[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.

                          ____________________