| FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE |
April 29, 1999 |
| CONTACT: Diane Pratt |
(202) 225-5235 |
"Treating Our Farmers Fairly"
By Rep. Allen Boyd
Over the last several years,
the United States has enjoyed an unprecedented
period of prosperity and economic growth. Unfortunately,
our nation's family farmers have not benefited
from this abundance. In the wake of NAFTA and
the implementation of a national farm policy destined
for failure, America's farmers have suffered and
many are on the verge of bankruptcy. Maintaining
a self-sufficient agricultural industry is critical
to our national security. So today, our government
should be doing everything in its power to assist
the weakened agricultural market. Instead, the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is about
to deliver another blow to America's family farmers.
Under
the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA),
EPA was directed to review the pesticides used
by U.S. farmers to determine whether or not they
are safe for human consumption, through food products
or natural fibers. There is no question that to
ensure the well-being of America's families, EPA
should evaluate crop protection tools and restrict
the use of products which threaten our health
and safety.
Unfortunately,
in a rush to meet an August deadline imposed by
FQPA, EPA reviewers have been unable to consider
new scientific data on pesticides, relying instead
upon figures they have studied and utilized since
the project began over two years ago. In addition,
in their product evaluations, EPA has used extreme
worst-case assumptions that do not come close
to reflecting the average American's exposure
to pesticides on agricultural products.
In
an effort to ensure our farmers are treated fairly,
I have joined several bipartisan colleagues in
introducing H.R. 1592, the Regulatory Fairness
and Openness Act. This legislation would require
EPA, before it bans the use of any crop protection
tool, to prove they have used sound scientific
process and evaluated all available data.
If
EPA issues its findings based on outdated figures
and inappropriate assumptions, they could ban
the use of many crop protection tools which America's
family farmers depend on, and for which there
may be no safe alternative. These restrictions
would put U.S. farmers at an even greater competitive
disadvantage with foreign imports which are not
required to meet these strict regulatory requirements.
As our growers struggle to battle pests and plant
diseases without necessary tools, foreign farmers
will flood our market with their products, which
have been grown with chemicals we prohibit our
farmers from using. This not only hurts American
farmers; it hurts American consumers.
Certainly,
we want to prohibit the use of dangerous chemicals
in farming processes, but at the same time, we
do not want to unnecessarily ban products which
are critical to the success of America's farmers.
In its April 9, 1999 editorial on EPA's pesticide
review, the Tallahassee Democrat editorial board
stated, "before taking steps that could exterminate
exterminators, cripple our farmers and jack up
our food prices, the EPA must be sure they've
done the homework." The Regulatory Fairness and
Openness Act ensures that when EPA issues regulations
on crop protection tools, these regulations will
be based on sound science.
America's
farmers can produce the highest quality food and
fiber supply in the world, as long as they are
provided a level playing field. Our farming families
deserve no less. |