governor kristi noem and the

chair and ranking member of the house select committee on china . they discuss the acquisition of u.s. farmland by china and security concerns related to the food sector. congressman glenn thompson chairs the house and agriculture committee. congressman glenn thompson of pennsylvania chairs the house agriculture committee. >> the committee comes to order and thank you for joining the the e committee will come t order. good morning and thank you all for joining for today's hearing, the danger china poses to american agriculture. after brief opening remarks

members will receive testimony from our witnesses today and the hearing will be open to questions. we traditionally don't do questions with our panels of our colleagues, but i know governor noem was interested in taking a few questions. timeline wise i don't know if we will do a full five minute round with the governor. five minutes of questions as normal. so, good morning and thank you all for being here for a timely and necessary conversation about the threats china poses to american agriculture. the people's republic of china governed by the chinese communist party, which is where this comes from. it doesn't come from individuals -- this is imposed -- basically we're looking at links to the chinese communist party.

it is going out of its way to reduce its alliance on american agriculture aisle while aggressively pursuing tactics that threaten our nation's ability to feed itself. these threats are multifaceted, strategic, incendiary, and require a proactive aided response. the last few years have seen china steel u.s. intellectual property, heck cybersecurity, weaponize trade and acquire american farmland at an alarming rate. each of these disrupt our national security, rural communities, and resiliency. china using its own regulatory system to steal our property and we have seen this in semi conductors to see. not to mention the scale and sophistication by which china can manipulate critical infrastructure as exposed vulnerabilities in american technologies. this interference has ranged from data breaches and theft of research to

ramping up disruptions of irrigation and transportation systems. in 2022, the chairman and i along with 125 republican colleagues asked the government accountability office to evaluate foreign investments to u.s. farmland and its impact on american security, trade. as many of you know in 2021, the department of agriculture estimates foreign investment in agricultural land grew to 40 million acres. a few months ago we received a final report which showed congress where gaps exist in our framework and the coordination between federal agencies could increase visibility into potential national security risks related to foreign investment. congress took a natural first step with the recent passage of the consolidated appropriations act with the bill addressing foreign ownership of land by approving the tracking system of it. the fact china imports

almost as much food as the u.s. exports to the whole world makes this conversation more difficult. in recent years, the u.s. has seen record export values to china for soybeans, corn, beef, tree nuts, and sorghum, all of which are major contributors to our domestic farm economy underscoring the importance of expanded market access and market adversity elsewhere. so, how do we strike the balance protecting our producers, consumers, and every piece of agriculture value chain? while keeping pace with china's needs? how do we reduce our reliance on one country without undermining a necessity of a strong export market? how do we think smartly about policies that mitigate threats while protecting our best assets ? today's witnesses come to the table with lived experience and decades of knowledge on china

and these very questions and i welcome each of you and i look forward to the discussion. with that, i would like to welcome distinguished ranking member, mr. scott, for any opening remarks. >> thank you, chairman. ladies and gentlemen, the purpose of today's hearing is to discuss the influence that china has on american agriculture. but unfortunately some of the rhetoric surrounding this topic may derail us from tackling the real issues at hand and may contribute -- hopefully not -- but may contribute to violence against asian americans. and i want all americans to know that we are on the agriculture committee condemn all bigotry, including race motivated threats and acts of

violence. this is about agriculture policy, not people policy. i also want us to keep in mind that china is an important trading partner to the united states and we need a thorough and policy heavy conversation so that we can help the american farmers and our agriculture system navigate this difficult, challenging, somewhat thorny issue. and i hope everyone here today will engage in a serious, fact-based conversation and avoid fear mongering and alarmism. though i am told this isn't the topic of this hearing, i am also pleased that the recently enacted agriculture

appropriations bill will help usda update its outdated system attracting farm, agricultural, land ownership in the united states of america. and if we are going to have a serious discussion about foreign influence on american agriculture, we must remember that china is our largest trade partner accounting for $33.7 billion in u.s. agriculture exports just last fiscal year alone. american farmers are the most efficient and productive, and because of this, we produce far more than we americans can consume. my colleagues will also note that we are in an agricultural

trade deficit right now. and i am here to tell you that alienating our trade partners will only deepen that deficit. american farmers need large markets to export their products and when those markets are lost, who doesn't harm? are farmers and then the american people. we saw the implications of this when the trump administration started a trade war with china, creating chaos and undermining markets for our american farmers. since the trade war, shut american farmers out of china. what? brazilian farmers have filled the gap, increasing their exports to china as our market share decreased.

now trump is calling for a 60% tariff on all chinese goods. this would have drastic impacts on american agriculture production. it would increase costs for consumers and would almost certainly lead to devastating, retaliatory tariffs placed on the u.s. agriculture exports. so i think it is fair to think the u.s. being so dependent on a single export market, who is also a strategic competitor, raises and poses a risk for our american farmers. one way we can address this concern is to expand trade in existing markets wildly open new markets. and i continue to support

increasing the market access program. that is the way to go. foreign market development program in the farm bill, i believe this new trade deal are critical for our american agriculture, however there are many places where i am very critical of the chinese government. the theft of seed and other agriculture technology is highly concerning to me and continues to be a problem. market distribution through domestic price support programs and ignoring wto decisions, creating an uneven playing field for u.s. farmers, and i also remain highly critical of

any foreign government seeking to buy american land near a central -- essential intelligence or our military installations. this is now a major national security. we must protect our national security interests. this is a national security issue of soaring magnitude to this nation . we've got to protect our farmland and not get it in the hands of foreign interests, particularly china. i look forward to hearing from my witness, chairman, today and coming out of this hearing with an improved understanding with our relationship with china and how we can work together to protect america's agriculture interests. thank you.

>> thank you, gentlemen. the chair would request other opening statement for the record. witnesses may begin your testimony. and sure there is time for questions. i call the gentleman from south dakota to introduce our first witness today. >> mr. chairman, governing a nation should be a team sport. unfortunately there are a lot of free agents in politics. people don't understand shared vision and shared efforts. locally -- luckily our speaker, my friend, my governor, she knows how to work together. she understands that we get a lot more done when the federal government and state governments are trying to find a path forward together. i don't think there is a month that goes by she isn't showing the leadership necessary to be able to work, half our teamwork with her team, whether it's protecting american farmland from the chinese communist party, getting tiktok off government devices, making sure

her state pension program has the flexibility to best from ccp influences, making sure the farm belt priorities are right, managing the black hills national forest in an appropriate way, protecting mount rushmore -- i could go on for an hour, sir. and i know you don't want me to. >> [ laughter ] >> the ways that the speaker and i have been able to work together. and so, i've just got to tell you, i am honored to have a real south dakota and, a leader, a partner come back to the committee and share some wisdom with us. mr. chairman, the governor of the great state of south dakota, kristi noem. >> i thank the gentleman . welcome, governor noem. our second witness, our esteemed colleague, the gentleman from wisconsin, mike gallagher , chairman of the select committee on the chinese communist party . congressman, thank you for joining us.

hopefully our third witness today, and i know he had some scheduling conflicts initially here so we are hoping he will be able to join us in time to offer his perspective as another respected colleague of mine, of ours, someone i work with on many issues including courier in education, the gentleman from illinois, roger morphy, ranking member on the chinese communist party. thank you all , witnesses, for joining us today. we will proceed to your testimony. you will each have five minutes. the timer will count down to zero at which point your time has expired. governor noem, please begin when you are ready. >> it is an honor to be with you today and thank you, congressman, for that kind introduction. you are a wonderful friend and you are doing a great job because you still have my staff and kept them. no, but you are a wonderful representative for south dakota. thank you for caring so

passionately for our people. chairman, sitting in front of me today, chairman lucas, was my chairman advisor in the house of representatives and had a chance to do two farm bill serving under his leadership on this committee was a special honor for me and i loved being a member of his team as he put together foreign policy which i always referred to as food policy for the united states of america so it is wonderful to see you again, chairman lucas. i look forward to continuing to receive your wisdom over the years. chairman scott, ranking members of the committee, thank you for allowing me to be here today to discuss this topic. i know very well that each day you protect our nation's food supply but you are stewards of our land and it is a treasure for us to do that each and every day. i come before you and said as the 33rd governor of south dakota. my home state is known for its gorgeous black hills, rolling plains, and iconic mount rushmore. we have a lot to be proud of and if you

haven't come visit us, you probably should because it's beautiful. agriculture is the number one industry and tourism is the second. is incredibly to our people our lamb stay in good shape and we continue to produce. this year is special to me because this is the 30th year that i have worked on the agriculture policy . i've spent my lifetime working on policy not just being a farmer and a rancher and raising my family on the land, but being involved in meetings. at the age of 22, my dad was killed in an accident on the family farm and i got angry when i found out how my family would be hit tragically by the death tax. i showed up at meetings to talk about policy and how it impacted small farms. at the time, tom daschle, a democrat, appointed me to serve on the farm service agency state committee, the agency that oversees the farm programs in the state of south dakota. i did that for many years as a young wife and mother, as a farmer and rancher running an

operation our state and i was heavily involved in the federal farm programs in our state making sure they worked for the ranchers and were as flexible as possible to give them the freedom to choose how to run their farms. i served on many commissions and taskforces in washington, d.c. during those years to help disadvantaged farmers, people in tough situations, critical situations. as the general manager of our business operations i ran the farm for many decades. i was first elected to the state legislature in 2006 and became the assistant majority leader in the house. i rewrote our agriculture property tax system. i ended up running for congress, was elected, served on this committee and we worked on two farm bills when i served on this committee and served on natural resources, armed services, education workforce, and the ways and means community -- committee and was

prouder to see that signed into law. in 2018 when i ran for governor, i won and was reelected again last year, or in 2022. i'm in my second term now. i tell you all of this because i think it is important for you to know that my heart is with the land and with our people, but when it comes to policy that i know what i am talking about and i know it's because i live it. today i focus of this committee on the danger china poses to american agriculture. over the years i have witnessed this hostile communist country work to systematically take over our food supply chain. decades ago they started buying our fertilizer companies, controlling our ability to access fertilizer and bring it into the united states. i watched them via power chemical companies as i worked on programs and policies at the state and federal level. i watched us as we sold citizenship to chinese communist members, members of

the communist party, for investment and our processing systems and most of our facilities are owned by the chinese government. now they're coming for our land and when they buy up our land they will complete their chain of control of our food supply. between 2010 and 2020, the chinese communist party's holdings of ag land increased by 5300%. reports show china owns 384,000 acres of u.s. ag land valued at $2 billion. this should be alarming to all of us. usda admits that this may not even account for all of the land they own because of there is very little track of foreign interest involved in large transactions. in fact there is very little reporting that happens at the state or federal level and little consequences for allowing countries who hate us from owning our land. just this past summer, we had members of the communist party contact our state government and want to come and visit to

our processing facilities, farms, and visit south dakota. we declined all of those meetings but within days we received a phone call from the state department telling us those chinese spies. they were there to steal our intellectual property, our genetics, wanted to debrief us if we had met with them. thank god we did not. we were told they were there to help improve our trade relations, that they were there to improve our business, our exports, but instead, they were there to steal from the united states of america so the threat is real to us every single day what china is doing. they have a thousand year plan to become a dominating power in the world and the only thing standing in their way is america. just this past summer, it was very clear to me when the chinese spies were in our state that china wants to control us and they want to do that by controlling our food supply. the chinese communist party is not our friend . they are not our partner or our ally.

they are our enemy and they are a rapidly expanding national security threat that can't be ignored. let me be clear, they are buying up our entire food supply chain and when america can't feed itself and we rely on numbers of another country to feed us, it becomes a national security issue. the country that feeds us controls us and let me remind you why we do a farm bill every year. i'm well aware that you have a priority to get that done and i'm looking forward to getting that done because that is a safety net for our farmers out there. in the past the farm bill has always been a bipartisan issue and should continue to be a bipartisan issue. i've had the opportunity to work on two of them and it is simply a safety net for our farmers. america decided years ago we needed a farm bill to ensure every family in this country had a safe and had an affordable food supply, that they had the ability to go to the grocery store and put food on the table for their families and if a farmer had a good year, he could pay his bills.

if he had a bad year, he could lose everything and we didn't want to have a drought or flood or something happen that caused us to lose all of our small family farms and allow us to lose the ability to feed ourselves. every family in this country recognizes the importance of a farm bill. i know you do too and i am looking forward to getting one completed to make sure we can feed ourselves in this country. the farm bill should be designed to help farmers, not environmental extremists. i hope you continue to ensure we are working as a conservationist. i am committed to protecting the abundance of natural resources in our state but climate smart agriculture dictated by the biden administration does not help farmers or put food on the table or conserve our natural resources. you want wildlife habitat solutions that fit the needs of people in the states that best serve the country in our ability to feed and protect ourselves. the farm bill manages risk and it is a safety net and i hope you can't get that done.

media reports show the largest chinese holder of american ag land is shipping food and medical supplies to china to be stockpiled by the chinese military. we all saw when china purchased land in north dakota they claimed was for acorn processing plant that there wasn't going to be enough corn in the area to supply the plant and it was miles from a military installation. they purchased the land on purpose for natural security reasons and that is why i am ensuring is not happening on my watch. in south dakota we worked for two years to make sure we had a bill in place to make sure we knew who was buying our land and it wouldn't be from a country who hated us. china would never allow us to go to their country and allow us to buy land in their country. they don't even allow their own people to buy their whole land. there is no way we should let them by our land close to our military installations. south dakota is the home of the b-1 bomber that has protected this country for the last 50 years, home to the reaper drones

and operation protecting us as well, but it will be the first home of the beat 21, the bombing platform to protect this country for the next 50 years and it is incredibly important we stop china and we make sure other governments don't come in and have the opportunity to buy up land next to the military installations. when we talk about food policy, please talk about it from a national security standpoint. it is important we grow our own food, we produce it here and are doing it in a way that protects the united states of america and with that, mr. chairman, i yield back. >> very good. thank you, governor. chairman gallagher, begin when you are ready. >> thank you, chairman thompson, ranking member scott, members of the committee. what an amazing opportunity to discuss the threat the tiny -- chinese government poses to america. i want to thank the governor for sounding the alarm and for caring the burden of dealing with dusty johnson. >> [ laughter ]

>> he may not technically weigh that much, but that is a heavy burden and i believe he is from your dakota. i always get it confused. a year ago, a gentleman, a prc national, pled guilty to conspiracy to commit economic espionage and was sentenced to two years in prison for stealing intellectual property from his employer. he took copies of the algorithm on a one-way flight back to china where he later worked for the chinese academy of science's institute of soil science. here you have an example of someone stealing american technology and bringing it directly back to the chinese communist party, which reflects the ccp's approach to agriculture and food security in that it is not just about economic competition . to coat -- quote xi jinping himself, it is a national security issue of extreme

importance. the prc is the largest importer of corn, soybeans, wheat, and dairy products in the world. the ccp views food insecurity as an existential issue. xi understands if they were to invade taiwan, they would face massive challenges in feeding its population so to put it bluntly, the chinese communist party tactically engaged in wherefore -- warfare against the united states. the government mentioned the share of u.s. farmland increasing more than fivefold between 2010 and 2021. these are only the acquisitions we know about. there can be much more because the federal oversight system for reporting is alarmingly lax and enforcement is minimal. the governor referenced a group purchasing land near the air force base in the other dakota

in 2021. they did not report the purchase to usda until the u.s. media started asking questions about it. that is unacceptable. if you look broadly at the process, three problems emerge. one, the u.s. government has no way of tracking land purchases by foreign adversaries. a recent report found usga isn't capable of tracking such forces by actors. second, even discovering, it has no jurisdiction despite the fact that in the bill we tried to give them said jurisdiction. because the air force base in question was not listed as a sensitive site, sify is claimed it had no authority to review the transaction. that is unacceptable. third and finally, they cannot review our domestic food security as a risk factors our foreign adversaries are able to

purchase thousands of acres of farmland and cfius cannot consider the potential impact on our food supply. this is something democrats and republicans could come together right now in this congress and solved by passing something like the protecting u.s. farmland and a sensitive site from foreign adversaries act. there are members on both sides of the aisle. we worked productively on this issue. this is something we can get done even in divided government. give cfius the resources it needs to make sure our adversary can't buy land near critical infrastructure and military bases. it should be a no-brainer. i would suggest we could do better protecting our agricultural ip by passing bills like the bio secure act which my ranking member is a cosponsor of. this would ensure u.s. taxpayer dollars don't go to ccp backed firms, like the genomics into institute that want to collect genetic sequences from american plants and farmers and on the flipside

we should protect our food security for generations to come by cataloging sequences of plants and animals to help american families keep american families said. in closing, i spend a lot of my time as chairman asking why any of this matters. why are you having this hearing? why do we care about the threat posed by the chinese communist party? it is not just they are stealing our intellectual property or trying to dominate our food supply. i really do think -- and i don't think this is alarmism. i think this is reality if you read what xi jinping is saying to his party and his people, i believe the ccp is preparing for a war with the united states. there is no doubt they would prefer the fruits of war without the actual cost. that is to be sure. they are preparing, nonetheless. he has told us repeatedly that he is prepared to use force if necessary to achieve his lifelong ambition, taking taiwan, thereby dominating the region and ultimately displacing the united states as the most

powerful country in the world. if we want to avoid that outcome, which would be a terrible outcome, a war with china would be horrific if you have ever participated in a wargame. many on the committee have served and understand the cost of war. if we want peace, we must prepare for war. that is the challenge, to mobilize our colleagues, our constituents to do difficult, costly, but important things that put us on a path to deter war. thank you for having this important hearing and thank you for letting me go a little longer. >> thank you for your leadership and your testimony and i know you have a hearing to get to, so feel free to -- >> i could imagine what raj would say if you were here. we spent so much time together. >> c-span is covering the hearing. you will be able to hear him time delayed a. >> thank you.

>> we are going to take an opportunity while mr. morphy is at another hearing right now on his way, so we will take two questions from each side of the dais here for the governor who has been more than generous with her time and so i first recognize mr. lucas from oklahoma for five minutes of questions. >> thank you, esther chairman and governor, it is nice to see you in this room again. i think we both agree a strong, healthy, vibrant america in agriculture is the key to our national security but i serve on the body now where memories are short and i would like to go back 10 years ago to win you and i worked together. that 2 1/2 year struggle as you remember to create the third generation farm bill. not just the way you conducted

yourself on behalf of your constituents, but in the republican conference committee meetings, where we together battled diligently to get the attention of elected leadership about the importance of these farm bills, i will forever be eternally grateful for you backing me up in the way you handled the speaker and the floor leader on behalf of rural america and agriculture. so, thank you, for that tenacity which i suspect has only grown stronger with time in your role as governor. >> sir, you keep lighting people on fire and they get tougher. understand that what you all say matters. what you do matters. the words you use have consequences. it matters who is in leadership . i have gone at times in my different roles and i recognize leadership needs to sit and

listen to people and have conversations. we have become a country addicted to being offended by each other and therefore we love to be offended by something someone has said and i would ask that we start listening to each other. the farm bill should be bipartisan. it should be bipartisan . we should be able to put a safety net out there and i'm asking you to do it for the consideration of our food policy. if we think a pandemic was scary, imagine what would happen if we couldn't feed our people. we are only three meals away from a crisis and i recognize and notice as governor, as the ceo of my state, how much control china has not just over manipulating our currency, stealing our ip, things we've known forever. even my pension funds -- i can't even get vanguard to say china is not an emerging market anymore. everyone in the world will agree they are not in emerging market. they should give me the ability if i ever want to do that as governor if i want to give people the best returns

possible but when i look at the food supply systems and we recognize china is not our ally yes, we do trade with them and when we trade -- and i've worked on trade agreements when i worked on the ways and means committee -- i noticed we created friendlier neighborhoods but we can't do that if we are not talking to each other and having conversation so that farm bill, even though i picked a lot of fights with my fellow republicans, we got it done and we will have to challenge members of both parties to come back to the table to make sure we have a safety net to feed our families. >> thank goodness for the tenacity you demonstrated then and continue to demonstrate. with that, i yield. >> i will recognize the ranking member for five minutes of questions. >> thank you so much, governor. how are you? >> i am good. >> it is good to have you with us. tell me this. what is your opinion of trump's proposal for a 60% tariff on all chinese imports? and are your farmers ready to face the

potential consequences of this? >> i think that is a proposal people are still looking at and having conversations about and that is a great conversation for you to continue to have as well with the republican members has here to weigh in to make sure we get the best policy in place because policy is what matters and the debate and discussion is incredibly important. you made a comment in your opening statement, ranking member scott, about the fact we were here to talk about ag policy, not people policy. for me, you know, i would say that all ag policy is people policy, that what you do on this committee is people policy. it's about feeding people. it's about taking care of the needy folks, the need to have that kind of help, about making sure we have many farmers on our land and we have a safety net there. you have an incredible opportunity to do something in this committee that is not happening anywhere else on capitol hill and i hope you catch that vision. nobody cared years ago that

much about a little state called south dakota. we get more -- one member of the house. when i came as a congresswoman, i didn't get a delegation. i became friends with anybody, republican or democrat, because if i wanted to get stuff done, we could. we were the first team to ban tiktok and after that, dozens of states band tiktok. >> governor, i've got one more question for you in my short time. if you listened to my opening statement, i hope you understand how concerned i am about foreign governments coming in and buying up our land. especially our farmland. food makes the agriculture committee the most powerful committee up here in congress because you can do without a

lot of things, but the one thing we cannot do without his food. >> right. >> i'm concerned about the china impact especially and buying up this farmland and when you correlate that with the number of immigrants coming into this country from china, that's a long way to walk. and stay walking to get to mexico or south america, to get into those trips where they are coming across our border, i've got to wonder about that and i want to ask you, how much land in south dakota has gone to foreign interest? and i want you to know that i agree with you.

this is a national security of high monumental interest and we've got to get to the bottom of it. how is your state reacting to the buying of land by foreign governments, particularly china, in your state? >> sir, that was the question i had when i became governor and i found we had a lawn the books that prevent foreign, evil governance from buying our land but there was no reporting mechanism and there was no consequence so we didn't know who owned the land, who owned our investment. we couldn't determine that because nobody was reporting it and if we did find someone is purchasing land, a country such as north korea, iran, russia, china, venezuela, cuba, then there was no reporting therefore we didn't know and there would be no consequences if we did find out the last year to the legislature i brought a bill that would have

allowed me to create a cfius board at the state level. that is what i wanted to have in place. the state had the opportunity to have a cfius board to review the transactions and put forward consequences to make sure it was done closer to the people and we had more accountability and we are looking at real estate transactions and putting that in place. that bill did not pass and what we ended up passing this year was a bill that added reporting mechanisms to the bill lee already had with consequences forcing the sale of the land so now i will know when we have a bill on the books that has the two components we need to truly get the answer. >> but there are foreign interests buying land in south dakota? >> i believe there are countries that own land that are friendly to the united states. i do not know if there are unfriendly once buying ag land right now. i know the biggest processing facilities are owned by china. smithfield foods processes is

-- in sioux falls, south dakota, my largest city and they have been difficult for me to work with. >> thank you, chairman, for having this hearing because i truly believe that food is now a national security issue. thank you. >> thank you, ranking member. >> we have two additional questions for the governor and we will get testimony from my good friend from illinois, my son and daughter-in-law's congressman. i will yield to congressman austin scott, followed by congresswoman slatkin. mr. scott, you have five minutes for questioning. >> i will get a little technical in this but the reason it is so important for us to be aggressive with china on the ag issue is this is a basic necessity. we are not talking about ways. we are talking about the chemicals it takes for the food supply. we are talking about the

technology and our seed of supply and u.s. companies less than 10 years ago were 80% of the global seed supply and today we are about 30% of the global seed supply. when you rely on countries like china through companies to become one of the largest seed suppliers in the world and the largest chemical supplier in the world, i might add, then you are putting one of your basic daily needs at risk, your food supply. governor, i want to commend you for being aggressive with that. it is way past time we are aggressive with china. they are not an economic competitor anymore. they are an adversary and, you know, we have to acknowledge that and if tourists are what it takes to bring manufacturing

back not just to the united states and western hemisphere, that is what it will take for us to have self-control over our basic necessities. you were here during the last farm bill. one of the big discussions that we have asked help for and were not able to get it from me and my colleagues on the other side of the aisle is an increase in reference prices. you have talked with your farmers and producers out there. can you tell me what you are hearing from them about the increased cost and the need for reference prices so they have a safety net as we push forward? >> if you don't address the increase in reference prices, don't bring them up to where they should be. there is no safety net. as far as doing these programs and making sure you're making adjustments to all of the programs and components of a farm bill, that is one of the most important things you can do to manage risk . i want you to remember farmers do every

year. for those of you that aren't farmers, they literally go to the bank and borrow money to buy land. they borrow more money to buy a tractor, a corn planter. then they go back and get an operating note so they can buy their seed, fertilizer, chemical and they put it in the dirt and they hope maybe it will rain and something will grow and month later they will be able to go back and pick something up and harvest enough to pay their bills. they are some of the biggest gamblers i know because there could be millions of dollars in the dirt and they are taking a chance because they really do believe producing food is a need and an american need. give them a safety net because it is not the fact they operate on faith and heavily leverage. that is why they can have one year that is a drought and lose their entire operation because of the risk they take. increasing those reference prices is critical to give them a safety net that works and functions to get them through a situation like that and that is

why i have always talked about the farm bill as our national food policy because we decided as a country it was important we always feed ourselves, that we don't depend on other countries to feed us and therefore it does is good to have a much more competitive and affordable food supply if there are a lot of farmers out here. it is a safe and affordable one because we have a farm bill and a safety net program to ensure they stay on the land. >> thank you for your testimony. i appreciate you and the type of member that you are. and the governor that you have been. i will finish with this, mr. chairman. i think the last call i got was from a farmer. it was from a banker. his response was, i don't inc. there is a commodity that we grow in the state of georgia where our farmers can make a profit this year with the current prices where they are. i yield back. >> the gentle man yields back. councilwoman slotkin. >> thank you . i want to

reiterate and support i think what you have seen on a bipartisan basis, food security is national security. there are two of us on this committee and that is my entire sort of lens with which i look through this. we should always be able to feed ourselves by ourselves. you are right. during covid, my family is in the hot tub business and during covid, we were concerned with the meat processing plants going down with covid that americans don't know what it's like to walk into a store and see no protein on the shelves and the panic that would create and the concern that would create. i live on my family farm. i guess just to pick up on a thread that representative gallagher mentioned, this idea of having farmland purchases go through what's called the cfius process . i think, again, i see

it as a federal issue because based on your example, right? the intelligence community, the full weight of our insider information that we may have on a company, on individuals, on their intentions resides within the federal government. i respect your attempts to do one at the state level. just like you were about to meet with the state department, they came in and said we've got real issues with them, that resides at the federal level. there are a bunch of bipartisan bills putting all purchases of farmland, not just farmland adjacent to a military base, adjacent to a sensitive site, but all farmland to go through that cfius process and let our intelligence community tell us whether this is a risk or not. last week myself and lakemore from utah, a republican, went a step further and i would ask you to think about this. it is not just farmland. if you have a company coming in building a big manufacturing

site -- i am from michigan, right? if you have a company coming in to do a huge purchase of our infrastructure, like hog slaughter, right? you should be putting that through that same intelligence process to help us understand if that is a strategic threat to us. and i think we are all trying to solve the same problem, which is how do we make sure nations that could be real adversaries potentially down the road are not able to purchase major infrastructure and assets in the united states . we have to make distinction. we can't hit it with a giant club. the biggest purchasers of a farmland in michigan arm canada and holland. i am not stressed about the canadians who are my neighbors. i used to go there to drink when the drinking age was 19. i'm not stressed about the canadians buying land in michigan. it has to be limited and tailored, but i do think it is an area of bipartisan

cooperation. we have to do that without demonizing people from china who are living under this government. i bet they really, really don't like. we want the best and brightest from china to be students here and stay here and build their lives here instead of taking information back to china. that is my one ask. let's have a real conversation and do so on a bipartisan basis. we have the will here but in the process, let's not demonize all human beings with a giant brush. in a way, again, as you mentioned, we are leaders. set the tone. i agree with you on many, many things but i ask you to think about taking it one step further from not just farmland but the big infrastructure we know they're interested in purchasing here with connections to the chinese communist party . >> that is obviously something we have had a lot of conversations about in south dakota. i'm alarmed by that. what about commercial property?

i mean, it is not they haven't been conducting nefarious activities from smaller tracts of land. we should all be analyzing it that is what i proposed the cfius model at the state level because i get the privilege and i get the opportunity to be solely focused on south dakota. i know what's going on there better than i think someone does that doesn't live in south dakota and lives across the country and no offense to the federal government, but it is very rare you guys fix anything. a lot of times when we are doing something, i am doing it in south dakota or another governor is doing it and you're taking it as a model and using it. frankly the united states constitution gives us rights and opportunities, more than the federal government. by giving us the opportunity to fight for my people and to bring policies forward it gives other states a chance to do that in the federal government follows in place. i would use tiktok as an example. by banning tiktok on government devices, dozens of states

followed our lead. the federal government recognize the threat tiktok was how it was collecting data and spying on us and being used to study the american people and stealing our information, so you know, let the states the incubators of using what our constitution intended us to be. models like this that the federal government as well can proliferate and move forward and do things. i am much more nimble than the federal government is. >> thank you, gentle lady. i thank the governor. >> thank you, sir. it's an honor and a privilege. >> thank you for taking the time and expense to come. and your leadership on this issue, much appreciated. at this point, you are excused and i am going to recognize my good friend from illinois, who is the vice chair -- or the ranking member of the select committee on china, mr. raja

krishnamoorthi for his testimony . >> thank you for inviting me to speak today. agee has always been a cornerstone of the u.s./china relationship and chairman gallagher and i have worked closely with the ag committee on this issue. in august of 2023, the chairman and i travel to a small town in iowa. in 2011, not very far from dicer, a farmer saw a man digging in the cornfields. after some investigation, authorities discovered this man was not digging for fun. he was looking for proprietary corn seeds to send back to his employer, a chinese seed corn company. the man eventually tried to ship 250 pounds of corn seeds to hong kong disguised in costco -sized packs of

microwavable popcorn, just like this. >> that is clever. >> the total cost of this one case of ip theft was estimated to be $30 million because the folks in china wanted to reverse engineer the contents of this to be able to produce the same back in china. ag technology is a prime target of ip theft because american technology and farming are the best and most productive in the world. the select committee's bipartisan economic report released in december last year included broad recommendations how to best protect ip. for the ag sector, we need to improve coordination between local and federal law enforcement agencies and properly resource and train the doj to prosecute these particular crimes. there are other ag related concerns addressed in our report. congresswoman slotkin and congresswoman hinson have

already transformed another economic recommendation into the securing american ag act which will require the usda to study the supply chains of our ag inputs including vitamins, animal feed, pesticides, where china has been increasingly dominating the market and crowding out american and other suppliers. as we remain in an era of uncertainty in our relationship with china, we need to better protect american farmers from retaliation by the ccp, including by diversifying ag export markets for american farmers. now i know this committee has been looking at the issue of land sales. there are legitimate concerns with certain purchases by ccp affiliates, ccp affiliated entities, especially close to sensitive and military sites, however as we address these problems we have to make sure the cure is not worse than the disease. some solutions have had very

real and harmful effects on the asian american community as well. dozens of bills across the country, for instance, target chinese nationals regardless of whether they are affiliated with the ccp and regardless of the proximity of their land acquisitions to sensitive sites . florida, for example, past sb 264, a law that prohibits chinese nationals from purchasing real property in the state. this law has serious negative impacts on the agent community. i will give you one example. there is a political asylum living in florida who was persecuted by the ccp and who fled to the united states. he was beginning to rebuild his life in florida. since the passage of sb 264, he was forced to cancel the purchase of what would have

been his new home in his new country. though lesson is very clear. when land purchase bills target individuals were merely immigrants, they target those outside of the intended audience . the asian american defense fund filed a lawsuit against equal protection grounds. laws like as be 264 i know are there fair nor justified and in the early 20th century states passed similar land laws in more than a dozen other states prohibiting chinese and japanese immigrants from becoming landowners. those policies severely restricted economic opportunities and exacerbated discrimination. every one of those laws were repealed one, by one, by one and all of those states. so, please come as you consider these land purchase laws, let's be careful. you folks don't want to pursue

policies that discriminate against anybody. in that spirit, let's be careful not to adopt or encourage those types of policies. chairman thompson, ranking member scott, thank you again for this very special opportunity to testify before this very distinguished committee. the select committee very much look forward to working with your committee in the future and i thank you again. >> congressman krishnamoorthi, thank you . i know you have had a busy day and you are bouncing between hearings so we will excuse you from the panel but thank you for joining us and for your leadership and for sharing with us this morning. >> thank you so much. >> we will take a brief break just to -- brief. no more than five minutes recess to allow the first pane