[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 76 (Tuesday, May 25, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H3536-H3538]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[[Page H3536]]
     PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1906, AGRICULTURE, RURAL 
    DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND RELATED AGENCIES 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2000

  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, 
I call up House Resolution 185 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 185

       Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule 
     XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 1906) making appropriations for Agriculture, 
     Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related 
     Agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2000, and 
     for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be 
     dispensed with. Points of order against consideration of the 
     bill for failure to comply with clause 4(a) of rule XIII or 
     section 306 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 are 
     waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill and 
     shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by 
     the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
     Appropriations. After general debate the bill shall be 
     considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. Points 
     of order against provisions in the bill for failure to comply 
     with clause 2 of rule XXI are waived. During consideration of 
     the bill for amendment, the Chairman of the Committee of the 
     Whole may accord priority in recognition on the basis of 
     whether the Member offering an amendment has caused it to be 
     printed in the portion of the Congressional Record designated 
     for that purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII. Amendments so 
     printed shall be considered as read. The chairman of the 
     Committee of the Whole may: (1) postpone until a time during 
     further consideration in the Committee of the Whole a request 
     for a recorded vote on any amendment; and (2) reduce to five 
     minutes the minimum time for electronic voting on any 
     postponed question that follows another electronic vote 
     without intervening business, provided that the minimum time 
     for electronic voting on the first in any series of questions 
     shall be 15 minutes. At the conclusion of consideration of 
     the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report 
     the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been 
     adopted. The previous question shall be considered as ordered 
     on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without 
     intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or 
     without instructions.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart) 
is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, for the purposes of debate only, I 
yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hall), 
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During 
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose 
of debate only.
  House Resolution 185 is an open rule, providing for the consideration 
of H.R. 1906, the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug 
Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill for Fiscal 
Year 2000.
  The rule waives clause 4(a) of rule 13, requiring a 3-day layover of 
the committee report, and Section 306 of the Congressional Budget Act, 
prohibiting consideration of legislation within the Committee on the 
Budget's jurisdiction, unless reported by the Committee on the Budget, 
against consideration of the bill. Further, the rule waives clause 2 of 
rule XXI, prohibiting unauthorized and legislative provisions in an 
appropriations bill, against provisions in the bill.
  As has become standard practice since the 104th Congress, Mr. 
Speaker, the rule provides Members who have preprinted their amendments 
in the Record prior to their consideration priority in recognition to 
offer their amendments.
  The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may postpone votes during 
consideration of the bill and reduce voting time to 5 minutes on a 
postponed question if the vote follows a 15-minute vote.
  Finally, the rule provides for one motion to recommit, with or 
without instructions.
  I would like to urge my colleagues to support this open rule on our 
first appropriations measure to come to the floor in the 106th 
Congress, Agriculture Appropriations.
  I commend the subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from New Mexico 
(Mr. Skeen), and the ranking member, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. 
Kaptur), for their hard work in producing this year's bill, which 
provides significant assistance for agriculture. I know that spending 
levels are extremely tight, and I believe they did a good job of 
working within their limits.
  The Agriculture Appropriations bill funds programs that help benefit 
each of us every single day. From improving nutrition to helping ensure 
safe and nutritious food to put on America's tables, the funds in this 
bill make it possible for less than 2 percent of the American 
population to provide food that is safe, nutritious, and affordable for 
all 272 million people in the United States of America, as well as 
others throughout the world.
  I have consistently been an admirer and supporter of American 
agriculture, and I commend the hard work and efficiency of the American 
farmer. I am pleased to support both this open rule providing the means 
to bring forth this legislation today and the underlying bill. I urge 
my colleagues to support this rule.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-
Balart) for yielding me the time.
  This is an open rule on the Agriculture Appropriations bill. As my 
colleague has described, this rule provides for one hour to be equally 
divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of 
the Committee on Appropriations.
  The rule permits amendments under the 5-minute rule, which is the 
normal amending process in the House. Members on both sides of the 
aisle will have the opportunity to offer amendments which are germane 
and which follow the rules for appropriations bills.
  The Agriculture Appropriations bill is one of the most important 
measures that we consider. It funds programs that feed hungry people in 
the United States and around the world. It supports the American 
farmers, who are so important to the U.S. economy.
  This bill represents a compromise. I wish that some of the funding 
levels could be higher. However, I recognize that appropriators were 
working under restraints and they faced many difficult decisions. 
Overall, this is a worthwhile bill.
  I appreciate the efforts of the Appropriations subcommittee chairman, 
the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Skeen), and especially the 
gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), ranking minority member, in 
crafting the bill. They did a good job. They had to work under 
difficult constraints, but they did a very, very good job and funded 
some very important programs.
  The committee restored $50 million cut by the administration for 
Title 2 of the P.L. 480 ``Food for Peace'' program. This program 
donates crops grown by American farmers to hungry people in 
impoverished and war-torn countries. This is the cornerstone of 
America's humanitarian assistance around the world.
  The bill provides $4 billion for the WIC program, which provides 
nutrition to women, infants, and children. This is $81 million more 
than the current level of funding but $100 million less than the 
administration's request. According to the Center on Budget and Policy 
Priorities, this level is not adequate to maintain the current 
participation level of 7.4 million recipients.
  Mr. Speaker, I note that once again the Committee on Rules has been 
forced to waive the 3-day layover for committee reports. This rule 
guarantees that all Members have at least 3 days to examine a bill 
before the committee files a report with the House. By waiving this 
rule, the House risks that some Members will not have enough time to 
study a bill before it is considered on the House floor.
  This is the 13th time this year the Committee on Rules had to waive 
this rule. But it is an important bill and we need to act quickly, so I 
will support the rule and the bill. I think it is vital, important, and 
we need it.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from 
Oklahoma (Mr. Coburn).
  (Mr. COBURN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)

                              {time}  1230

  Mr. COBURN. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today to talk about 
where we

[[Page H3537]]

are going in this country. This rule is symptomatic of the problem that 
we face. There are two Members of the House who honestly agreed that we 
would not be able to live within the 1997 budget agreement with the 
President. Those two Members voted for a budget that would actually 
spend Social Security money. Everybody else that is a Member of this 
House voted for one budget or another that would preserve 100 percent 
of the Social Security surplus this year. This bill is the first among 
many bills that will do exactly the opposite of that. The 
Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and 
Drug Administration, and Related Agencies states that this bill is a 
cut. That is an untruthful statement. This bill actually increases 
spending around $250 million. That money will come from the Social 
Security surplus.
  There will be those today in the debate on this bill that will deny 
that. They will say there is no way you can know that this money will 
be coming from Social Security because we have not considered the other 
bills. To me that is intellectually dishonest, because we realize that 
this is the first bill of 13 appropriations bills under which we will 
consider over the next several months. We have said with the budget 
that passed this House that we would preserve 100 percent of the Social 
Security surplus. My question to my colleagues is if we really do not 
intend to do that, it is time for us to be very, very honest with the 
American people. I put my colleagues on notice that I will vote for no 
appropriations bill and no rule that is intended to spend the first 
penny of Social Security surplus. The issue really is not Social 
Security. The issue really is are we going to regenerate faith of the 
American people in this body? We cannot in good conscience for our 
country, for our children and for our grandchildren do anything but be 
fully honest about what our intentions are.
  On my side of the aisle, there is a great debate on how best to 
accomplish this. We are faced with an ag appropriations bill because of 
process time. We must get a bill to the floor. We must start passing 
appropriations bills. Consequently, we are going to put forth a bill 
today and a rule. There is no question in my mind it will pass. There 
is no question in my mind that this bill also will probably pass. But 
if it does in its present form, $250 million above last year, then what 
we are saying to the American people is we do not really mean what we 
say when we passed both a Democrat budget, which did not pass but when 
we voted on it, or the Republican budget which did pass and we voted 
on, that we really do not mean what we say about protecting Social 
Security money. That lies at the heart of the problems of our body. For 
America to thrive, for America to turn around from the tragedies that 
are facing us today, the same principles have to be beheld in this 
body, and that is a principle of truth.
  If in fact this body intends to protect Social Security, if it 
intends to do that, if we are true with our votes about what we meant 
on the various budgets, then there is no way this rule should pass and 
there is no way if this rule passes that this bill should pass.
  I come from an agricultural district. My district is farmers. It is 
rural. Everything in my district has lots to do with the appropriations 
coming from the Agricultural Department. But we can do better. We must 
do better. Because it is not about spending Social Security money. It 
is not about being true to our word. It is about the foundational 
structure of our country and whether or not we are going to operate on 
the principles that we want our children to have, that we are going to 
reinforce the positive aspects of honor, of commitment to your word. 
Are we going to set an example for our children in high school that we 
are going to do what we said we were going to do? Are we going to be 
true to the founding principles of this country?
  I am in my last term, and I must say that I am very much discouraged 
as a Member of this body whether or not we have a great future when in 
fact we say one thing and mean another. I hope that you will check your 
heart, not just your mind, especially not your political mind, but that 
you will check your heart. Do we really mean it when we say we are 
going to protect Social Security, or do we not? I believe we do not 
mean it.
  Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman 
from Vermont (Mr. Sanders).
  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time. I rise in strong support of this rule, and I congratulate the 
chairman and the ranking member for their work. I think there are a lot 
of very positive aspects to this bill.
  I wanted to highlight, though, at this moment two amendments that I 
will be offering with support from different members from both 
political parties. Mr. Speaker, it is important to note that in the 
United States of America today, at a time when we are far and away the 
wealthiest country in the history of the world, hunger, h-u-n-g-e-r, 
remains a very serious problem for senior citizens and for children in 
this Nation. At a time when this Nation possesses so much wealth, there 
is absolutely no excuse, none at all, that one American citizen is 
hungry. And yet hospital administrators tell us that many of the senior 
citizens who come into their hospitals are suffering, if you can 
believe this, from malnutrition. Malnutrition. That is not what should 
be going on in the United States. I along with Democrats and 
Republicans will be offering an amendment to increase by $10 million 
funding for the Commodities Supplemental Food Program which comes 
close, therefore, to the level that the President had requested. This 
amendment will be offset by cutting the Agricultural Research Service 
which received a $50 million increase this year, bringing it up to $830 
million. So they received a $50 million increase up to $830 million 
when we have large numbers of senior citizens in this country going 
hungry. And while agriculture research is important and there is much 
in that bill that is important, we should not be increasing funds to 
develop red snapper aquaculture when senior citizens and children in 
America are going hungry.
  The second amendment that I will be introducing will be a very small 
amount of money which would go to help develop agritourism in the 
United States. It is no secret that all over this country, family 
farmers, whether it is dairy, whether it is in other commodities, are 
fighting for their lives, and there are States such as New Mexico and 
Massachusetts with an agritourism program, a program by which tourists 
could come visit family farms, perhaps to bed-and-breakfast or other 
types of activities and get cash into the pockets of family farms who 
are struggling. There are some very good programs all over this country 
that have been established in New Mexico, established in Massachusetts. 
I think it is important for a small sum of money to be appropriated at 
the Federal level to allow innovative programs to be developed 
throughout this country. I would hope that for those of us who are 
concerned about preserving the family farm, we support that amendment 
as well.
  Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I would simply request support for this rule. It is an open rule. Any 
concerns or opposition that Members may have with regard to the 
underlying legislation can be dealt with through amendments. If there 
are colleagues who believe there is too much spending, they can propose 
amendments to cut spending. All of that is permitted under a totally 
open rule. And so I would ask all of my colleagues to support this rule 
so that the process can go on and so precisely debate on the 
legislation, including any disagreements, may also go on and take place 
in this House today.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the 
previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). The question is on the 
resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. COBURN. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a 
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not 
present.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
  The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.

[[Page H3538]]

  The Chair announces that proceedings will resume immediately 
following this first 15-minute vote on the three postponed suspension 
motions and that each of those will be 5-minute votes.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 402, 
nays 10, not voting 21, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 147]

                               YEAS--402

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Blagojevich
     Bliley
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Burton
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cannon
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Fowler
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Granger
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill (IN)
     Hill (MT)
     Hilleary
     Hinchey
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Hooley
     Horn
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kelly
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     Kuykendall
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Largent
     Larson
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (OK)
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ose
     Owens
     Oxley
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Pease
     Pelosi
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pickett
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Reynolds
     Riley
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Salmon
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaffer
     Schakowsky
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sisisky
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Talent
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watkins
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Weygand
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Young (FL)

                                NAYS--10

     Bishop
     Coburn
     Edwards
     Hilliard
     Hostettler
     McIntosh
     McKinney
     Miller, George
     Sanford
     Wu

                             NOT VOTING--21

     Boucher
     Brown (CA)
     Buyer
     Cox
     Ewing
     Graham
     Hinojosa
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     John
     Kasich
     Lucas (KY)
     Millender-McDonald
     Napolitano
     Ortiz
     Packard
     Peterson (MN)
     Reyes
     Smith (TX)
     Waxman
     Whitfield
     Young (AK)

                              {time}  1301

  So the resolution was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________