GRASSLEY: As Nobel Prizes for various achievements are slowly being announced, the world agricultural community is converging on Des Moines to participate in the World Food Prize International Forum. In fact, just on Friday, an ambassador from one of the African countries came up to me at the Ronald Reagan Airport here in Washington, D.C., and said he was on his way to Des Moines for the World Food Prize.
So I know that there's a lot of interest in this. Now, you know, in the mid-1980s, Dr. Borlaug recognized that the achievements of people to improve the quality and quantity of food for the world's people were being overlooked. He sought an award of the stature of the Nobel Prize but one that would recognizes contributions involved in the world food supply.
In 1986, the World Food Prize announced the first laureate thanks to the vision and generosity of Des Moines businessman, John Ruan and his family. The World Food Prize has a home in the middle of the bread basket of America. The World Food Prize has grown from a small event to one encompassing a week of discussions, lectures, and youth involvement.
The need to address a nutritious and sustainable food supply has only grown over the years. The World Food Prize serves as a backdrop for discussions of this very important factor in peace, statistic, and world.
And at this time that peace prizes are being announce, you ought to stop to think of how Dr. Borlaug had to work for years and years to get the world's Nobel Peace Prize and how it has deteriorated into a political statement over the last ten years.
Michelle?
QUESTION: Good morning, Senator. This is Tom Rider in for Michelle today at WNAX.
Senator, I was wondering -- I understand your committee, the Finance Committee, is expected to vote to the health care bill today, and I was wondering how you see it affecting farmers and ranchers and if you'll vote for it.
GRASSLEY: Well, I'm going vote against it, and there's several reasons I'm going to vote against it, but I'll just name a few.
The fact that it takes $444 billion out of Medicare and it's going increase or reduce the care that Medicare Advantage people are getting from it. There's a massive expansion of the federal government in the role of health care. People's premiums are going to go up, and I think most people would expect, with health care reform, that premiums would quit going up. There's new taxes and fees.
For the first time in the history of our country, it's going to say that you've got to buy something even if you don't want to buy something. So if you don't buy health insurance, you're going to pay $1,500 as a family, and employers that don't have good enough health insurance for their employees are going to have to face a penalty.
People are going to have to get at least 10 percent of their income on health care before they can deduct it from their income tax where that's 7.5 percent now. And 25 million people are still going to be uninsured.
So consequently, I don't think it does what it was portrayed to do over the long haul. And there are some good aspects of it, yes, but I intend to vote against it. And I don't think it's going to improve the health care that farmers can buy at all. In fact, it's going to cause premiums to go up for them just like everybody else.
QUESTION: Do you think the votes are there to defeat it, sir?
GRASSLEY: No. It'll pass on a -- probably a party-line vote of 13 to 10.
Let's see. Gene, Iowa Farmer?
Tom Steever?
QUESTION: Good morning, Senator. There are some that are calling on the administration to get a bit more involved in climate change legislation.
What do you think that'll do for chances of climate change legislation finally coming to a vote? Whether or not it will cause it or help it to pass?
GRASSLEY: Well, I don't think it's going to come to a vote this year. So whatever efforts the president is going to make in that direction, he might as well wait until January of next year to promote it because I think we're going to spend the rest of this year on health care reform and maybe on some tax legislation, but I don't think cap-and-trade is going to come up -- global warming stuff is going to come up.
So I think that, from the standpoint of agricultural interests, you'll find most people in agriculture are going to find global warming legislation to be very detrimental and very costly to farming because it puts a tax on energy, and farming is very tax -- very energy -- it just takes a lot of energy to farm.
And so, consequently, you know, it's -- it's not looked upon very positively. And another thing, you know, if it doesn't include China and India, our own Democrat director of EPA says it's not going to reduce the problems of global warming.
Ken Root?
Stacia?
Jean, Agrinews?
George of the Cedar Rapids Gazette?
Anybody I didn't call? I've gone through the list.
Are you guys there? Is anybody there?
QUESTION: Yes, sir.
GRASSLEY: OK.
QUESTION: I'm here, Senator.
GRASSLEY: OK. Well, then I guess we've covered everybody.
QUESTION: Could I ask you one more question?
GRASSLEY: Yes, please.
QUESTION: Sir, I understand there's a rumor that EPA may take more time to make their decision on the E-15 waiver, that they may wait until next summer because they want to do some tests on emissions standards on cars and trucks.
Have you heard anything on that? And how do you feel about that?
GRASSLEY: Well, how I feel about it is they ought to fish or cut bait. They extended the comment period. They ought to make a decision. I hope it's a positive decision. If they've got some doubts about E-15, well, at least make a decision to E-11 so we can move beyond the stone wall that's been built up around the mandate because we don't have enough room beyond 10 percent to consume all that the mandate requires.
OK. Goodbye, everybody.
QUESTION: Thank you, Senator.
GRASSLEY: Thank you.
END