Congressional Record, Volume 152 Issue 125 (Friday, September 29, 2006)

[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.

____________________