MR. CRAWFORD: Thank you very much. I appreciate this distinguished panel for coming forward to hear from our agricultural groups today. My name is Jeff Crawford. I'm a peanut grower as well as Executive Director of the Florida Peanut Growers Association.

I'm here today to represent the Southern Peanut Farmers Federation, a coalition made up of Georgia Peanut Commission, Alabama Peanut Farmers and in Florida the Peanut Growers Association. We represent the largest segment of peanut production in the United States, which is almost 60 percent. Florida grows almost 100,000 acres of these peanuts.

I appreciate the opportunity to be here today. Historically, peanut growers have composed world trade negotiations. This happened in the North American Free Trade Agreement and in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. During these previous trade agreements our industry lost all import trade protections and received no export subsidies. We have lost 20 percent of our markets and many of our growers.

This trend will continue unless the Administration takes some interest in the future of the peanut industry. Not one country is now importing U.S. peanuts as a result of the NAFTA or the GATT agreements. Our exports have decreased since the last trade agreement, not increased. We have gone from 403,259 metric tons in 1991-'92 to 244,280 metric tons in '96 and '97. Why? We have the best peanuts planted in the United States. Imports are taking an increasing share of our market.

What can be done to enhance the U.S. peanut history and continue the Administration's pro-trade policies? First, the U.S. government must consider regulatory systems. U.S. government must comply with -- growers must comply with federal and state environmental, labor and other regulations. The Environmental Protection Agency, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and Immigration and Naturalization Service all play a role in U.S. grower's business. How many of our trade partners impair their agriculture industry as much as we do in the United States?

Chemical regulations and labor restriction costs are increasing, not decreasing for peanut growers. This has to be reviewed in any new agreements.

Second, market access must be controlled. An entire industry has been created in Canada just to process peanuts and peanut products. Although many of the products passing through Canada to the U.S. are applied to the GATT quotas, others are not. The confectionery items entering the U.S. outside of any peanut tariff or in quotas would equate to approximately 40,000 tons of farm stock peanuts.

This is about one-half of the total access granted by the GATT for peanuts. All peanut outlets must be counted against tariff rate quotas and not bailed out to enter outside of them because of misclassification.

Access for a commodity should only be granted to countries which are directly involved in producing the commodity as determined by the rules bargained. Argentina and Mexico do grow peanuts. Promoting trade agreements that include peanuts to countries having no interest in producing peanuts should not occur.

The rules of origin under NAFTA for Mexico should apply to other new trade partners. They should be exported to the U.S. as long as they are made of a particular country's own raw product. This would bring equity to a marketplace that has been solely infused by Canada.

Third, sanitary and phytosanitary standards should be strengthened. Some exporting countries have already been to World Trade Organizations and lessened or diminished current sanitary and phytosanitary standards. We do not support this. Peanut growers have worked very hard with the public research institutions to establish the world's safest and largest and highest quality peanut in the market. Standards should be made tougher. Consumers have to be the Administration's top priority including safety issues. Consumer advocates are right on this issue.

Fourth, snapback provisions should be implemented. Although the U.S. peanut program has a price import system we are not dissimilar from other commodities in this regard. We are at a disadvantage with other commodities in that we have lost all import protection, have no export subsidies and have not been supported by the U.S. trade representative and ensured that the imported products are not coming into the U.S. unfairly.

We also have not received the support of the Secretary of Agriculture in encouraging peanut farmers in the international feeding programs as other commodities have received. This stares in the face of a product that is low cost and high in nutrition. Snapback provisions should protect peanut growers at any time imports begin to cause significant interference with the operation of the peanut program.

Fifth, to provide safeguards in the event of changing exchange rates between currencies. This impacts all commodities in light of our new world economy. It has to be considered.

Southeastern peanut growers want to be a part of the trade negotiations. We plan to continue our efforts to be heard by working with the Administration and Congress, but we are concerned that the Administration has not considered the decline of U.S. agriculture in the last two years. Our industry has had little support because we have not been staunch free trade advocates. This neglect has cost us over 20 percent of our markets and thousands of dollars.

We ask you to consider the impact of these agreements on the peanut industry. We look forward to working with you in the development of trade agreements that we can support. Thank you for allowing me to be heard today.

(Applause.)