MR. MORRISSETTE: Okay. My name is Ron Morrissette and I'm a retired dairy farmer. I'm also a Board member. My dairy farm is in New York.

I came to this hearing today because I believe that our current trade policy is misguided and the direction of our current agricultural trade policy will lead to the destruction of the independent family operated farm and the loss of one of this country's greatest strengths, the independent family operated farm.

I will briefly go over the reasons I believe this will happen. I also believe that the current policies will result in environmental damages and do not encourage farmers to use sustainable farming principles.

The WTO is not a democratic organization that allows impute from all sectors of the agricultural community, consumers and environmental interests. Decisions by the WTO are made behind closed doors, not in open meetings that allow the public access to the decision-making process. The WTO is controlled by the multi-national corporations that benefit low producer prices and trade policies that allow them to pit farmers from different areas of the world against each other.

Also, the WTO has power to overrule laws put in place by local governments to protect the agricultural resources and environmental resources of the region. As an example, the WTO could conceivably declare the Northeast Dairy Compact an illegal trade barrier and require the Compact to be dismantled. It also has the power to overrule the laws put in place to protect the environment, such as the outlawing of the use of certain types of fishing nets by the U.S. to protect dolphins. That law was overturned by the WTO after Mexico. The current rules of the WTO do not allow member countries to protect their own consumers from unsafe production practices in foreign countries and dictate that member countries must allow foods that are produced using hormones and genetically altered crops that are not sufficiently tested to prove that they are safe over the long term.

Food security of its member nations should be the number one goal of the WTO. Current policy results in the citizens of the world being put at the mercy of profits of the multi-national corporations. Without having protections in place to protect the producers of our food from devastating low prices, such as the current situation in Vermont, family farmers are not able to make investment decisions to stay in production and provide an adequate living for their families.

NAFTA and the reform in the GATT were portrayed by the USDA administration as a way for farmers to improve their incomes. Currently the prices that farmers receive for their products are at an all-time low. It is time the USDA and the administration in Washington provide some answers and leadership in agricultural and trade policies.

Thank you.

MR. GRAVES: Ron, I was going to ask Jenny this question but didn't have a chance. Since you raised the issue again, I would like to ask you. We would welcome any input that you might have.

You raised the issue of the possibility, at least, that the WTO might find the Compact to be out of compliance with or not consistent with the WTO agreements that we currently are operating under. I wonder if you would care to expand on that if you have firsthand knowledge that that is the case, because that's not my understanding. If you do have that information, I would like to be one of the first ones to know. Obviously, as hard as we worked for that instrument and its continued opportunities here in the northeast, I certainly want to know if there is any issue they're pursuing at this point in time.

MR. MORRISSETTE: Well, I don't think that I have any access to information that you don't. But it's certainly been the case that the laws and supports under the WTO that support farmers are illegal. They aren't supposed to subsidize. And I see that Northeast Compact would be -- could be looked at that way and challenged from that standpoint.

MR. CUMMINGS: I would say in that regard, that put on disciplines for restrictions on the ability to subsidize their agriculture, but subsidies within those limits are still permitted. So, it is not simply a ban totally on all subsidies for domestic agriculture in the WTO. And to our knowledge, no one has challenged the Compact.

MR. MORRISSETTE: That's just up to this point. We can't assume that will not happen in the future.

MR. CUMMINGS: Well, obviously you believe -- we will obviously defend our domestic exports.

MR. MORRISSETTE: We know there is really strong opposition from all the midwest and the large -- and some of the large processors. It's very conceivable that they could challenge that as a trade barrier. They are already saying that. You know, they haven't brought it to a boil. But I could see where it might happen.

MR. GRAVES: I do suspect, Ron, also there is the difference between direct government payments of subsidization as opposed to a mechanism that provides an opportunity for broad consumer support coming directly out of marketplace. But you bring up a valid point and we certainly will be looking for that and watching that issue pretty carefully.

MR. CUMMINGS: Bob, if I could just address another one of your points, which I think some individuals before you raised. That's the issue of secrecy or transparency in the WTO. We have been pushing that. The WTO needs to be a little a more open organization. So, we have been pushing several transparency issues allowing the opening of the WTO sessions to the public, putting -- making more available to the public documents among the WTO, including -- if Americans are going to have support for the WTO, it needs to be an open and transparent process. We are meeting with some opposition from other countries who don't share our views, but that doesn't mean it's going to stop. And we are going to continue to press for the WTO to be an open organization because we have -- there is no need for it to be otherwise. It needs to be an open organization so everyone can see what's going on. We are going to continue to press that.

MR. MORRISSETTE: Thank you.