[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 85 (Tuesday, June 11, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H6164-H6182]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND
RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1996
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hefley). Pursuant to House Resolution
451 and rule XXIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of
the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the
bill, H.R. 3603.
The Chair designates the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Goodlatte] as
Chairman of the Committee of the Whole, and requests the gentleman from
Georgia [Mr. Linder] to assume the chair temporarily.
{time} 1603
in the committee of the whole
Accordingly the House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole
House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill (H.R.
3603) making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food
and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the fiscal
year ending September 30, 1997, and for other purposes with Mr. Linder
(Chairman pro tempore) in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is
considered as having been read the first time.
Under the rule, the gentleman from New Mexico [Mr. Skeen] and the
gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Durbin] will each be recognized for 30
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Mexico [Mr. Skeen]
Mr. SKEEN. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to bring before the House today
H.R. 3603, a bill making appropriations for fiscal year 1997 for
Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration and
Related Agencies.
This bill is the product of 15 days of hearings conducted in March
and April. We have published seven volumes of hearing records totaling
5,775 pages, with all the budget presentations and the full testimony
of 304 witnesses including 19 Members of Congress.
Mr. Chairman, the bill was voted out of the subcommittee unanimously
on May 30 and from the full committee on June 6. It was filed on June 7
and the copies of the bill, as amended, and the report have been
available since Monday morning.
Our original allocation required us to cut nearly $1 billion in
budget authority from $13 billion in discretionary spending, a nearly
impossible task. However, our allocation situation improved
considerably up to the day of the full committee markup, making our
situation still difficult but much better than the original one, and
for that I want to thank the gentleman from Louisiana, Chairman
Livingston, for his help and his understanding of our situation.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to make clear for the benefit of all my
colleagues, because we had several inquiries today, that the extra
allocation mentioned in the press this morning is already factored in
our bill. No extra allocation was given to this subcommittee that was
not already factored into the full committee markup last week.
The bill totals $52.7 billion in budget authority, which is $10.4
billion less than fiscal year 1996, and $5.8 billion less than the
administration requested. The mandatory spending total in the bill is
$39.9 billion and the discretionary is $12.8 billion.
This bill meets our targets for both budget authority and outlays. In
discretionary spending the bill reduces the budget authority by $509
million and outlays by $228 million from fiscal year 1996.
Our priorities for funding this year, I think, are shared by most
Members of the House, regardless of party. They are nutrition, food
safety, research, rural development and the maintenance of programs
that keep American agriculture strong and progressive.
Like all the appropriations subcommittees, we were severely hampered
by the very late arrival of th Administration's budget, and
complicating our task was the fact that the Administration budget
proposal did not reflect the reality of the recently passed farm bill.
Mr. Chairman, I would like now to summarize some of the major
spending and saving elements of the bill.
The reorganizing and streamlining of the Department of Agriculture,
which began in the Bush administration, continues. Some 43 agencies
have been reduced to 29, and the work force has been reduced by 10,000
staff years since 1993. Our bill reduced Farm Service Agency salaries
by more than $48 million from fiscal year 1996.
Nearly two-thirds of the USDA budget is spent on nutrition and
feeding programs, mainly mandatory programs such as food stamps and
school lunch. WIC--the Women, Infants and Children feeding program--is
a discretionary account but it may be the most important one we have in
our jurisdiction. WIC is maintained at last year's funding level but
with a substantial carryover. Some of this carryover may be directed to
other critical programs at the discretion of the Secretary of
Agriculture.
Child nutrition programs, including school lunch, school breakfast,
and the child and adult food programs are funded at $8.7 billion.
Spending on rural development has been reduced by more than $258
million from fiscal year 1996 but we have consolidated programs and
given the administration the flexibility it requested to better meet
the requirements of each individual State.
Before I conclude, Mr. Chairman, I must say I read with considerable
disappointment statements in the press attributed to Secretary Glickman
regarding funding levels for rural development. When I met with the
Secretary about a month ago to discuss the Fund for Rural America, he
was not able to indicate what plans the administrations had for this
new $100 million program, even though he personally lobbied for its
inclusion in the Farm Bill 3 months earlier. The administration also
continues to ignore the serious problem for loan programs caused by the
rise of interest rates.
Furthermore, the subcommittee was told back in February that an
additional $36 million would be transferred from WIC carryover funds
into rural and water and sewer programs, which the administration
claims he is a very high priority with them. This authority was given
to USDA in the fiscal year 1996 appropriations bill and, as of last
week, those funds have still not been transferred.
I would strongly suggest to the Secretary, with the best of
intention, that
[[Page H6165]]
the best use of time and resources at USDA is in planning and executing
actual projects that benefit rural America and not in the issuing of
vague press releases and endless bureaucratic turf battles.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank all the members of the
subcommittee and their staffs for their help on this bill, and they
have all made substantial contributions. To my Republican friends, the
gentleman from Indiana, John Myers, the gentleman from New York, Jim
Walsh, the gentleman from Arkansas, Jay Dickey, the gentleman from
Georgia, Jack Kingston, the gentleman from California, Frank Riggs, the
gentleman from Washington, George Nethercutt, and the gentleman from
Louisiana, our full committee chairman, Bob Livingston. And to my
Democratic friends, the gentleman from Wisconsin, Dave Obey, the
distinguished ranking member of the committee, the gentleman from
Illinois, Dick Durbin, who is ranking on the subcommittee, the
gentlewoman from Ohio, Marcy Kaptur, the gentleman from Arkansas, Ray
Thornton, the gentlewoman from New York, Nita Lowey, and the gentleman
from California, Vic Fazio. I would also like to commend the staff,
headed by Mr. Tim Sanders, with Carol Murphy and John Ziolkowski, and
also the USDA detailee, Martin Delgado, and my own personal member of
that committee, Mr. Jaime Castillo.
Mr. Chairman and Members of the House, this bill supports programs
that benefit every one of your constituents every day. It has nutrition
programs for the young and the elderly, conservation programs that not
only protect farmland but protect the watersheds that provide drinking
water to our cities, food safety inspection, drug and medical device
programs for every American consumer, and trade and rural development
programs that support millions of jobs in rural and urban areas.
We have met our balanced budget obligations and we have done our best
to meet the needs of food and fiber producers, consumers, public health
and safety in rural America. It is a bipartisan bill to which Member on
both sides of the aisle have made a contribution.
Mr. Chairman, last year we were given strong bipartisan support for
the bill as passed by the House and the conference report. As a result,
the bill was signed into law quickly after passage, and not one day, I
repeat, not one day was lost in providing your constituents with the
important programs in this bill. There was no shutdown in agriculture.
This bill deserves that same kind of support and treatment again this
year, and I respectfully ask for my colleagues' help and their vote on
final passage.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume,
and I want to thank the gentleman for recognizing me to claim the other
side's opening time.
I would like to salute first my colleague from New Mexico for a fine
job under very difficult circumstances.
Mr. Chairman, we all know we are serious about budget deficit
reduction, and as we have learned many years ago in the Committee on
Appropriations, we deal in the reality of limited funds and unlimited
needs. Our subcommittee, like so many others, has tried to fairly
balance those two opposing situations. I think we have done a good job,
although I will say there are some parts of it that I would like to
have seen us do a little better job on.
Most people, when they hear the budget for the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, think in terms of farmers and ranchers and do not think
about the other major responsibilities of the department.
The gentleman from New Mexico [Mr. Skeen] properly noted the
responsibility of this department in the area of nutrition. One of the
programs that I have focused on in my tenure in the House of
Representatives, serving on the subcommittee, is the WIC Program, the
supplemental feeding program for women infants and children. It is a
program which is designed to help low-income mothers during their
pregnancy and, after they have given birth, to raise healthy children.
I happen to think it is one of the single most important investments
that U.S. taxpayers make. This program literally reaches and helps 40
percent, 40 percent of the infants in America. We are talking about a
program that is essential to make certain that babies are born strong,
healthy, with a fighting chance to become productive citizens.
This program, through the U.S. Department of Agriculture, is a
Godsend in many parts of America where, otherwise, pregnant mothers
would go without this assistance, counseling, and nutritional advice,
and the basic foodstuffs that feed them during their pregnancies. And
children, of course, new to the world, in those formative months, need
the very best. This program was worked to make sure this happens.
Mr. Chairman, I am happy my colleague from New Mexico shares my
dedication to this program. It should be bipartisan. It is a bipartisan
program. I think our goal is to reach some 7.6 million, I am not
certain of the exact figures as I stand here, by the end of this next
fiscal year. And I hope we can do that in a bipartisan fashion.
We are hopeful that what we have done in this bill will provide the
necessary funds for WIC to meet its goal of enrollment. I think the
subcommittee has spoken informally, and we should put on the record
here our commitment to return, if necessary, and ask for additional
funds, if needed, to make sure the WIC Program is not underfunded. I
hope that it is not.
I believe we have taken care of them, and if that is not the case,
then I think there is a general feeling that we must return and make
sure that is done.
Mr. Chairman, let me speak about several other items in the bill that
I think are important.
{time} 1615
Agriculture research is often overlooked by people. We have
colleagues of ours on the floor of the House who like to stand at these
microphones and giggle about the names of some of these ag research
projects. The Pink Bull Work project, they giggle. The Boll Weevil
Eradication project. The Screw Worm project, and their sides are
bursting as they laugh about the names of these projects.
Little do they know that the critical research that is being done in
these areas is absolutely essential, not only for the farmers and
ranchers involved, but for consumers and environmentalists. Our efforts
to eradicate pests that attack cotton in America are essential because
that is one of the crops that uses so many ag chemicals. As we find
ways to reduce the pests assaulting cotton, we reduce the need for the
use of ag chemicals and potential danger from runoff.
So I hope that some of my friends, particularly from the city, who
like to get a good belly laugh over some of these ag research programs
would be honest enough to take the time, as I have, to understand how
important these programs are.
Mr. Chairman, I am sorry that we have had to cut back on ag research.
It is an area where we should be spending our money and our investment.
I have to commend the chairman for the $30 million additional in the
Food Safety and Inspection Service. Each of us in America takes for
granted the safety of meat and poultry and fish and food products that
we buy at the grocery store. If we travel to a Third World country, we
not only worry about the purity of the drinking water and the safety,
but also the safety of the food that is being served to us. Has it been
cooked long enough to be safe to eat?
That is usually not a concern in the United States because we have a
good Food Safety and Inspection Service. We are in the process of
making it dramatically better by moving to new technological ways to
measure the danger to consumers and to go after them. This investment
of $30 million will help us reach that goal so that the hundreds and
sometimes thousands of Americans who suffer from food contamination
each year will be protected.
The cutback in funds for soil and water conservation is hurtful, and
I hope that we can revisit this at some time in the future to restore
some of these funds. It is an essential part of any effort to keep the
environment clean, and I can tell my colleagues that our friends who
live in rural areas are anxious to be part of that partnership.
These are families that live on farms and drink the water out of
wells a few
[[Page H6166]]
hundred feet away from the crops that are being planted. They want
their water safe in the wells around the farms and they do not want the
runoff to endanger the drinking water of any other American.
I also want to say that the rural development funds are down in
amount, up in flexibility. We are going to find out whether that works;
if we give the department more flexibility in rural development,
whether it is in water or sewer development, whether that can overcome
a cutback in some funding. When it comes time for budget deficit
reduction we often have to make that kind of a choice.
This is a good bill. There are parts of it that I disagree with. That
is not unusual. There were parts that I disagreed with when I was Chair
of this subcommittee. But we have to bring a bill to the floor that is
an honest compromise to achieve the purpose of this subcommittee and
this appropriation. My colleague from New Mexico has done that. I
salute him for it. Though we may disagree from time to time on the
floor, our friendship and collegiality are never in jeopardy and it
will not be in the course of this debate.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SKEEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend, the gentleman from Illinois [Mr.
Durbin], who is leaving this body to go to the never-never land of the
endless quorums. I want to say that we certainly have had a great
relationship. This is what this is all about. Notwithstanding party
differences, that has been a small item.
Mr. Chairman, it has been a delight to work with the gentleman when
he was chairman. The gentleman gave me the model of what a chairman
should really do and be like, and I appreciate that very much.
It is sweet just to be able to return a favor in kind. I want to wish
the gentleman well, up to a point. We are not going to measure that
point at all. Mr. Chairman, he is a great gentleman, Dick Durbin, and
it was a great pleasure to serve with him.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana [Mr.
Myers].
Mr. MYERS of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding
me this time. I, too, rise in support of this legislation, this
appropriation.
Mr. Chairman, as has been said already, I guess the best that can be
said is that it is adequate. It is not the appropriation many of us
would like to see if we had a free hand in spending the taxpayers'
money. Maybe it is a good thing we do not have that free hand.
One area that I think we are making a mistake, and the gentleman from
Illinois [Mr. Durbin] mentioned this, is ag research. Farmers today,
this year if they were financially able to carry their crops and their
grain into later this year, made a profit. But they have been able to
make a profit because we have been able to research to increase yields
with less costly production, and we have been finding more uses for
agricultural products through research.
So, Mr. Chairman, this is one area that I think we are making a
mistake, and it is not the fault of this subcommittee but it is the
fault of the system, that we ought to be making more money available
for research because that is what is going to keep the American farmer
in production, keep the American farmer on the farm and, most
importantly, will keep them competitive in the world.
Much of the world today would like to buy foods. Many of the
countries that need it worst do not have the money to buy from the
United States. We have the capacity, thank goodness, in this country to
produce more than we use.
So if we can continue the research to be competitive in the world,
giving farmers the tools that they can produce a crop cheaper and
therefore be able to sell it cheaper and still stay in business, this
is what we should be doing. This appropriation unfortunately, through
no fault of this subcommittee, does not do as good a job in research as
we would like to do.
Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from New Mexico [Mr. Skeen] for
the time, and I thank the staff and everyone who has worked so hard for
this bill.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from
Wisconsin [Mr. Obey].
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, the first thing I would like to do is to say
something about the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Durbin], who as
Members know is serving his last year in this House because he has had
the bad judgment to decide he wanted to run for the U.S. Senate.
Mr. Chairman, I think that it is fair to say that if people put
together any list of the 10 Members of Congress who they would describe
as being the most honest and the most passionate in terms of defending
the public interest, the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Durbin] would be
on it.
There is no question that any time he comes to the floor he knows his
subject. He is speaking because of what he believes, and he always does
it with grace and with honor, and I think has represented the finest
traditions of the history of this House. He is as close to a perfect
definition of being a true public servant as any human can possibly be.
We are going to miss him greatly. We are going to miss his talent. We
are going to miss his sense of fairness. We are going to miss his sense
of judgment and his insistence on always putting the public interest
first.
That does not mean I have always agreed with him. I have not. But he
has been a tremendous addition to this committee and this House. He is
a worthy and will be a worthy successor to Paul Simon. He is in that
tradition of clean as well as effective government, and he continues
that proud tradition that Senator Paul Douglas established so many
years ago. He was Mr. Integrity. Senator Douglas was also a man who
understood as much about the way this economy works as almost anybody
in the history of this Congress.
I think the people of Illinois and the people of America will be
served by Mr. Durbin's service in the other body, should the people of
Illinois be wise enough to elect him to the U.S. Senate, and I am
confident they will.
I would also like to take a moment to talk about this bill. It is
being brought to the floor by a chairman, the gentleman from New Mexico
[Mr. Skeen], who everyone understands is a legislator's legislator. He
always finds a way to try to work out problems in a fair-minded and
intelligent way, and he has performed in fine, bipartisan tradition,
and I respect that very much. I enjoy the opportunity to serve in the
same Congress with the gentleman.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to make just a couple of comments about
the bill itself. Coming from a rural district, I regret the fact that
the committee could not find a way to provide more support for rural
sewer and water. Members have to come from a rural district to
understand how important programs like that are.
I have many communities in my district that are 200, 300, 400 people;
not exactly the large metropolitan areas of this world. I have many,
many communities, the majority of households from those communities are
headed either by women or someone who is retired. Communities like that
do not have the income base, they do not have the property tax base to
meet the environmental cleanup needs that face so many of those
communities.
They really need much more help than they are getting from both their
State governments and the Federal Government, and I think that we have
an obligation to try to find ways to provide more help to them because
they are, in essence, when they are faced with environmental cleanup
requirements, they are faced with the responsibility to clean up
problems that somebody from yesterday left those communities.
I hope that as this bill moves through the process, we will find ways
to help those communities more.
Second, I have to say a word about something that is not in this
bill. The last farm bill that went through this House, the authorizing
bill, contained a provision which allows a few States in the northeast
section of the country to set up what I would define as a dairy cartel.
Under that proposal, the northeastern States can band together. They
can, in effect, establish tariffs on dairy products that are produced
outside of the northeast region and sold in that region of the country.
[[Page H6167]]
That cartel could also be used to artificially subsidize dairy
products that are exported from that region of the country into other
regions of the country. I do not believe that that is fair to my
farmers. I do not think it is fair to farmers in any other section of
the country.
When we add that to the already egregious and incredibly unfair milk
marketing order system which will pay farmers from one region of the
country $2 and $3 per hundred pounds of milk more than they will pay
them if they come from my region of the country, I think that that is
just another example of how the Federal Government has screwed up
national dairy policy.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer an amendment which eliminates
that provision, but I think, frankly, there is no point in doing that,
given the way things have been brought about in this Congress on that
provision. But I would certainly hope that the administration itself
does not allow that northeast dairy cartel to come into being, and if
they proceed to try to do it, I would hope that in the courts it would
be declared unconstitutional.
I wish that there were a way to effectively get at that in this bill.
I have been thinking about offering an amendment, but I recognize
reality, and I think we will have to rely on the administration and the
courts to do what needs to be done to provide fairness and justice for
farmers in all regions of the country.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I again congratulate the gentleman from
Illinois and wish him well in the election, and I thank the gentleman
from New Mexico [Mr. Skeen], chairman of the subcommittee, as well.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his kind remarks.
Mr. SKEEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I say once again that I thank the gentleman from
Wisconsin [Mr. Obey] for the kind words. He can be a meddlesome
individual at times; he has been anything but that. It is a pleasure
working with him and I admire his style and his tenacity. I just do not
admire some of the things that he says. That is a fair given. But the
gentleman from Wisconsin is a great gentleman and I appreciate it.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from New York [Mr.
Walsh].
(Mr. WALSH asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of our bill,
H.R. 3603, and its accompanying report that provides funding for
agriculture, rural development, Food and Drug Administration and
related agencies.
{time} 1630
I commend the distinguished chairman, the gentleman from New Mexico
[Mr. Skeen], and the ranking member, the gentleman from Illinois [Mr.
Durbin]. I tell both of them that I enjoyed very much working with them
and the cooperation that they have shown me throughout this process and
to all of us.
I would also like to thank the subcommittee staff for the great work
that they did.
In this bill we have had to make very difficult choices. The
subcommittee had to reduce discretionary spending by over $500 million,
causing painful reductions in rural housing and development programs.
Nevertheless, we have continued to provide sufficient funding for
critical agricultural research. In fact, we increased it by $47
million, and the total amount for ag research is $1.5 billion.
Spending on agriculture research enables the American farmer to
deliver an abundant and affordable food supply to a largely urban
population and to a hungry world and provides for a large portion of
the American trade surplus.
I am also glad to report that this bill provides critical funding for
conservation programs. Conserving, improving, and sustaining our
natural resources and environment has to be one of our Nation's top
priorities. Agriculture today is facing greater challenges than ever
before in meeting public demands for environmental protection.
Agriculture has been identified as a major contributor to nonpoint
source water pollution. In fact, water quality is the most rapidly
emerging issue impacting on agriculture today.
This appropriations bill provides the Soil Conservation Service with
the necessary resources to provide planning and technical assistance
for watershed projects and to help farmers implement conservation
compliance plans on highly erodible lands. With many of our Nation's
rivers and lakes being threatened by agricultural related nonpoint
source pollution, we need to utilize best management practices to
conserve our soil and water resources. These practices would include
soil erosion control, animal waste management, plant nutrient
management, the building of manure lagoons and pesticide and chemical
management. The benefits from this conservation planning will result in
reduced erosion and sedimentation, cleaner water, reduction of health
hazards, improved fish and wildlife habitat, and protection of wetlands
and flood prevention.
In this bill we are also able to expand the wetlands reserve by
providing an additional 130,000 acres of wetlands. Last year the
committee was not able to provide any funding for this program. While I
would have liked to have seen more lands set aside for wetlands
protection, this committee has added eight new States to the Wetlands
Reserve Program and enrolled 130,000 additional acres so that we can
better preserve and protect our precious wetlands.
This bill was a real challenge in terms of our priorities, but we
strongly funded our nutrition programs. We increased funding for the
School Lunch Program, the School Breakfast Program, the Child and Adult
Program, Food Program, the Food Stamp Program, the Emergency Food
Assistance Program; all of these programs were increased in funding.
There was a lot of political hay made last year about cut, cut, cut,
cut, cut, but a lot of untruths were being told at the time. All of the
nutrition programs in fact are increasing. WIC was held constant,
however. There was a large surplus carried over from last year that
will help to fund the program. We are committed to the nutrition of
this Nation and to providing everyone who is in difficulty with the
proper nutrition that we can and should provide.
Mr. Chairman, I strongly, again, appreciate your hard work on this
and the ranking member and urge its adoption.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Florida [Mrs. Thurman].
Mrs. THURMAN. Mr. Chairman, I should say that I echo all of those
wonderful remarks that have been made both for the gentleman from New
Mexico [Mr. Skeen], and for the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Durbin].
So I will not take my 2 minutes, but you know that they are well meant.
What I do want to bring up though is that the issue of research and
research has become a very important part of the agriculture industry,
not only for things to provide a safer and better food product for our
country and our citizens but also to help control some diseases that
can potentially have some very adverse effects on very important
products that are grown within our States.
In this particular issue, the State of Florida, with oranges, last
fall the USDA had identified a brown citrus aphid infestation is some
parts of Florida. This actually is something that transmits CTV which
can pose a very formidable threat to our industry. It actually has not
only and will not only hit Florida, but it also has an opportunity to
go into Arizona, California, and Texas. Most of this is commercial but
some of this is backyards.
What we are asking is that we look at some of these areas in the
eradication of the brown citrus aphid. I think there is some money in
this bill for some in California, but there is maybe not too much in
Florida. So I am just raising the issue on the floor so that, as we go
into conference, we might be able to look at where there has been some
identifiable issues and that we might look at this as we go into
conference and hopefully help Florida with their actual $8 billion, $9
billion industry and the economy to the State of Florida.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
North Carolina [Mrs. Clayton].
Mrs. CLAYTON. Mr. Chairman, if I may, may I compliment both sides. I
do want to compliment the fairness as
[[Page H6168]]
well as the tireless service that the ranking member has provided and
the fairness that the chairman has provided.
I do want to raise the issue about rural development because I spoke
on this floor before about rural development and on both sides we
acknowledged there was a need.
As I remember, when it went to conference, we had to work it out with
the Senate in order to get $400 million. Again, you can say that is
flexibility. But apparently we in the House somehow will not rise to
the occasion to provide more money. We have to depend on the Senate to
do that. I would hope that since it is not in the bill as much as it
should be, we will do it.
One other area I am very much concerned is the lack of the
appropriation at the level for minority farmers. Again, that is an area
of concern. Five years ago there was considerably more commitment. Over
the years we never have met that commitment. I would hope that we would
find the opportunity to provide for those resources.
Mr. SKEEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Delaware [Mr. Castle].
Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to
me.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to enter into a colloquy with the
gentleman from New Mexico, chairman of the Subcommittee on Agriculture,
Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies.
After reviewing the report of the Agriculture, Rural Development,
FDA, and Related Agencies appropriations bill, I am very concerned
about the funding level of the 502 Rural Housing Direct Loan Program.
The committee bill provides $83 million for the 502 Direct Program.
This is a reduction of $67.8 million from the 1996 level. As the
Chairman knows, the 502 Direct Program provides funds for home mortgage
loans for low-income residents of rural areas who do not have adequate
access to private mortgage programs or other Government housing
programs.
However, to offset this reduction, the committee report states that
it intends that the $100 million made available under the Freedom to
Farm Act be used for rural, housing, development and research programs
beginning January 1, 1997.
Last year, the gentleman from New Mexico worked with me and other
supporters of rural housing to improve the final 1996 funding level for
the 502 Program. I would like the gentleman's assurance that he will
continue to work with me to ensure adequate funds are made available
from the fund for rural America for the 502 Home Loan Program. And, if
possible, to provide additional direct funding for the 502 Program
during conference with the Senate on this legislation.
Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from New Mexico [Mr. Skeen]
for his response.
Mr. SKEEN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Delaware who has
been one of the strongest and most consistent supporters of rural
development programs. As a former Governor, he is particularly
knowledgeable about their benefits.
I know that these programs are not funded at the level that the
gentleman would like to see or for that matter that I and other
colleagues would like to see. But the appropriations process is about
hard choices and that is what we have done here in order to meet our
goal of balancing the budget and funding critical programs.
I would like to point out to the gentleman that the fund for rural
America will make available $100 million on January 1, 1997 and $200
million more in the 2 succeeding years. This money is over and above
what is in the bill now. We have instructed the Secretary to use this
fund as a primary backup for critical housing, water and sewer
programs. I will be happy to work with the gentleman to follow up on
this also.
We have provided for the transfer of excess WIC money, as we did last
year, at the Secretary's discretion. Finally, I want to assure the
gentleman that rural housing and our other rural development programs
are among our highest priorities. If there is a possibility to find
additional funding in the conference with the Senate, we will certainly
give it a try.
Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman.
Mrs. CLAYTON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. CASTLE. I yield to the gentlewoman from North Carolina.
Mrs. CLAYTON. Mr. Chairman, I also want to join in support of the
gentleman from Delaware [Mr. Castle] who we joined in an amendment last
time on the 502 housing. In that rural America has more than just
housing, it gives to the administration flexibility for housing, rural
development as well as for minority farmers.
Could the gentleman affirm what the level for minority farmers and
small farmers in the rural fund may be?
Mr. SKEEN. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will continue to yield,
fund for rural America is whatever the Secretary chooses. He has that
discretion within the budget to do it and the fund for rural America.
Mrs. CLAYTON. Mr. Chairman, how about the disadvantaged farmers?
Mr. SKEEN. One million in our bill.
Mrs. CLAYTON. Separate in your bill?
Mr. SKEEN. In our bill.
Mrs. CLAYTON. But they have flexibility in rural America as well?
Mr. SKEEN. Yes.
Mrs. CLAYTON. You remember there was a discussion about at least
moving it up to 2 million. There was not any acceptance of that at all?
Mr. SKEEN. Well, we just could not push it through the screen that
way because we had very severe shortages in funding so we had to leave
it at the level we had it. I am sorry that we could not raise it to $2
million.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Hawaii [Mrs. Mink].
Mrs. MINK of Hawaii. Mr. Chairman, I regret I have to break the
harmony of the comments on the floor, as the Chair has noted, but I
must rise in great distress over a provision that has been included in
this appropriation bill. That has to do with the sugar program.
In the bill that we have today, there is a section that places a cap
on the raw sugarcane prices that the growers may expect to receive. I
find that decision of the committee to lay on the sugar program a
limit, a cap as to what the growers can expect to receive as an
unconscionable interference with the market.
We have heard on the floor so many times Members belaboring the fact
that we have to support open commerce, free enterprise, free trade and
allow market conditions to determine the fate of our commerce,
especially in the agricultural area. Yet we have before us today an
amendment to the appropriations bill which is legislation on an
appropriations bill, by the way, which sets a cap at 21 cents.
I have sent letters to members of the Committee on Appropriations
indicating that if this cap were permitted to remain in the
legislation, and I hope it does not when it goes to conference, I hope
it is removed, I hope the Senate does not do the same thing, because
the effect in my district will be to actually eliminate the potential
for our industry because we cannot produce it at 21 cents.
Sugar, the cost of production of sugar in my district ranges around
22 cents, 23 cents. I have been informed by the cane growers on the
island of Kauai that if this bill becomes law and the cap remains on
the price of cane sugar, that they will be driven out of business. That
is thousands of jobs in my area.
I do not believe that that is the intent of this body. We had an
effort here to kill the entire sugar program not too long ago. We were
able to defeat that amendment.
{time} 1645
So this House has spoken already, that such an effort is contrary to
the best interests of this country. Yet we have this amendment which
has been placed in this bill, and I am going to be forced to vote
against the bill because I cannot vote against a major portion of the
industry of my State.
The Department of Agriculture advises us that they will not know how
to even implement this type of restriction. As far as these experts in
the Department can determine, the only way that they can regulate and
assure the enforceability of a 21-cent cap is to increase the imports.
So the Department says that they are unclear as to what the
mechanisms for enforcing it are. They do not really know what the
refiners are paying. In
[[Page H6169]]
some States, I understand there is a kickback or a discount on the
price, and so their only ability to regulate a 21-cent price cap for
the growers is through an influx of more imports in the sugar area, and
that, of course, will be extremely destructive for the rest of the
sugar industry in Florida, in the beet sugar areas.
So I submit that this idea comes from those who wish to destroy the
industry, and they have had their chance here. They brought their
amendment to destroy by eliminating the program, and they were
defeated, and so this effort is simply another backdoor way of making
sure that our domestic industry goes down.
So I plead with the Members of this House to remember the debate with
respect to the repeal of the sugar program and vote against the passage
of this bill.
Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, this Member rises in support of H.R.
3603, the Agriculture appropriations bill for fiscal year 1997.
Mr. Chairman, this Member certainly recognizes the severe budget
constraints under which the full Appropriations Committee and the
Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee operated. This Member is
especially pleased that the earlier funding problems were resolved so
that there will be full funding for the protection flexibility
contracts authorized in the farm legislation enacted earlier this year.
Clearly, this is good news for our Nation's farmers.
This Member is also grateful and pleased that this legislation
includes funding for several important projects of interest to the
State of Nebraska.
First, this Member is pleased that H.R. 3603 includes $15.7 million
for hazardous waste management and that the report includes language
regarding the need to conduct a private water well quality assessment
related to the health risks of communities in Nebraska and other States
due to the use of fumigants in Commodity Credity Corporation grain
storage sites.
This Member would like to take this opportunity to draw attention to
a potentially serious problem facing a large number of communities
throughout Nebraska and Kansas, and undoubtedly elsewhere too--and
including this Member's hometown of Utica, NE. These problems resulted
from the use of fumigants containing carbon tetrachloride by the USDA
through stored Commodity Credit Corporation grain in Nebraska and other
States, primarily from the 1940's through the early 1970's. Carbon
tetrachloride contamination of the groundwater at many of these sites
is a serious problem. Approximately 290 communities in Nebraska and 268
in Kansas has USDA grain bin storage sites and potentially remain at
risk because the problem has not been fully investigated and addressed
in many of these communities. As previously mentioned, this Member's
hometown of Utica, NE, is one of the sites which is contending with
contamination of its water supply as a result of a carbon
tetrachloride, a carcinogen, from a grain storage facility. In addition
to the contamination of public water supplies, numerous private wells
are also affected. Private wells known to be contaminated have had
treatment installed or have been removed from service, but far too
little has been done to help identify such wells.
This Member has been actively involved in seeking solutions to this
problem for a number of years. In fact, this Member worked with then-
Secretary of Agriculture Clayton Yeutter to develop a hazardous waste
management and response program within USDA. Sufficient Federal funding
of this program is necessary to address this hazardous situation and to
ensure the safety of drinking supplies of people living near, and
downgradient from, old CCC grain storage sites. Although the carbon
tetrachloride problems have begun to be addressed at many of these
sites, the progress has been slow and somewhat random. An overall
strategy needs to be developed.
To ensure that a timely and comprehensive approach is taken, this
Member joins with the State of Nebraska in recommending an accelerated
response in a three-phased strategy:
One, an immediate private water well quality assessment for those
communities which have not yet had a complete assessment and providing
emergency bottled water supplies as needed.
Two, environmental site characterization to determine sources and the
extent of soil and groundwater contamination.
Three, remedial cleanup of contaminated sites and long-term
groundwater monitoring.
This Member is also pleased that the bill provides $423,000 for the
Midwest Advanced Food Manufacturing Alliance. The alliance is an
association of 12 leading research universities and corporate partners.
Its purpose is to develop and facilitate the transfer of new food
manufacturing and processing technologies.
The alliance awards grants for research projects on a peer review
basis. These awards must be supported by an industry partner willing to
provide matching funds. During its second year of competition, the
alliance received 33 proposals requesting a total of $1,165,033, but it
was limited to funding 10 proposals for a total of $350,000. Matching
funds from industry totaled $1,268,937, with an additional $370,311
from in-kind funds. These figures convincingly demonstrate how
successful the alliance has been in leveraging support from industry.
Mr. Chairman, the future viability and competitiveness of the U.S.
agricultural industry depends on its ability to adapt to increasing
worldwide demands for U.S. exports of intermediate and consumer good
exports. In order to meet these changing worldwide demands,
agricultural research must also adapt to provide more emphasis on
adding value to our basic farm commodities. The Midwest Advanced Food
Manufacturing Alliance can provide the necessary cooperative link
between universities and industries for the development of competitive
food manufacturing and processing technologies. This will, in turn,
ensure that the U.S. agricultural industry remains competitive in an
increasingly competitive global economy.
This Member is also pleased that this bill includes $200,000 to fund
a drought mitigation project at the agricultural meteorology department
at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. This level of funding will
greatly assist in the further development of a national drought
mitigation center. Such a center is important to Nebraska and all arid
and semi-arid States. Although drought is one of the most complex and
least understood of all natural disasters, no centralized source of
information currently exists on drought assessment, mitigation,
response, and planning efforts. A national drought mitigation center
would develop a comprehensive program designed to reduce vulnerability
to drought by promoting the development and implementation of
appropriate mitigation technologies.
Another important project funded by this bill is the Alliance for
Food Protection, a joint project between the University of Nebraska and
the University of Georgia. The mission of this alliance is to assist
the development and modification of food processing and preservation
technologies. This technology will help ensure that Americans continue
to receive the safest and highest quality food possible.
The report also includes important language directing the
Agricultural Research Service to continue to fund the perennial grass
germ plasm project at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln.
Unfortunately, the administration's budget deleted funding for the warm
grass genetics and breeding project at the Lincoln ARS unit. However,
the $270,000 called for in the report will ensure the continuation of
this productive research project which has a tremendous record of
accomplishment.
Also, this Member is pleased that H.R. 3603 includes $1.2 million for
the new section 538, the rural rental multifamily housing loan
guarantee program. The program provides a Federal guarantee on loans
made to eligible persons by private lenders. Developers will bring 10
percent of the cost of the project to the table, and private lenders
will make loans for the balance. The lenders will be given a 100-
percent Federal guarantee on the loans they make. Unlike the current
section 515 Direct Loan Program, where the full costs are borne by the
Federal Government, the only costs to the Federal government under the
538 Guarantee Program will be for administrative costs and potential
defaults.
Mr. Chairman, finally this member also appreciates the subcommittee's
support for the very successful Department of Agriculture's 502
Unsubsidized Loan Guarantee Program. The program has been very
effective in rural communities by guaranteeing loans made by approved
lenders to eligible income households in small communities of up to
25,000 residents in nonmetropolitan areas and in rural areas. The
program provides guarantees for 30-years fixed-rate mortgages for the
purchase of an existing home or the construction of a new home. The
loan amount may be up to 100 percent of a home's market value, with a
maximum mortgage amount of $67,500.
Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, this member supports H.R. 3603 and urges
his colleagues to approve it.
Mr. BAKER of California. Mr. Chairman, statistics can be boring, eye-
glazing, and mind-numbing. Yet they can also be illuminating,
disturbing, and striking. When it comes to statistics concerning breast
cancer, the latter category is clearly in play.
Breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths among
women. In 1996 approximately 184,300 women will be diagnosed with
invasive breast cancer; 44,300 women are expected to die of this
disease by the end of the year. This is troubling news, and forces us
to consider how best to combat this destructive illness.
At present, breast cancer cannot be prevented. However, there are
steps women can take in order to detect breast cancer in its earliest
stages. The easiest, most common technique is a breast self-exam [BSE],
which can
[[Page H6170]]
make the difference between life and death. I have supported
legislation to encourage breast cancer screening through making exams
easily available to poor women through Medicaid, and by giving
employers a tax break for costs incurred in making breast exams
available to their employees.
Noninvasive breast self-exams are essential to the thousands of women
seeking to combat this deadly cancer. Currently, the only technique
readily available for women to perform this procedure at home is soap
and water. Yet American ingenuity has once again risen to the occasion
and created a new device to aid women with BSE's.
This device is called the sensor pad. It consists of two plastic
sheets coated with lubricant. That's it: no involved machinery, no
elaborate high-technology gadgetry, no invasion of the body. It is a
method of detecting lumps that heightens sensitivity to a greater
degree than soap and water.
Although the sensor pad is a promising, helpful device for women, the
FDA has chosen not to make it available to all women and has approved
it under a prescription-only status. This means that instead of costing
a woman $21.15 for a sensor pad, it will cost her an estimated $70.
This is outrageous.
I am an original cosponsor of H.R. 3504, the Breast Cancer Detection
Act which urges the FDA to reverse its prescription only status to this
pad and other breast cancer detection devices and allow the
manufacturer to produce them for all women, not just women who can
afford to see their doctors.
It is vital to the health of all American women to routinely perform
breast self-exams. I believe that by giving all women a choice of
methods, less women will die of breast cancer because they will perform
BSE's and detect breast cancer in its early stages.
Clearly, inclusion of the provisions of H.R. 3504 in the fiscal year
1997 Agriculture, Rural Development, and Food and Drug Administration
Appropriations Act--H.R. 3603--will provide American women with more
tools to determine whether or not they have breast cancer. I am pleased
that H.R. 3504 is part of H.R. 3603, and look forward to its passage
into law.
Mr. SKEEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment
under the 5-minute rule.
During consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chair may accord
priority in recognition to a Member offering an amendment that he has
printed in the designated place in the Congressional Record. Those
amendments will be considered read.
The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may postpone until a time
during further consideration in the Committee of the Whole a request
for a recorded vote on any amendment and may reduce to not less than 5
minutes the time for voting by electronic device on any postponed
question that immediately follows another vote by electronic device
without intervening business, provided that the time for voting by
electronic device on the first in any series of questions shall not be
less than 15 minutes.
After the reading of the final lines of the bill, a motion that the
Committee of the Whole rise and report the bill to the House with such
amendments as may have been adopted shall, if offered by the majority
leader or a designee, have precedence over a motion to amend.
The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 3603
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the
following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the
Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for Agriculture, Rural
Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related
Agencies programs for the fiscal year ending September 30,
1997, and for other purposes, namely:
TITLE I
AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS
Production, Processing, and Marketing
Office of the Secretary
(including transfers of funds)
For necessary expenses of the Office of the Secretary of
Agriculture, and not to exceed $75,000 for employment under 5
U.S.C. 3109, $2,836,000: Provided, That not to exceed $11,000
of this amount, along with any unobligated balances of
representation funds in the Foreign Agricultural Service
shall be available for official reception and representation
expenses, not otherwise provided for, as determined by the
Secretary: Provided further, That none of the funds
appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be
used to detail an individual from an agency funded in this
Act to any Under Secretary office or Assistant Secretary
office for more than 30 days: Provided further, That none of
the funds made available by this Act may be used to enforce
section 793(d) of Public Law 104-127.
Executive Operations
chief economist
For necessary expenses of the Chief Economist, including
economic analysis, risk assessment, cost-benefit analysis,
and the functions of the World Agricultural Outlook Board, as
authorized by the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7
U.S.C. 1622g), and including employment pursuant to the
second sentence of section 706(a) of the Organic Act of 1944
(7 U.S.C. 2225), of which not to exceed $5,000 is for
employment under 5 U.S.C. 3109, $4,231,000.
national appeals division
For necessary expenses of the National Appeals Division,
including employment pursuant to the second sentence of
section 706(a) of the Organic Act of 1944 (7 U.S.C. 2225), of
which not to exceed $25,000 is for employment under 5 U.S.C.
3109, $11,718,000.
office of budget and program analysis
For necessary expenses of the Office of Budget and Program
Analysis, including employment pursuant to the second
sentence of section 706(a) of the Organic Act of 1944 (7
U.S.C. 2225), of which not to exceed $5,000 is for employment
under 5 U.S.C. 3109, $5,986,000.
Chief Financial Officer
For necessary expenses of the Office of the Chief Financial
Officer, including employment pursuant to the second sentence
of section 706(a) of the Organic Act of 1944 (7 U.S.C. 2225),
of which not to exceed $10,000 is for employment under 5
U.S.C. 3109, $4,283,000: Provided, That the Chief Financial
Officer shall actively market cross-servicing activities of
the National Finance Center.
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration
For necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Administration to carry out the
programs funded in this Act, $613,000.
Agriculture Buildings and Facilities and Rental Payments
(including transfers of funds)
For payment of space rental and related costs pursuant to
Public Law 92-313, including authorities pursuant to the 1984
delegation of authority from the Administrator of General
Services to the Department of Agriculture under 40 U.S.C.
486, for programs and activities of the Department which are
included in this Act, and for the operation, maintenance, and
repair of Agriculture buildings, $120,548,000: Provided, That
in the event an agency within the Department should require
modification of space needs, the Secretary of Agriculture may
transfer a share of that agency's appropriation made
available by this Act to this appropriation, or may transfer
a share of this appropriation to that agency's appropriation,
but such transfers shall not exceed 5 percent of the funds
made available for space rental and related costs to or from
this account. In addition, for construction, repair,
improvement, extension, alteration, and purchase of fixed
equipment or facilities as necessary to carry out the
programs of the Department, where not otherwise provided,
$5,000,000, to remain available until expended; making a
total appropriation of $125,548,000.
Hazardous Waste Management
(including transfers of funds)
For necessary expenses of the Department of Agriculture, to
comply with the requirement of section 107(g) of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 9607(g), and section
6001 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 6961, $15,700,000, to remain available
until expended: Provided, That appropriations and funds
available herein to the Department for Hazardous Waste
Management may be transferred to any agency of the Department
for its use in meeting all requirements pursuant to the above
Acts on Federal and non-Federal lands.
Departmental Administration
(including transfers of funds)
For Departmental Administration, $28,304,000, to provide
for necessary expenses for management support services to
offices of the Department and for general administration and
disaster management of the Department, repairs and
alterations, and other miscellaneous supplies and expenses
not otherwise provided for and necessary for the practical
and efficient work of the Department, including employment
pursuant to the second sentence of section 706(a) of the
Organic Act of 1944 (7 U.S.C. 2225), of which not to exceed
$10,000 is for employment under 5 U.S.C. 3109: Provided, That
this appropriation shall be reimbursed from applicable
appropriations in this Act for travel expenses incident to
the holding of hearings as required by 5 U.S.C. 551-558.
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations
(including transfers of funds)
For necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations to carry out
the programs funded in this Act, including programs involving
intergovernmental affairs
[[Page H6171]]
and liaison within the executive branch, $3,728,000:
Provided, That no other funds appropriated to the Department
in this Act shall be available to the Department for support
of activities of congressional relations: Provided further,
That not less than $2,241,000 shall be transferred to
agencies funded in this Act to maintain personnel at the
agency level.
Office of Communications
For necessary expenses to carry on services relating to the
coordination of programs involving public affairs, for the
dissemination of agricultural information, and the
coordination of information, work, and programs authorized by
Congress in the Department, $8,138,000, including employment
pursuant to the second sentence of section 706(a) of the
Organic Act of 1944 (7 U.S.C. 2225), of which not to exceed
$10,000 shall be available for employment under 5 U.S.C.
3109, and not to exceed $2,000,000 may be used for farmers'
bulletins.
Office of the Inspector General
(including transfers of funds)
For necessary expenses of the Office of the Inspector
General, including employment pursuant to the second sentence
of section 706(a) of the Organic Act of 1944 (7 U.S.C. 2225),
and the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended,
$63,028,000, including such sums as may be necessary for
contracting and other arrangements with public agencies and
private persons pursuant to section 6(a)(9) of the Inspector
General Act of 1978, as amended, including a sum not to
exceed $50,000 for employment under 5 U.S.C. 3109; and
including a sum not to exceed $95,000 for certain
confidential operational expenses including the payment of
informants, to be expended under the direction of the
Inspector General pursuant to Public Law 95-452 and section
1337 of Public Law 97-98: Provided, That funds transferred to
the Office of the Inspector General through forfeiture
proceedings or from the Department of Justice Assets
Forfeiture Fund or the Department of the Treasury Forfeiture
Fund, as a participating agency, as an equitable share from
the forfeiture of property in investigations in which the
Office of the Inspector General participates, or through the
granting of a Petition for Remission or Mitigation, shall be
deposited to the credit of this account for law enforcement
activities authorized under the Inspector General Act of
1978, as amended, to remain available until expended.
Office of the General Counsel
For necessary expenses of the Office of the General
Counsel, $27,749,000.
Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education and Economics
For necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of the
Under Secretary for Research, Education and Economics to
administer the laws enacted by the Congress for the Economic
Research Service, the National Agricultural Statistics
Service, the Agricultural Research Service, and the
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service,
$540,000.
Economic Research Service
For necessary expenses of the Economic Research Service in
conducting economic research and analysis, as authorized by
the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1621-1627)
and other laws, $54,176,000: Provided, That this
appropriation shall be available for employment pursuant to
the second sentence of section 706(a) of the Organic Act of
1944 (7 U.S.C. 2225).
National Agricultural Statistics Service
For necessary expenses of the National Agricultural
Statistics Service in conducting statistical reporting and
service work, including crop and livestock estimates,
statistical coordination and improvements, marketing surveys,
and the Census of Agriculture notwithstanding 13 U.S.C.
142(a-b), as authorized by the Agricultural Marketing Act of
1946 (7 U.S.C. 1621-1627) and other laws, $100,221,000, of
which up to $17,500,000 shall be available until expended for
the Census of Agriculture: Provided, That this appropriation
shall be available for employment pursuant to the second
sentence of section 706(a) of the Organic Act of 1944 (7
U.S.C. 2225), and not to exceed $40,000 shall be available
for employment under 5 U.S.C. 3109.
Agricultural Research Service
For necessary expenses to enable the Agricultural Research
Service to perform agricultural research and demonstration
relating to production, utilization, marketing, and
distribution (not otherwise provided for); home economics or
nutrition and consumer use including the acquisition,
preservation, and dissemination of agricultural information;
and for acquisition of lands by donation, exchange, or
purchase at a nominal cost not to exceed $100, $702,831,000:
Provided, That appropriations hereunder shall be available
for temporary employment pursuant to the second sentence of
section 706(a) of the Organic Act of 1944 (7 U.S.C. 2225),
and not to exceed $115,000 shall be available for employment
under 5 U.S.C. 3109: Provided further, That appropriations
hereunder shall be available for the operation and
maintenance of aircraft and the purchase of not to exceed one
for replacement only: Provided further, That appropriations
hereunder shall be available pursuant to 7 U.S.C. 2250 for
the construction, alteration, and repair of buildings and
improvements, but unless otherwise provided the cost of
constructing any one building shall not exceed $250,000,
except for headhouses or greenhouses which shall each be
limited to $1,000,000, and except for ten buildings to be
constructed or improved at a cost not to exceed $500,000
each, and the cost of altering any one building during the
fiscal year shall not exceed 10 percent of the current
replacement value of the building or $250,000, whichever is
greater: Provided further, That the limitations on
alterations contained in this Act shall not apply to
modernization or replacement of existing facilities at
Beltsville, Maryland: Provided further, That the foregoing
limitations shall not apply to replacement of buildings
needed to carry out the Act of April 24, 1948 (21 U.S.C.
113a): Provided further, That funds may be received from any
State, other political subdivision, organization, or
individual for the purpose of establishing or operating any
research facility or research project of the Agricultural
Research Service, as authorized by law.
None of the funds in the foregoing paragraph shall be
available to carry out research related to the production,
processing or marketing of tobacco or tobacco products.
buildings and facilities
For acquisition of land, construction, repair, improvement,
extension, alteration, and purchase of fixed equipment or
facilities as necessary to carry out the agricultural
research programs of the Department of Agriculture, where not
otherwise provided, $59,600,000, to remain available until
expended (7 U.S.C. 2209b): Provided, That funds may be
received from any State, other political subdivision,
organization, or individual for the purpose of establishing
any research facility of the Agricultural Research Service,
as authorized by law.
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service
research and education activities
For payments to agricultural experiment stations, for
cooperative forestry and other research, for facilities, and
for other expenses, including $163,671,000 to carry into
effect the provisions of the Hatch Act (7 U.S.C. 361a-361i);
$19,882,000 for grants for cooperative forestry research (16
U.S.C. 582a-582-a7); $26,902,000 for payments to the 1890
land-grant colleges, including Tuskegee University (7 U.S.C.
3222); $44,235,000 for special grants for agricultural
research (7 U.S.C. 450i(c)); $11,769,000 for special grants
for agricultural research on improved pest control (7 U.S.C.
450i(c)); $96,735,000 for competitive research grants (7
U.S.C. 450i(b)); $4,775,000 for the support of animal health
and disease programs (7 U.S.C. 3195); $650,000 for
supplemental and alternative crops and products (7 U.S.C.
3319d); $500,000 for grants for research pursuant to the
Critical Agricultural Materials Act of 1984 (7 U.S.C. 178)
and section 1472 of the Food and Agriculture Act of 1977, as
amended (7 U.S.C. 3318), to remain available until expended;
$475,000 for rangeland research grants (7 U.S.C. 3331-3336);
$3,000,000 for higher education graduate fellowships grants
(7 U.S.C. 3152(b)(6)), to remain available until expended (7
U.S.C. 2209b); $4,000,000 for higher education challenge
grants (7 U.S.C. 3152(b)(1)); $1,000,000 for a higher
education minority scholars program (7 U.S.C. 3152(b)(5)), to
remain available until expended (7 U.S.C. 2209b); $2,000,000
for an education grants program for Hispanic-serving
Institutions (7 U.S.C. 3241); $4,000,000 for aquaculture
grants (7 U.S.C. 3322); $8,000,000 for sustainable
agriculture research and education (7 U.S.C. 5811);
$9,200,000 for a program of capacity building grants to
colleges eligible to receive funds under the Act of August
30, 1890 (7 U.S.C. 321-326 and 328), including Tuskegee
University 7 U.S.C. 3152(b)(4), to remain available until
expended (7 U.S.C. 2209b); $1,450,000 for payments to the
1994 Institutions pursuant to section 534(a)(1) of Public Law
103-382; and $9,605,000 for necessary expenses of Research
and Education Activities, of which not to exceed $100,000
shall be for employment under 5 U.S.C. 3109; in all,
$411,849,000.
None of the funds in the foregoing paragraph shall be
available to carry out research related to the production,
processing or marketing of tobacco or tobacco products.
Native American Institutions Endowment Fund
For establishment of a Native American institutions
endowment fund, as authorized by Public Law 130-382 (7 U.S.C.
301 note), $4,600,000.
buildings and facilities
For acquisition of land, construction, repair, improvement,
extension, alteration, and purchase of fixed equipment or
facilities and for grants to States and other eligible
recipients for such purposes, as necessary to carry out the
agricultural research, extension, and teaching programs of
the Department of Agriculture, where not otherwise provided,
$30,449,000, to remain available until expended (7 U.S.C.
2209b).
Extension Activities
Payments to States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico,
Guam, the Virgin Islands, Micronesia, Northern Marianas, and
American Samoa: For payments for cooperative extension work
under the Smith-Lever Act, as amended, to be distributed
under sections 3(b) and 3(c) of said Act, and under section
208(c) of Public Law 93-471, for retirement and employees'
compensation costs for extension agents and for costs of
penalty mail for cooperative extension agents and State
extension directors, $260,438,000; payments for the nutrition
and family education program for low-income areas under
section 3(d) of the Act, $58,695,000; payments for the pest
management program under section 3(d) of
[[Page H6172]]
the Act, $10,783,000; payments for the farm safety program
under section 3(d) of the Act, $2,855,000; payments for the
pesticide impact assessment program under section 3(d) of the
Act, $3,214,000; payments to upgrade 1890 land-grant college
research, extension, and teaching facilities as authorized by
section 1447 of Public Law 95-113, as amended (7 U.S.C.
3222b), $7,549,000, to remain available until expended;
payments for the rural development centers under section 3(d)
of the Act, $908,000; payments for a groundwater quality
program under section 3(d) of the Act, $10,733,000; payments
for the agricultural telecommunications program, as
authorized by Public Law 101-624 (7 U.S.C. 5926), $1,167,000;
payments for youth-at-risk programs under section 3(d) of the
Act, $9,554,000; payments for a food safety program under
section 3(d) of the Act, $2,365,000; payments for carrying
out the provisions of the Renewable Resources Extension Act
of 1978, $3,192,000; payments for Indian reservation agents
under section 3(d) of the Act, $1,672,000; payments for
sustainable agriculture programs under section 3(d) of the
Act, $3,309,000; payments for rural health and safety
education as authorized by section 2390 of Public Law 101-624
(7 U.S.C. 2661 note, 2662), $2,628,000; payments for
cooperative extension work by the colleges receiving the
benefits of the second Morrill Act (7 U.S.C. 321-326, 328)
and Tuskegee University, $24,337,000; and for Federal
administration and coordination including administration of
the Smith-Lever Act, as amended, and the Act of September 29,
1977 (7 U.S.C. 341-349), as amended, and section 1361(c) of
the Act of October 3, 1980 (7 U.S.C. 301 note), and to
coordinate and provide program leadership for the extension
work of the Department and the several States and insular
possessions, $6,271,000; in all, $409,670,000: Provided, That
funds hereby appropriated pursuant to section 3(c) of the Act
of June 26, 1953, and section 506 of the Act of June 23,
1972, as amended, shall not be paid to any State, the
District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, or the Virgin
Islands, Micronesia, Northern Marianas, and American Samoa
prior to availability of an equal sum from non-Federal
sources for expenditure during the current fiscal year.
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs
For necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs to
administer programs under the laws enacted by the Congress
for the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service,
Agricultural Marketing Service, and the Grain Inspection,
Packers and Stockyards Administration, $618,000.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
salaries and expenses
(including transfers of funds)
For expenses, not otherwise provided for, including those
pursuant to the Act of February 28, 1947, as amended (21
U.S.C. 114b-c), necessary to prevent, control, and eradicate
pests and plant and animal diseases; to carry out inspection,
quarantine, and regulatory activities; to discharge the
authorities of the Secretary of Agriculture under the Act of
March 2, 1931 (46 Stat. 1468; 7 U.S.C. 426-426b); and to
protect the environment, as authorized by law, $435,428,000,
of which $4,500,000 shall be available for the control of
outbreaks of insects, plant diseases, animal diseases and for
control of pest animals and birds to the extent necessary to
meet emergency conditions: Provided, That no funds shall be
used to formulate or administer a brucellosis eradication
program for the current fiscal year that does not require
minimum matching by the States of at least 40 percent:
Provided further, That this appropriation shall be available
for field employment pursuant to the second sentence of
section 706(a) of the Organic Act of 1944 (7 U.S.C. 2225),
and not to exceed $40,000 shall be available for employment
under 5 U.S.C. 3109: Provided further, That this
appropriation shall be available for the operation and
maintenance of aircraft and the purchase of not to exceed
four, of which two shall be for replacement only: Provided
further, That, in addition, in emergencies which threaten any
segment of the agricultural production industry of this
country, the Secretary may transfer from other appropriations
or funds available to the agencies or corporations of the
Department such sums as he may deem necessary, to be
available only in such emergencies for the arrest and
eradication of contagious or infectious disease or pests of
animals, poultry, or plants, and for expenses in accordance
with the Act of February 28, 1947, as amended, and section
102 of the Act of September 21, 1944, as amended, and any
unexpended balances of funds transferred for such emergency
purposes in the next preceding fiscal year shall be merged
with such transferred amounts: Provided further, That
appropriations hereunder shall be available pursuant to law
(7 U.S.C. 2250) for the repair and alteration of leased
buildings and improvements, but unless otherwise provided the
cost of altering any one building during the fiscal year
shall not exceed 10 percent of the current replacement value
of the building.
In fiscal year 1997 the agency is authorized to collect
fees to cover the total costs of providing technical
assistance, goods, or services requested by States, other
political subdivisions, domestic and international
organizations, foreign governments, or individuals, provided
that such fees are structured such that any entity's
liability for such fees is reasonably based on the technical
assistance, goods, or services provided to the entity by the
agency, and such fees shall be credited to this account, to
remain available until expended, without further
appropriation, for providing such assistance, goods, or
services.
Of the total amount available under this heading in fiscal
year 1997, $98,000,000 shall be derived from user fees
deposited in the Agricultural Quarantine Inspection User Fee
Account.
Mr. SKEEN. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder
of title I through page 29, line 17, be considered as read, printed in
the Record and open to amendment at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there an objection to the request of the gentleman
from New Mexico?
There was no objection.
The remainder of title I is as follows:
buildings and facilities
For plans, construction, repair, preventive maintenance,
environmental support, improvement, extension, alteration,
and purchase of fixed equipment or facilities, as authorized
by 7 U.S.C. 2250, and acquisition of land as authorized by 7
U.S.C. 428a, $3,200,000, to remain available until expended.
Agricultural Marketing Service
marketing services
For necessary expenses to carry on services related to
consumer protection, agricultural marketing and distribution,
transportation, and regulatory programs, as authorized by
law, and for administration and coordination of payments to
States; including field employment pursuant to section 706(a)
of the Organic Act of 1944 (7 U.S.C. 2225), and not to exceed
$90,000 for employment under 5 U.S.C. 3109, $37,592,000,
including funds for the wholesale market development program
for the design and development of wholesale and farmer market
facilities for the major metropolitan areas of the country:
Provided, That this appropriation shall be available pursuant
to law (7 U.S.C. 2250) for the alteration and repair of
buildings and improvements, but the cost of altering any one
building during the fiscal year shall not exceed 10 percent
of the current replacement value of the building.
Fees may be collected for the cost of standardization
activities, as established by regulation pursuant to law (31
U.S.C. 9701).
limitation on administrative expenses
Not to exceed $59,012,000 (from fees collected) shall be
obligated during the current fiscal year for administrative
expenses: Provided, That if crop size is understated and/or
other uncontrollable events occur, the agency may exceed this
limitation by up to 10 percent with notification to the
Appropriations Committees.
funds for strengthening markets, income, and supply (section 32)
(including transfers of funds)
Funds available under section 32 of the Act of August 24,
1935 (7 U.S.C. 612c) shall be used only for commodity program
expenses as authorized therein, and other related operating
expenses, except for: (1) transfers to the Department of
Commerce as authorized by the Fish and Wildlife Act of August
8, 1956; (2) transfers otherwise provided in this Act; and
(3) not more than $10,576,000 for formulation and
administration of marketing agreements and orders pursuant to
the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended,
and the Agricultural Act of 1961.
payments to states and possessions
For payments to departments of agriculture, bureaus and
departments of markets, and similar agencies for marketing
activities under section 204(b) of the Agricultural Marketing
Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1623(b)), $1,200,000.
Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of the
United States Grain Standards Act, as amended, for the
administration of the Packers and Stockyards Act, for
certifying procedures used to protect purchasers of farm
products, and the standardization activities related to grain
under the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, as amended,
including field employment pursuant to section 706(a) of the
Organic Act of 1944 (7 U.S.C. 2225), and not to exceed
$25,000 for employment under 5 U.S.C. 3109, $22,728,000:
Provided, That this appropriation shall be available pursuant
to law (7 U.S.C. 2250) for the alteration and repair of
buildings and improvements, but the cost of altering any one
building during the fiscal year shall not exceed 10 percent
of the current replacement value of the building.
inspection and weighing services
limitation on inspection and weighing service expenses
Not to exceed $43,207,000 (from fees collected) shall be
obligated during the current fiscal year for inspection and
weighing services: Provided, That if grain export activities
require additional supervision and oversight, or other
uncontrollable factors occur, this limitation may be exceeded
by up to 10 percent with notification to the Appropriations
Committees.
[[Page H6173]]
Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety
For necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of the
Under Secretary for Food Safety to administer the laws
enacted by the Congress for the Food Safety and Inspection
Service, $446,000.
Food Safety and Inspection Service
For necessary expenses to carry on services authorized by
the Federal Meat Inspection Act, as amended, the Poultry
Products Inspection Act, as amended, and the Egg Products
Inspection Act, as amended, $574,000,000, and in addition,
$1,000,000 may be credited to this account from fees
collected for the cost of laboratory accreditation as
authorized by section 1017 of Public Law 102-237: Provided,
That this appropriation shall not be available for shell egg
surveillance under section 5(d) of the Egg Products
Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 1034(d)): Provided further, That
this appropriation shall be available for field employment
pursuant to section 706(a) of the Organic Act of 1944 (7
U.S.C. 2225), and not to exceed $75,000 shall be available
for employment under 5 U.S.C. 3109: Provided further, That
this appropriation shall be available pursuant to law (7
U.S.C. 2250) for the alteration and repair of buildings and
improvements, but the cost of altering any one building
during the fiscal year shall not exceed 10 percent of the
current replacement value of the building.
Office of the Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign Agricultural
Services
For necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of the
Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services to
administer the laws enacted by Congress for the Consolidated
Farm Service Agency, Foreign Agricultural Service, and the
Commodity Credit Corporation, $572,000.
Farm Service Agency
salaries and expenses
(including transfers of funds)
For necessary expenses for carrying out the administration
and implementation of programs administered by the Farm
Service Agency, $746,440,000: Provided, That the Secretary is
authorized to use the services, facilities, and authorities
(but not the funds) of the Commodity Credit Corporation to
make program payments for all programs administered by the
Agency: Provided further, That other funds made available to
the Agency for authorized activities may be advanced to and
merged with this account: Provided further, That these funds
shall be available for employment pursuant to the second
sentence of section 706(a) of the Organic Act of 1944 (7
U.S.C. 2225), and not to exceed $1,000,000 shall be available
for employment under 5 U.S.C. 3109.
dairy indemnity program
(including transfers of funds)
For necessary expenses involved in making indemnity
payments to dairy farmers for milk or cows producing such
milk and manufacturers of dairy products who have been
directed to remove their milk or dairy products from
commercial markets because it contained residues of chemicals
registered and approved for use by the Federal Government,
and in making indemnity payments for milk, or cows producing
such milk, at a fair market value to any dairy farmer who is
directed to remove his milk from commercial markets because
of (1) the presence of products of nuclear radiation or
fallout if such contamination is not due to the fault of the
farmer, or (2) residues of chemicals or toxic substances not
included under the first sentence of the Act of August 13,
1968, as amended (7 U.S.C. 450j), if such chemicals or toxic
substances were not used in a manner contrary to applicable
regulations or labeling instructions provided at the time of
use and the contamination is not due to the fault of the
farmer, $100,000, to remain available until expended (7
U.S.C. 2209b): Provided, That none of the funds contained in
this Act shall be used to make indemnity payments to any
farmer whose milk was removed from commercial markets as a
result of his willful failure to follow procedures prescribed
by the Federal Government: Provided further, That this amount
shall be transferred to the Commodity Credit Corporation:
Provided further, That the Secretary is authorized to utilize
the services, facilities, and authorities of the Commodity
Credit Corporation for the purpose of making dairy indemnity
disbursements.
outreach for socially disadvantaged farmers
For grants and contracts pursuant to section 2501 of the
Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7
U.S.C. 2279), $1,000,000, to remain available until expended.
agricultural credit insurance fund program account
(including transfers of funds)
For gross obligations for the principal amount of direct
and guaranteed loans as authorized by 7 U.S.C. 1928-1929, to
be available from funds in the Agricultural Credit Insurance
Fund, as follows: farm ownership loans, $600,000,000, of
which $550,000,000 shall be for guaranteed loans; operating
loans, $2,345,071,000, of which $1,700,000,000 shall be for
unsubsidized guaranteed loans and $200,000,000 shall be for
subsidized guaranteed loans; Indian tribe land acquisition
loans as authorized by 25 U.S.C. 488, $1,000,000; for
emergency insured loans, $25,000,000 to meet the needs
resulting from natural disasters and for credit sales of
acquired property, $25,000,000.
For the cost of direct and guaranteed loans, including the
cost of modifying loans as defined in section 502 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as follows: farm ownership
loans, $27,975,000, of which $22,055,000 shall be for
guaranteed loans; operating loans, $96,840,000, of which
$19,210,000 shall be for unsubsidized guaranteed loans and
$18,480,000 shall be for subsidized guaranteed loans; Indian
tribe land acquisition loans as authorized by 25 U.S.C. 488,
$54,000; for emergency insured loans, $6,365,000 to meet the
needs resulting from natural disasters; and for credit sales
of acquired property, $2,530,000.
In addition, for administrative expenses necessary to carry
out the direct and guaranteed loan programs, $221,046,000, of
which $208,446,000 shall be transferred to and merged with
the ``Farm Service Agency, Salaries and Expenses'' account.
Office of Risk Management
For administrative and operating expenses, as authorized by
the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (7
U.S.C. 6933), $62,198,000: Provided, That not to exceed $700
shall be available for official reception and representation
expenses, as authorized by 7 U.S.C. 1506(i).
CORPORATIONS
The following corporations and agencies are hereby
authorized to make expenditures, within the limits of funds
and borrowing authority available to each such corporation or
agency and in accord with law, and to make contracts and
commitments without regard to fiscal year limitations as
provided by section 104 of the Government Corporation Control
Act, as amended, as may be necessary in carrying out the
programs set forth in the budget for the current fiscal year
for such corporation or agency, except as hereinafter
provided.
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Fund
For payments as authorized by section 516 of the Federal
Crop Insurance Act, as amended, such sums as may be
necessary, to remain available until expended (7 U.S.C.
2209b).
Commodity Credit Corporation Fund
reimbursement for net realized losses
For fiscal year 1997, such sums as may be necessary to
reimburse the Commodity Credit Corporation for net realized
losses sustained, but not previously reimbursed (estimated to
be $1,500,000,000 in the President's fiscal year 1997 Budget
Request (H. Doc. 104-162)), but not to exceed $1,500,000,000,
pursuant to section 2 of the Act of August 17, 1961, as
amended (15 U.S.C. 713a-11).
operations and maintenance for hazardous waste management
For fiscal year 1997, the Commodity Credit Corporation
shall not expend more than $5,000,000 for expenses to comply
with the requirement of section 107(g) of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 9607(g), and section 6001 of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6961:
Provided, That expenses shall be for operations and
maintenance costs only and that other hazardous waste
management costs shall be paid for by the USDA Hazardous
Waste Management appropriation in this Act.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will continue to read.
The Clerk read as follows:
TITLE II--CONSERVATION PROGRAMS
Office of the Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment
For necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of the
Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment to
administer the laws enacted by the Congress for the Forest
Service and the Natural Resources Conservation Service,
$693,000.
Natural Resources Conservation Service
conservation operations
For necessary expenses for carrying out the provisions of
the Act of April 27, 1935 (16 U.S.C. 590a-590f) including
preparation of conservation plans and establishment of
measures to conserve soil and water (including farm
irrigation and land drainage and such special measures for
soil and water management as may be necessary to prevent
floods and the siltation of reservoirs and to control
agricultural related pollutants); operation of conservation
plant materials centers; classification and mapping of soil;
dissemination of information; acquisition of lands, water,
and interests therein for use in the plant materials program
by donation, exchange, or purchase at a nominal cost not to
exceed $100 pursuant to the Act of August 3, 1956 (7 U.S.C.
428a); purchase and erection or alternation or improvement of
permanent and temporary buildings; and operation and
maintenance of aircraft, $619,392,000, to remain available
until expended (7 U.S.C. 2209b), of which not less than
$5,835,000 is for snow survey and water forecasting and not
less than $8,825,000 is for operation and establishment of
the plant materials centers: Provided, That appropriations
hereunder shall be available pursuant to 7 U.S.C. 2250 for
construction and improvement of buildings and public
improvements at plant materials centers, except that the cost
of alterations and improvements to other buildings and other
public improvements shall not exceed $250,000: Provided
further, That when buildings or other structures are erected
on non-
[[Page H6174]]
Federal land, that the right to use such land is obtained as
provided in 7 U.S.C. 2250a: Provided further, That this
appropriation shall be available for technical assistance and
related expenses to carry out programs authorized by section
202(c) of title II of the Colorado River Basin Salinity
Control Act of 1974, as amended (43 U.S.C. 1592(c)): Provided
further, That no part of this appropriation may be expended
for soil and water conservation operations under the Act of
April 27, 1935 (16 U.S.C. 590a-590f) in demonstration
projects: Provided further, That this appropriation shall be
available for employment pursuant to the second sentence of
section 706(a) of the Organic Act of 1944 (7 U.S.C. 2225) and
not to exceed $25,000 shall be available for employment under
5 U.S.C. 3109: Provided further, That qualified local
engineers may be temporarily employed at per diem rates to
perform the technical planning work of the Service (16 U.S.C.
590e-2).
Mr. SKEEN. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder
of title II, through page 34, line 7, be considered as read, printed in
the Record, and open to amendment at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
New Mexico?
There was no objection.
The remainder of title II is as follows:
watershed surveys and planning
For necessary expenses to conduct research, investigation,
and surveys of watersheds of rivers and other waterways, and
for small watershed investigations and planning, in
accordance with the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention
Act approved August 4, 1954, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1001-
1009), $10,762,000: Provided, That this appropriation shall
be available for employment pursuant to the second sentence
of section 706(a) of the Organic Act of 1944 (7 U.S.C. 2225),
and not to exceed $110,000 shall be available for employment
under 5 U.S.C. 3109.
watershed and flood prevention operations
For necessary expenses to carry out preventive measures,
including but not limited to research, engineering
operations, methods of cultivation, the growing of
vegetation, rehabilitation of existing works and changes in
use of land, in accordance with the Watershed Protection and
Flood Prevention Act approved August 4, 1954, as amended (16
U.S.C. 1001-1005, 1007-1009), the provisions of the Act of
April 27, 1935 (16 U.S.C. 590a-f), and in accordance with the
provisions of laws relating to the activities of the
Department, $101,036,000, to remain available until expended
(7 U.S.C. 2209b), of which up to $15,000,000 may be available
for the watersheds authorized under the Flood Control Act
approved June 22, 1936 (33 U.S.C. 701, 16 U.S.C. 1006a), as
amended and supplemented: Provided, That this appropriation
shall be available for employment pursuant to the second
sentence of section 706(a) of the Organic Act of 1944 (7
U.S.C. 2225), and not to exceed $200,000 shall be available
for employment under 5 U.S.C. 3109: Provided further, That
not to exceed $1,000,000 of this appropriation is available
to carry out the purposes of the Endangered Species Act of
1973 (Public Law 93-205), as amended, including cooperative
efforts as contemplated by that Act to relocate endangered or
threatened species to other suitable habitats as may be
necessary to expedite project construction.
resource conservation and development
For necessary expenses in planning and carrying out
projects for resource conservation and development and for
sound land use pursuant to the provisions of section 32(e) of
title III of the Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act, as amended
(7 U.S.C. 1010-1011; 76 Stat. 607), the Act of April 27, 1935
(16 U.S.C. 590a-f), and the Agriculture and Food Act of 1981
(16 U.S.C. 3451-3461), $29,377,000, to remain available until
expended (7 U.S.C. 2209b): Provided, That this appropriation
shall be available for employment pursuant to the second
sentence of section 706(a) of the Organic Act of 1944 (7
U.S.C. 2225), and not to exceed $50,000 shall be available
for employment under 5 U.S.C. 3109.
forestry incentives program
For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, to
carry out the program of forestry incentives, as authorized
in the Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C.
2101), including technical assistance and related expenses,
$6,325,000, to remain available until expended, as authorized
by that Act.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
TITLE III--RURAL ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS
Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development
For necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of the
Under Secretary for Rural Development to administer programs
under the laws enacted by the Congress for the Rural Housing
Service, Rural Business-Cooperative Service, and the Rural
Utilities Service of the Department of Agriculture, $588,000.
Rural Housing Service
rural housing insurance fund program account (including transfers of
funds)
For gross obligations for the principal amount of direct
and guaranteed loans as authorized by title V of the Housing
Act of 1949, as amended, to be available from funds in the
rural housing insurance fund, as follows: $3,300,000,000 for
loans to section 502 borrowers, as determined by the
Secretary, of which $2,300,000,000 shall be for unsubsidized
guaranteed loans; $35,000,000 for section 504 housing repair
loans; $15,000,000 for section 514 farm labor housing;
$58,654,000 for section 515 rental housing; $600,000 for
section 524 site loans; $50,000,000 for credit sales of
acquired property; and $600,000 for section 523 self-help
housing land development loans.
For the cost of direct and guaranteed loans, including the
cost of modifying loans, as defined in section 502 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as follows: section 502
loans, $89,210,000, of which $6,210,000 shall be for
unsubsidized guaranteed loans; section 504 housing repair
loans, $11,081,000; section 514 farm labor housing,
$6,885,000; section 515 rental housing, $28,987,000:
Provided, That no funds for new construction for section 515
rental housing may be available for fiscal year 1997; credit
sales of acquired property, $4,050,000; and section 523 self-
help housing land development loans, $17,000.
Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Speaker, my purpose in rising today is to enter into a colloquy
with my chairman, the gentleman from New Mexico [Mr. Skeen] regarding
the section 515 rural rental housing program.
As my colleague knows, the fiscal year 1997 Agriculture
Appropriations bill we are now considering, does not provide any funds
for section 515 new construction, and actually cuts the program by two
thirds from the current fiscal year. This program has been useful in my
district providing housing for low income families, creating jobs, and
attracting important economic development to a rural area. It has been
a successful public-private partnership. Therefore, I wish to express
some concern about this issue.
Mr. Chairman, as you know, the section 515 Rural Housing program
provides affordable rental housing to very low-income and low-income
rural families, handicapped, and elderly residents. It is the Federal
Government's only directly targeted tool for meeting the multifamily
housing needs of rural America. The average income of a tenant in a
section 515 project is under $7,300. However, in 1993, problems and
abuses in the section 515 program were uncovered and investigated by
the General Accounting Office [GAO], the House Appropriations
Committee's surveys and investigations staff, and the U.S. Department
of Agriculture's inspector general. In the summer of 1994, the House
Appropriations Committee investigative report on section 515 and
section 521 was released, under the gentleman's and Congressman
Durbin's leadership.
Without going into a great deal of detail, after hearings, audits,
and many meetings, the House passed H.R. 3838, the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1994. This effort developed a list of
reforms to the section 515 program. The House again passed a bill in
this Congress, H.R. 1691, the Homesteading and Neighborhood Restoration
Act, which included similar provisions to the reforms in H.R. 3838.
Unfortunately, however, the Senate has not taken any action on this
issue.
Mr. Chairman, the gentleman and ranking minority member, Mr. Durbin,
are to be commended for bringing these problems to our attention. The
section 515 program is in need of reform.
However, according to the 1990 census, there were still 7.6 million
people below the poverty line in the rural United States, 13 percent of
the total rural population. Adding to this problem is the fact that
almost 2.7 million rural residents currently live in substandard
housing and 1.8 million live in overcrowded housing units. This year
there are 200,000 applicants on the waiting list for apartments in
rural areas. The section 515 program is serving a significant rural
need, and the fiscal year 1997 level of funding is not adequate to meet
even a fraction of that need.
I might add that most States, including New York, are running the
program honestly and effectively, and, Mr. Chairman, I agree with you
the Senate needs to address this issue. It is my intention to discuss
the reform of the section 515 program with Senator Alfonse D'Amato,
chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. It is my hope that reasonable
reforms of the section 515 program can be considered in the Senate
agriculture appropriations bill or other housing authorization
legislation.
[[Page H6175]]
Mr. Chairman, I would like to request that if the Senate does
consider reforms of the section 515 Rural Rental Housing Program, if
the gentleman would be willing to reopen the issue, and provide funding
for section 515 new construction.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. WALSH. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from New York [Mr.
Walsh]. I appreciate his concern about the funding of section 515, new
construction.
The 515 program has a worthy objective. It is a goal which all of us
share in providing multifamily housing in rural areas.
Several years ago, when this subcommittee investigated this program,
we found that some developers were ripping off the Federal Government.
We proposed to the Committee on Banking and Financial Services some
significant reforms in this program. The Committee on Banking and
Financial Services passed housing authorization bills which adopted
most of what we proposed on a bipartisan basis. Then a new Congress
came in. The same thing occurred under the new Congress. The
Republican-controlled Banking Subcommittee on Housing, which I believe
the gentleman from New York [Mr. Lazio] chairs, passed reform
legislation along the lines we have suggested. Again, as in the
previous Congress, the bill died in the Senate.
This subcommittee is very frustrated. We want to fund this program.
We do not want to waste taxpayers' dollars. If we can pass the reforms
suggested in both bills, this program will be funded as it should be.
The gentleman from New York is right. We need to meet our obligation
here, but to do it in a way that we can do it with a straight face and
say we are doing the right thing by taxpayers.
I am pleased that the gentleman intends to speak to the chairman of
the Senate Committee on Banking. The opportunity to put this program on
track is in their hands, and I would like to see the Senate act on
those reforms.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from New York [Mr. Walsh] has
expired.
(By unanimous consent, Mr. Walsh was allowed to proceed for 1
additional minute.)
Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from New Mexico
[Mr. Skeen].
Mr. SKEEN. Mr. Chairman, I, too, appreciate the gentleman's concern
and support the goal of the section 515 program.
Unfortunately, our lower allocation for the entire appropriations
bill this year necessitated a careful review of our funding priorities.
We simply do not have the ability to fund programs about which we are
uneasy. While many members of our subcommittee support rural housing
programs, section 515 has been beset with problems, as mentioned in the
colloquies that have taken place before this one. The Agency, through
administrative actions, has addressed numerous weaknesses in the
program, however, statutory changes are necessary to further rid the
program of fraud and abuse.
The House has acted twice on the reforms. It is now time for the
Senate to act. Of course, we would be willing to consider the
gentleman's request once we have seen movement by the Senate on this
particular program.
Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I pledge that I will pursue this
aggressively with the Senator from New York and see if we can get these
reforms passed.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
In addition, for administrative expenses necessary to carry
out the direct and guaranteed loan programs, $366,205,000,
which shall be transferred to and merged with the
appropriation for ``Rural Housing Service, Salaries and
Expenses''.
Mr. SKEEN. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder
of title III through page 46, line 10, be considered as read, printed
in the Record and open to amendment at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there any objection to the request of the gentleman
from New Mexico.
There was no objection.
The remainder of title III is as follows:
rental assistance program
For rental assistance agreements entered into or renewed
pursuant to the authority under section 521(a)(2) or
agreements entered into in lieu of debt forgiveness or
payments for eligible households as authorized by section
502(c)(5)(D) of the Housing Act of 1949, as amended,
$493,870,000; and in addition such sums as may be necessary,
as authorized by section 521(c) of the Act, to liquidate debt
incurred prior to fiscal year 1992 to carry out the rental
assistance program under section 521(a)(2) of the Act:
Provided, That of this amount not more than $5,900,000 shall
be available for debt forgiveness or payments for eligible
households as authorized by section 502(c)(5)(D) of the Act,
and not to exceed $10,000 per project for advances to
nonprofit organizations or public agencies to cover direct
costs (other than purchase price) incurred in purchasing
projects pursuant to section 502(c)(5)(C) of the Act:
Provided further, That agreements entered into or renewed
during fiscal year 1997 shall be funded for a five-year
period, although the life of any such agreement may be
extended to fully utilize amounts obligated.
mutual and self-help housing grants
For grants and contracts pursuant to section 523(b)(1)(A)
of the Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1490c), $26,000,000, to
remain available until expended (7 U.S.C. 2209b).
rural housing assistance program
(including transfers of funds)
For the cost of direct loans, loan guarantees, agreements,
and grants, as authorized by 7 U.S.C. 1926, 42 U.S.C. 1472,
1474, 1479, 1486, and 1490(a), except for sections 381E,
381H, 381N of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development
Act, $73,190,000, to remain available until expended, for
direct loans and loan guarantees for community facilities,
community facilities grant program, rural housing for
domestic farm labor grants, supervisory and technical
assistance grants, very low-income housing repair grants,
rural community fire protection grants, rural housing
preservation grants, and compensation for construction
defects of the Rural Housing Service: Provided, That the cost
of direct loans and loan guarantees shall be as defined in
section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as
amended: Provided further, That the amounts appropriated
shall be transferred to loan program and grant accounts as
determined by the Secretary: Provided further, That no funds
for new construction relating to 515 rental housing may be
available for fiscal year 1997: Provided further, That of the
funds made available in this paragraph not more than
$1,200,000 shall be available for the multi-family rural
housing loan guarantee program as authorized by section 5 of
Public Law 104-120: Provided further, That if such funds are
not obligated for multi-family rural housing loan guarantees
by June 30, 1997, they remain available for other authorized
purposes under this head: Provided further, That of the total
amount appropriated, not to exceed $1,200,000 shall be
available for the cost of direct loans, loan guarantees, and
grants to be made available for empowerment zones and
enterprise communities as authorized by Public Law 103-66:
Provided further, That if such funds are not obligated for
empowerment zones and enterprise communities by June 30,
1997, they remain available for other authorized purposes
under this head.
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the Rural Housing Service,
including administering the programs authorized by the
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act, as amended,
title V of the Housing Act of 1949, as amended, and
cooperative agreements, $53,889,000: Provided, That this
appropriation shall be available for employment pursuant to
the second sentence of 706(a) of the Organic Act of 1944, and
not to exceed $520,000 may be used for employment under 5
U.S.C. 3109.
Rural Business-Cooperative Service
rural development loan fund program account
(including transfers of funds)
For the cost of direct loans, $18,400,000, as authorized by
the Rural Development Loan Fund (42 U.S.C. 9812(a)):
Provided, That such costs, including the cost of modifying
such loans, shall be as defined in section 502 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974: Provided further, That
these funds are available to subsidize gross obligations for
the principal amount of direct loans of $40,000,000: Provided
further, That through June 30, 1997, of the total amount
appropriated $3,345,000 shall be available for the cost of
direct loans, for empowerment zones and enterprise
communities, as authorized by title XIII of the Omnibus
Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, to subsidize gross
obligations for the principal amount of direct loans,
$7,246,000.
rural economic development loans program account
(including transfers of funds)
For the principal amount of direct loans, as authorized
under section 313 of the Rural Electrification Act, for the
purpose of promoting rural economic development and job
creation projects, $12,865,000.
For the cost of direct loans, including the cost of
modifying loans as defined in section 502 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, $2,830,000. In addition,
for administrative expenses necessary to carry out the direct
loan program, $654,000, which shall be transferred to and
merged with the appropriation for ``Salaries and Expenses.''
[[Page H6176]]
alternative agricultural research and commercialization revolving fund
For necessary expenses to carry out the Alternative
Agricultural Research and Commercialization Act of 1990 (7
U.S.C. 5901-5908), $6,000,000 is appropriated to the
alternative agricultural research and commercialization
revolving fund.
rural business--cooperative assistance program
(including transfers of funds)
For the cost of direct loans, loan guarantees, and grants,
as authorized by 7 U.S.C. 1926, 1928, and 1932, except for
381E, 381H, 381N of the Consolidated Farm and Rural
Development Act, $51,400,000, to remain available until
expended, for direct loans and loan guarantees for business
and industry assistance, rural business grants, rural
cooperative development grants, and rural business
opportunity grants of the Rural Business--Cooperative
Service: Provided, That the cost of direct loans and loan
guarantees shall be as defined in section 502 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended: Provided
further, That $500,000 shall be available for grants to
qualified nonprofit organizations as authorized under section
310B(c)(2) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act
(7 U.S.C. 1932): Provided further, That the amounts
appropriated shall be transferred to loan program and grant
accounts as determined by the Secretary: Provided further,
That, of the total amount appropriated, not to exceed
$3,000,000 shall be available for cooperative development:
Provided further, That, of the total amount appropriated, not
to exceed $148,000 shall be available for the cost of direct
loans, loan guarantees, and grants to be made available for
business and industry loans for empowerment zones and
enterprise communities as authorized by Public Law 103-66 and
rural development loans for empowerment zones and enterprise
communities as authorized by title XIII of the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1993: Provided further, That if such
funds are not obligated for empowerment zones and enterprise
communities by June 30, 1997, they remain available for other
authorized purposes under this head.
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the Rural Business-Cooperative
Service, including administering the programs authorized by
the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act, as amended;
section 1323 of the Food Security Act of 1985; the
Cooperative Marketing Act of 1926; for activities relating to
the marketing aspects of cooperatives, including economic
research findings, as authorized by the Agricultural
Marketing Act of 1946; for activities with institutions
concerning the development and operation of agricultural
cooperatives; and cooperative agreements; $25,680,000:
Provided, That this appropriation shall be available for
employment pursuant to the second sentence of 706(a) of the
Organic Act of 1944, and not to exceed $260,000 may be used
for employment under 5 U.S.C. 3109.
Rural Utilities Service
rural electrification and telecommunications loans program account
(including transfers of funds)
Insured loans pursuant to the authority of section 305 of
the Rural Electrification Act of 1936, as amended (7 U.S.C.
935), shall be made as follows: 5 percent rural
electrification loans, $125,000,000, 5 percent rural
telecommunications loans, $75,000,000; cost of money rural
telecommunications loans, $300,000,000; municipal rate rural
electric loans, $525,000,000; and loans made pursuant to
section 306 of that Act, rural electric, $300,000,000, and
rural telecommunications, $120,000,000, to remain available
until expended.
For the cost, as defined in section 502 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, including the cost of
modifying loans, of direct and guaranteed loans authorized by
the Rural Electrification Act of 1936, as amended (7 U.S.C.
935), as follows: cost of direct loans, $4,818,000; cost of
municipal rate loans, $28,245,000; cost of money rural
telecommunications loans, $60,000; cost of loans guaranteed
pursuant to section 306, $2,790,000: Provided, That
notwithstanding section 305(d)(2) of the Rural
Electrification Act of 1936, borrower interest rates may
exceed 7 percent per year.
In addition, for administrative expenses necessary to carry
out the direct and guaranteed loan programs, $29,982,000,
which shall be transferred to and merged with the
appropriation for ``Salaries and Expenses.''
rural telephone bank program account
The Rural Telephone Bank is hereby authorized to make such
expenditures, within the limits of funds available to such
corporation in accord with law, and to make such contracts
and commitments without regard to fiscal year limitations as
provided by section 104 of the Government Corporation Control
Act, as amended, as may be necessary in carrying out its
authorized programs for the current fiscal year. During
fiscal year 1997 and within the resources and authority
available, gross obligations for the principal amount of
direct loans shall be $175,000,000.
For the cost, as defined in section 502 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, including the cost of
modifying loans, of direct loans authorized by the Rural
Electrification Act of 1936, as amended (7 U.S.C. 935),
$2,328,000.
In addition, for administrative expenses necessary to carry
out the loan programs, $3,500,000.
distance learning and medical link program
For the cost of direct loans and grants, as authorized by 7
U.S.C. 950aaa et seq., as amended, $7,500,000, to remain
available until expended, to be available for loans and
grants for telemedicine and distance learning services in
rural areas: Provided, That the costs of direct loans shall
be as defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act
of 1974.
rural utilities assistance program
(including transfers of funds)
For the cost of direct loans, loan guarantees, and grants,
as authorized by 7 U.S.C. 1926, 1928, and 1932, except for
381E, 381H, 381N of the Consolidated Farm and Rural
Development Act, $496,868,000, to remain available until
expended, for direct loans and loan guarantees and grants for
rural water and waste disposal, and solid waste management
grants of the Rural Utilities Service: Provided, That the
cost of direct loans and loan guarantees shall be as defined
in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as
amended: Provided further, That the amounts appropriated
shall be transferred to loan program and grant accounts as
determined by the Secretary: Provided further, That, through
June 30, 1997, of the total amount appropriated, $18,700,000
shall be available for the costs of direct loans, loan
guarantees, and grants to be made available for empowerment
zones and enterprise communities, as authorized by Public Law
103-66: Provided further, That, of the total amount
appropriated, not to exceed $18,700,000 shall be for water
and waste disposal systems to benefit the Colonias along the
United States/Mexico border, including grants pursuant to
section 306C of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development
Act, as amended: Provided further, That, of the total amount
appropriated, not to exceed $5,000,000 shall be available for
contracting with qualified national organizations for a
circuit rider program to provide technical assistance for
rural water systems: Provided further, That an amount not
less than that available in fiscal year 1996 be set aside and
made available for ongoing technical assistance under
sections 306(a)(14) (7 U.S.C. 1926) and 310(B)(b) of the
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1932).
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the Rural Utilities Service,
including administering the programs authorized by the Rural
Electrification Act of 1936, as amended, and the Consolidated
Farm and Rural Development Act, as amended, and cooperative
agreements, $33,195,000: Provided, That this appropriation
shall be available for employment pursuant to the second
sentence of 706(a) of the Organic Act of 1944, and not to
exceed $105,000 may be used for employment under 5 U.S.C.
3109.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments?
If not, the Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
TITLE IV
DOMESTIC FOOD PROGRAMS
Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services
For necessary salaries and expenses of the Office of the
Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services to
administer the laws enacted by the Congress for the Food and
Consumer Service, $454,000.
CHILD NUTRITION PROGRAMS
(INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)
For necessary expenses to carry out the National School
Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1751-1769b), except section 21, and the
Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1772-1785, and 1889);
except sections 17 and 19; $8,652,597,000, to remain
available through September 30, 1998, of which $3,218,844,000
is hereby appropriated and $5,433,753,000 shall be derived by
transfer from funds available under section 32 of the Act of
August 24, 1935 (7 U.S.C. 612c); Provided, That none of the
funds made available under this heading shall be used for
studies and evaluations; Provided further; That up to
$4,031,000 shall be available for independent verification of
school food service claims.
{time} 1700
Amendments Offered by Mr. Volkmer
Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman, I offer amendments, and I ask unanimous
consent that they be considered en bloc.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendments offered by Mr. VOLKMER:.
On page 47, line 4 of the bill after the words ``used for''
insert ``new'' and on page 48, line 19 of the bill after the
words ``used for'' insert ``new''.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
Missouri?
There was no objection.
Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Chairman, this is for the purpose of making it clear
that the appropriation on further studies and evaluations by this
office over USDA will only be prospective for the coming year. It does
not include any evaluation and studies that are ongoing at the present
time, so that valid studies like for the electronic benefit transfer,
WIC program, and stuff, that will continue.
[[Page H6177]]
I have worked this out with the gentleman from New Mexico and the
gentleman from Illinois. I do not believe there are any objections to
the amendments.
Mr. SKEEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the gentleman's
amendments. It was not the intention of the committee to stop any
ongoing studies. The Department currently has 62 studies that are at
one stage or another and plans to start 36 new studies in fiscal year
1997. The committee's action was intended to prevent the start of new
studies for 1 year and give the Department time to complete the 62
ongoing studies. I accept the gentleman's clarification.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. I have no
objection to the amendments offered by the gentleman from Missouri.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendments offered by the
gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Volkmer].
The amendments were agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
special supplemental nutrition program for women, infants, and children
(wic)
For necessary expenses to carry out the special
supplemental nutrition program as authorized by section 17 of
the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786),
$3,729,807,000, to remain available through September 30,
1998: Provided, That none of the funds made available under
this heading may be used to begin more than two studies and
evaluations: Provided further, That up to $6,750,000 may be
used to carry out the farmers' market nutrition program from
any funds not needed to maintain current caseload levels:
Provided further, That, of the total amount of fiscal year
1996 carryover funds that cannot be spent in fiscal year
1997, any funds in excess of $100,000,000 may be transferred
by the Secretary to other programs in the Department of
Agriculture, excluding the Forest Service, with prior
notification to the House and Senate Appropriations
Committees: Provided further, That none of the funds in this
Act shall be available to pay administrative expenses of WIC
clinics except those that have an announced policy of
prohibiting smoking within the space used to carry out the
program: Provided further, That none of the funds provided in
this account shall be available for the purchase of infant
formula except in accordance with the cost containment and
competitive bidding requirements specified in section 17 of
the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786).
food stamp program
For necessary expenses to carry out the Food Stamp Act (7
U.S.C. 2011-2029), $27,615,029,000: Provided, That funds
provided herein shall remain available through September 30,
1997, in accordance with section 18(a) of the Food Stamp Act:
Provided further, That $100,000,000 of the foregoing amount
shall be placed in reserve for use only in such amounts and
at such times as may become necessary to carry out program
operations: Provided further, That none of the funds made
available under this heading shall be used for studies and
evaluations: Provided further, That funds provided herein
shall be expended in accordance with section 16 of the Food
Stamp Act: Provided further, That this appropriation shall be
subject to any work registration or workfare requirements as
may be required by law: Provided further, That $1,174,000,000
of the foregoing amount shall be available for
nutrition assistance for Puerto Rico as authorized by 7
U.S.C. 2028.
commodity assistance program
For necessary expenses to carry out the commodity
supplemental food program as authorized by section 4(a) of
the Agriculture and Consumer Protection Act of 1973 (7 U.S.C.
612c (note)), the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983, as
amended, and section 110 of the Hunger Prevention Act of
1988, $166,000,000, to remain available through September 30,
1998: Provided, That none of these funds shall be available
to reimburse the Commodity Credit Corporation for commodities
donated to the program.
food donations programs for selected groups
For necessary expenses to carry out section 4(a) of the
Agriculture and Consumer Protection Act of 1973 (7 U.S.C.
612c (note)), section 4(b) of the Food Stamp Act (7 U.S.C.
2013(b)), and section 311 of the Older Americans Act of 1965,
as amended (42 U.S.C. 3030a), $205,000,000, to remain
available through September 30, 1998.
food program administration
For necessary administrative expenses of the domestic food
programs funded under this Act, $104,487,000, of which
$5,000,000 shall be available only for simplifying
procedures, reducing overhead costs, tightening regulations,
improving food stamp coupon handling, and assistance in the
prevention, identification, and prosecution of fraud and
other violations of law: Provided, That this appropriation
shall be available for employment pursuant to the second
sentence of section 706(a) of the Organic Act of 1944 (7
U.S.C. 2225), and not to exceed $150,000 shall be available
for employment under 5 U.S.C. 3109.
TITLE V
FOREIGN ASSISTANCE AND RELATED PROGRAMS
Foreign Agricultural Service and General Sales Manager
(including transfers of funds)
For necessary expenses of the Foreign Agricultural Service,
including carrying out title VI of the Agricultural Act of
1954, as amended (7 U.S.C. 1761-1768), market development
activities abroad, and for enabling the Secretary to
coordinate and integrate activities of the Department in
connection with foreign agricultural work, including not to
exceed $128,000 for representation allowances and for
expenses pursuant to section 8 of the Act approved August 3,
1956 (7 U.S.C. 1766), $128,005,000, of which $2,792,000 may
be transferred from the Export Loan Program account in this
Act, and $1,005,000 may be transferred from the Public Law
480 program account in this Act: Provided, That the Service
may utilize advances of funds, or reimburse this
appropriation for expenditures made on behalf of Federal
agencies, public and private organizations and
institutions under agreements executed pursuant to the
agricultural food production assistance programs (7 U.S.C.
1736) and the foreign assistance programs of the
International Development Cooperation Administration (22
U.S.C. 2392): Provided further, That funds provided for
foreign market development to trade associations,
cooperatives and small businesses shall be allocated only
after a competitive bidding process to target funds to
those entities most likely to generate additional U.S.
exports as a result of the expenditure.
None of the funds in the foregoing paragraph shall be
available to promote the sale or export of tobacco or tobacco
products.
public law 480 program and grant accounts
(including transfers of funds)
For expenses during the current fiscal year, not otherwise
recoverable, and unrecovered prior years' costs, including
interest thereon, under the Agricultural Trade Development
and Assistance Act of 1954, as amended (7 U.S.C. 1691, 1701-
1715, 1721-1726, 1727-1727f, 1731-1736g), as follows: (1)
$216,400,000 for Public Law 480 title I credit, including
Food for Progress programs; (2) $13,905,000 is hereby
appropriated for ocean freight differential costs for the
shipment of agricultural commodities pursuant to title I of
said Act and the Food for Progress Act of 1985, as amended;
(3) $837,000,000 is hereby appropriated for commodities
supplied in connection with dispositions abroad pursuant to
title II of said Act; and (4) $29,500,000 is hereby
appropriated for commodities supplied in connection with
dispositions abroad pursuant to title III of said Act:
Provided, That not to exceed 15 percent of the funds made
available to carry out any title of said Act may be used to
carry out any other title of said Act: Provided further, That
such sums shall remain available until expended (7 U.S.C.
2209b).
For the cost, as defined in section 502 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, of direct credit agreements
as authorized by the Agricultural Trade Development and
Assistance Act of 1954, as amended, and the Food for Progress
Act of 1985, as amended, including the cost of modifying
credit agreements under said Act, $177,000,000.
In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the
Public Law 480 title I credit program, and the Food for
Progress Act of 1985, as amended, to the extent funds
appropriated for Public Law 480 are utilized, $1,750,000.
amendment offered by mr. goss
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Amendment No. 4 offered by Mr. Goss: Page 51, line 23,
strike ``1727-1727f,''.
Page 52, line 4, insert ``and'' before ``(3)''.
Page 52, line 7, strike ``; and (4)'' and all that follows
through ``Act'' on line 9.
Page 52, line 11, insert ``such'' before ``title''.
Page 52, line 12, insert ``such'' before ``title''.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, this amendment goes to title III of Public
Law 480. We have taken a close look at Public Law 480. There are some
pluses and minuses to it. The pluses that we have talked about in the
past are the business for American flag shipping, the compassion and
humanitarian relief that so many are concerned about and the champion,
the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Hall], spoke so eloquently about it
yesterday in the Rules Committee and an area which I have a great deal
of sympathy.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment was to go to title III which is
basically the loans proposition in Public Law 40. It does not touch the
humanitarian programs in title II or some of the other programs that I
think serve a very good purpose in title I that basically come under
the grants programs.
The question here is not an awful lot of money but the question here
is a program that is not working very well that does have negative
consequences and the money could be better spent elsewhere. I have
conferred with Chairman Livingston if in fact this $29 million would
not do better in title I or
[[Page H6178]]
title II than title III and I think Chairman Livingston is going to
speak on that in a moment.
So my view is to zero out title III and to leave to the wisdom of
others, who I think, as I say, are going to speak on this, that $29.5
million to get it more on target.
What are my reasonings on this? We have now got some reports that we
have been taking an increasing look at that are talking about the
problems of waste, fraud, and abuse in Public Law 480. This does not
get to all of those. But what it does get to is that those countries
where we are distorting the market by creating a surplus of food coming
from us where the people who should be in the position of creating, a
lifting up by their own bootstraps to feed themselves are being
unfairly competed with by local UST foods under title III. Consequently
we get a negative effect. We are not helping people create their own
development in their own country. We are creating a counterincentive
for them to have their hand out and become dependents on welfare of the
American taxpayers. That is not what we want to do.
We want to encourage development in these programs; we want the
United States to be compassionate; we want people to be fed who are in
true need and in true hunger and we can do that through titles I and
II. This simple amendment takes the $29.5 million out of title III and
makes it available for reallocation.
Mr. Chairman, I yield to the distinguished gentleman from Louisiana
[Mr. Livingston], the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations.
Mr. LIVINGSTON. I thank my friend from Florida for yielding to me.
Mr. Chairman, while I take no position on his amendment, I would say
to our colleagues that if his amendment succeeds, it would be my
intention to take the full amount that has been deleted from title III
and move it into title I so that we would in fact have no change in the
overall spending for food aid under the bill.
One may make the case that title I is better administered than title
III, and if that is the case, then the money will be better spent in
that fashion. I commend the gentleman for his diligence in trying to
make sure that the American taxpayers' dollars are well spent. As I
say, while I do not necessarily support the amendment, I do intend to
move the money to title I in the event that he is successful.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I have nothing further to
add to this. I think it is a very straightforward explanation. I would
be very happy to respond to any questions from those in opposition.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Mr. Chairman, I stand in opposition to this amendment. Keep in mind
that we have reduced the amount of money under title III, Public Law
480, from $50 million to $29 million. I am almost speechless, and that
is something for a politician, when I consider that we are now trying
to take away $29 million spent by the United States of America in the
poorest countries of the world, literally the poorest of the poor. The
money is given to professional private voluntary organizations which
use the food to convert into cash to put into programs to feed the
poorest people in the world literally.
In order for a country to qualify for this $29 million, I say to my
friend from Florida, there is a requirement under the law that the
annual income has to be less than $742 a year. We are talking about
people, and I have visited people in Bangladesh, which has to be a
basket case among this family of nations that we live in for disastrous
consequences from cyclones and hurricanes to flooding and drought.
This money is given to local organizations through the conversion of
grain into cash and then given back to the people to feed their babies,
to feed their infants. to make certain that we do not see the horror on
the television of people starving to death. That is what title III is
all about.
Mr. Chairman, the grain companies are not going to notice $29 million
more in title I, but we are going to notice it when they visit
countries like Bangladesh, Bolivia, Honduras, Sri Lanka, and Ethiopia
where the poorest of the poor rely on this program. A nation as rich as
the United States, as compassionate as the United States, can surely
spare $29 million out of a $1.5 trillion budget for the poorest of the
poor around the world.
I guarantee my colleague from Florida that if his amendment goes
through and we see the kind of famine and disaster we have seen in
nations, there will be an outpouring not only from private citizens but
from this Government to come to their aid. Please do not cut off this
basic program which provides food. This is not a boondoggle.
The gentleman says it is used to distort the market mechanism. The
market mechanism in Bangladesh? Has the gentleman been there? Has he
seen their market mechanism? It is not a question of driving to the
supermarket. It is a question of whether the baby has milk, whether or
not there are basic foodstuffs to feed children.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. DURBIN. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, the purpose of my amendment is not to take
away food from those who are truly needy or in any way to diminish the
American contribution for true compassionate service needs. My aim is
to try and get more mileage out of our dollar. That is why Chairman
Livingston has made the statement that he has. The parts of this
program that are doing the very thing that the gentleman is speaking
about, and speaking so eloquently about, are title I and title II.
Title III is where the abuse has been. It is the mechanism I am after.
Mr. DURBIN. Let me reclaim my time. I think the gentleman has made
his point. I think the gentleman needs to take the time to read what is
done with the title III money. The gentleman will understand that when
you spread $29 million over the poorest countries in the world, you
literally give a tiny helping hand.
Let me give an example. In Honduras, the title III money is being
used for purposes such as providing food to 1.3 million children and
nursing mothers. In Sri Lanka they have developed a Food Stamp Program
for the poorest of the poor who live in rural areas; in Bangladesh,
establishing a strategic food reserve so that farmers can basically
have food when they go through these droughts and lose everything.
I would say to the gentleman, if we need to find $29 million more for
title I, I will work overtime to find it. Please do not take it out of
title III. We have cut this program dramatically. It is a program that
truly is a compassionate program. I have been there. I have seen it.
The gentleman just does not understand the gravity of this program and
its importance to some of the poorest people in the world.
I urge my colleagues, do not do this in the name of false economy. If
we have a famine and a disaster, we will respond with much more than
$29 million. Please defeat this amendment.
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number
of words, and I yield to the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Goss].
Mr. GOSS. I thank the distinguished chairman of the Committee on
Appropriations for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, again I think we are going at cross purposes here and I
realize that I have hit a chord of real compassion which has made the
gentleman be, I think, very concerned but totally unnecessarily so. We
have a commitment from the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations
that programs that are passing muster, which are titles I and II, much
better in getting right to the compassion need are the appropriate
place for this money to go.
What brought my attention to this particular title problem was a
problem that happened in Somalia where the war lords were abusing this
title, I am told, and requiring people to come into the city, for
political reasons, in order to get this food. This was using this sort
of as a political chip to coerce people, who are in dire straits, as we
all know, which helped escalate to another serious problem that
regrettably we saw another tragedy involving American servicemen on. We
go to the IG's reports at USID on this matter and start looking at the
fraud, waste, and abuse. I have no problem in sharing America's
wonderfully blessed abundant resources with those truly in need,
subject, of course, to rational and prudent constraints of our own
domestic needs in this country. I am only suggesting that if we have
mechanisms
[[Page H6179]]
that are not performing well and we find ourselves being taken
advantage of, we see abuse to our largesse being made, we see our
compassion being misdirected, we see ourselves being taken advantage
of, played the fool, made a sucker of because of our legitimate
compassionate feelings, it seems to me that we ought to correct the
mechanism. That is all I am trying to accomplish here. If we have got
something that does not work, we need to admit it rather than just
saying, ``Oh, gosh, somebody may starve.''
{time} 1715
The answer is, oh, gosh, we may be able to save more people if we get
rid of a mechanism that is faulty and put the money in something that
works. That is all I am trying to say.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. LIVINGSTON. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.
Mr. DURBIN. I thank the gentleman.
I would like to say to my friend from Florida, I think we share the
same goal. I do not want to see a single penny wasted. I do not want to
see a single taxpayer's dollar misused for political purposes or
otherwise. But does the gentleman realize in titles I and II we have
over $1 billion being spent by this country?
The gentleman is talking about taking $29 million out of title III
because he is upset with one or two allocations around the world. I
would say to the gentleman, I have a list here in my hand of five
allocations which he should applaud, where this title III money is
being used to literally feed starving people.
Please, do not kill the whole program in countries like Ethiopia, Sri
Lanka, Honduras, Bolivia, and Bangladesh, because you have some
objection to what happened in Somalia.
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield further, I guess
I would finish this by saying that humanitarian an emergency feeding
programs, which are the type the gentleman are talking about, that come
under title III, are going to remain not only fully funded, but
probably enhanced under this amendment. We are going to get more money
where the need is doing it this way than we are by just maintaining the
status quo of a program that has already been cut, because, frankly, it
is not doing the job it should be doing, and, frankly, it has got some
problems. The people, properly the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr.
Livingston] and his people, have seen there is trouble there.
Consequently, they have cut some money.
I merely suggested we got a good first step, why not take the rest of
the stem and get rid of title III, and do it right through titles I and
II and get the job done well. I think the consequence is we end up
taking care of more serious needs than not. My motive is none other
than that.
What struck the chord yesterday was the gentleman from Ohio [Mr.
Hall] trying in the Committee on Rules to find a way to get the
Committee on Rules to grant an exception for a waiver that would
basically get more money into title II. We could not do it on the
Committee on Rules, so I thought this would be a fair way to try and
accommodate the desires of the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Hall].
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Goodlatte). The question is on the
amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Goss].
The amendment was rejected.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Are there further amendments to this
paragraph?
If not, the Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
commodity credit corporation export loans program account
(including transfers of funds)
For administrative expenses to carry out the Commodity
Credit Corporation's export guarantee program, GSM 102 and
GSM 103, $3,381,000; to cover common overhead expenses as
permitted by section 11 of the Commodity Credit Corporation
Charter Act and in conformity with the Federal Credit Reform
Act of 1990, of which not to exceed $2,792,000 may be
transferred to and merged with the appropriation for the
salaries and expenses of the Foreign Agricultural Service,
and of which not to exceed $589,000 may be transferred to and
merged with the appropriation for the salaries and expenses
of the Farm Service Agency.
export credit
The Commodity Credit Corporation shall make available not
less than $5,500,000,000 in credit guarantees under its
export credit guarantee program extended to finance the
export sales of United States agricultural commodities and
the products thereof, as authorized by section 202 (a) and
(b) of the Agricultural Trade Act of 1978 (7 U.S.C. 5641).
TITLE VI
RELATED AGENCIES AND FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the Food and Drug Administration,
including hire and purchase of passenger motor vehicles; for
rental of special purpose space in the District of Columbia
or elsewhere; and for miscellaneous and emergency expenses of
enforcement activities, authorized and approved by the
Secretary and to be accounted for solely on the Secretary's
certificate, not to exceed $25,000; $907,499,000, of which
not to exceed $87,528,000 in fees pursuant to section 736 of
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act may be credited to
this appropriation and remain available until expended:
Provided, That fees derived from applications received during
fiscal year 1997 shall be subject to the fiscal year 1997
limitation: Provided further, That none of these funds shall
be used to develop, establish, or operate any program of user
fees authorized by 31 U.S.C. 9701.
In addition, fees pursuant to section 354 of the Public
Health Service Act may be credited to this account, to remain
available until expended.
In addition, fees pursuant to section 801 of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act may be credited to this account,
to remain available until expended.
None of the funds appropriated or made available to the
Federal Food and Drug Administration shall be used to
implement any rule finalizing the August 25, 1995 proposed
rule entitled ``The Prescription Drug Product Labeling;
Medication Guide Requirements,'' except as to any specific
drug or biological product where the FDA determines that
without approved patient information there would be a serious
and significant public health risk.
Section 3 of the Saccharin Study and Labeling Act (21 U.S.C
348 nt.) is amended by striking out ``May 1, 1997'' and
inserting in lieu thereof ``May 1, 2002''.
buildings and facilities
For plans, construction, repair, improvement, extension,
alteration, and purchase of fixed equipment or facilities of
or used by the Food and Drug Administration, where not
otherwise provided, $21,350,000, to remain available until
expended (7 U.S.C. 2209b).
rental payments (fda)
(including transfers of funds)
For payment of space rental and related costs pursuant to
Public Law 92-313 for programs and activities of the Food and
Drug Administration which are included in this Act,
$46,294,000: Provided, That in the event the Food and Drug
Administration should require modification of space needs, a
share of the salaries and expenses appropriation may be
transferred to this appropriation, or a share of this
appropriation may be transferred to the salaries and expenses
appropriation, but such transfers shall not exceed 5 percent
of the funds made available for rental payments (FDA) to or
from this account.
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Financial Management Service
payments to the farm credit system financial assistance corporation
For necessary payments to the Farm Credit System Financial
Assistance Corporation by the Secretary of the Treasury, as
authorized by section 6.28(c) of the Farm Credit Act of 1971,
as amended, for reimbursement of interest expenses incurred
by the Financial Assistance Corporation on obligations issued
through 1994, as authorized $10,290,000.
INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
Commodity Futures Trading Commission
For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of the
Commodity Exchange Act, as amended (7 U.S.C. 1 et seq.),
including the purchase and hire of passenger motor vehicles;
the rental of space (to include multiple year leases) in the
District of Columbia and elsewhere; and not to exceed $25,000
for employment under 5 U.S.C. 3109; $55,101,000, including
not to exceed $1,000 for official reception and
representation expenses: Provided, That the Commission is
authorized to charge reasonable fees to attendees of
Commission sponsored educational events and symposia to cover
the Commission's costs of providing those events and
symposia, and notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302, said fees shall
be credited to this account, to be available without further
appropriation.
Farm Credit Administration
limitation on administrative expenses
Not to exceed $37,478,000 (from assessments collected from
farm credit institutions and from the Federal Agricultural
Mortgage Corporation) shall be obligated during the current
fiscal year for administrative expenses as authorized under
12 U.S.C. 2249.
TITLE VII--GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 701. Within the unit limit of cost fixed by law,
appropriations and authorizations made for the Department of
Agriculture for the fiscal year 1997 under this Act shall be
available for the purchase, in addition to those specifically
provided for, of not to exceed 667 passenger motor vehicles,
of which
[[Page H6180]]
643 shall be for replacement only, and for the hire of such
vehicles.
Sec. 702. Funds in this Act available to the Department of
Agriculture shall be available for uniforms or allowances
therefor as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 5901-5902).
Sec. 703. Not less than $1,500,000 of the appropriations of
the Department of Agriculture in this Act for research and
service work authorized by the Acts of August 14, 1946, and
July 28, 1954 (7 U.S.C. 427, 1621-1629), and by chapter 63 of
title 31, United States Code, shall be available for
contracting in accordance with said Acts and chapter.
Sec. 704. The cumulative total of transfers to the Working
Capital Fund for the purpose of accumulating growth capital
for data services and National Finance Center operations
shall not exceed $2,000,000: Provided, That no funds in this
Act appropriated to an agency of the Department shall be
transferred to the Working Capital Fund without the approval
of the agency administrator.
Sec. 705. New obligational authority provided for the
following appropriation items in this Act shall remain
available until expended (7 U.S.C. 2209b): Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service, the contingency fund to meet
emergency conditions, fruit fly program, and integrated
systems acquisition project; Farm Service Agency, salaries
and expenses funds made available to county committees; and
Foreign Agricultural Service, middle-income country training
program.
New obligational authority for the boll weevil program; up
to 10 percent of the screwworm program of the Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service; Food Safety and Inspection
Service, field automation and information management project;
funds appropriated for rental payments; funds for the Native
American institutions endowment fund in the Cooperative State
Research, Education, and Extension Service, and funds for the
competitive research grants (7 U.S.C. 450i(b)), shall remain
available until expended.
Sec. 706. No part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current
fiscal year unless expressly so provided herein.
Sec. 707. Not to exceed $50,000 of the appropriations
available to the Department of Agriculture in this Act shall
be available to provide appropriate orientation and language
training pursuant to Public Law 94-449.
Sec. 708. No funds appropriated by this Act may be used to
pay negotiated indirect cost rates on cooperative agreements
or similar arrangements between the United States Department
of Agriculture and nonprofit institutions in excess of 10
percent of the total direct cost of the agreement when the
purpose of such cooperative arrangements is to carry out
programs of mutual interest between the two parties. This
does not preclude appropriate payment of indirect costs on
grants and contracts with such institutions when such
indirect costs are computed on a similar basis for all
agencies for which appropriations are provided in this Act.
Sec. 709. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act,
commodities acquired by the Department in connection with
Commodity Credit Corporation and section 32 price support
operations may be used, as authorized by law (15 U.S.C. 714c
and 7 U.S.C. 612c), to provide commodities to individuals in
cases of hardship as determined by the Secretary of
Agriculture.
Sec. 710. None of the funds in this Act shall be available
to reimburse the General Services Administration for payment
of space rental and related costs in excess of the amounts
specified in this Act; nor shall this or any other provision
of law require a reduction in the level of rental space or
services below that of fiscal year 1996 or prohibit an
expansion of rental space or services with the use of funds
otherwise appropriated in this Act. Further, no agency of the
Department of Agriculture, from funds otherwise available,
shall reimburse the General Services Administration for
payment of space rental and related costs provided to such
agency at a percentage rate which is greater than is
available in the case of funds appropriated in this Act.
Sec. 711. None of the funds in this Act shall be available
to restrict the authority of the Commodity Credit Corporation
to lease space for its own use or to lease space on behalf of
other agencies of the Department of Agriculture when such
space will be jointly occupied.
Sec. 712. With the exception of grants awarded under the
Small Business Innovation Development Act of 1982, Public Law
97-219, as amended (15 U.S.C. 638), none of the funds in this
Act shall be available to pay indirect costs on research
grants awarded competitively by the Cooperative State
Research, Education, and Extension Service that exceed 14
percent of total Federal funds provided under each award.
Sec. 713. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Act,
all loan levels provided in this Act shall be considered
estimates, not limitations.
Sec. 714. Appropriations to the Department of Agriculture
for the cost of direct and guaranteed loans made available in
fiscal year 1997 shall remain available until expended to
cover obligations made in fiscal year 1997 for the following
accounts: the rural development loan fund program account;
the Rural Telephone Bank program account; the rural
electrification and telecommunications loans program account;
and the rural economic development loans program account.
Sec. 715. Such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year
1997 pay raises for programs funded by this Act shall be
absorbed within the levels appropriated in this Act.
Sec. 716. (a) Compliance With Buy American Act.--None of
the funds made available in this Act may be expended by an
entity unless the entity agrees that in expending the funds
the entity will comply with sections 2 through 4 of the Act
of March 3, 1933 (41 U.S.C. 10a-10c; popularly known as the
``Buy American Act'').
(b) Sense of Congress; Requirement Regarding Notice.--
(1) Purchase of american-made equipment and products.--In
the case of any equipment or product that may be authorized
to be purchased with financial assistance provided using
funds made available in this Act, it is the sense of the
Congress that entities receiving the assistance should, in
expending the assistance, purchase only American-made
equipment and products.
(2) Notice to recipients of assistance.--In providing
financial assistance using funds made available in this Act,
the head of each Federal agency shall provide to each
recipient of the assistance a notice describing the statement
made in paragraph (1) by the Congress.
(c) Prohibition of Contracts With Persons Falsely Labeling
Products as Made in America.--If it has been finally
determined by a court or Federal agency that any person
intentionally affixed a label bearing a ``Made in America''
inscription, or any inscription with the same meaning, to any
product sold in or shipped to the United States that is not
made in the United States, the person shall be ineligible to
receive any contract or subcontract made with funds made
available in this Act, pursuant to the debarment, suspension,
and ineligibility procedures described in sections 9.400
through 9.409 of title 48, Code of Federal Regulations.
Sec. 717. Notwithstanding the Federal Grant and Cooperative
Agreement Act, marketing services of the Agricultural
Marketing Service and the Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service may use cooperative agreements to reflect a
relationship between Agricultural Marketing Service or the
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and a State or
Cooperator to carry out agricultural marketing programs or to
carry out programs to protect the Nation's animal and plant
resources.
Sec. 718. None of the funds in this Act may be used to
retire more than 5% of the Class A stock of the Rural
Telephone Bank or to maintain any account or subaccount
within the accounting records of the Rural Telephone Bank the
creation of which has not specifically been authorized by
statute.
Sec. 719. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act may be used to provide food stamp
benefits to households whose benefits are calculated using a
standard deduction greater than the standard deduction in
effect for fiscal year 1995.
Sec. 720. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to provide assistance to, or to pay the salaries of
personnel who carry out a market promotion/market access
program pursuant to section 203 of the Agricultural Trade Act
of 1978 (7 U.S.C. 5623) that provides assistance to the U.S.
Mink Export Development Council or any mink industry trade
association.
Sec. 721. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act shall be used to enroll in excess of
130,000 acres in the fiscal year 1997 wetlands reserve
program, as authorized by 16 U.S.C. 3837.
Sec. 722. Of the funds made available by this Act, not more
than $1,000,000 shall be used to cover necessary expenses of
activities related to all advisory committees, panels,
commissions, and task forces of the Department of Agriculture
except for panels used to comply with negotiated rule
makings.
Sec. 723. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act shall be used to pay the salaries and
expenses of personnel who carry out an export enhancement
program if the aggregate amount of funds and/or commodities
under such program exceeds $100,000,000.
Sec. 724. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act shall be used to pay the salaries and
expenses of personnel who carry out a farmland protection
program in excess of $2,000,000 authorized by section 388 of
Public Law 104-127.
Sec. 725. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act shall be used to pay the salaries and
expenses of personnel who carry out a wildlife habitat
incentives program authorized by section 387 of Public Law
104-127.
Sec. 726. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act shall be used to pay the salaries and
expenses of personnel who carry out a conservation farm
option program in excess of $2,000,000 authorized by section
335 of Public Law 104-127.
Sec. 727. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available to the Department of Agriculture shall be used to
transmit or otherwise make available to any non-Department of
Agriculture employee questions or responses to questions that
are a result of information requested for the appropriations
hearing process.
Sec. 728. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to pay the salaries of employees of the Department of
Agriculture who make payments pursuant to a production
flexibility contract entered into under section 111 of the
Federal Agriculture
[[Page H6181]]
Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-127; 7
U.S.C. 7211) when it is made known to the Federal official
having authority to obligate or expend such funds that the
land covered by that production flexibility contract is not
being used for the production of an agricultural commodity or
is not devoted to a conserving use, unless it is also made
known to that Federal official that the lack of agricultural
production or the lack of a conserving use is a consequence
of drought, flood, or other natural disaster.
Sec. 729. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act shall be used to extend any existing or
expiring contract in the Conservation Reserve Program
authorized by 16 U.S.C. 3831-3845.
Sec. 730. None of the funds made available in this Act may
be used to maintain the price of raw cane sugar (as reported
for an appropriate preceding month for applicable sugar
futures contracts of the Coffee, Sugar, and Cocoa Exchange,
New York) at more than 117\1/2\ percent of the statutory loan
rate under section 158 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement
and Reform Act (title 1 of Public Law 104-127).
Sec. 731. None of the funds appropriated in this Act may be
used to carry out the provisions of section 918 of Public Law
104-127, the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act.
Sec. 732. (a) In General.--Any owner on the date of
enactment of this Act of the right to market a nonsteroidal
anti-inflammatory drug that--
(1) contains a patented active agent;
(2) has been reviewed by the Federal Food and Drug
Administration for a period of more than 96 months as a new
drug application; and
(3) was approved as safe and effective by the Federal Food
and Drug Administration on January 31, 1991, shall be
entitled, for the 2-year period beginning on February 28,
1997, to exclude others from making, using, offering for
sale, selling, or importing into the United States such
active agent, in accordance with section 154(a)(1) of title
35, United States Code.
(b) Infringement.--Section 271 of title 35, United States
Code shall apply to the infringement of the entitlement
provide under subsection (a).
(c) Notification.--Not later than 30 days after the date of
the enactment of this section, any owner granted an
entitlement under subsection (a) shall notify the
Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks and the Secretary for
Health and Human Services of such entitlement. Not later than
7 days after the receipt of such notice, the Commission and
the Secretary shall publish an appropriate notice of the
receipt of such notice.
Mr. SKEEN (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent
that the remainder of title VII, through page 68, line 22, be
considered as read, printed in the Record, and open to amendment at any
point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from
New Mexico?
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Are there further amendments?
amendment offered by mr. skeen
Mr. SKEEN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Skeen: General Provisions: On page
66 strike all on line 9 through 14.
Mr. SKEEN. Mr. Chairman, my amendment deletes the limitation on the
Department of Agriculture that would have prevented them from sending
questions that had been submitted to the Department to third parties,
including OMB. The past several years, we have had difficulty in
getting questions back from the Department in a timely manner that are
related to our hearings. It turns out that many times the holdup was
not at the agency or Department level, but was with the OMB.
Although there was a rumor that this year some questions were
reviewed by non-Federal people, that could not be confirmed. We have
since had discussions with OMB, and will drop this provision, in hopes
that next year the Committee can receive prompt response to its
questions.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I am in complete agreement with this amendment. It is
long overdue. It was a portion of the bill that was very controversial,
behind closed doors. I think the gentleman has made the right decision.
It greatly improves the bill, and I support the amendment.
Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite last word.
(Ms. KAPTUR asked and was given permission to revise and extend her
remarks.)
Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I wanted to rise in support of the entire
bill and commend our chairman, the gentleman from New Mexico [Mr.
Skeen], and our ranking member, the gentleman from Illinois [Mr.
Durbin], who is handling this bill for the last time here in the House,
and wish him well in the other body as of next January, and to thank
the gentleman from New Mexico for working with all of us on the
committee, on both sides of the aisle, to continue support for American
farmers, who are the most productive in the world.
Mr. Chairman, just for the record, let me say that in view of how
much we have cut spending in this bill to meet the budget mark, let no
one doubt which committee in this Congress is taking seriously the
mandate to balance our budget. Our discretionary spending levels have
been going down dramatically over the past several years.
Frankly, if you ask me, one way to solve the entitlement and
mandatory spending problems and overruns we face as a country, it would
be to collapse the jurisdiction of all those entitlement and mandatory
spending programs right here in the Committee on Appropriations. We do
a good job of it. I just want to thank the chairman for his leadership.
Mr. Chairman, the bill provides $52.6 million in total budget
authority for USDA and related agencies, a level that is $10.51 billion
below the fiscal year 1996 appropriations and $5.9 billion below the
Administration budget request for fiscal year 1997. Let no one doubt
which committee in this Congress takes serious by its mandate to
balance the budget. Our discretionary spending levels are on a
consistently downward slope. Frankly, if you ask me one way to solve
the entitlement and mandatory spending overrun in other committees of
this Congress would be to transfer their jurisdiction here. This is the
only, committee that has a proven track record of deficit reduction.
The bill includes a total of $12.8 billion for discretionary programs
which is $508 million less than the amount appropriated in fiscal year
1996 and $1.3 billion less than the budget request.
For mandatory programs, which are nearly 80 percent of the funding in
this bill, the committee provides $39.9 billion, a decrease of $9.9
billion below the amount available for fiscal year 1996 and $4.5
billion below the budget request.
Mr. Chairman, those who serve farmers and work with Agriculture are
taught over and over again that there is a big difference between money
and wealth. Our job on this Committee on Agriculture is to help create
the wealth of America through the investments that we make in
agriculture.
Market-oriented farm policy means farming for the market and not the
Government, and requires investments in research which will keep
agriculture competitive as we move into the new century.
The committee faced tough choices given our spending constraints.
Yet, while faced with tight budget constraints we were still able to
shift resources to priority programs.
In order to adequately fund critical programs like agricultural
research and food safety, we needed to look at all programs funded in
this bill including the new mandatory programs created by the farm
bill.
Much discussion has focused on the $100 million cut in farm program
payments that was included in the subcommittee mark. I did not support
efforts to restore this funding--$100 million out of $5.2 billion, is
reasonable particularly when you consider that prices are record
levels. At a time when we are on a path to balanced budget, it makes no
sense to add new mandatory programs or to provide a windfall in farm
payments.
I am particularly pleased that this bill also includes a provision
which I offered and passed unanimously at subcommittee which requires
farmers to plant in order to receive production flexibility payments
under the new farm bill. This is a good Government amendment that
allows taxpayers to get something in return for their investment in
agriculture. The amendment allows for exemptions for conserving uses
and weather-related exceptions.
As one supportive Member has described it, this is the ``just don't
sit on the tractor'' amendment. This amendment basically says to
receive a Federal payment you must work for it. If we expect welfare
recipients to work for Federal payments, why shouldn't farm payments go
only to those who work.
Since this amendment was offered I have heard from a number of tenant
farmers who have been told by their landlords that their annual leases
will not be renewed, so that the landlord can collect the full
transition payment. For example, a rice farmer in Texas called my
office today to say that the land he had farmed for the past 20 years
was being taken away from him. He paid $80 an acre for rent and under
the payment structure of the new farm bill that landlord could receive
$160 an acre. Since the signup for the new farm bill is
[[Page H6182]]
in effect through July 12 we can make no estimate as to how widespread
this concern is. But I want to serve notice today, that I will offer
this amendment year after year until this provision which allows
landlords to ``take the money and run'' is fixed.
And another farmer wrote me recently,
By all accounts my farming operation is rated as one of the
top five in my county. We (my father and brother) combine
ourselves so we rely on no outside help . . . We specialize
in production of rice, corn and soybeans. We lease 75% of
ground to farm which is the cause of our problem.
The landowner can now, terminate a lease of the tenant, . .
. with the sole purpose of collecting the payment and not
producing any crops on that land. . . . it allows investors
to buy real estate and use the payment to help pay for the
land, while not allowing a producer to farm it. . . . It was
not the intent of this legislation to give land owners or any
one the chance to exploit this bill into another public
relations nightmare.
I must however express my opposition to the cap on sugar payments
that is included in this bill. While I will not offer a motion to
strike this provision, its impact will be devastating to the sugar beet
farmers in my District. This bill caps the U.S. raw sugar price at
117.5 percent of the loan rate, or 21.5 cents per pound. This about 1.5
cents below current prices. According to USDA, so much foreign sugar
would have to be imported to reduce the raw sugar price to the capped
level, that the refined sugar prices beet producers receive for their
crop would plummet to about 24 cents per pound from the current 32
cents per pound. This cap will reduce the value of the sugar produced
by beet growers by $650 million.
Traditional farm programs continue to receive a decreasing portion of
our spending and in my view we should target our scarce agricultural
dollars to small family farmers. I opposed the recent farm bill because
I do not believe that it did enough to target assistance to family
farmers and to provide them with a safety when times are bad. While the
farm bill made progress by enacting a $40,000 payment limitation, I
remain concerned that large corporate farmers can still have access to
Federal payments.
In the decade of the 1980's we have slowly eroded the basis of
American agriculture--the family farmer--and are moving in the
direction of large corporate farms. We must address the increased
concentration in agricultural markets that is squeezing family farmers
out of business. We must also ensure that commodity prices are
maintained at a level high enough to compensate for costs of production
and to maintain standards of living in order to attract and retain
individuals in farm production. And further, we must also negotiate
trade agreements which encourage and enhance the ability of family
farmers to compete in world markets.
In agriculture trade, we must also work to recapture lost markets and
increase exports. As American agricultural exports grow, foreign
agriculture exports are being shipped to the United States in greater
magnitude. Since 1981, our agricultural exports have declined from
$43.8 billion to a low of $26.2 billion in 1986 and are projected to be
a record $60 billion next year. At the same time agricultural imports
have increased from $10.8 billion to approximately $25 billion in 1995.
In many cases these are products our own farmers could be selling.
In closing, I want to again commend the chairman and the ranking
member for putting together a good bill. I urge the Members to support
this fiscally responsible measure.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by
the gentleman from New Mexico [Mr. Skeen].
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. SKEEN. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Chambliss) having assumed the chair, Mr. Goodlatte, Chairman of the
Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill, H.R. 3603,
making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug
Administration, and Related Agencies Programs for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 1997, and for other purposes, had come to no
resolution thereon.
____________________