are going to be encouraging further production. Palm oil groves are going to be coming onstream, as the gentleman pointed out, 10 or 12 years from now. And so far as the question of ownership of these groves is concerned, that is something that troubles me also. And to be very frank, we didn't get any straight answers. We were told some of these groves were owned by shareholders or they were farmers' cooperatives and so on. I am not at all sure that is the case. We are still trying to find out. And I would appreciate information from this subcommittee in that regard. I would like to benefit in that regard as well. Mr. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, may I also respond? From additional information we have-and I don't think the gentlelady from Louisiana was here but I pointed out that 26 percent of the current world palm oil production came directly from these loans. So I think from that fact we can deduce that these loans have been, as Mr. Paul would say, an unnatural and unmarketplacelike contributor to the production of these things. We are not sure if the product of those groves would ever have gone onstream if they would not have had these loans, because these loans are very favorable loans indeed. And I agree with the chairman of the subcommittee completely. We are not asking in any way to stop production or convert. We are simply saying if we continue this process of making these loans and encouraging new plantations to come onstream, we are wrecking our domestic oilseeds industry. We are simply saying that, No. 1, for sure, yes, cease the loans from this day forward. No. 2, I think Chairman Poage's suggestion should be supported 100 percent to let the public know that when they buy palm oil, they are buying something worse than animal fat as far as their health is concerned. No. 3, I think that other provisions may well be in order as in quotas and tariffs. Mr. GONZALEZ. I think the average citizen thinks they get palm oil when they buy Palmolive soap. Mrs. BOGGS. Most people think that palm oil gives people a beautiful complexion. Mr. POAGE. Could I suggest to the gentlelady from Louisiana that if she would use sheep tallow, the result is as good. [Laughter.] Mr. MATHIS. Mr. Chairman, I always wondered what the gentlelady used and now I know her secret. Mr. STEPHENS. Mr. Chairman, my wife pointed out in respect to a similar idea-well, somebody told her I was getting sort of old and didn't have that many wrinkles in my face, and her answer to that was "You never saw wrinkles in a balloon." [Laughter.] Mr. STEPHENS. Mr. Chairman, I would like to say one thing. I am delighted to have heard the interchange of ideas between the members on the Agriculture Committee, who have a field of responsibility, and our responsibility in respect to the recommendation of the continuation of the Inter-American Development Bank and the other development bank support. When this matter came up on the floor of the House in the appropriations proposal that you made, I did not vote for the position that you took. And it was a mistake for me and I can see this. But if we had some information at the time that we were considering this, Mr. Chairman, it would have been possible for me to not have voted under that misapprehension. This is one time I voted under a misapprehension and I voted wrongly. And it is no criticism of the chairman, but the idea of sometimes referring a bill to two committees-where you have different viewpoints-it gives a much better position and it gives a much better position in that we are not having an antagonistic attitude because someone believes someone is trying to take jurisdiction away from the other one. And so I think it is great that we have this interchange and this is taking place under the leadership of Chairman Gonzalez and the leadership of the Agriculture Committee. We have two bills. One was referred to us and one to the International Relations Committee. Now Mr. Poage, you referred to your bill on labeling. What is the bill you have on labeling? Mr. POAGE. That was in the Mathis subcommittee. It does not relate to any financing. It only relates to labeling. Mr. STEPHENS. I understood that, but I had a lady write me about this confusion on labeling and truth in packaging. She said she wished something could be done about it because she had gone to fix an egg for her husband for breakfast and ended up with two fried pantyhose over light. [Laughter.] Mr. GONZALEZ. This has been the reason for these hearings. As you know, this is the reason we are very grateful for your presence, because we know that every member-particularly in this particular period with the elections and everything-finds it difficult, but we also realize there is a responsibility. It is also the reason why I have been responsible for delaying somewhat. There has been pressure on us to act on the Asian Development Bank bill, which we rushed through before the authorization period in May, and then it was held up. And my position has been very simple. We want to know more about the questions that some members have raised-though they may have been opposed to the bill itself. I don't think there is any legislation, which is worthy of the name legislation, that cannot stand open discussion and debate, as Congressman Stephens said. And the more we know, the better legislators are able to be. It is not the first time we have done it. On one occasion I requested the presence of the pertinent members of the then Foreign Affairs Committee because I felt that the fine line dividing our policies and their jurisdiction on foreign affairs was very thin indeed. And I think it worked beautifully. I think we all benefited from it. And in this case here, it just seems to me incredible that we would, on the one hand, be pushing for enactment of a policy to uphold our continued support of these institutions but without taking note of some of the practices that come back to hurt our own domestic economy. As Congressman de la Garza very aptly said, it does not make sense because in order for us to help the underdeveloped nations, we have to be strong enough to help. And it does not make any more sense to offer help that comes back to hurt us or undermine us. And this has been the main rationale. I promise you gentlemen that this subcommittee will continue. Our hope is to continue to have hearings and try to bring in the officials from the Department of the Treasury and, if need be, the State Department. And when and if we are lucky enough to get them to cooperate, we will advise you. We will keep you informed. And hopefully in the next Congress we will be able to cooperate with whatever administration is in power, because our Nation is involved, this is an international matter, and our country is in a leadership position. I don't think we can say "Stop the world; we want to get off." And yet at the same time, as I have said repeatedly, we don't have to prove we are good neighbors by giving the family jewels away. [Laughter.] Mr. GONZALEZ. Is there any further comment? Mr. MATHIS. Mr. Chairman, in line with what you said, let me say on behalf of the members of the Oilseeds and Rice Subcommittee and I think the whole Agriculture Committee, that we would be glad to work with you in any way we can. As I told you, we did have 2 days of hearings on this and took testimony from some 50 witnesses including representatives of the Treasury, Agriculture, and other departments. I would recommend those hearings to you. You might be able to develop some ideas that you want to pursue by having the staff study those. Mr. GONZALEZ. I don't think your hearings have been printed yet. Mr. MATHIS. If they haven't, I am sorry. We will get them to you. Mr. GONZALEZ. Well, we would like, with permission of the majority of the subcommittee at our next meeting, to incorporate them as part of the hearings in this matter. I think it will be very, very important, because you have some technical-because I am sure you have some technical presentations we have not had available to us. Mr. MATHIS. I would also say to the chairman that we would welcome the opportunity of any joint hearings. If the gentleman would like to go to Singapore, I would be willing to go with him. Mr. GONZALEZ. Very good. We would be delighted. We will even take Congressman Stephens with us. Mr. MATHIS. Mr. Chairman, I am advised by staff they have now been printed. Mr. STEPHENS. Mr. Mathis, when do you want to leave? [Laughter.] Mr. POAGE. We would have to get back by January 3. Mr. GONZALEZ. If there are not further questions or statements from the witnesses and since I see no other Congressman arriving, I would like to ask unanimous consent to offer for the record statements submitted by Congressmen Omar Burleson, Charles E. Grassley, Mark Andrews, John Y. McCollister, Paul Findley, Don Fuqua, Bo Ginn, John W. Jenrette, Jr., Ed Jones, and Albert H. Quie, and by W. D. Lawson, president of the National Cotton Council of America. [The statements referred to may be found in the appendix that follows.] Mr. MATHIS. Mr. Chairman, it might be out of order, but I understand Congressman Kenneth L. Holland had a statement. He was on his way over here. Is it possible to hold the record open? Mr. GONZALEZ. Yes, thank you for reminding me. Our intention is to hold the record open and also to keep it open until such time as we can get some cooperation from the Treasury Department. I think it would be important to get the Treasury to cooperate. Mr. STEPHENS. Mr. Chairman, along the line of what Mr. Mathis said, Congressman Holland had a representative here in the room earlier to follow the hearings. Mr. GONZALEZ. His statement will certainly be received with anticipation, and we will keep the record open. Thank you very much. [Whereupon, at 12:05 p.m. the hearing was adjourned.] |