Mike Johanns was sworn in as the 28th Secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) on January 21, 2005. Secretary Johanns' strong agricultural roots stretch back to his childhood. He was born in Iowa and grew up doing chores on his family's dairy farm. As the son of a dairy farmer, he developed a deep respect for the land and the people who work it. He still describes himself as "a farmer's son with an intense passion for agriculture."

Yong Tang, People's Daily Washington-based correspondent, conducted an exclusive interview with the "farmer's son" in his USDA office days before the Christmas.

USDA Secretary Mike Johanns (L) received interview from Yong Tang.

USDA Secretary Mike Johanns (L) and Yong Tang

About the protection of farmers and agriculture

Yong Tang: The number of American farmers today is very small, only 2% of the total population. The people who work in agriculture, forestry and fishery sectors are only 0.7% of the total working force. The agriculture production in 2005 is only 1% of US GDP. In such case can we call American farmers marginal groups? Can we call American agriculture marginal industry?

Johanns: If you want to eat today, agriculture is very important! The numbers can be very very misleading. When I grew up on a farm in the 1950s and 1960s, it was very intense hand labor. We had tractors of course and equipments, but much different than what you have today. The productivity of American farmers has just continued to climb. That means today farmers are just farming much more land and have much more efficient operations and crops that they raise are much more productive than ever before, really in the history of the world.

So when you look at the number and say, well, we have only 2 million farmers today compared to 4 million in 1950s. It created an impression that there is a decline in agriculture but in fact that is not the case. Those 2 million farmers are just doing so much more. Their equipment is more efficient. The varieties that they are planting are more productive. Everything is just a lot different than it was when I grew up on the farm. In general American farmers are very productive.

Yong Tang: But agriculture production in 2005 is only 1% of US GDP. Since agriculture doesn't contribute greatly to American economy, why does US government still protect farmers and agriculture so much?

Johanns: It is not so much an attitude of protecting farmers. It is an attitude of supporting agriculture in a way that provides for a robust industry. Again, the important feature here is not so much the numbers you are looking at as the importance of providing a very stable and wholesome food supply to not only people here in the United States but also people in the world. I started out by saying if you ate today American farmers are very important. That may have been a little bit facetious but not really, people must eat everyday. If we can support that effort to provide food security not only to the United States but the countries around the world, agriculture is very important.

Yong Tang: To aid agricultural producers you had led the effort to provide timely assistance after the devastating hurricane season of 2005. What has USDA done to cope with the aftermath of hurricane Katrina?

Johanns :USDA has been very proactive. In the immediate aftermath we were one of the entities that provided food and water to people in the affected areas. We have a number of programs where we have assisted in cleaning up and assisted returning farmers to productivity. It covers a whole wide range of items. We have done a lot and we will continue our efforts in that regard. Recently we just released another $220 million dollars to assist in the aftermath of Katrina, if I remember correctly.

Yong Tang: How does USDA deal with the oversupply of agricultural products arising from good harvests?

Johanns: At USDA, we have employees in over 75 foreign countries. All of them are engaged in some form or fashion in assisting the marketing of US products into that country or countries around there. So market promotion, assisting with sanitary-phytosanitary issues, a whole range of items are under our umbrella to assist in the marketing of those products. Many, many farm bills back, but this is not the case today, USDA would buy agricultural commodities. We don't really do that today. We don't have excess commodities to speak of. We have a much different farm bill than what it used to be 20 or 30 years ago.

Yong Tang: 25% of the sold agricultural products here are for export. The exported agricultural products in 2006 are expected to be worthy of 77,000 million. Why USDA is so successful in promoting the export of American agricultural products?

Johanns: We just have a very efficient system for exporting to the customer. The production of the products, the transportation of products into the international marketplaces, all of these things work very very well in the United States. It takes all of that. You can have a very very productive agricultural system but if you have a very poor transportation system, then you won't be very successful. Fortunately in the United States we have all the elements in place. We are not only strong in growing the products but to transporting and selling the products. Plus, we just have very high quality agricultural products. It is a rare situation that we get tangled up in these sanitary, phytosanitary issues. It is rare enough that it generates a lot of attention when it happens. But if you think of billions of dollars that we have sent into the international marketplaces, a pretty small amount of that ever has an issue. So, we just have a very, very successful system.

Yong Tang: According to the agricultural bill adopted in 2002, the government subsidy and financial support of agriculture within the next 10 years will be 190 billion dollars. That means the annual subsidy is about 19 billion dollars. Why does US offer so many generous subsidies to farmers?

Johanns: There are a lot of ways to subsidize agriculture. Actually when it comes to the cash subsidies you just mentioned, we are the third in the world. Japan is the second and the European Union is the first. Many countries choose to subsidize their farmers by having closed markets and high tariffs. As an American farmer wants to sell a product into a given country, if the tariff is too high, it is very hard to do it. That is the subsidy to farmers, no question about it. But in the United States actually our cash subsidies to farmers in the last few years have been going down. We say that simply because we have been very successful in finding uses for our commodities and marketing our products. So the trend is quite different than the impression your question creates.

Yong Tang: According to WTO regulations, the annual agricultural subsidy should be less than 19.1 billion. For America, the number is 19 billion. Doe this mean that US is complying with WTO regulations in agricultural subsidy?

Johanns: Yes. We try to comply with WTO regulation in all areas, whatever it is. Our goal is to be in compliance with international trade rules.

Yong Tang: Does US government have any timetable to reduce or even completely abolish agricultural subsidy in the long run?

Johanns: We have always said that in return for increased market access, we were willing to reduce our subsidies. Our President has, in fact, said we should be working toward elimination of all trade-distorting subsidies with the WTO process. Our preference is that we should try to do everything we can to achieve market access. We won't unilaterally disarm. We won't ask other countries to do the same. But we ought to move together to work to reduce our subsidies. We said this over and over again that we are willing to negotiate on that point. We have to have market access. We have to have tariffs come down. We should have the ability to sell agricultural products from country to country.

Yong Tang: American farmers may become angry with the reduction of agricultural subsidizes. How do you persuade them to accept reduced subsidizes?

Johanns: I think our farmers believe that they can compete anyplace in the world if they have a level playing field. If you have high tariffs, it is not a level playing field. That is why we have said to them if you give me greater market access we can reduce our subsidies. Our farmers have said to us over and over again that if we can achieve greater and fair market access, we will reduce our subsidies. I am confident that they would.

Yong Tang: A new agricultural bill is being drafted and it will become law in 2007. Are there any new regulations to protect American farmers and agriculture? You said the new bill would be extremely important to American farmers. Why?

Johanns: It is important in terms of establishing a base or sending a signal to farmers of our belief in the future of our agriculture in the United States. It is not only a bill, but a whole host of other things we do. Every five years we have an opportunity to establish forward-leaning and good farm policy. 2007 is one of those years. I am confident working with the House and Senate that we can do something that will be very positive for American agriculture. But again it isn't just based on subsidies. It is based on trade, open markets, fair markets and such sort of things.

Yong Tang: USDA has some wonderful plans for the economically disadvantaged people including the poor, the handicapped, the aged, the students and the fat people. For example, to fight obesity you launched the interactive, bi-lingual MyPyramid.com, a motivational and interactive food guidance system. Can you tell me more about WIC program, national student lunch program and food pyramid program? What is the logic behind those programs?

Johanns: The logic behind those programs is that if we can educate and help people make healthy decisions relative to their lifestyle they will live healthier lives and more productive lives and live longer. There is tremendous research that shows those things. The MyPyramid program has been hugely and remarkably successful. We have more hits on that website on this program than anything else we have done here at USDA. The concept behind MyPyramid program is pretty straightforward. People may enjoy a variety of foods as long as you do so in moderation and as long as you do so with exercise as a part of your daily routine.

Again the whole idea is to help people make good healthy decisions about food and their lifestyles. So the MyPyramid program is part of that. We also try to build in this concept in our nutrition programs. We also established new guidelines for women and children to help them make healthy choices about their diets. We do a lot of that. It is very important to us.

Yong Tang: I know WIC program is free for those who qualify. How about national student lunch program? Is it also free?

Johanns: It is free for some students and available at reduced costs for others. It would depend upon many factors, but it is either free or reduced.

Yong Tang: So USDA has to pay a lot for these programs?

Johanns: It is like any other social program that we have in the United States. There is a cost to it. About 55% to 60% of the USDA budget is in nutrition programs.

Yong Tang: In China today, food safety is a big concern. Almost everything on the table is likely to be unhealthy and even toxic. How do you make sure all the agricultural products consumed here are safe?

Johanns: We are working very hard at it. Food safety is a major part of our agenda as it is for the Food and Drug Administration. We work together in a very cooperative way. Our food in the United States is very safe. It is probably the safest of any place in the world. It is quite rare that our food is unsafe. That is why food safety issues don't get a lot of attention here. I always say to people that we have unbelievable benefit of going into supermarkets that have a huge display of food and we spend less of our disposable income on food than just about any country in the world. The food is very, very safe and wholesome. But it doesn't happen accidentally. The private sectors involved. Public sectors involved. State governments are involved. Local governments are involved. It is a big task. But because of the work of many, we have a very safe food supply in the United States.

Yong Tang: What is the biggest challenge for American agriculture in the 21st century?

Johanns: There are a lot of challenges and opportunities. One of the challenges we face today is that we all want to move toward more energy independence. Agriculture plays a role in that. That is redefining agriculture in the United States. 20% of our corn crops and 6 % of soy bean crops will be processed as renewable fuel. That is a challenge but also presents great opportunities. I think technology advancement and research have always been the backbone of American agriculture. Agriculture is more efficient today because of the advancement of technology and research. So investing there is one of the challenges we face. But it is very important that we do that for the future.

About Sino-American agricultural cooperation

Yong Tang: Did you visit China this year?

Johanns: I did not visit China this year. I went to China twice last year. I met with Chinese Primer Wen Jiabao. I have been to China a number of times through the years.

Yong Tang: In 2006, what aspect of China has impressed you most?

Johanns: China is growing and developing rapidly, there is no doubt about that. Every time I go to China, it is a different China. There is a lot of growth in China. I am confident that is going to continue.

Yong Tang: In 2006, how does your focus of attention on China change? What aspect of China has intrigued you most?

Johanns: China continues to be a very strong market for agriculture products. Our working relationship with China in agriculture just continues to grow. There are bumps on the road. By and large it has been a relationship where we found a very open market to some of our products. As the economy of China grows, and it will, there is no doubt about that, people just turn to other things for their diet and we grow a lot of those crops. I think the future here is good for continued expansion of sales into China.

Yong Tang: Since you visit China frequently what is your personal impression on Chinese farmers and agriculture?

Johanns: We have worked with Chinese farmers in a number of ways. Chinese farmers are interested in advancing and using new technology, using new genetics for livestock, using hybrids. I have never forgotten when I was with a Chinese farmer some years ago in his home, he was telling me how he was adapting what he grew because the marketplace was telling him that they wanted different products and better products and that sort of thing. Farmers in China, I think are like farmers anywhere in the world. They are very interested in improving the productivity of their land, the productivity of their crops. Again I think that will continue in the years to come.

Yong Tang: How can China learn from America in agriculture development since we have so different agricultural system and conditions? Do you think China and America is complementary in agriculture?

Johanns: There are areas where we are complementary. I always view trade relations as a two way street. We can learn things from China and China can learn things from us. My experience, again, with Chinese farmers shows us that they have tremendous interest in improving genetics, improving hybrids, improving efficiency, better water management, all of things that US farmers work on are issues Chinese farmers face too. Because of that, I think there is opportunity for a very complementary working relationship between the two countries.

Yong Tang: Soy beans have become America's third largest export product to China, only after airplanes and semiconductors. In what fields can China and US cooperate in agriculture except the mutual trade?

Johanns: I think science, technology, genetics, water management, and irrigation would be areas where there could be strong cooperation. When I was Nebraska Governor, one of our farmers actually shipped hogs to China. A farmer in China bought those hogs because of their genetics. They wanted to improve the genetics of their hogs in China. Again, that is just one example of how US and Chinese farmers can work together.

Yong Tang: Where will US China agricultural cooperation go in the future? What could be the biggest challenge or stumbling block?

Johanns: There are always stumbling blocks. We have been working with China on the beef issue. We would like to have that market open based upon international standards, but we are not there yet. There are trade stumbling blocks. China probably has something that they would like to be selling here in the US that has not cleared our regulatory process. Those are areas we have to consistently work on and definitely focus on improving.

Yong Tang: China has imported so many agricultural products from America, what has US done to indicate your reciprocity?

Johanns: Those identical things that I've mentioned. We have either gone through the regulatory process or have completed the regulatory process on a number of products that China has requested. Cooked poultry is a good example of that. We have an annual meeting with China where we try to work through some of these issues and solve these problems so that American markets will be more open. Again, this is a two way street. We recognize that, we understand and value the importance of that. I don't think there will be a day when either China or US can say all problems have been solved. We have complex economies so I don't think it is going to be the case. My impression is that we have made progress in many areas.

Yong Tang: This December is the 5th anniversary of China's accession to WTO. USTR recently submitted a report to Congress, saying that the performance of China is decidedly mixed. How do you think of the report? How do you evaluate the performance of China in complying with the WTO rules in the field of agriculture?

Johanns: USTR traces and tracks these kinds of issues. There are many areas where China has made progress. There are many areas where the progress since then has not been robust as we would like to see. The most recent example, which I would mention just because it has gotten some attention, would be beef. What China is insisting on is not complying with international standards. We have to solve that problem. I can tell you as US Secretary of Agriculture my goal is to move our trade toward international standards. When I work with China I can say these are our standards, the same standards you would face with other countries. And vice versa. That is what we expect of our trading partners. These would be examples of problems we have and they really need to be solved. If we are going to be members of WTO, we should not only get benefits from that, which I think are very important, but we should also comply with the rules of the WTO.

Yong Tang: GMO products are a sensitive and controversial issue. China has approved to buy from America 8 kinds of genetically modified corns, 2 kinds of cottons, 7 kinds of rapes and one kind of soy bean. Many countries, European Union in particular, are reluctant to import genetically modified crops. But many American scientists insist that GMO is safe and its risk is marginal. How do you think of the safety of GMO crops and products in America?

Johanns: We have a regulatory process that these products go through. At the end of the regulatory process, if they are what we call deregulated, I am very, very confident in saying that they are safe, safe for human beings, safe from the environmental standpoint, safe for animals. Genetically modified products are quite common in the United States. In our country because of our safety record in this area, people are very willing and open to genetically modified products, very willing to use them.

Here is what I want to say, again just to be very candid: farmers do want the latest technology. Safe genetically modified products are really changing the world. They feed hungry people. They allow farmers to be more productive on the same amount of land. Countries who deny access to their farmers are leaving their farmers behind. Very very truly their farmers will find it very difficult to compete in the world marketplace. We are very, very close to products that, literally by the inclusion of an additional element in the food supply, may prevent blindness of children. What country would not want that? If we can grow rice with that here in the United States, and do so safely, and provide that to children, then rice farmers in another part of the world will be left behind if they can't do that. So I think more and more you are going to see farmers' demand of their countries that this "take it or leave it "attitude should change and it will change.

Yong Tang: Does USDA have any special regulations for the sale and export of GMO crops and products?

Johanns: We do. We have a regulatory process in place to decide what products should be deregulated and which should not be deregulated. So we do have a complex system. The products have to go through testing, we are part of the oversight for that.

Yong Tang: In the supermarkets here, genetically modified products will be labeled as GMO, right?

Johanns: No, not in the United States. 70% of our processed foods in the United States in all likelihood have some genetically modified background to some extent. Again in our marketplace here, because of the safety issues, consumers are very willing to receive genetically modified products. GMO is not a real big issue here in the United States to speak of.

Yong Tang: So you and your family also often use genetically modified food?

Johanns: Yes. Yesterday we shopped at a grocery store just like any other consumer and bought products off the shelf. There is no special supermarket because I am the Secretary of Agriculture. I go where everybody goes.

Yong Tang: American Rice Alliance proposed recently that American government should get rid of GMO rice and re-establish the export of American non-GMO rice. Can you explain this?

Johanns: Rice, to date, has been GMO free. They are all sold that way. That is what our rice industry wants to be. If rice farmers here want to be GMO free, they are free to choose that course of action.

Yong Tang: As the WTO transition period ends in China, Chinese agricultural market will be open more fully to foreign competition. How could Chinese agriculture compete in the world since it is so weak and small at the moment?

Johanns: There is no doubt Chinese agriculture can compete. The size of farms may be different. The size of farms in European Union is smaller than the United States but 20% of food product imports to the United States come from European Union and it is growing. I am very confident that Chinese farmers can compete. They may have different sized farms but size doesn't always mean competitive advantage. Sometimes it does but not always. I am confident Chinese farmers can compete in the world marketplace.

Yong Tang: But some experts even say Chinese agriculture may collapse in the near future due to the new round of competition?

Johanns: It is an exaggeration. I have been around Chinese farmers, certainly not as much as I have been around US farmers, but I see a spirit there that is very, very positive and I just think you will always have a strong agricultural base in China. It may change and evolve over the time,that is normal. Chinese agriculture, I believe, will always be a feature of the Chinese economy.

Yong Tang: When could China be granted full market economic status by America?

Johanns: I will send you over to USTR for that question. (laugh)

About the power and working style

Yong Tang: Compared to other countries, American agriculture is very strong. But taking into its contribution to the overall economy, your agriculture is quite small. In such a country how powerful are you as USDA Secretary? I mean is it a very powerful secretary? Is it a very powerful department?

Johanns: I work for the President. I work under the oversight of both the House and Senate. That is just the way the structure works. I would tell you that opinions of Secretary of Agriculture are valued and important. I don't think that has much to do with the size we have in US economy. It is important we eat. It is important that agriculture is successful. So my opinions are certainly listened to and more often than not valued.

Yong Tang: How much budget is under your control?

Johanns: The budget of USDA will be somewhere between $90 billion and $100 billion dollars. Not all of that budget is for subsidies. 60% of that budget will go to nutrition programs.

Yong Tang: How many employees does USDA have?

Johanns: About 110,000.

Yong Tang: How many employees could you have final say on their promotion?

Johanns: The vast majority of our employees are in the governmental system. They are promoted by that system, not by me.

Yong Tang: As USDA Secretary, how much are you paid annually and what welfare could you get? It includes medical care, housing, bodyguards, chefs and etc.

Johanns: I get a salary. I don't get housing from the government. There is a medical care plan for cabinet members, of course. I have no bodyguards, no chefs. There are not a lot of extra benefits. There is a government car that takes me to and from work but I don't use that car much. I usually ride with my wife in our personal car. It is pretty straightforward.

Yong Tang: Do you enjoy special plane or chartered plane for traveling?

Johanns:No, I fly on commercial airplanes. It will be very very rare that I will be in a government plane. If I am on a special mission of some kind, which may be once or twice a year, I get in a government plane. But at all the other times I fly commercially.

Yong Tang: Before you became USDA Secretary, you were once a mayor and a governor. Everybody knows that public servants in America are paid not very well. If you become a lawyer or a doctor or a CEO, I am sure you would make much more money. So what motivates you to choose a career in the government?

Johanns: I just believe in public service and choosing a career in the federal government. I admire this President just a tremendous amount. I love agriculture. So it is kind of natural. I won't do this forever, but I am honored to do it for the time that I am here.

Yong Tang: Your strong agricultural roots stretch back to your childhood. You were born in Iowa and grew up doing chores on your family's dairy farm. As the son of a dairy farmer, you developed a deep respect for the land and the people who work it. You still describe yourself as "a farmer's son with an intense passion for agriculture." Can you tell me how have you benefited from such a background? How does your agricultural roots contribute to your successful work today?

Johanns: It is huge. On personal level, that's where I learned to work hard and be very disciplined. But it also gives me a deep understanding of agriculture that is very personal because I grew up there.

Yong Tang: Do you have any chances to interact with ordinary farmers?

Johanns: All the time. We did Farm Bill Forums in 48 states and asked farmers to just come in and talk to us.

Yong Tang: Come to USDA?

Johanns: No, I went to their states.

Yong Tang: On a regular basis?

Johanns: Over a whole year we did this. I interact with farmers all the time.

Yong Tang: I once interviewed a farmer in North Dakota. He has a wonderful life but neither of his two children wants to become a farmer. Are you worried about the fact that less and less people here want to become farmers?

Johanns: Here is what I would say: I want to create an atmosphere where if a young man or a young woman wants to stay home and farm or ranch, that the economic opportunity to do so is there. That doesn't mean they will all stay home and ranch. Nor should they. Some want to be doctors or lawyers or work in town, I mean there are just so many factors that go into that decision. But for me I want to be able to create the atmosphere where if some young person wants to stay home and farm or ranch they can and they can make a living and support a family. That is my goal to create that opportunity.

We have some awfully great professors, teachers, doctors, politicians who decided not to stay at home and farm and ranch. That is what is beautiful about America. You could grow up on a farm in North Central Iowa and become the President of the United States.

Yong Tang: Or become USDA Secretary! (Laugh)

Johanns: Yeah.

Yong Tang: Do you vision a day when the number of farmers is dwindling to such an extent that agriculture may disappear in the US?

Johanns: No, I don't think that could happen at all. Farming will continue to grow in efficiency. Because of that there may be farmers out there who retire and somebody in his family doesn't take over his farm, but you will always have agriculture in the United States.

Yong Tang: People's Daily is the largest newspaper in China, enjoying a daily circulation of three million. What do you want to say most to our three million readers?

Johanns: I have been to China many times, I enjoy my visits there, I look forward to continued good working relationship in the years to come.

By Yong Tang, People's Daily correspondent based in Washington, DC