Congressional Record, Volume 148 Issue 110 (Wednesday, September 4, 2002)

[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 110 (Wednesday, September 4, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8144-S8148]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT,
2003--Continued

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.

Amendment No. 4480

Mr. BYRD. Madam President, I am about to send to the desk an
amendment. Before doing so, let me just briefly tell Senators what this
amendment is about.
This amendment is being offered by myself, Senator Burns, Senator
Stevens, and other Senators. It addresses the critical firefighting
needs of the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management.
As many of our colleagues know, 2002 is turning out to be one of the
most devastating fire seasons on record. Therefore, our amendment
provides $825 million in emergency funding to reimburse the various
accounts from which these agencies are currently borrowing. Of the
amount provided, $636 million is allocated to the Forest Service and
$189 million is allocated to the Department of the Interior. These are
the exact amounts requested by the President just last week.
If anyone may think that this money is not needed, let me briefly
state for the record, over the past 10 years the average number of
acres burned by fire between January 1 and September 3 has been 3.2
million acres. This year--this year--however, the comparable number of
acres burned is 6.3 million, almost twice the 10-year average.
This problem is much more than just numbers of acres burned. The
devastation and destruction resulting from these fires is almost too
much to comprehend. More than $1 billion will be spent on fighting
fires, nearly 2,300 structures have been destroyed, and 20 brave
firefighters have lost their lives. Clearly, this situation amounts to
a domestic emergency of historic proportions.
I send to the desk, Madam President, an amendment, the amendment to
which I have already referred, for the clerk's reading, after which the
amendment will be open to amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Byrd), for himself, Mr.
Burns, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Reid, Mr. Domenici, Mrs. Murray, Mr.
Craig, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Kyl, and Mr. Baucus, proposes an
amendment numbered 4480.

Mr. BYRD. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that further
reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To provide funds to repay accounts from which funds were
borrowed for emergency wildfire suppression)

On page 127, line 2, immediately following the ``.'' insert
the following:

``TITLE IV--WILDLAND FIRE EMERGENCY APPROPRIATIONS

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT

For necessary expenses to repay prior year advances from
other appropriations transferred for emergency rehabilitation
or wildfire suppression by the Department of the Interior,
$189,000,000, to be available immediately upon enactment of
this Act and to

[[Page S8145]]

remain available until expended: Provided, that the Secretary
of the Interior shall certify in writing to the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations within 30 days of
receiving funds under this title which appropriations
accounts from which funds were advanced in fiscal year 2002
for emergency rehabilitation or wildfire suppression have
been repaid and the amount of repayment: Provided, further,
That the entire amount is designated by the Congress as an
emergency requirement pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A) of the
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, as
amended.

RELATED AGENCY

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

FOREST SERVICE

WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT

For necessary expenses to repay prior year advances from
appropriations accounts from which funds were borrowed for
wildlife suppression, $636,000,000, to be available
immediately upon enactment of this Act and to remain
available until expended: Provided, that the Secretary of
Agriculture shall certify in writing to the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriation within 30 days of receiving funds
under this title which appropriations accounts from which
funds were advanced in fiscal year 2002 for wildfire
suppression have been repaid and the amount or repayment:
Provided further, That the entire amount is designated by the
Congress as en emergency requirement pursuant to section
251(b)(2)(A) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985, as amended.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana.
Mr. BURNS. Madam President, I am supportive of this amendment. I
thank my chairman for offering this amendment. And nothing could be
closer to the truth than the reason he stated for the appropriation of
these funds.
It is not just that it is over 6 million acres this year; it is where
those acres are located, as we have seen more burning this year in the
forest and urban interface areas than we have ever seen. And they have
been devastating. It has been in areas where it could have and should
have taken more management skills to prevent the fires, but,
nonetheless, that is the situation in which we find ourselves.
So I am very supportive of this amendment. I thank the chairman of
the Appropriations Committee. As we debate this amendment today, I
think the rest of the Senate will, too. Not only is there a shortfall
in the funds that they had to borrow from in other programs that do
other things that are very important within the Department of the
Interior and the BLM, the Park Service, the Forest Service, but other
programs suffered because of these devastating fires this year.
So I thank my chairman and look forward to working with him as we
move this legislation through the Senate.
I yield the floor, Madam President.
Mr. BAUCUS. Will the Senator yield for a unanimous consent request
that I be added as a cosponsor of this amendment?
Mr. BYRD. Yes. Absolutely. I make that unanimous consent request,
Madam President.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The majority leader.
Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I want to also indicate my strong
support for the amendment just offered by Senator Byrd.
Like many States in the West and throughout the country, South Dakota
has suffered this year, especially from fires that have devastated many
parts of the Black Hills in particular. Thousands of acres have been
lost. So, clearly, this legislation is needed.
I am pleased the administration recently indicated, for the first
time, its willingness to support, on an emergency basis, additional
funds for firefighting. So I am grateful to the distinguished chairman
for his amendment. I strongly support it.

Amendment No. 4481 To Amendment No. 4480

Madam President, I am mystified, however, that the administration,
while willing to support, on an emergency basis, the funds necessary to
fight fires, has, at least up until now, expressed opposition to
providing assistance to those who are suffering from drought. In many
cases, drought can be just as devastating economically as fires. The
response on the part of the Federal Government is every bit as
important as it is for fires. There appears to be a disconnect between
those who support funding to fight fires and those who oppose funding
for purposes of fighting drought.
So I intend to offer an amendment on behalf of Senators Baucus,
Johnson, Harkin, Carnahan, Burns, Dorgan, Nelson of Nebraska, Stabenow,
Levin, Clinton, Lincoln, Conrad, Wellstone, Dayton, Schumer, and Reid.
I send the amendment to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from South Dakota, [Mr. Daschle], for himself,
Mr. Baucus, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Harkin, Mrs. Carnahan, Mr.
Burns, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, Ms. Stabenow, Mr.
Levin, Mrs. Clinton, Mrs. Lincoln, Mr. Conrad, Mr. Wellstone,
Mr. Dayton, Mr. Schumer, and Mr. Reid proposes an amendment
numbered 4481 to amendment No. 4480.

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of
the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To provide emergency disaster assistance to agricultural
producers)

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

TITLE __--EMERGENCY AGRICULTURAL DISASTER ASSISTANCE

SEC. __01. CROP DISASTER ASSISTANCE.

(a) In General.--Notwithstanding section 508(b)(7) of the
Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 1508(b)(7)), the
Secretary of Agriculture (referred to in this title as the
``Secretary'') shall use such sums as are necessary of funds
of the Commodity Credit Corporation to make emergency
financial assistance authorized under this section available
to producers on a farm that have incurred qualifying crop
losses for the 2001 or 2002 crop due to damaging weather or
related condition, as determined by the Secretary.
(b) Administration.--The Secretary shall make assistance
available under this section in the same manner as provided
under section 815 of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food
and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations
Act, 2001 (Public Law 106-387; 114 Stat. 1549A-55), including
using the same loss thresholds for the quantity and quality
losses as were used in administering that section.

SEC. __02. LIVESTOCK ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.

(a) In General.--The Secretary shall use such sums as are
necessary of funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation as are
necessary to make and administer payments for livestock
losses to producers for 2001 and 2002 losses in a county that
has received an emergency designation by the President or the
Secretary after January 1, 2001, and January 1, 2002,
respectively, of which an amount determined by the Secretary
shall be made available for the American Indian livestock
program under section 806 of the Agriculture, Rural
Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2001 (Public Law 106-387; 114
Stat. 1549A-51).
(b) Administration.--The Secretary shall make assistance
available under this section in the same manner as provided
under section 806 of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food
and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations
Act, 2001 (Public Law 105-277; 114 Stat. 1549A-51).

SEC. __03. COMMODITY CREDIT CORPORATION.

The Secretary shall use the funds, facilities, and
authorities of the Commodity Credit Corporation to carry out
this title upon enactment.

SEC. __04. REGULATIONS.

(a) In General.--The Secretary may promulgate such
regulations as are necessary to implement this title.
(b) Procedure.--The promulgation of the regulations and
administration of this title shall be made without regard
to--
(1) the notice and comment provisions of section 553 of
title 5, United States Code;
(2) the Statement of Policy of the Secretary of Agriculture
effective July 24, 1971 (36 Fed. Reg. 13804), relating to
notices of proposed rulemaking and public participation in
rulemaking; and
(3) chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code (commonly
known as the ``Paperwork Reduction Act'').
(c) Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking.--In carrying
out this section, the Secretary shall use the authority
provided under section 808 of title 5, United States Code.

SEC. __05. EMERGENCY DESIGNATION.

(a) In General.--The entire amount made available under
this title shall be available only to the extent that the
President submits to Congress an official budget request for
a specific dollar amount that includes designation of the
entire amount of the request as an emergency requirement for
the purposes of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. 900 et seq.).
(b) Designation.--The entire amount made available under
this section is designated by Congress as an emergency
requirement under sections 251(b)(2)(A) and 252(e) of that
Act (2 U.S.C. 901(b)(2)(A), 902(e)).

Mr. BYRD. Madam President, would the distinguished majority leader
add my name to the list of Senators who are cosponsors of this measure?

[[Page S8146]]

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I would be happy to add the name of the
distinguished Senator from West Virginia, Mr. Byrd, as a cosponsor. I
ask unanimous consent that he be added as a cosponsor of the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, first of all, let me also express
publicly my appreciation to Senator Byrd for his accommodation of my
schedule this morning. He was prepared to offer his amendment some time
ago and withheld doing so in order to accommodate my schedule. As
always, he is very courteous, and has been very helpful to me in this
case. I appreciate his cooperation.
Madam President, when the Senate passed the farm bill 202 days ago,
we agreed, overwhelmingly, to include assistance for farmers and
ranchers who suffered serious economic losses as a result of natural
disasters during the crop-year of last year. Madam President, 69
Senators--Republicans and Democrats--voted to include that assistance
in the farm bill.
The administration at that time, and Republican House leaders,
objected. In conference, they threatened to block any farm bill from
passing unless we removed the natural disaster assistance for this
year. They said they would block all assistance for farmers and
ranchers unless we agreed to drop disaster assistance.
So, reluctantly, we agreed. But we said, when the farm bill passed,
that the need for disaster assistance for farmers and ranchers would
not go away. It would only get worse, and we would have to revisit the
issue. That is what we are doing once again today.
Our amendment is simple and straightforward. It does not create a new
program. All it does is fund existing crop loss and livestock
assistance programs for this year and last year. It does, in other
words, exactly what 69 Senators agreed to do 202 days ago.
There are some who said we should not spend another dollar on
agriculture. They say the new farm bill is more than generous. I want
to make an important distinction. The new farm bill covers loss due to
low prices. It does not cover losses due to natural disasters. Farmers
and ranchers all across America are suffering staggering losses due to
natural disasters.
In fact, in yesterday's Wall Street Journal there was a report that
indicated the current drought may be the most expensive in all of U.S.
history.
According to the Journal:

The U.S. may be looking at the most expensive drought in
United States history, inflicting economic damage far beyond
the Farm Belt.

In South Dakota, the drought is costing farmers upwards of $5 million
a day. All told, the impact on my State alone is estimated to be $1.8
billion to agriculture and rural business. Things are getting worse by
the day. Some counties have had less rain this year than they had in
1936, at the height of the Dust Bowl.
For as long as I can remember, the Congress has agreed that disaster
relief constitutes an emergency. Disaster relief for wildfires,
tornadoes, floods, or any other natural disaster is truly an emergency.
It is astounding to me now that during what may be the most serious of
all droughts we have had in U.S. history, some people would want to
change that. They would say that farmers and ranchers don't need or
don't deserve disaster assistance. They are wrong.
The farm bill doesn't include funds to help farmers and ranchers
weather this unprecedented set of circumstances. Unless we act, many of
them simply will not survive.
We should not discriminate against those who are hurting simply
because of the nature of the disaster. Whether it is caused by floods
or droughts or wildfires, whether it devastates Texas or South Dakota
or any other State, an emergency is an emergency. Sixty-nine of us
recognized that fundamental fact 202 days ago. I urge my colleagues to
reaffirm it as we consider this amendment.
I yield the floor.

Amendment No. 4481, As Modified

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
Mr. BYRD. Madam President, may I ask the distinguished majority
leader: The leader and the assistant leader and the distinguished
ranking member of the subcommittee, Mr. Burns, Mr. Baucus, and I
earlier had a discussion to the extent that the offeror, the author of
the amendment, Mr. Daschle, would modify the amendment to make it read
that the funds would be available in fiscal year 2002 and that the
amount would be charged to the Committee on Agriculture, the
authorizing committee. Are these provisions included in the amendment?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. DASCHLE. If I could respond to the distinguished Senator from
West Virginia, I would confirm that the issues raised just now by the
distinguished Senator are ones to which we have agreed. Obviously, we
have to incorporate the appropriate language in order to accommodate
that agreement. It is my intention to do so. At some point, I will ask
unanimous consent that the amendment be so modified to accommodate
those requests.
Let me reiterate, they would involve charging whatever funds may be
used against the Agriculture Committee. I would draw a distinction
between that implication or that requirement and any implication that
that would entail using funds from the recently passed farm bill. The
Congressional Budget Office has indicated we are not able to do that,
to draw funds from the farm bill, per se. But none of us has any
objection to charging the funds against the committee itself.
Let me also say, we certainly have no objection to ensuring that
those funds are taken from the fiscal year 2002 budget allocation and
not the 2003.
So we certainly would be in agreement with both recommendations and
would be offering modifying language when we have it. I understand the
language is now at the desk. I ask unanimous consent that the amendment
be so modified.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
Mr. BYRD. Madam President, as I understand it, the author of the
amendment needs no consent to modify his amendment at this point, no
action having been taken on his amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
Mr. DASCHLE. I simply would then modify my amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is so modified.
The amendment (No. 4481), as modified, is as follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

TITLE __--EMERGENCY AGRICULTURAL DISASTER ASSISTANCE

SEC. __01. CROP DISASTER ASSISTANCE.

SEC. __02. LIVESTOCK ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.

SEC. __03. COMMODITY CREDIT CORPORATION.

The Secretary shall use the funds, facilities, and
authorities of the Commodity Credit Corporation to carry out
this title upon enactment.

SEC. __04. REGULATIONS.

(a) In General.--The Secretary may promulgate such
regulations as are necessary to implement this title.

[[Page S8147]]

(b) Procedure.--The promulgation of the regulations and
administration of this title shall be made without regard
to--
(1) the notice and comment provisions of section 553 of
title 5, United States Code;
(2) the Statement of Policy of the Secretary of Agriculture
effective July 24, 1971 (36 Fed. Reg. 13804), relating to
notices of proposed rulemaking and public participation in
rulemaking; and
(3) chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code (commonly
known as the ``Paperwork Reduction Act'').
(c) Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking.--In carrying
out this section, the Secretary shall use the authority
provided under section 808 of title 5, United States Code.

SEC. __05. EMERGENCY DESIGNATION.

SEC. . CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET ACT.

Notwithstanding Rule 3 of the Budget Scorekeeping
Guidelines set forth in the joint explanatory statement of
the committee of conference accompanying Conference Report
105-217, the provisions of this section that would have been
estimated by the Office of Management and Budget as changing
direct spending or receipts under section 252 of the Balanced
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 were it
included in an Act other than an appropriations Act shall be
treated as direct spending or receipts legislation, as
appropriate, under section 252 of the Balanced Budget and
Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, and by the Chairman of
the Senate Budget Committee, as appropriate, under the
Congressional Budget Act.

Mr. BYRD. I thank the distinguished majority leader.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana.
Mr. BAUCUS. Madam President, I think finally we are here. Finally we
will pass agricultural disaster assistance which is so needed by many
farmers and ranchers throughout our country. The amendment now pending
is the amendment I offered which got 69 votes just 200 days ago. It has
been modified.
My colleague, Senator Burns, and I have modified the amendment so it
applies to years 2001 and 2002--that is, to crop losses and livestock
losses in both those years--whereas the earlier amendment I offered
covered losses only in the year 2001. This has been a devastating year,
in addition to 2001 being a devastating year.
Mother Nature works in strange ways. Some parts of America are hit in
some years rather than others. It doesn't rain in some parts of our
country in some years, whereas it does in others. That is true within
States. Last year was worse for my State of Montana, and this year is a
little bit better, but not a lot.
For Montana, it is not just 2 years of drought, it is successive
years of drought. It is 4 or more years depending upon where you are
located in my State. I say that not only because of the obvious
implication that there are 4 years of farmers who are not producing the
quality or quantity of crops that they should, but also because of the
perverse way crop insurance works. I point this out to my colleagues
who may not be as steeped in agricultural policy as others.
I ask unanimous consent, even though we will get into morning
business, that I be allowed to continue as in morning business.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. BAUCUS. The perverse operation of crop insurance is that with
each successive year's drought, premiums rise but coverage decreases.
That is how crop insurance works; namely, premiums rise during years of
droughts and coverage declines.

Some might ask, why do we need agricultural disaster assistance when
we have Federal crop insurance? That is a good point. Federal crop
insurance is helpful. Federal crop insurance is widely available in
most parts of the country. The fact is, crop insurance today provides
less coverage than is needed because of the perverse effect of the
operation of the program and does not negate the need to provide
natural disaster.
Again, to repeat, in successive years of drought, premiums that
farmers pay for Federal crop insurance rise and the coverage continues
to decline with each year that passes during a natural disaster. That
is the way it works because farmers have less of production history,
less acreage in a prior year that is available.
Add to that, when you have successive years of drought, it might rain
this year, as it has in some parts of my State, but that is just the
surface soil that is given moisture. It is the subsurface soil down 1,
2, 3 feet that is parched. It is so dry. A lot of crops have roots that
go deeper. In addition, very dry subsurface soil has an effect on the
moisture content at the surface. So there are many reasons this has
just mounted.
In 1996--I can only speak for Montana; I cannot speak as
authoritatively for other States--before these successive years of
drought began, farmers received almost $1 billion in cash receipts from
wheat; $847 million, to be precise. Last year, 5 years into the
drought, Montana received only $317 million in cash receipts--that is a
62-percent decline--just because of the drought.
The same is true with livestock. We are talking about not only crop
assistance but also livestock because in drought years feed prices are
extremely high and ranchers are liquidating their herds. The range is
in poor condition. It just adds up and has a very detrimental
cumulative effect.
Agriculture is more than 50 percent of my State's economy. It is
truly the backbone of our State's economy. So a drought affects not
only farmers and ranchers specifically, but it affects communities, it
affects schools and businesses, because when farmers don't have a crop,
what happens? They are not buying seed, they are not buying fertilizer,
not buying fuel, not buying all the staples that go into agriculture.
When that happens, clearly, the towns begin to suffer dramatically.
It affects our schools and the income available to schools. It affects
the psychology of the communities. More than that, it affects the
number of people who are willing to stay and fight and live in those
communities.
Many communities in Montana are losing population. If we don't get
this agricultural disaster assistance, I can guarantee you that the
failure is going to hasten the decline of the populations in many parts
of our country. I can speak personally for parts of my State of
Montana.
The leader made an excellent point a few minutes ago, which is that
we passed a farm bill that addressed economic assistance for farmers.
It is needed because the earlier farm program, ``freedom to fail'' was
just that; it hurt farmers. There was no safety net. Farmers fell
through the cracks and holes in the safety net. We didn't have a basic
underpinning for people. Not only was it necessary for farmers to have
that underpinning, but I want to remind my colleagues that we have a
big battle with other countries that support their farmers much more
than America supports its farmers.
I also might point out an interesting statistic, which is that
agricultural trade barriers worldwide average about 60 percent.
Manufacturing trade barriers and tariffs average about 5 percent. We
Americans have very few barriers to agricultural trade. There are some
commodities, such as peanuts and sugar, that have some assistance, but
when it comes to the basic commodities of wheat and barley, we have
virtually no protective subsidies. We have no trade barriers to help
our industries, whereas, as I mentioned before, the average
agricultural trade barrier worldwide is 60 percent. So, clearly, we
have to help our people when other countries are helping theirs so much
more than we are.
Second, in 1975, the European Union was the largest net importer of
agricultural products. They didn't like that, so they started doing
something about that. They decided to enact various measures within
Europe, price levies, agricultural export subsidies, and similar
measures. By 1985, Europe was the largest net exporter of agricultural
products. That was a big turnaround in 10 years because of the degree
to which they were protecting their producers.
Eighty-two percent or eighty-six percent of the world's agricultural
export subsidies are European Union. Their agricultural export
subsidies are about

[[Page S8148]]

85 percent of the world's agricultural export subsidies. What are
America's? Maybe 2 percent. Our Export Enhancement Program is just
peanuts compared with what the Europeans do. So we have to fight and we
have to help our farmers. The farm bill was to help our farmers.
We are talking today about something totally different. What is it?
We are not talking about assistance for low prices, we are talking
about disaster assistance. When there are tornadoes, our country
responds with disaster assistance. When there are floods, our country
responds with disaster assistance. We had the Trade Towers tragedy--an
unspeakable tragedy--and our country responded to that disaster. We are
simply stating--all of us who are sponsoring this amendment--in fact, I
was the original author of this amendment along with Senator Burns. We
are saying here is another disaster, but not because of a tornado,
earthquake, or floods, but because of the drought, people need help.
There is no reason that drought should play by a different set of rules
than other natural disasters.
We have the opportunity today to keep our rural communities and
economies alive. Rural America is resilient. And like them, I will not
give up. Thousands of people are suffering from the relentless drought.
They deserve emergency agricultural assistance and I will continue to
fight until we are successful.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. It is long overdue
and desperately needed.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Johnson). The Senator from Minnesota is
recognized.
Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I will be brief. I know others want to
speak.
I think I speak for the Presiding Officer, given what he has seen in
South Dakota. Senator Daschle also talked about the drought. Let me
make this appeal to my colleagues. In northwestern Minnesota, there are
17 counties that have been declared Federal disasters. In our case, it
is the flooding. I cannot remember more emotional gatherings I have
ever been to since I have been in the Senate. We have had a lot of this
kind of flooding, and I have been in towns devastated by tornadoes.
I make this appeal to my colleagues. Never in the years I have been a
Senator--and I will be finishing up my 12th year--have I voted against
disaster assistance for any community anywhere in the United States of
America, whether it is tornadoes, hurricanes, fire, drought, or whether
it is flooding. I believe this is a perfect example of there but for
the grace of God go I. The devastation to so much rich farmland in
Minnesota and to those farmers and these communities is not because
people have been bad managers. Nobody asked for this. As Senator
Daschle said, we are not talking about countercyclical income for low
prices; we are talking about disaster relief.
So I will say to every Senator, Democrat and Republican, we hope we
will have your support. This is what we do as a community. This is what
we do as a national community. We provide help to people. I know the
President has said no to this. I wish he would take another position.
But I really believe Senators understand full well that this kind of
disaster can happen to any community in any one of our States, and I
think this is a time when we really should come together, a time when
we become a community to help communities.
I am so pleased that this amendment is on the floor. I know we are
soon going to go back to the homeland defense bill, but tomorrow we
will be back on this amendment. Tomorrow, there will be an up-or-down
vote. Tomorrow, I hope Senators will vote for this. Right now, for me,
as a Senator from Minnesota, it is a priority to get help to these
people. A lot of farmers and a lot of people in northwestern Minnesota
really need the help. Please provide that help.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota is recognized.

____________________