[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 125 (Friday, September 29, 2006)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10565-S10569]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      AGRICULTURE DISASTER RELIEF

  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I rise today on behalf of myself, Senator 
Nelson of Nebraska, Senator Hagel, Senator Dorgan, Senator Salazar, 
Senator Coleman, Senator Baucus, Senator Johnson, Senator Burns, 
Senator Harkin, Senator Cantwell, Senator Clinton, Senator Schumer, 
Senator Inouye, Senator Thune, Senator Durbin, Senator Obama, Senator 
Reid of Nevada, Senator Dayton, Senator Murray, Senator Jeffords, and 
Senator Enzi.
  Mr. President, 21 Senators, on a fully bipartisan basis, have 
cosponsored this legislation to provide disaster relief for our 
Nation's farmers.
  In North Dakota, last year, we faced what was then extraordinary 
flooding. As shown here, these were pictures all across eastern North 
Dakota. We had a million acres that were prevented from even being 
planted, hundreds of thousands of additional acres that were planted 
and then drowned out. There was no disaster assistance for those 
people.
  This year--the irony of ironies--we have now had extraordinary 
drought. This is a picture from my home county, Burleigh County, in the 
center of North Dakota. This is a corn crop with absolutely nothing 
growing. This drought is now the third worst drought in our Nation's 
history.
  This chart shows the U.S. drought monitor. It shows the severity of 
the drought across the entire midsection of the country. This shows, in 
the darkest colors, exceptional drought. You can see the exceptional 
areas of drought are these. North Dakota and South Dakota are the 
epicenter of this drought. It has been devastating. If assistance is 
not granted, thousands of farm families will be forced off the land. 
That is a fact.
  I have had the independent bankers of my State say to the White House 
representative who was in my office: If assistance does not come, 5 to 
10 percent of their clients in North Dakota will be forced out of 
business.
  Thirty-four farm organizations--34 farm organizations--have now 
spoken and told the Congress of the United States: Take action on 
disaster assistance and take it now.
  In addition, we have this letter from the State Commissioners of 
Agriculture from all across the country, saying that emergency 
agricultural disaster assistance is a high priority requiring action by 
Congress this year. It could not be more clear that assistance is 
needed, and it is needed now.
  Last May, the Senate approved bipartisan emergency agricultural 
disaster assistance for the 2005 crop year. The President threatened to 
veto the bill if the farm assistance provisions were included. During 
the conference with the House, the majority leadership demanded the 
assistance provisions be removed.
  In June, the Senate Appropriations Committee once again approved 
emergency disaster assistance as part of the agriculture appropriations 
bill for 2007. Again, the majority leadership has failed to bring that 
measure to the Senate floor for debate and vote.
  Since that time, much of rural America has suffered from what USDA 
meteorologists have described as the third worst drought since records 
have been kept. Only the 1930s and 1950s exceed the severity of this 
drought.
  In early September, I introduced a new bipartisan farm disaster 
relief bill to provide help for both 2005 and 2006. Senator Nelson and 
I offered that legislation as an amendment to include during the port 
security bill consideration. A vote on that amendment was denied by the 
Senate leadership.
  Last week, I once again tried to get the Senate to adopt disaster 
relief legislation. Again, the efforts were thwarted by the majority 
leadership.
  Today, as we are about to recess the Senate, I will offer a revised 
version of the important disaster legislation. Let me make clear to my 
colleagues, these are the disaster provisions that have already been 
approved by the Senate, but we have made a modification because the 
administration has said there are two provisions they object to. Those 
provisions--the economic assistance provisions to help offset the 
rising cost of energy, and the additional grants to the States to deal 
with the livestock losses--we have removed those two provisions the 
administration has objected to.
  We retain the crop and livestock production loss provisions of the 
original legislation. Crop producers will still need to demonstrate a 
35-percent loss before they get anything. Payments for the livestock 
compensation program will only be made to producers whose operations 
are in counties designated as disaster areas by the Secretary, and who 
can demonstrate they suffered a material loss.
  It also contains additional funding for conservation programs to help 
restore and rehabilitate drought and wildlife losses on grazing lands.

  As I have indicated, my new legislation eliminates the emergency 
economic assistance for program crop and dairy producers, and it 
strikes the supplemental grants to the States to assist other livestock 
and specialty crop producers.
  These provisions were included in the original bill, but because the 
administration has objected, we have removed them. By making these 
changes, the Secretary's opposition no longer has any basis.
  The cost of providing emergency disaster assistance for losses in 
2005 and 2006 is reduced from $6.7 billion in my original bill to $4.9 
billion in this legislation.
  Farmers and ranchers need assistance for 2005 and 2006 natural 
disasters, and they need it now. If these emergencies are not dealt 
with, tens of thousands of farm families and main street businesses 
will suffer, some of them irretrievably. It is time for Congress to act 
and to allow this legislation to be voted on. Let's give our colleagues 
a chance to vote. We have removed the reasons for the objection from 
the administration.
  I urge my colleagues to act.
  Mr. President, I ask the Presiding Officer, how much time do I have 
remaining?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Chambliss). The Senator has 22 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask the Senator from South Dakota if he 
could take 4 minutes? I yield 4 minutes to the Senator from South 
Dakota; and to the Senator from North Dakota, if I could give 4 
minutes; and the Senator from Montana 4 minutes; and then the Senator 
from Nebraska 4 minutes as well.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Dakota.
  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, I am glad to join my colleague from North 
Dakota today and support him and the other 20 Senators who are on this 
bill in moving disaster assistance through the Senate.
  As the Senator from North Dakota has noted--you saw the drought chart 
he put up earlier--the Dakotas were the epicenter when it comes to 
drought this year. We had the bull's-eye, the area where the most 
severe drought hit.
  I visited in South Dakota in June. At that point, we had no wheat 
crop. In all of central South Dakota, both winter wheat and spring 
wheat were all wiped out.
  I went back in July to central South Dakota and looked at other parts 
of the State. By then, we could tell we were not going to have a corn 
crop. I went to western South Dakota in August with my colleague 
Senator Johnson. We traveled to areas west of the Missouri River and 
again to the central part of the State. We looked at corn that rivaled 
what the Senator from North Dakota showed that was about this tall--or 
about this tall--when it ought to have been in full bloom.
  The livestock producers in western South Dakota had no hay crop. As a 
consequence, many of them had to liquidate their herds. What that means 
is that effect is felt not only directly by them and those families, 
but by the entire rural area, the entire farm economy in my State and 
States such as North Dakota.
  It would be one thing if it were a 1-year deal. But this is 
successive years of drought, 6 years in a row, 1999, 2000, on through 
2005. We have had these types of weather conditions in our States. The 
month of July was the hottest July on record in my State. In the months 
of May and June we normally would get precipitation. We had less 
precipitation than the average during

[[Page S10566]]

the years of the Great Depression--the biggest disaster to ever hit 
farm country.
  We respond as a country, as a Congress, when other areas of the 
country are impacted.
  We do it when we have hurricanes. Many stepped up and supported the 
assistance for areas in the gulf. This is the same sort of disaster. It 
has the same sort of effect. It may not have the immediate aftermath 
you see when a hurricane strikes. It is a slow-motion disaster, but the 
effect on the economy in places in the Midwest is just as disastrous 
and devastating.
  Mr. President, we need action. We need the Senate to do what it has 
done in the past; that is, step forward and provide relief for these 
hard-hit farmers and ranchers in the Midwest. It was noted by my 
colleague from North Dakota that the Senate has, on a couple occasions, 
passed drought disaster relief. We need to get it passed. I am happy to 
join in that effort.
  I yield back the remainder of my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Thune). The Senator from North Dakota is 
recognized.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, my colleague said it well. This is a 
picture of Frank Barnick walking in a creekbed that used to provide 
water for his cattle. One day this summer, it was 112 degrees in North 
Dakota. You can see the devastating drought that has occurred. The land 
looks like a moonscape.
  Frank Barnick said this:

       It is the worst drought I have ever seen. You do a lot of 
     praying and wondering how you are going to get through it.

  One way you get through these things is when Congress decides to 
reach out with a helping hand and say: We want to help you, you are not 
alone. We have always done that. Somehow, this year it hasn't been 
quite as urgent to do it. I don't understand that.
  Senator Burns and I have twice moved legislation through the 
Appropriations Committee. The Senate has twice passed agricultural 
disaster aid. It has moved through the Appropriations Committee a third 
time. My colleague, Senator Conrad, taking the lead in drafting, with 
many of us assisting, created the disaster legislation now pending that 
we should, by consent, move through the Senate. Yet somehow it remains 
blocked. It is not urgent for some. This isn't about the major 
industries--the pharmaceutical industry, the oil industry, or about 
another big industry--this is about individual families living a hard 
life, trying to make a living during tough times.
  Will Congress help? We have helped endangered species. We can deal 
with them--birds, bats, butterflies, black-footed ferrets, and prairie 
dogs. When they are endangered, we say: Let's help. There is a species 
called family farmers and family ranchers who are out on the land 
living alone, trying to make do by themselves. When tough times come, 
when weather-related disasters come, they need help.
  With the Katrina victims, when those who live on farms in the gulf 
were devastated by Hurricane Katrina, this Congress passed agricultural 
disaster aid for them. This Congress said yes. So did this President. 
They just said to all the rest of you in the country out there on the 
farm or ranch who got hit by an agricultural disaster, a weather-
related disaster: You are out of luck, we don't support you. That was 
the message from the President. So he blocked it.
  These are Republicans and Democrats on the floor of the Senate today 
working together to say this needs to get done. This is a priority. I 
hear the President and others go all around the world when there is 
trouble to say: Let us help. We are there to help you. What about here 
at home? Do we need to help here? You bet your life we do. We need to 
do it now.
  The question of whether these folks will farm and ranch next year 
depends on whether we do what we are required and responsible to do. 
The answer for the last year now, and recent months, is that somehow we 
don't have time or the urgency and that we cannot quite get this done. 
That is the wrong priority for this country. This country has a 
responsibility to reach out to help its own, reach out to help people 
who are in trouble.
  These are American all-stars, the people who live on the farms. They 
produce food for a hungry world. They don't ask for very much. When a 
weather disaster strikes--a hurricane, a drought, or a flood--and their 
entire income is washed away, they would hope, I would hope, and I 
think the values of our country would expect, that we would reach out a 
helping hand and say: We want to do this now. It is a time-honored 
tradition.
  We are not asking for something strange or different. We have always 
helped during tough times. Let's make this an urgent priority this 
afternoon; we can do this. Let's make this a priority and decide we are 
going to do the right thing for America's family farmers and ranchers.
  I yield back my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana is recognized.
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I don't know of anything more frustrating 
to all of us who come from farm and ranch country than to try to get 
this taken care of. We tried to take care of it last year and didn't 
get it done. There was no urgency. We had a fairly good crop this year. 
We were not the epicenter of the drought. We have been in that bull's-
eye now for 6, going on 7 years. It takes its toll not only on wells 
but reservoirs and streams.
  I am here in support of this because I will tell you that the Dakotas 
were the epicenter, and they helped us out when we needed it. We are 
going to try to help them out the best we can and do something.
  This year in range country, we probably had more range fires 
burning--over 800,000 acres in Montana alone. We had a lot of growth to 
our grass in the first part of the year. We hit July when it was 
terribly hot, and it became crisp. When August came, we got the fires. 
They were devastating, taking out fall pastures, hayfields, fences, 
even livestock, and we had to move a lot of livestock.
  We need to boost this legislation. We have it back down to where I 
think it is a pretty commonsense approach where nobody is getting rich. 
The only thing we are trying to do is just get the folks to next 
spring, get them into next year. That is what this piece of legislation 
is all about. There is nothing excessive in this piece of legislation 
or the money we will spend. There is not. All of that has been taken 
out. This is barebones. This is the basics to their operations. We need 
to pass it this afternoon. I call on the leadership from both sides of 
the aisle to urgently take a look at this and make sure we get it done 
before we go home.
  Mr. President, I heartily support this, and I know the man in the 
chair right now, who probably knows his State about as good as 
anybody--he was raised ``west of the river,'' as we call it, in South 
Dakota. I have never seen an area as devastated by drought as this area 
was. You could not raise a fence.
  So I would call on the leadership to take a look at this, pass it 
this afternoon, and get them some money before next spring rolls 
around.
  I thank my good friends from North Dakota for their leadership.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota is recognized.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for an additional 
minute.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is 
so ordered.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senators 
Dayton, Murray, Jeffords, Enzi, and Thomas be added as original 
cosponsors.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senator 
from South Dakota be given 4 minutes and the Senator from Minnesota, 
Mr. Dayton, be given 4 minutes at the conclusion of Senator Nelson's 
remarks.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is that from the Senator's time?
  Mr. CONRAD. Yes, out of my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nebraska.
  Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, I rise to speak in support of 
S. 3991, the Emergency Farm Relief Act of 2006. I thank my colleague, 
Senator Conrad, for his hard work and leadership in trying to get this 
bill passed. We have all been working together on a bipartisan basis.

[[Page S10567]]

  The Presiding Officer spoke eloquently about the need for this 
relief. Today is the last day for this Congress to consider providing 
relief for our Nation's farmers and ranchers who have suffered through 
multiple years of drought and other natural disasters. This is the time 
we can do it, before we adjourn for the elections.
  I am frustrated with our refusal to provide relief to farmers and 
ranchers suffering from this particular natural disaster even though we 
seem to have no problems providing relief for other natural disasters, 
such as hurricanes. I accept the fact that we do that, but I don't 
accept the fact that we do that and fail to do this.
  Mr. President, I have a chart here which shows the extent of the 
drought in the Midwest and down into Texas. You can see where the 
hotspots are. I will tell you that this only tracks it most recently. 
It doesn't show the extent of the damage that has happened over 5 to 7 
years. So if you just overlaid 5 or 7 years on this, you would see 
where the drought has continued.
  I decided that maybe to get parity here for this kind of disaster it 
might be helpful to give the drought some identification. So, 
unilaterally, I decided to name it ``Drought David,'' the same way we 
name hurricanes.
  The unfortunate fact is that Drought David has, in some instances and 
in some locations, experienced its fifth birthday and, in some other 
areas, its seventh birthday.
  Failure to provide this needed relief threatens many small rural 
businesses and communities as well as farmers and ranchers. It 
threatens our Nation's food and fuel security efforts. So today I join 
my colleagues and thank Senator Conrad for his final push because this 
is, in fact, a bipartisan effort to try to take care of those who are 
experiencing losses that are far beyond their ability to sustain and, 
certainly, far beyond their control.
  Over the last few years, I think we have begun to understand that a 
drought has devastating impacts in much the same way hurricanes do in 
other locations. The difference is that a hurricane or a flood is a 
fast-moving disaster; this is a slow-moving disaster that can go over 
the course of years, as I have indicated. Giving it a name, I hope, 
will somehow have the impact of our colleagues understanding that this 
is an incident which goes over a long period of time; nevertheless, the 
devastation can be considerable, and in some cases the economic losses 
can be the same as those who have other disasters.
  We cannot prevent a drought, but Congress can help when a drought 
devastates large portions of our country. Some said maybe what we need 
to do is make sure the crop insurance program takes care of it. Well, 
the crop insurance program is for an occasional loss, not a continuing 
and sustained loss such as this. To give some sort of an analogy, you 
could not have insurance that would cover your house if it burned down 
every year, but occasional loss can be covered by insurance. This is 
just not coverable by insurance the way that it is right now. We cannot 
prevent it, but we can help. That is what we are all about today.
  I am happy to report that we have taken some action that I think will 
be helpful. Just the other day, the Commerce Committee passed my 
NIDIS--National Integrated Drought Information System--legislation. 
That will help us create a system that will give us early warning so we 
will know how long droughts continue, give us better ideas about what 
drought conditions are predicted. This early warning system will give 
farmers and ranchers a better idea of what to expect. They can make 
planning decisions or livestock decisions based on the kind of 
information that will be available.
  Unfortunately, at the present time, we are where we are, and we are 
not where we would like to be. We hope we will have the opportunity 
today with unanimous consent to move this bill forward. We can do it 
before we break, whether it is tonight, tomorrow, or Sunday. We need to 
get this done. There is no justification. We can ask the question: If 
not now, when? If not now, why?
  I thank the Presiding Officer, and I thank Senator Conrad for this 
time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Dakota.
  Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I thank the Senators from North Dakota, 
Mr. Conrad and Mr. Dorgan, for their extraordinary leadership on this 
issue.
  We have a crisis of enormous proportions across a large swath of 
America, from the Canadian border all the way to Mexico. My home State 
of South Dakota, as has been noted, is virtually the epicenter of what 
has been a drought, not just a catastrophic drought this year but the 
previous year and some portions of South Dakota going back to the year 
2000. It has been devastating to our agricultural economy, but then as 
well to our Main Streets, to the economy of that entire region.
  Recently, I joined with my colleague, Senator Thune, in a joint 
drought tour around portions of South Dakota that have been worst hit. 
It was evident that the needs were urgent.
  We saw herds being sold off entirely, calves being sold prematurely. 
We saw the factory, in effect, being sold off from the livestock sector 
of our State.
  In the crop areas, we saw areas where there was corn that was perhaps 
6 inches high with no ears. In other areas, you would have to get out 
of the pickup and kick the dust to tell what had been planted, whether 
it was soybeans, corn, whatever. It was entirely lost.
  There are stock dams without water. Farming operations--good 
operations--that have been in the family for generations, some 100 
years or more, are in great jeopardy.
  So I am here today to share my support for getting on with disaster 
relief.
  We passed disaster relief for the 2005 drought as part of the 
supplemental appropriations bill. Unfortunately, when it went to the 
House, the agriculture portion of it was largely stripped out. We 
provided money to rebuild Iraq and money to rebuild Katrina--and I wish 
them all well--but there is a lack of regard for the crisis that exists 
in rural America.
  The administration is talking about rebuilding Iraqi agriculture in 
rural communities. That is fine. But we have American farmers and 
ranchers and American Main Streets that need some attention, and that 
need for attention is urgent.
  We attempted to pass agriculture relief on the Agriculture 
appropriations bill, but that has now been delayed until after the 
election. Whether we are able to hold on to that funding remains to be 
seen.
  Clearly, we will have progress if we continue the bipartisan support 
we have up to now exhibited in the Senate where there has been pretty 
good support, with Republicans and Democrats, Senators from all regions 
behind us on this issue. We need to have support from the White House 
as well.
  It is my hope that the White House will recognize that this drought 
has only grown worse, the needs more urgent. Senator Conrad, to his 
good credit, has worked very closely with the White House and with 
others to reduce the cost of this effort, to meet some of the 
objections that have been raised by the White House and by USDA.
  So what we have here is a drought bill that would cost about the 
equivalent of 2 weeks' expenditure in Iraq for the entire Nation, for 
the entire year, for multiple drought years.
  It is important we recognize droughts are disasters, just as much as 
earthquakes, hurricanes, and tornadoes. They are less dramatic because 
they happen through a drawn-out period of time, but they are just as 
devastating. Just as Americans come together to deal with disasters 
that occur in other parts of the country, we need to come together on 
this disaster as well. Americans looking after Americans.
  We are now at the final shred of time left in this Congress. This is 
our last remaining hope to get this done. It is my hope we can set 
aside partisan politics and appreciate the losses that are being 
sustained are losses that are happening to American farmers and 
ranchers and American Main Streets, and it needs an American response.
  If we pull together in this body, I am confident that we will, in 
fact, make some progress. There still is time, but we have to act now.
  Again, Mr. President, I urge my colleagues, I urge USDA, the White 
House, and our friends in the other body to recognize the critical 
need, the urgent need for attention to this catastrophic string of 
drought years that our farmers and ranchers and Main Streets are 
facing.

[[Page S10568]]

  I yield the floor.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, how much time do I have remaining?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Ten minutes.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I yield 4 minutes to the Senator from 
Minnesota. If he uses less, he can yield time back.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
  Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished colleague from 
North Dakota, Mr. Conrad, who championed this cause of disaster relief 
for not only his farmers in North Dakota but across the affected areas, 
which certainly includes my State of Minnesota.
  As others noted, this is a bipartisan effort. I see my friend and 
colleague, Senator Coleman from Minnesota, is here also. We stand 
together to make this a bipartisan effort on behalf of the farmers 
throughout our State who have been devastated by these natural 
disasters over the last few years and particularly the last 2 years to 
which this bill applies.
  I regret that this has been passed by the Senate before. I commend 
this body for doing so, again, on a very strong bipartisan basis. 
Unfortunately, the administration has not been willing to allow this 
funding to go forward or even some part of it. This is long overdue.
  It is unfortunate that we are now at the 11th hour, the 59th minute 
of this session in this year, and we haven't even addressed the 
disaster relief necessary for the last calendar year. This legislation 
would deal with that and also this year's relief.
  This disaster has afflicted our State, and some of our counties have 
lost three-fourths of our crops. In fact, almost half the counties in 
Minnesota have already been declared disaster areas.
  The crisis is real. The suffering is acute. As others said, we have a 
magnitude of disaster in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, but a 
disaster is a disaster. A complete disaster is as devastating to a 
family in northwestern Minnesota as it is to a family in New Orleans.
  I urge my colleagues, once again, to support this measure, and I 
plead with the House and the administration to work out these 
differences so that these farmers and their farms can be saved, and 
their families can be saved. It is only simple justice and humanity.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor and yield back the remainder of my 
time.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I can yield 3 minutes to the Senator from 
Minnesota. We have now run down the clock.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
  Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from North Dakota 
for yielding me time.
  I stand with my colleague from Minnesota, Senator Dayton, in 
bipartisan agreement. This is not a partisan issue, and it should not 
be a partisan issue. I consider this one of the most important pieces 
of legislation that has been left undone this year, agricultural 
disaster assistance.
  While this body has come to the aid of producers in the gulf affected 
by hurricanes who need agricultural disaster assistance, Minnesota's 
farmers and families have been left to fend for themselves in the face 
of natural disasters--the flooding of 2005 and the record drought in 
2006.
  In the sugar sector alone, revenue was reduced by $60 million in 
Minnesota in 2005 thanks to this natural disaster. In one county, crop 
loss exceeded $52 million, and farmers were prevented from planting 
over 90,000 acres thanks to saturated fields. These are not just 
numbers; these are people's lives. These are their livelihoods. There 
is a sense of history and connection to the land, and the future is now 
at risk.
  I was up at Lake Bronson, MN, in northwest Minnesota, and met with 
over 100 farmers. It is their lives. The farmers are calling my office 
desperate to save the family farm. Farmers are losing operations, pure 
and simple.
  Some folks in Washington cited the overall success of agriculture in 
2006, the aggregate numbers, as justification for withholding 
assistance. Congress didn't look at the overall economy in determining 
what sort of assistance to give those affected by the great disaster in 
the gulf. We didn't cite the Nation's robust GDP growth and low 
unemployment rate as a reason not to assist gulf communities whose 
local economies were devastated by natural disaster. Nor should we 
propose such a false standard for comprehensive agricultural disaster 
assistance.
  It is true that the suffering in the gulf is great. I have seen the 
tremendous damage myself. I have come to this floor time and again to 
lend my hand to fellow Americans. I can't help but think of the 100-
year flood in the Red River Valley. Senator Dayton knows; he was there. 
We saw neighbors fighting a flood together one sand bag at a time, 
regardless of whose house was closest to the water.
  Your State might not be the closest to the flooding that occurred in 
my State last year or the drought this year, but as a neighbor of mine, 
a fellow American, I just ask you to help me fight the natural disaster 
being endured in Minnesota, the Dakotas, and other parts of this 
country. None in this body can build a dike on our own. Please allow 
this assistance to go forward.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I have been advised that an objection will 
be raised when we make the request to go to this bill. I deeply regret 
that. I cannot tell colleagues how deeply I regret that because we have 
tried to meet now every objection that has been raised.
  We were told that the only objection left to this legislation was 
that there were provisions that could conceivably help someone not 
damaged by natural disaster, even though they had been damaged by the 
sharp runup of energy costs.
  The legislation as previously passed by the Senate could aid those 
who were not hurt by natural disaster. So we took out those provisions, 
with a savings of $1.9 billion.
  Now what is left are the most basic disaster provisions that have 
been provided by Congress in disaster after disaster. This is national 
legislation; it is not regional. It is national. Nobody gets any 
assistance unless they have had at least a 35-percent loss. And if they 
have had at least a 35-percent loss, they get no help for that first 
35-percent loss. They get nothing. Zero. It is only if they have had a 
loss of more than 35 percent that they get any help, and the assistance 
only then applies to after they have had the loss of 35 percent. Once 
you get beyond that, then assistance begins.
  No one is made whole. No one is enriched. What people are given is a 
chance to make it to next year. That is what is in doubt.
  The bankers of my State have told me that if there is a failure to 
provide this kind of assistance, 5 to 10 percent of the producers in my 
State will be forced off the land. That is the reality of what we 
confront.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending business be 
set aside.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I regret very much an objection has been 
raised. We have done everything we have been asked to do to alter this 
legislation to meet the objections previously raised.
  So I ask one more time, Mr. President: I ask unanimous consent that 
the pending business be set aside.
  Mr. GREGG. I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, the Senator has that right. I regret that 
he has exercised that right. What we have done on a bipartisan basis 
now, 23 Senators have come endorsing this legislation on a fully 
bipartisan basis asking for help of the most basic sort. I must say, as 
one Senator, if we can't get assistance in this kind of circumstance, 
we are going to have to think long and hard when other colleagues come 
to us about assistance for their areas when they suffer disaster. 
Always before we have responded in kind. We have helped those who have 
had disaster, whether it is flood or hurricane or whatever disaster. 
And now we are told that a drought somehow is not worthy of assistance. 
I must say, I think it is shameful.

[[Page S10569]]

  The people are about to lose their livelihoods. We have done 
everything we have been asked to do to reduce the cost of this bill, 
and now we are told: Sorry, there is no help. We won't even consider 
it. We won't even allow a vote to occur because we know what would 
happen if there was a vote. It would be overwhelmingly passed, as it 
has been in the past when it was far more expensive than the bill we 
come with today.
  Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. CONRAD. I am happy to yield.
  Mr. ROBERTS. I ask unanimous consent that I be added as a cosponsor 
to this legislation.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, the reason we know it would pass, I would 
say to the gentleman, and I thank him for introducing this--and I am a 
little out of breath because I didn't realize we were debating this, so 
I ran over here. But at any rate, I thank my colleague for introducing 
this bill.
  The reason we know it would pass is it has already passed the Senate 
as part of the supplemental. It is about $4 billion. Everybody 
understood at that particular time we had an urgent need in farm 
country. Everybody understood at that particular time we had a lot of 
problems with disasters, but as others have pointed out, if you have a 
hurricane, you get in the headlines. If you have a forest fire, you are 
getting headlines. If you have those kinds of tragedies, like a flood 
or even a mudslide in a State where people build houses perhaps where 
they shouldn't build them--obviously it attracts attention
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The gentleman's time has expired.
  Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be granted 
an additional 5 minutes. I know there are other Members waiting, but I 
would like to at least proceed with the Senator, my friend, for another 
5 minutes, if that would be all right.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that--I was to be 
the next speaker for 15 minutes, so I ask that I be granted 20 minutes 
on my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. ROBERTS. I wish to thank Senator Gregg for his generosity in 
regard to allowing me, with the gentleman yielding to me, to make some 
additional comments.
  I was saying that all of these tragedies end up in the headlines. We 
know, and all of us who are privileged to represent rural areas, 
especially the Plains, that we have had a drought not 1, not 2, but in 
some cases 5 or 7 years in a row, and we know we don't have any subsoil 
moisture. We also know energy prices have gone up 113 percent since 
2002. It isn't exactly that we were rolling in clover to begin with, 
but now there is no clover that will come up.
  We also know, although people may not want to talk about it right 
now, that the current farm bill doesn't work in this circumstance. I 
voted against the current farm bill. It is not my intent to come down 
here and discuss the farm bill, however, there are some very real 
problems. First, it is the countercyclical program. It means when a 
farmer doesn't have a crop, he gets no payment. It also means he has no 
real crop insurance because the average production history on his crop 
insurance has gone down. So no crop insurance, no payment. High and 
dry. This is the only way we are going to provide assistance to 
farmers.
  Now, I regret it is the 11th hour and 59th minute. I fully expect an 
objection. I hope that would not take place. But at any rate, we are 
building a case that if we have to come back here during what is called 
a lameduck session, something can be done. I credit the Senator for his 
leadership in this regard.
  A drought is a drought is a drought, and it doesn't get much 
attention, but the people affected suffer just as much as people who 
suffer from other tragedies. I again credit the Senator for bringing 
this up. I am a cosponsor. Whatever we get done, I look forward to 
working with him. We have done it in the past. We did it with the 
supplemental. It was taken out in the House, by the way. We need this 
relief, and we need it now.
  As I said before, I will vote for the bill, and I will speak for it, 
as I have done. And quite frankly, if this is headed for a Presidential 
veto, I will vote to override it.
  I thank the Senator.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I thank very much the Senator from Kansas, 
the former chairman of the House Agriculture Committee and a real 
leader on the Senate Agriculture Committee and my friend. I would 
advise him that an objection has already been raised, so we are going 
to be denied even a chance to vote. I regret that and I regret that 
deeply because I know what it means, after having been all across my 
State and having farmers tell me--some farmers who have been in the 
business for more than 30 years who have told me this will be their 
last year; to have had the bankers of my State come to Washington to 
tell me that if there is a failure to provide disaster assistance, 5 to 
10 percent of the farm and ranch families of my State will be put out 
of business. That is the harsh reality. And this afternoon, an 
objection has been raised and raised in a way that will preclude us 
from even having a vote. I think we all know what would happen if a 
vote were held: this legislation would pass, and it would pass 
overwhelmingly.

  We should advise our colleagues this will not be our last attempt. If 
there is a lameduck session, we will be here and we will insist on the 
chance to have consideration for this legislation.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?
  Mr. CONRAD. I am happy to yield.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, how much time remains?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 1 minute 20 seconds remaining.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, let me just follow up on the point that 
this would be a bipartisan vote here in the Senate today. I want to 
point out that the piece of legislation Senator Conrad has worked on 
and that I have added as an appropriations measure twice has passed the 
Senate. Twice I was in conference with that. Twice it was defeated in 
conference. I wish to make that point because the implication was the 
Department of Agriculture didn't have much to do with that. The fact is 
the House conferees defeated this because the President threatened to 
veto it, and the House conferees were listening to the Department of 
Agriculture, which also opposed it.
  Look, it seems to me we need the administration to understand what is 
going on here. This is bipartisan on the floor of the Senate. We need 
some help downtown as well from the Department of Agriculture as well 
as the White House to get this done.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I have been asked to ask unanimous consent 
that Senator Clinton be given 15 minutes at the end of the current 
queue.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. GREGG. Yes. I have a unanimous consent request that following 
Senator Hutchison, who will follow me, the following Senators be 
recognized in order: Senator Clinton for 15 minutes, Senator Chafee for 
5 minutes, Senator Kyl for 15 minutes, and Senator Byrd for up to 45 
minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I ask 
unanimous consent that I be recognized to speak on the bill I believe 
is before the Senate, the Secure Fence Act, for up to 20 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from New Hampshire is recognized for 20 minutes.

                          ____________________