continue to navigate economic uncertainty. We appreciate the Hardwood Federation and Chairman Thompson's leadership in ensuring hardwoods were included in this package and look forward to its passage. A stronger future for the American hardwood industry depends on vibrant, well-functioning markets that reward innovation, support existing infrastructure, sustain our rural communities, and keep forest landowners engaged and the active management our forests desperately need. Thank you to the committee for your leadership on these issu- issues, your support of rural manufacturing, and your commitment to America's working forests. I look forward to your questions.

Thank you. Mister Frank, your, Frankie, your may begin your testimony when ready, please.

OK. Mister uh Mister Chairman, Ranking Member Craig, and members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. My name is Chad Franke and I serve as President of Rocky Mountain Farmers Union, representing over fourteen thousand family farmers and ranchers across Wyoming Colorado and New Mexico. I also serve on the board of National Farmers Union. I grew up on a fifth generation farm and cattle ranch in northeastern Colorado. My wife and I created and operated a Berkshire pork business and a feed mill before selling that and moving to central Wyoming several years ago. Today's hearing is about building demand. We need strong local and regional markets, new opportunities for farmers and ranchers, and stable export markets. But demand alone is not enough if farmers and ranchers cannot capture the value of that demand. Family farmers and ranchers have been under tremendous economic pressure for decades and are at a breaking point. Congress has had to repeatedly step in with emergency assistance because decades of failed farm policy has not addressed the underlying causes of farm income instability. Family farmers and ranchers want fair markets, not government payments. One of the biggest barriers to creating new opportunities is the lack of fair and competitive markets. Recently, I spoke with a colleague about building a USDA inspected facility. capable of processing about two hundred head of cattle per day. This would be for a source-verified, state-branded beef product. On paper, the investment makes sense. In practice, it will probably never be built. The reason is not a lack of cattle. It is not a lack of consumer demand. It is not a lack of profitability. It is uncertainty created by a marketplace dominated by a handful of large companies with enormous market power. as recognized by President Trump and Secretary Rollins. When people do not believe they can compete on a level playing field, they won't put their investment at risk. When investment in new ideas stops, we miss opportunities to meet local demand for homegrown products. We see the same challenges at RMFU's Cooperative Development Center, where we help evaluate new business opportunities to build stronger local economies and the demand this hearing is about. But too often, good ideas run into the same obstacle. Highly concentrated or unstable markets make the dollars not work. That is why increasing demand and increasing competition must go hand in hand. Congress should protect and strengthen the Packers and Stockyard Act to bring more accountability to the large meat packers. reinstate mandatory country of origin labeling so the beef the for beef so the consumers know where their product comes from and American ranchers gain that recognition for their products. Continue the efforts to strengthen antitrust enforcement across the economy. These are not separate issues from demand. They are essential to ensuring that demand actually benefits family farmers and ranchers. We should also continue investing in local and regional food systems. Many farmers union members expanded production and invested in the equipment necessary to serve schools and food banks through USDA's local food pr- purchasing initiatives Those programs created stable markets and helped growers connect with their communities. When the programs were cancelled last year, Not only did it hurt the communities that they were serving, but many farmers were left with the lost markets and lost investment dollars. That experience highlights an important lesson. Building new markets takes time, financing, consistency, and commitments. Farmers need confidence that successful programs and markets will not disappear overnight, or be taken from them. The House Farm Bill authorizes these local foods efforts and is a good start, and we'll thank we're thankful for their inclusion. Family farmers and ranchers are always looking for ways to create more value, develop new markets, and meet consumer demand. We are ready to do our part. But if we want more investment, more processing, more local foods, and better opportunities for American agriculture, we need markets that are fair, competitive, and stable. Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you and I look forward to any questions.

Thank you, Mr. Franklin. At this time, members will be recognized for questions in the order of seniority, alternating between majority and minority members, and in the order of arrival for those who joined us after the hearing convened. You'll be recognized for five minutes e- each in order to allow us to get uh to as many questions as possible. I recognize myself for five minutes. Uh, Mr. Johnson. Would you set the scene for us on some of the unique challenges the cotton industry is facing today? Uh from your perspective, how do you see the Buying American Cotton Act mitigating some of those challenges and further benefiting the entire cotton supply chain, from the producer to the consumer, and in particular the unfair competition we deal with the Chinese and what's going on in the ginning industry?

Okay. I uh the cotton industry, cotton production, just like many other uh crops, producers are facing uh ever-increasing input cost. We have uh USDA projects that in two thousand twenty seven uh uh per acre cost for uh cotton will exceed a thousand dollars for the first time and that'll be a that would be a record high uh cotton has a very uh require specialized equipment, a a cotton picker costs one point two million dollars, or a stripper that is used in Oklahoma and Texas close to a million dollars. It has a single purpose. And uh so our market it's really haven't kept up with that. Baca, uh we have two major challenges, Brazil has come on and is now the number one exporter of cotton that we compete with, uh and also synthetic fibers are or our other competition. And Baca works to incentivize uh brands and retailers first of all to use cotton rather than synthetics and in particular to use uh US cotton and if you look at that, uh in my testimony we're using eighteen million bales, buying eighteen million bales worth of cotton in this country, only four million is US, but there's an addi additional twenty-two million bales of polyester of synthetic fibers that's being used. So Uh Baca helped shift uh some of that market share back to cotton and in particular US cotton.

Miss Taylor, wheat is one of Oklahoma's top export commodities. And I know my wheat farmers in Oklahoma see the value in market promotion programs like MAP and FMD. In your opinion, how will the investments made into these programs from the Working Families Tax Cuts Act and the Farm Food and National Security Act help expand markets abroad and provide greater certainty for farmers who are dealing with tough commodity prices here uh at home.

Thank you Congressman. I think for those market development programs that are based at USDA, what we have found is they are highly effective. Um Texas A and M did a study a few years ago that found for every one dollar in those export promotion programs invested from USDA about twenty-four dollars and fifty cents of US exports resulted. I don't know about you, I wish my portfolio performed that well. Um and so I think what we find is while there are federal dollars invested in these programs, industry also comes to the table to invest their own resources into um opening markets, addressing technical issues, um building consumer trust, uh building consumer knowledge. And so we find them highly effective uh programs and um I think it's an important part of the overall economic picture is having reliable uh predictable markets for US um agricultural products all over the world.

Mister Curry, your testimony notes that the most effective way to bring down beef prices is to rebuild the domestic cattle herd. Producers in turn are making difficult decisions today, knowing that rebuilding the herd is a long-term investment that they may not see the benefits of for several years. In your view, what can Congress do now, if anything, to support producers as they work to rebuild the domestic beef cattle herd.

Uh thank you for the question, Congressman. I think the most important thing is stability in the market that we uh don't have changing regulations as we go along every time a a regulation is is changed after we make a decision it interferes with our long-term plans so we're very thankful for ha having stability um we we very much want to regulations that are consistent and fair. Um we that's part of the reason we support so strongly the the voluntary USA label, so that we can promote our product and not be burdened with a high cost that would come from from some kind of mandatory program. Uh those type of programs um do not benefit the average cattleman in the long run, but uh voluntary programs that we can use to our advantage are what really help us. Thank you.

Mister Franke, I'm out of time, but I'm much calmer now thanks to local volunteer firemen than the last time we were together. I would ask you to respond in writing to that question, I uh just asked Mister Curry, when you have a chance. With that uh my time's expired, I now recognize the ranking member for five minutes for questions.

Thank you so much uh Mister Chairman. Um Mister Franke, let me start with you, uh while there are a number of good farm policy changes contained within the house version of the farm You've remarked to the press that the farm bill passed by the House would have little impact on farmers' bottom lines in the midst of a very serious economic downturn. You've also noted that farmers have become in re increasingly reliant on ad-hoc payments. Um, what would you like to see changed in federal farm safety net policy to help mitigate the reliance and then you know further what policies that may not be included in the uh farm bill one way or the other are impacting the need for these payments. So really two part question.

Yeah. Uh thank you for that question. Um our position is the underlying uh food and farm policy contained in both versions passed by this house and being debated later today in the senate. Um really accentuates that it is decades of failed farm and food policy. Um the prices that um our producers get for their products, they don't get any say in that. Um what they pay for their input costs, they don't get any say in. They are price-takers, not price-makers. So we really need some policy that supports them, that cannot uh make their own prices. Um Over the last ten years uh we are very thankful that we've gotten it, but the hundred billion dollars of ad-hoc emergency uh payments just goes to show that the underlying farm economy is not working. Uh one thing that we could add, we have a program called I'mset that's a voluntary uh supply management that would benefit soil health. It's also uh driven by the producers and not by

Mister Franke, has um Mister Franke, has um has USMCA been in the round good for the American farmer? has USMCA been, in the round, good for the American farmer?

USMCA.

The Mexico-Canada Trade Agreement.

Sorry, I'm throwing out a name. Yes, um they're a good trading partner. Um I believe overall it is. Um however, I disagree with my colleague from Colorado. Um I believe that uh the burden is not large on mandatory country of origin labeling. And um the actions to reduce or uh remove M cool in twenty fifteen um as a result of a World Trade Organization action, I don't think was beneficial to our family farmers and ranchers. I think it was beneficial to those who process the meat. And I would ask as we negotiate USMCA that MQ will be included in that.

D do you think we should renegotiate USMCA? Mexico and Canada are important trading partners for us.

I believe that we do need good trading partners, um and I do believe we should uh renegotiate USMCA.

Thank you. Um I wanna turn to Miss Taylor now. Uh last year Republicans cut about a hundred and eighty-seven billion from the SNAP program. So far five million Americans have lost access to those benefits, including one point five million children. Uh in fact in Minnesota, seventy-seven percent of those who've lost SNAP since the bill passed are children. Uh that's not just the millions of Americans, but producers and grocers, too are going to suffer financially. That one hundred and eighty-seven billion dollar cut actually translates to about twenty-five billion in lost revenue to farmers. Can you explain just a little bit about how snap dollars drive domestic demand, and how can Congress attempt to prevent this impending harm to American producers and consumers?