[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 87 (Thursday, June 16, 2011)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1113-E1114]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND 
               RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2012

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                        HON. LEONARD L. BOSWELL

                                of iowa

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, June 14, 2011

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2112) making 
     appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and 
     Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the 
     fiscal year ending September 30, 2012, and for other 
     purposes:

  Mr. BOSWELL. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to language in the 
agricultural appropriations bill for Fiscal Year 2012.
  H.R. 2112 contains a rider that withholds funding to implement the 
proposed Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration 
(GIPSA) rule that the authorizing committee directed the USDA to craft 
in the 2008 Farm Bill.

[[Page E1114]]

  Today, the USDA is in the process of conducting economic analyses as 
well as a comprehensive review of the comments submitted on the 
proposed rule.
  H.R. 2112 would stop the USDA in its tracks and prevent it from 
completing its year of work on GIPSA.
  Two of our Nation's largest member organizations who work to support 
farmers, ranchers and producers are opposed to the provision which 
would cut off funding for the GIPSA rule--the National Farmers Union 
and the Farm Bureau.
  Like me, these Iowa members and the national organizations believe 
that this is an issue under the jurisdiction of the authorizing 
committee, not the appropriating committee, and that regardless of 
which side of the regulation you may fall, that the comment review and 
economic analyses deserve completion.
  NFU President Roger Johnson said in a recent statement: ``I urge that 
funds for the enforcement of the GIPSA rule be reinstated in future 
versions of the agriculture appropriations bill.''
  The American Farm Bureau Federation sent a letter to my colleague, 
Congresswoman Kaptur, on May 31, 2011, the day of the full committee 
markup, that stated: ``We oppose language to preclude USDA from 
reviewing the comments and completing their economic analysis and are 
strongly opposed to any action that would stop work on that [GIPSA] 
rule.''
  However, appropriators ignored this call to action, and instead chose 
to move forward on behalf of large processors.
  The rulemaking process on the GIPSA rule was started with the 
issuance of the draft rule on June 22, 2010--nearly one year ago and 
more than 60,000 comments were submitted on the GIPSA rule docket. To 
end the process now would equate to an unfortunate waste of government 
resources.
  Thirty years ago there were 1.3 million beef cattle operations. Today 
there are 740,000. In 1980, there were 660,000 hog farms. Today there 
are 67,000. Last year alone, approximately 2,300 additional hog 
producers went out of business.
  On behalf of producers and competition in our marketplace, I urge my 
colleagues to oppose defunding the GIPSA rule, and allow the USDA to 
complete their work and review on this issue.

                          ____________________