MR. LANG: Thank you, Secretary Judge and Secretary Glickman, for this opportunity to speak to you today. It certainly is a privilege to have you in the state of Iowa even under these circumstances. My name is Craig Lang, and I represent Iowa Farm Bureau as vice president. I farm in partnership with my father and my brother on a thousand-acre farm and we milk 400 milk cows. I apologize. I missed the first two hours of your presentation this morning because I spent the first two hours this morning feeding 65 baby calves. Seems like I'm the only one left on the farm that's qualified for that particular job.

Trade is extremely important to Iowa farmers. Nearly 36 percent of the commodities we produce are exported. A typical Iowa corn farmer can attribute 45 percent of his revenue to the export market. The typical Iowa hog producer can attribute as much as 15 percent of his revenue to the export market. Overall, exports contribute about $70 per acre to a farmer's per-acre revenue. When Congress passed the 1996 Freedom to Farm Act, it phased out price supports making Iowa farmers even more dependent on the world markets. The upcoming round of negotiations in Seattle is extremely important to us. We need to make significant progress on the remaining trade barriers and resolve issues related to sanitary and phytosanitary barriers.

We suggest these for your consideration: First and foremost, we strongly oppose the concept of Early Harvest, this Early Harvest that the U.S. will present to the General Council of the World Trade Organization this month. This proposal will allow other countries to walk away from the negotiations before the full package is negotiated, cherry-picking the less contentious issues. Agriculture is part of the built-in agenda, meaning that no package is complete until the agricultural negotiations are concluded. We cannot afford to have this very critical issue put at risk by accepting the Early Harvest concept. We urge you to withdraw this proposal and stay with a single undertaking framework as espoused by President Clinton in his original statements on the upcoming negotiations.

Second, we must begin the negotiations and conclude them as quickly as possible to put Iowa farmers on a level playing field with the rest of the world. We recommend that you set a goal of concluding the agricultural negotiations by 2002, and sooner if at all possible.

We must resolve the issue of market approval and access for biotechnology products produced from genetically-modified organisms. Significant delays and lack of transparency in the regulatory approval process for GMOs in the European Union indicate a need to clearly establish that biotechnology products are covered by science-based provisions of the WTO SPS agreement. We cannot continue to be held hostage to the EU's discriminatory processes that deny market access to our corn and soybeans.

The new negotiations must include a reaffirmation of all nations' commitment to the WTO agreement on sanitary and phytosanitary measures. These provisions are appropriate and should not be re-opened. The U.S. has successfully pursued several SPS cases that underscore the strength of this agreement. However, we question the level of commitment that our trading partners, particularly the EU, have toward this agreement. Re-opening this agreement will only serve to weaken it.

All WTO member countries must completely eliminate export subsidies. You have heard that several times today. Iowa farmers cannot compete against the level of spending that our primary competitors make. The EU spends in excess of eight times -- and we heard ten times this morning earlier -- the level of domestic and export subsidies in the U.S. This level of spending distorts world trade and undermines Iowa farmer's competitiveness in vital export markets.

The negotiations must set a specific time frame for tariff equalization and increased market access. Iowa farmers compete openly in their own domestic markets but are shut out of the export markets due to high tariffs and other unfair trade barriers. And we appreciate the progress you've made in those directions.

An end result of these negotiations must be improvements in the dispute resolution process. Iowa farmers cannot afford to have lengthy dispute resolution cases.

And in conclusion, I must comment on today's atmosphere in agriculture. I'm a sixth-generation farmer on our farm in Brooklyn, Iowa, and I know that Secretary Judge knows that only God cultivated the ground before my family did. But I think one of the things that we need immediate attention to here in the state of Iowa is a national LDP program, and I would wish that you would give that immediate concern and let us look at what you have so our farmers can have that this year. Thank you.