[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 120 (Thursday, September 22, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10327-S10332]
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, 2006
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the
Senate will resume consideration of H.R. 2744, which the clerk will
report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 2744) making appropriations for Agriculture,
Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and related
agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, and
for other purposes.
Pending:
Dayton modified amendment No. 1844, to condition the use of
funds for carrying out a provision relating to prevented
planting payments, with an offset.
Bingaman (for Jeffords) amendment No. 1796, to provide
funds to carry out the historic barn preservation program,
with an offset.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the
Senate will proceed to a vote in relation to the Dayton amendment, No.
1844.
The Senator from Utah.
Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I see Senator Dayton is here. The yeas
and nays have not been ordered. There have been discussions during the
evening about this amendment. I wonder whether the Senator wants the
yeas and nays. I would say the Jeffords amendment, which under the
previous order is the next pending business, will be withdrawn.
Amendment No. 1796 withdrawn
I ask unanimous consent that it be withdrawn, after conferring with
Senator Jeffords and his staff.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
Amendment No. 1844, as modified
Mr. BENNETT. We are now on the Dayton amendment.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The vote occurs in relation to the
Dayton amendment, No. 1844, as modified.
Mr. DAYTON. I ask for the yeas and nays.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The question is on agreeing to the amendment. The clerk will call the
roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Corzine)
is necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Murkowski). Are there any other Senators
in the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 47, nays 52, as follows:
[[Page S10328]]
[Rollcall Vote No. 240 Leg.]
YEAS--47
Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Byrd
Cantwell
Carper
Clinton
Coleman
Conrad
Dayton
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Grassley
Harkin
Inouye
Jeffords
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Kohl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Mikulski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Rockefeller
Salazar
Sarbanes
Schumer
Stabenow
Thune
Wyden
NAYS--52
Alexander
Allard
Allen
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burns
Burr
Chafee
Chambliss
Coburn
Cochran
Collins
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
DeWine
Dole
Domenici
Ensign
Enzi
Frist
Graham
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Isakson
Kyl
Lott
Lugar
Martinez
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Roberts
Santorum
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Talent
Thomas
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
NOT VOTING--1
Corzine
The amendment (No. 1844), as modified, was rejected.
Mr. BENNETT. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. BIDEN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Farmers Market Promotion Program
Mr. HARKIN. Madam President, I would like to take a moment and
comment about an important program that I worked to include in the 2002
farm bill. I wish to engage Chairman Bennett, manager of the fiscal
year 2006 Agriculture appropriations bill, in a colloquy regarding the
Farmers Market Promotion Program.
The House of Representatives has already passed its Agriculture
appropriations bill, which includes $1 million in funding for the
Farmers Market Promotion Program. As the Senate wraps up its work on
the pending bill and looks ahead to conference, I would like to request
that the chairman do all he can in those negotiations to secure full
funding for this important program.
Authorized in section 10605 of the 2002 farm bill, the Farmers Market
Promotion Program would provide critical Federal grant dollars to local
governments, chambers of commerce, farmers market alliances, coops, and
economic development organizations to support the expansion,
development and maintenance of farmers markets and other direct
marketing opportunities. An initial investment of $1 million will help
to get this program up and running, bringing critical resources to
communities nationwide.
I make this request of the chairman understanding the budget
pressures and competing interests within this bill. I would like to say
at this time, however, this $1 million would be very well spent.
Consumers are demanding locally grown farm raised agricultural products
and producers want to meet this demand. In my State and across the
Nation exciting things are happening in the area of new markets for
agricultural products, but many communities lack the needed seed money
to get off of the ground.
Mr. BENNETT. The Senator from Iowa and ranking member of the Senate
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, as well as member of
the subcommittee of jurisdiction over this bill, raises some important
points about funding in the bill. I will work with Senator Harkin in
conference to address this issue.
Mr. HARKIN. I am grateful to the Chair and thank him again for his
skillful work at crafting a bill that can be supported by the full
Senate.
Mr. DeWINE. Madam President, I thank Chairman Cochran for taking the
time to have this very serious discussion with me about a life saving
proposal that I believe needs to become part of this bill before it is
passed into law.
The proposal, originally suggested by President Bush, would allow a
small percentage of U.S. food aid dollars to be used to purchase food
locally in the country or region of a food aid crisis until U.S. food
aid can arrive. For example, if there is a food crisis in Ethiopia, the
U.S. Government would be able to purchase food in neighboring
countries, or even in other areas of Ethiopia where food is available,
and use it to save lives until food shipped from the United States
could arrive. On average, U.S. food aid takes over 4 months to arrive
in countries in need, and during that gap period, people die--children
die.
There is also another consideration that makes this proposal even
more imperative. U.S. food aid is stored in Galveston, TX, and 60
percent of our food aid shipments exit through the Gulf of Mexico. Now,
with Rita raging off the coast of Texas, several hundreds of millions
of dollars of food aid are in the direct path of the storm.
Even if the food stores are not destroyed by this storm, the vessels
that were intended to transport the food aid have been sent out to sea
and rail companies are not picking up additional commodities. This
means the U.S. food aid delivery system is in a state of arrest. If we
do not provide a limited authority to purchase food locally until U.S.
food aid can arrive in countries suffering from a food shortage crisis,
kids will starve to death as they wait for help to arrive. We cannot in
good conscience let that happen.
This is one of those rare times when we, as elected officials, have
the opportunity to take a step that directly saves lives. Make no
mistake about it--if we fail to give the U.S. Agency for International
Development the flexibility to purchase food from local sources, our
lack of action will prevent us from saving lives. Failing to act will
cost the lives of thousands of suffering men, women, and children. I
trust that such a failure is simply not acceptable to my fellow
Senators. It certainly is not acceptable to me.
Mr. COCHRAN. I thank the Senator from Ohio for bringing this issue to
my attention and note his desire to provide funding for this new
proposal to provide cash for in-country commodity purchasing. I want
the Senator to know that I will work with him throughout the conference
negotiations on this bill to address this issue.
food assistance programs
Mr. BAUCUS. I rise today to express my deep concern with the state of
our Nation's food assistance programs. In recent weeks our Nation has
seen first hand the critical importance of food assistance programs in
helping our fellow Americans in times of need. After Hurricane Katrina,
with Hurricane Rita bearing down on the Texas coast, and with rising
fuel costs, our ability to provide the resources needed by Americans
need of food assistance is threatened. This is a critical problem one I
have seen in the gulf States but also seen in Montana where many of my
fellow Montanans rely on food assistance.
Mr. COCHRAN. I join my colleague from Montana in expressing concern
over the condition of the Nation's food assistance programs. I too
believe that participation in these nutrition programs may increase due
to the recent hurricane. I look forward to working with the Senator to
provide adequate funding to meet the demand for food assistance.
Mr. BAUCUS. I appreciate Chairman Cochran's understanding and
concern. I have seen some of the devastation in the gulf and want to
express my sympathy and pledge my support to help. Montanans have seen
the devastation and like me, they have opened their arms and hearts to
Gulf State evacuees. I hope that the chairman will join me in pledging
his support for taking immediate action to help alleviate the critical
needs faced by Americans in the gulf as well as citizens across the
country regarding food assistance. The Senate should act, and act now
to provide Americans relying on food assistance assurance that the
resources they rely upon will be there when they need it.
Mr. KOHL. I join my distinguished colleagues from Mississippi and
Montana. Providing emergency funds for the food assistance programs in
this country is desperately required. Americans in the gulf, as well as
my home State of Wisconsin, should be provided the food assistance that
they need. Congress must act to address the essential needs of these
Americans by ensuring that the Nation's food banks, emergency feeding
and other food assistance organizations have the resources they
require.
Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I rise to speak about the fiscal year
2006 Agriculture appropriations bill. I want
[[Page S10329]]
to begin by thanking Chairman Bennett and Ranking Member Kohl for their
hard work on this important bill. They were given a tough assignment--
to meet the needs of our rural communities in the context of a very
tough budget picture. They have done a good job.
I have several amendments to this bill, and I know we have reached an
agreement on two of them. I thank my colleagues and their staffs, Galen
Fountain and Fitz Elder for their help. I will discuss those amendments
shortly.
I have spoken in this Chamber before about the forgotten America and,
once again, I stand here today to speak about my concern that we are
not doing everything we can on behalf of those farmers, ranchers and
agri-businesses which continue to play a vital role in our Nation's
rural communities.
I am concerned about these communities. Too often, Washington leaves
those communities to wither on the vine.
The administration has proposed reductions in farm commodity
programs, crop insurance, food assistance, rural development and
conservation.
Just yesterday, the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced that
Hurricane Katrina caused an estimated $900 million in farm losses,
however according to reports, this estimate did not include long-term
infrastructure losses such as damaged barns, machinery, and fuel
shortages.
The bill before us takes steps to send a message to rural America
that we are not forgetting that vital part of our country.
It invests 3 percent more than the House-passed bill.
It adds back many of the important investments that the President
proposed cutting in his budget earlier this year.
There are also important investments for Colorado. Specifically,
Colorado State University in Fort Collins will receive $1.9 million in
important agriculture research programming.
Colorado will see nearly $32 million in agricultural research and
conservation projects, including $15 million in investment to fight
noxious weeds and funding for resource conservation and development
councils.
I think we can do more, and we must do more, because it is not just
Washington that forgets rural America. Consider this. Earlier today, I
got on the World Wide Web and googled gas prices on Google News. Sixty-
four pages came back with stories on the gas prices that are hurting
this country.
But through tens of pages of stories, I did not see a single story on
the impact of high gas on farmers and ranchers. I did see stories on:
rising gas prices hurting commuters; rising gas prices hurting SUV
drivers; rising gas prices hurting local governments; rising gas prices
hurting lottery sales; rising gas prices hurting pizza delivery prices;
rising gas prices hurting golf travel plans; and rising gas prices
hurting leaf watchers.
I have no doubt these high prices are hurting families in each of
these situations.
But I also know that now, today, this week, in the height of harvest
time, no one is hurt by gas prices more than farmers and ranchers.
Here is what I am hearing from my State. During harvest, agricultural
producers are some of the largest fuel consumers in the U.S. and
producers are facing enormous fuel costs. In Grand Junction, CO, diesel
prices are as high as $3.16.
I have heard from one Colorado farmer in Kit Carson County who has
estimated that in order to harvest this year, he will need an
additional $46,000 to cover fuel costs alone.
I have also heard from another farmer in northeastern Colorado who,
in order to cover the increasing price of fuel, has applied for
additional loans at this bank only to be turned down because he is
already overextended with existing loans.
That is why I am so pleased this bill now includes my amendment to
require the Secretary of Agriculture to work with the Secretary of
Energy to produce a comprehensive report on the impact of high gas
prices on our farmers, ranchers and rural communities across the
country. That data is the first step toward a comprehensive solution to
helping these communities address these terrible prices.
I am also pleased the bill now includes my amendment to call the
Secretary's attention to an issue that is plaguing Colorado and the
West. I know that the chairman is acutely aware of this problem, and
thank him and his staff for their support.
The Forest Service reports that during 2004, a total of 7 million
trees covering over 1.5 million acres, were killed by several different
types of bark beetles throughout the State of Colorado.
Severely impacted counties in my State include: Grand, Jackson,
Routt, Summit, Eagle, Park, Chaffee, Pitkin, Saguache, Gunnison,
Hinsdale, San Miguel, Ouray, Delta, Montrose, Mesa, and Garfield.
Awareness of the bark beetle infestation has grown with the
increasing visual impact of the large stands of dead trees visible from
I-70 and Colorado's resort communities.
These infestations will leave millions of acres of Colorado forests
at risk of a catastrophic fire.
Regrettably, in the face of this challenge, the Secretary of
Agriculture continues to underplay the importance of Forest Service
funding. I am thankful that my colleagues on the Interior
appropriations subcommittee have done what they can in this budget
environment to increase funding to fight pine beetles.
But we can do better. Consider this: total USFS funding down 11
percent from last year; forest health management funding is flat;
fiscal year 2006 wildland fire management appropriated additional $25
million for forest health activities on Federal and State land, $15 M
and $10 M, respectively).
That is why it is so important that we send this message to the
Secretary today. He needs to help us be able to do more to fight this
scourge. And this amendment today is the first step in that effort.
I will spend this upcoming weekend with my mother, on our family
ranch in the San Luis Valley and will lend a helping hand to the potato
harvest on the farm. The people of that valley--like the people of
rural communities across this great country--may not get the chance to
ever come to Washington to see the work we do. Nonetheless, I hope,
that our work makes it to them, so that they can be assured that we
have not forgotten them.
Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, earlier this month, the emerald ash borer
was positively detected in the Upper Peninsula of my home State of
Michigan for the first time. Officials believe that this may be an
isolated outbreak, and hope that it can be successfully contained.
Unfortunately, this is an aggressive pest that we in Michigan have
been fighting for years, however we have had only limited success in
containing the infestation in the past. It is believed that the ash
borer was brought to Michigan about 6 years ago through the channels of
international trade. What started as a local infestation in a few
counties in southeastern Michigan has grown to infest the entire Lower
Peninsula. This find in a State park in Michigan's Upper Peninsula is
significant because it shows that efforts and the resources provided
until now have not been adequate to contain the pest.
While even as we speak, research is being conducted by some of our
State's best experts on ways to kill the bug while saving our ash
trees, a lack of funding is hampering these efforts. Whatever funding
is available must be balanced between research efforts and eradication
and containment. For now, that means removing our ash trees. In
Michigan alone, we are nearing 10 million trees removed. I cannot tell
you how distressing it is for communities which have been forced to
remove trees and have little or no funding to replace them. Ann Arbor,
near the heart of the infestation and known for its beautiful downtown
tree-lined streets, is increasing devoid of foliage, as is the case
with too many of our cities and towns.
The State of Michigan anticipated $30 million in Federal funding last
year for activities related to eradicating emerald ash borer.
Unfortunately, they only received a third of that. This has severely
affected our ability to do what is necessary to eradicate this pest.
Chipping of these downed trees has ground to a halt, and funding to
enforce the State's wood quarantines has been strained. We cannot
continue to hold back the spread of the ash borer on our own with such
meager funding.
[[Page S10330]]
This year, recognizing the serious threat that the ash borer poses to
the Nation, the administration requested $32 million for eradication
efforts. However, the Senate bill before us provides only $5.96 million
for the efforts. This is simply far too inadequate.
The House of Representatives approved $14 million for emerald ash
borer-related activities in their Agriculture appropriations bill.
While this is still far below what is required, I believe it is a
positive first step to providing the desperately needed funding to slow
the spread of the ash borer.
We must recognize that this is a nationwide problem that is
unfortunately not receiving the recognition or support that it should.
A handful of States where EAB has been detected cannot be expected to
contain the bug on their own forever. We have seen how quickly the ash
borer has infested my State of Michigan, taking only 5 years to spread
throughout the Lower Peninsula. Without adequate resources, we face a
serious threat to our ash stock. The further spread of the emerald ash
borer would be economically devastating to my State, and possibly to
much of the rest of the Nation.
I am hopeful that the Senate conferees to this bill will accept the
House's level of $14 million for EAB eradication efforts.
Mr. FEINGOLD. Madam President, I am pleased that the Senate has
approved H.R. 2744, the fiscal year 2006 appropriations bill providing
vital funding for the Department of Agriculture, Food and Drug
Administration and related agencies. While I may not support every
provision, this bill provides important funding to support our Nation's
farmers, rural communities, and conservation programs along with
providing nutritious food for seniors, children and those in need.
I am pleased that the Appropriations Committee rejected a number of
administration proposals to reduce or eliminate important programs such
as funds for research at our land-grant colleges and universities,
conservation partnerships through resource conservation and development
councils, and funds to combat Johne's disease in our dairy industry.
All of these programs were funded at a minimum of last year's levels
instead of receiving drastic cuts.
After years of delay, I was encouraged that the Senate bill included
funds to implement mandatory country-of-origin labeling, COOL, for
meat, vegetables and fruits. Country-of-origin labeling is vitally
important to enable our farmers to show their pride in the quality of
their products, from ginseng to cheese to cranberries. Wisconsin
farmers are proud of their work, and many consumers want to support
American products--with country-of-origin labeling, both farmers and
consumers benefit. I urge the Senate conferees to insist on funding
COOL when they meet with the House conferees to resolve differences
between the two Chambers' bills.
The Senate bill included over $18 million for efforts to control and
eradicate chronic wasting disease, CWD, in deer and elk. In addition to
this much needed funding, I also worked with Senator Allard to include
a provision that would require the Department of Agriculture to set
minimum national standards for CWD control. Under the current system
there are various State regulations but no set of basic procedures
guiding the movement, handling, testing and permitting of captive-
raised deer and elk. Our amendment, that was included as part of the
bill, requires the Animal Plant Health Inspection Service to publish
its uniform methods and rules concerning CWD within 90 days of
enactment of the provision. With CWD being newly discovered in New York
and West Virginia, it is clear that this disease requires a national
response. This provision is an important step to prevent the further
spread of CWD and help deer and elk farmers operate safely throughout
the Nation.
High fuel costs are putting a squeeze on all Americans, but our
farmers are in a particularly vulnerable position. While the high fuel
costs are hitting them at many levels, they have little flexibility in
whether to plant and harvest their fields, pay to move their products
to market or procure fertilizer and feed. More than that, they receive
what the market dictates for their products, so when fuel costs double
or triple and they see fuel surcharges on every one of their bills,
they can't pass these costs on and receive a higher price for their
milk, grain or other products. In recognition of this difficult
situation, I was proud to cosponsor an amendment offered by Senator
Salazar that was included in the bill as a first step to addressing
this problem. The amendment requires the Department of Agriculture to
study the issue and issue a report on the impact to farmers.
I also submitted an amendment to the bill to require the Food and
Drug Administration, FDA, to conduct a study on the levels of
pesticides in domestic and imported ginseng. With Wisconsin ginseng
being highly prized worldwide for its quality and lack of unsafe
residues, mislabeled imported ginseng, often with high levels of
pesticide residues, remains a problem for our producers. This study
would have investigated this issue and provided important information
to focus FDA's enforcement activities on reducing the amount of unsafe
ginseng being passed off as Wisconsin- or U.S.-grown and helping
growers fight back against this unfair competition. I was disappointed
that I was blocked from having this amendment included in the bill.
Despite this setback, I will continue to fight for better enforcement
to protect consumers and Wisconsin's ginseng growers.
Mr. DODD. Madam President, I thank Senator Bennett and Senator Kohl
for their efforts as floor managers of H.R. 2744, the Agriculture
appropriations bill, and for their willingness to include in that
legislation an amendment that I offered along with Senators Harkin,
Reed, Carper, Biden, and Lieberman.
Our amendment, No. 1818, expresses the sense of the Congress that the
Food and Drug Administration, FDA, should act within 1 year to issue
comprehensive labeling guidelines for over-the-counter, OTC, sunscreen
products--a so-called ``final monograph.'' The FDA began work to
develop such a monograph in 1978. In 2002, after 24 years, the agency
issued a final monograph. Unfortunately, the final sunscreen monograph
failed to address one of the most critical aspects of sunscreens--how
to measure protection against UVA rays, which are responsible for
causing skin cancer. Because the final monograph failed to address this
key issue, the FDA stayed it until a comprehensive monograph could be
issued in order to avoid consumer confusion and the need for
unnecessary product relabeling.
That stay was issued nearly 4 years ago, and the FDA has yet to issue
a comprehensive final monograph. Sunscreen manufacturers need clear
guidance on product labeling in order to provide consumers with crucial
information about the protective benefits of sunscreen products.
Studies have shown that skin cancer rates continue to rise, especially
in younger adults and women.
Furthermore, in the face of FDA inaction, States are poised to fill
the void, raising the specter of a patchwork of state labeling
requirements that could be confusing to consumers and unnecessarily
burdensome to manufacturers. Pursuant to section 751 of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, FFDCA, which was enacted in 1997, a
Federal rule on sunscreen labeling would preempt any related State
labeling requirements. But this preemption does not apply in the
absence of a Federal rule. A recent decision by the Los Angeles
Superior Court held that, because there is no final FDA monograph for
sunscreens, the FFDCA does not preempt California State labeling and
advertising laws. Consequently, California State law can require
specific labeling for sunscreens sold in California.
The FFDCA expresses Congress' view that national uniformity of
sunscreen labels is important to providing all consumers with equal
access to valuable information about the need for sunscreens to reduce
the risk of skin cancer. As such, under Public Law 105-115, the Food
and Drug Modernization and Accountability Act of 1997, Congress
intended the FDA, which has the requisite scientific and medical
expertise, to prescribe labels for sunscreen products.
In March 1999, in a letter to FDA Commissioner Jane Henney, Senator
Reed and I expressed similar concerns about the agency's protracted
delay in issuing a comprehensive final OTC
[[Page S10331]]
monograph for sunscreen. Sadly, and much to the detriment of many
Americans who need clear, accurate, and comprehensive sunscreen
labeling as their first line of defense against skin cancer, little has
been done by FDA since that time. Twenty-seven years is more than
enough time for FDA to finalize this monograph. Again, I thank Senator
Bennett and Senator Kohl for their willingness to address this issue. I
urge the FDA to act with all possible haste to finalize the OTC
monograph for sunscreen products, and to do so within the next year.
Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I rise to offer this amendment with
Senators Murray, Obama and Akaka, and I thank Senators Feinstein and
Hutchison, as managers of this bill, for working with us to place some
reasonable limitations on the review of disability claims for post-
traumatic stress disorder that is currently under way in the Department
of Veterans Affairs.
The Department of Veterans Affairs is conducting a review of 72,000
cases of veterans whom the VA has already rated at 100 percent
disability due to post-traumatic stress disorder. The reason for this
review is that the Inspector General of the VA recently found that the
Department has, in the past, approved many PTSD disability claims
without obtaining key documents from the veterans necessary to
demonstrate that the PTSD is connected to their military service. In
other words, the VA failed to adequately confirm the facts of the case.
In many cases, however, many years have now passed since the
Department rated the veteran as disabled and began providing disability
compensation. For many of these veterans suffering from the mental and
emotional burdens of some very horrific experiences, that VA disability
check may be their only source of income.
Now, the VA is re-opening these cases to determine if there was an
error in their collection of documentation, and if so, where and how
the error occurred.
Even if there was an error, however, that veteran is now dependent on
that income. The veteran should not now--years later--be punished with
a loss of their income due to the late discovery by the VA of its own
error.
For this reason, the amendment I am offering today prohibits the use
of any appropriated funds to revoke or reduce a veteran's disability
compensation for post-traumatic stress disorder based on a finding that
the Department of Veterans Affairs failed to collect justifying
documentation, unless such failure was the direct result of fraud by
the applicant.
It is the intent of this amendment that the Department may conduct
this review if it provides a report to the Committee on Appropriations
on the plan for staffing and funding requirements. The Department
cannot, however, correct its error by taking money away from veterans.
America's veterans deserve the undying gratitude of the people of
this Nation. America's veterans deserve speedy and accurate processing
of their claims at the Department of Veterans Affairs. They do not
deserve to be given compensation one day, only to have it taken away
years later. Fortunately, the Senate is acting today to prevent that
from happening.
Mr. FRIST. Madam President, every morning, farmers and ranchers
across America wake up to do the hard work of growing crops, tending
livestock, and providing food that is safe, abundant and affordable.
Over 2 million American farms grow the food that feeds the world.
And today we will pass, with near unanimous support, the Agriculture
appropriations bill, which helps America's farmers to be the most
productive in the world.
The Agriculture appropriations bill funds $100.7 billion for a wide
array of Government agencies. Roughly 80 percent of the funding in this
bill is for those programs referred to as ``entitlements.'' That
includes farm price support programs and funding for low-income,
domestic food assistance programs such as food stamps, school lunch,
and other child nutrition programs.
The portion of this bill we refer to as ``discretionary'' includes
such activities as rural development, rural housing, agriculture
research, FDA, and most conservation programs. That portion represents
$17.3 billion--less than a 3 percent increase over this year's funding.
Later today, the Department of Agriculture will release their most
current estimates on the agriculture damages caused by Hurricane
Katrina. Preliminary estimates indicate that the loss of agricultural
production in the area might be less than $1 billion. Small comfort to
the hard working people who have lost their livelihoods--shrimpers
along the coast who have lost their shrimp boats, broiler producers in
Mississippi who have lost their facilities.
But we do know that 8 of the 10 major export grain elevators near the
Port of New Orleans are operational today. Three major floating rigs,
which have comparable capacity to these elevators, are also
operational.
Eighty percent of grain export capacity has been restored, and barge
movement is now increasing. Export grain delivery from the upper
reaches of the Mississippi is catching up with these capacity numbers.
The real impact of Katrina on the agricultural sector will be the
increasing cost of energy and fertilizer costs.
As I mentioned earlier, the largest expenditure made by the USDA is
for food and nutrition programs. The appropriations bill provides $40.7
billion for the Food Stamp Program; $12.4 billion for the school meal
programs; $5.3 billion for the Women and Infants and Children program.
Rural housing loan programs are allotted nearly $5 billion.
Another critical function of the USDA is to conduct research into
improving our farming and conservation methods.
The Department provides grants to local communities for a variety of
rural development projects, ranging from electricity improvements, to
water infrastructure, waste management, broadband service, and energy
efficiency.
During the August recess, I had the opportunity to meet with a group
of county mayors back in my home State. Tennessee is a major grower of
cotton, corn, and soybeans. This year, we are expected to produce 48
million bushels of soybeans on 1.2 million acres of farmland. The
Tennessee USDA office also predicts we will set a new State record for
cotton production, at over 1.1 million bales.
While I was home meeting with the county mayors, we discussed
Tennessee's thriving farming business and what they need to help it
grow. Greater research into agricultural production was one area they
highlighted. The farm bill includes significant support for those
efforts.nc1udes significant support for those efforts.
It includes: $2 million for Appalachian horticultural research, a
collaborative project between the USDA and University of Tennessee;
$955,000 for research into the best way to protect soil and water
quality on farms which can suffer from heavy erosion; and nearly $40
million for the boll weevil eradication program to help our cotton
farmers combat this destructive pest.
These programs, along with major funding for the USDA's rural
development programs and housing services, are helping farmers around
the country continue to feed America, and indeed, the world.
From the very beginning of our Nation's history, farming has been the
backbone of our economy, our growth, and our independence. Our earliest
settlers were farmers. Farmers and ranchers pioneered our expansion to
the West. Indeed, the first patent issued by the Patent Office in 1790
was to Samuel Hopkins for a farming innovation.
I congratulate the chairman of the subcommittee, Senator Bennett, and
the ranking member, Senator Kohl, on reporting a bill that, even in a
time of tight budgets, targets spending on the needs of rural America,
while also maintaining funding for essential food assistance programs.
By pulling together and remaining focused, the United States Senate
is keeping America's expansive food and fiber system moving forward.
Mr. BENNETT. Madam President, all other amendments having been
withdrawn or disposed of, we are now to final passage. To accommodate
those who need to leave, I reserve any remarks about the bill until
after final passage and urge we move to the vote.
Madam President, I yield for the Senator from Alaska.
[[Page S10332]]
Change of Vote
Mr. STEVENS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent the vote on 237
be changed. I voted no and I intended to vote aye. I ask it be changed.
It will not change the outcome of the vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. KOHL. Madam President, I thank Senator Bennett once again for his
hard work and expert managing of this bill. It has been a pleasure to
work with him, and I look forward to continuing to work together as we
conference this bill with the House. I also publicly and sincerely
thank John Ziolkowski, Fitz Elder, Hunter Moorhead, Dianne Preece, and
Stacy McBride on his staff for their hard work and dedication.
They exhibited professionalism and a strong work ethic throughout
this entire process, and worked seamlessly with my staff--something I
am constantly reminded of as a rare occurrence in what can be an
incredibly partisan place. I look forward to continuing this strong
spirit of cooperation.
Mr. BENNETT. Madam President, I call for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a
sufficient second.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the engrossment of the
amendments and third reading of the bill.
The amendments were ordered to be engrossed and the bill to be read a
third time.
The bill was read the third time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill having been read the third time, the
question is, Shall the bill pass?
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Corzine)
is necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 97, nays 2, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 241 Leg.]
YEAS--97
Akaka
Alexander
Allard
Allen
Baucus
Bayh
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Brownback
Bunning
Burns
Burr
Byrd
Cantwell
Carper
Chafee
Chambliss
Clinton
Coburn
Cochran
Coleman
Collins
Conrad
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
Dayton
DeMint
DeWine
Dodd
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
Enzi
Feingold
Feinstein
Frist
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Harkin
Hatch
Hutchison
Inhofe
Inouye
Isakson
Jeffords
Johnson
Kennedy
Kerry
Kohl
Kyl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lott
Lugar
Martinez
McCain
McConnell
Mikulski
Murkowski
Murray
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Obama
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Roberts
Rockefeller
Salazar
Santorum
Sarbanes
Schumer
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stabenow
Stevens
Talent
Thomas
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
Wyden
NAYS--2
Ensign
Sununu
NOT VOTING--1
Corzine
The bill (H.R. 2744), as amended, was passed.
(The bill will be printed in a future edition of the Record.)
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.
Mr. BENNETT. Madam President, at this time I would like to thank
those who worked so hard to help us with the bill, particularly Dave
Schiappa and Laura Dove here on the floor, along with Bill Hoagland of
the leader's staff and Chairman Chambliss and his staff, all of whom
have been tremendously helpful. We also thank David Tinsley, Kathie
Alvarez, Lula Davis, the Parliamentarians, and the cloakroom staff.
These marathon activities are not the best kind of situations for some
of these folks whom we take for granted around here. I want to
acknowledge their help and their support.
I, of course, want to acknowledge the staff of the subcommittee, and
I will list their names as a single staff, even though technically they
are divided between majority and minority, but in this subcommittee we
work together as if we are one staff: John Ziolkowski, Fitz Elder,
Hunter Moorhead, Dianne Preece, Stacy McBride, Galen Fountain, Jessica
Frederick, Bill Simpson, and Tom Gonzales.
All of these people have my very deep and sincere thanks for the work
in getting this done.
Now, Madam President, I understand we have to appoint conferees.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate insists
on its amendment, requests a conference with the House on the
disagreeing votes of the two Houses, and the Chair appoints Mr.
Bennett, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Specter, Mr. Bond, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Burns,
Mr. Craig, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Kohl, Mr. Harkin, Mr.
Dorgan, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Johnson, Ms. Landrieu, and Mr.
Byrd conferees on the part of the Senate.
____________________