[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 42 (Wednesday, March 12, 2008)]
[House]
[Pages H1597-H1598]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SHORT-TERM FARM BILL EXTENSION
Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules
and pass the Senate bill (S. 2745) to extend agricultural programs
beyond March 15, 2008, to suspend permanent price support authorities
beyond that date, and for other purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the Senate bill.
The text of the Senate bill is as follows:
S. 2745
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS.
(a) Extension.--Except as otherwise provided in this
section and notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
authorities provided under the Farm Security and Rural
Investment Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-171; 7 U.S.C. 7901 et
seq.) and each amendment made by that Act (and for mandatory
programs at such funding levels), as in effect on September
30, 2007, shall continue, and the Secretary of Agriculture
shall carry out the authorities, until April 18, 2008.
(b) Conservation Programs.--
(1) Farmland protection program.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, the Secretary of Agriculture (referred to
in this subsection as the ``Secretary'') shall continue the
farmland protection program established under subchapter B of
chapter 2 of subtitle D of title XII of the Food Security Act
of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3838h et seq.) at a funding level of
$97,000,000 per year.
(2) Ground and surface water conservation.--Notwithstanding
any other provision of law, the Secretary shall continue the
ground and surface water conservation program established
under section 1240I of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16
U.S.C. 3839aa-9) at a funding level of $60,000,000 per year.
(3) Wildlife habitat incentives program.--Notwithstanding
any other provision of law, the Secretary shall continue the
wildlife habitat incentive program established under section
1240N of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3839bb-1)
at a funding level of $85,000,000 per year.
(c) Exceptions.--This section does not apply with respect
to the following provisions of law:
(1) Section 1307(a)(6) of the Farm Security and Rural
Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 7957(a)(6)).
(2) Section 524(b) of the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7
U.S.C. 1524(b)).
(3) Section 25 of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C.
2034).
(4) Section 601(j)(1) of the Rural Electrification Act of
1936 (7 U.S.C. 950bb(j)(1)).
(5) Section 231(b)(4) of the Agricultural Risk Protection
Act of 2000 (7 U.S.C. 1621note; Public Law 106-224).
(6) Section 9002(k)(2) of the Farm Security and Rural
Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 8102(k)(2)).
(7) Section 9004(d) of the Farm Security and Rural
Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 8104(d)).
(8) Section 9006(f) of the Farm Security and Rural
Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 8106(f)).
(9) Subtitles A through C of title I of the Farm Security
and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 7911 et seq.),
with respect to the 2008 crops (other than the 2008 crop of a
loan commodity described in paragraph (11), (12), (13), or
(14) of section 1202(b) of the Farm Security and Rural
Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 7932(b))).
(d) Suspension of Permanent Price Support Authorities.--The
provisions of law specified in subsections (a) through (c) of
section 1602 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of
2002 (7 U.S.C. 7992) shall be suspended through April 18,
2008.
(e) Relation to Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), this
section does not apply to the Agriculture, Rural Development,
Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2008 (division A of Public Law 110-161;
121 Stat. 1846).
(2) Repeal of superseded extension.--Section 751 of the
Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration,
and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2008 (division A of
Public Law 110-161; 121 Stat. 1883) is repealed.
(f) Effective Date.--This section and the amendment made by
this section shall take effect on March 15, 2008.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Minnesota (Mr. Peterson) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Goodlatte) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Minnesota.
Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 2745, a bill to extend
current farm programs until April 18, 2008. Mr. Speaker, our farm
policies ensure that all Americans have access to safe, secure and
abundant food supply while providing a safety net for American farmers
and ranchers. It also authorizes important nutrition programs for our
country's neediest citizens, encourages vital conservation programs and
supports the development of agriculturally based renewable energy.
Mr. Speaker, all of us on the Agriculture Committee would rather have
a new farm bill signed into law rather than be here today asking for an
extension.
After hearing about the popularity of the 2002 farm bill from farmers
and ranchers nationwide in a series of field hearings our committee
held in 2006, we set out last year to build on a strong farm safety net
while making new investments in rural America and for our Nation's
neediest citizens who depend on Federal food programs for a square
meal.
The new farm bill that this House passed last July makes those
investments in nutrition, fruits and vegetable production and farm-
based renewable energy. It reforms our farm programs and reinforces the
strong farm safety net. It includes an agreement between industry and
consumer groups on mandatory country-of-origin labeling for meat. All
that progress will be lost if we do not get this bill finished and
signed into law.
Nevertheless, Mr. Speaker, we are taking steps toward a bipartisan,
bicameral bill that Members can support. And I believe we have made
enough progress in that endeavor to support a 1-month extension.
So, in closing, I would like to thank my friend and the ranking
member, Mr. Goodlatte from Virginia, for his work over the last few
months and for standing alongside me in working with the Senate and the
administration in order to get this farm bill to a conclusion.
Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 2745, a bill to extend
current farm programs until April 18, 2008.
Mr. Speaker, our farm policies ensure that all Americans have access
to a safe, secure and abundant food supply while providing a safety net
for America's farmers and ranchers. Farm bills also authorize important
nutrition programs for our country's neediest citizens, encourage vital
conservation programs, and increasingly support the development of
agriculturally based renewable energy, which will help reduce our
dependence on foreign oil.
Mr. Speaker, all of us on the Agriculture Committee would rather have
a new Farm Bill signed into law rather than to be here today to ask for
an extension. When the House Agriculture Committee kicked off the Farm
Bill process in 2006 with Farm Bill field hearings all across America,
we hoped a new Farm Bill for American agriculture would have been
signed into law by now. Even though the farmers and ranchers we heard
from in those hearings were strongly supportive of the farm safety net
of the 2002 law, we knew passing a new Farm Bill would not be easy in
this kind of budget environment.
Mr. Speaker, the Farm Bill has been a victim of its own success. The
2002 law saved taxpayers billions but resulted in a 60 percent cut in
budget authority for traditional farm programs when budget baselines
were released a year ago.
Nevertheless, the Agriculture Committee wrote a Farm Bill from the
ground up; a new Farm Bill that makes historic investments in fruit and
vegetable production, conservation, nutrition, and renewable energy
while reinforcing the strong safety net for America's
[[Page H1598]]
farmers. The House-passed bill institutes mandatory country-of-origin
labeling for meat. And despite what is said by editorial boards in big
cities, this Farm Bill contains significant reforms that just a few
years ago many people thought would be impossible to pass. We have
eliminated the three-entity rule. We have implemented direct
attribution of payments for transparency. And thanks to a hard cap on
eligibility, millionaires will no longer be receiving farm payments.
The Senate passed their Farm Bill in late December, and staffs have
been working hard ever since the New Year to work out many of the
policy issues we will face once an overall funding level is reached.
Mr. Speaker, we are taking gradual steps to reaching a bipartisan,
bicameral bill that everyone can support, and I believe we have made
enough progress to support a 1-month extension.
Many people would like to see different things with this Farm Bill,
but the truth is, Mr. Speaker, that all of the advances we have made in
fruit and vegetable production, nutrition, conservation, reforming farm
programs, and encouraging farm-based renewable energy will go out the
window if we do not get this bill done and signed into law. The forward
progress we have made over the last few weeks lead me to believe that
we can get this done. Our farmers and ranchers expect us to finish a
new farm bill for a new age of agriculture.
In closing, I would like to thank my friend and Ranking Member Mr.
Bob Goodlatte of Virginia for his work over the last few months and for
standing alongside me in working with the Senate and the Administration
in order to get this Farm Bill to a conclusion.
Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of this bill.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 2745, the short-
term farm bill extension that will extend some provisions of the 2002
farm bill until April 18. The other body passed the same provision this
morning, and this body must pass this bill so both bodies can continue
to work on conference negotiations.
{time} 2030
Mr. Speaker, I would like nothing more than to stand before you today
and report that we are on the brink of an agreement on the farm bill.
However, progress on a new farm bill agreement has been painfully slow,
and this process has become a source of frustration for me and my
colleagues, and the chairman I know as well, as well as millions of
rural Americans awaiting a new farm bill.
If we do not seek prompt and substantive action on the farm bill, I
believe we must pursue a different course of action, because our
farmers and ranchers have already waited too long. Interminable delays
in implementing a new farm bill may not have real ramifications in
Washington, but in rural America the effects are real, and they are
substantial.
I appreciate the efforts of our committee chairman to try to keep
this process moving. I know at times he has shared my frustrations. We
all recognize the need for a new farm bill, and we continue to work
toward completing a farm bill and getting it to the President for him
to sign into law by April 18.
I urge my colleagues to support this farm bill extension to give us a
little more time to try to overcome the budget obstacles that have been
standing in the way of the farm bill finish line since last year.
We started this process together in a bipartisan fashion more than 2
years ago. We worked together in the committee to move a farm bill
forward, but we have been hindered time and time again outside the
committee by the fact that others in the Congress have failed to
recognize the fact that this farm bill starts out $58 billion below the
last farm bill in terms of what it will cost to continue the farm
legislation forward. That is a great thing. That is a tremendous
savings for the American taxpayer. But when we are trying to write a
modern, forward-looking farm bill that encompasses changes in
conservation, in nutrition, in energy, in specialty crops, and we are
trying to reform the commodity title of the farm bill, we needed to
have some additional resources.
The chairman and I went to the Budget Committee last year in a
bipartisan fashion and asked for some money above the baseline, not $58
billion coming back to us, but $5 billion, $10 billion above that
baseline, which still would have been a huge savings for the taxpayers
and allowed us to write a farm bill inside the committee and bring it
to the floor of the House without being dependent on another committee
or another source. The same problem existed in the Senate.
The outcome has been that we have been spinning our wheels having to
deal with other outside influences rather than getting the job done in
the committee because of this funding not being available. We are going
to have to look at some new alternatives if we don't get a breakthrough
here in the next couple of days, because even this extension will
expire very, very soon, and the time it takes to write a farm bill that
encompasses a whole host of issues, from what goes on on the farm to
all of our nutrition programs, to our environmental and conservation
programs, to research programs for agriculture, to a whole host of
other areas that are very, very important, not just to America's
farmers and ranchers, not just to people living in rural America, but
to every American consumer who depends upon our farm community to
continue to provide the safest, most abundant, most affordable food
supply in the world, and we will be working together.
I appreciate the chairman's working with me and with other Members on
this side of the aisle to accomplish that goal. He has been tenacious
in that effort. But we need to either move on, or we need to get the
help that was promised a year ago to finally come to the committee so
we can get the job done.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of
my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Peterson) that the House suspend the
rules and pass the Senate bill, S. 2745.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the Senate bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________