Next up Senator Matt Connealy, followed by Jim Jones and Dave Shiveley.

SENATOR MATT CONNEALY: I'm Matt Connealy, State Senator from the 16th District here in Nebraska. Senator Cap Dirks the Chairman of the Ag Committee of the Unicameral asked me to come and share some of his thoughts. He sends his regrets that he couldn't be here for this important listening session.

I'm a farmer and past ag promoter. I was on the Executive Committee on the U.S. Feed Grains Council now the U.S. Grains Council in the past. Also been past Chairman of the Corn Board and Ethanol Board here in Nebraska. So I understand exports.

As we all know, we export about 23 percent of the crops that we produce here in the United States, and these are big numbers. These figures have influenced us to believe that exports are important to farm income. They've influenced us to craft farm policies so that we meet our trade export negotiations. I think through the years we've figured out that this is misguided. After years of lowering priced commodities, in an effort to raise farm income, we continue to have lower and lower farm income and lower and lower economic activity out here in rural communities out here in Nebraska.

Exporting agriculture products at lower than the cost of protection may help some agriculture processors, but it hurts rural communities; it hurts states like Nebraska.

Nebraska is the fourth largest agricultural-producing state. So these issues are of utmost importance to us.

Nebraska is a number one state for the production and processing of beef and pork. So imports of hogs and pork products into the United States and Canada are really troubled. Last year when we had record low prices for pork, we still had Canada pouring pork into our depressed Nebraska market. Now were these coming in at a profit for Canadian producers? No. A trade policy that allows under-the-cost-of-production pork to come in should stop.

When we look at how we craft our position for the next round, the WTO, the United States should change its perspective. We should look less at small trade distortion patterns but look at how we increase the value of what we produce. This constant effort to lower farm beef prices has been proven to be an economic disaster for farmers, ranchers, and rural communities.

Congress and the administration need to know that there's a major price being paid out here for our current farm or trade stance. Family farmers, rural communities, states like Nebraska will continue to pay this price if we don't change our perspective.

Agricultural exports are good and important when they add income for farmers and ranchers, but below-the-cost-of-production dumping is not justified by Canada, by the United States, or by any country. When I sell my corn for $2 or less, I know that I am doing financial damage to my economic stance, to my community, to my state, but I'm also doing economic damage to the farmers and ranchers of the importing countries.

With that, I'll say thank you.