[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 72 (Tuesday, May 21, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3634-S3637]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
AGRICULTURE REFORM, FOOD, AND JOBS ACT OF 2013
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will
resume consideration of S. 954, which the clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (S. 954) to reauthorize agricultural programs
through 2018.
Pending:
Stabenow (for Cantwell) amendment No. 919, to allow Indian
tribes to participate in certain soil and water conservation
programs.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
Ms. STABENOW. We are now going to resume discussion on the farm bill,
but before doing that I see one of the distinguished members of our
committee on the floor who I know would like to make some other
comments. But I just wish to thank her in advance for her leadership.
We are so excited and pleased to have the Senator from North Dakota on
the Agriculture Committee.
Having had a chance to be in North Dakota--and she has said it to me
a thousand times, so it is burned into my memory--90 percent of the
land in North Dakota is in agriculture, and so she reminds me of that
every day. She has been a key person in helping us bring this farm bill
to the floor. So before proceeding on the Agriculture Reform, Food and
Jobs Act, I would ask that Senator Heitkamp be recognized.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
Tribute to Brad Hejtmanek
Ms. HEITKAMP. Mr. President, on the floor of the Senate Senators
often come to praise a local university football team that just won a
championship or a famous coach who is retiring or maybe even a famous
politician who has passed away. Today I come to the floor of the Senate
to thank a man who will never be written about in the history books or
even known outside of my small hometown of Mantador, ND. Brad
Hejtmanek's life and his accomplishments were pretty modest by national
standards, but nevertheless, for the people of my small hometown, Brad
was something special.
Brad was a standout high school athlete, a veteran, a softball coach,
a National Guardsman, a coworker, a husband, a father, a gardener, and
a friend. For most of his adult life, Brad was the mayor of Mantador--
not exactly the most glamorous of jobs. Mantador runs exclusively on
volunteer labor.
For years he made sure the city water and sewer were working, the
Christmas tree got decorated, that barking dogs were attended to, that
the garbage got picked up, the roads got fixed, and abandoned lots did
not get overrun with weeds and junk.
For years Brad got to do the great ceremonies incumbent of a small-
town mayor. For example, after I was elected attorney general of North
Dakota, Brad presented me with the key to the city. This was no
ceremonial key; it was the real deal. I wondered for months after
getting that key what that key actually opened, until one day I got a
call from Brad asking me if I could send the key back. You see, the key
was actually to the town dump and spring cleaning was coming. But that
was Brad.
You can't look anywhere in Mantador and not see his impact. One can
go to the small ballpark and remember that Brad organized the National
Guard to come and clean out the old grove of trees, look to the large
VFW and remember that Brad recruited folks to come and help build it,
look to the fire hall and remember the games of pickup baseball we
played when we were kids, look to the Mantador grade school and
remember that Brad was the kid who always took the dare, the kid who
always organized the pickup football games, and that every kid in grade
school knew the lyrics to the ``Marine Corps Hymn'' because Brad made
sure at every choir practice we sang it not only once but twice.
Men and women such as Brad Hejtmanek are the unsung heroes of our
democracy. They step up and volunteer when their country and their
community need them. They are friends when a person needs a friend, and
they never forget where they came from. So even though he will never
have a chapter in a history book, he will always have a place in the
hearts of the people of Mantador. In my book that is an honor
unequalled.
Thank you, Brad, for all you did for your country and your small
town. Godspeed, my friend. I and all of Mantador will miss you.
I ask unanimous consent to have his obituary printed in the Record.
[[Page S3635]]
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Bradley C. Hejtmanek
Bradley C. Hejtmanek, 59, of Mantador, ND passed away
Thursday, May 16, 2013 at Sanford Health in Fargo, ND,
surrounded by his family and friends. Funeral mass will be
Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 10:30 a.m. at Sts. Peter & Paul
Catholic Church in Mantador, ND with Fr. Peter Anderl
officiating and burial in Calvary Cemetery, Mantador with
military honors by the Hankinson American Legion Post #88 and
the Mantador VFW Post #9317 and the North Dakota National
Guard. Visitation will be Monday from 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.
with a prayer service at 7:00 p.m. all at the church, and
Tuesday morning one hour prior to the service at the church.
Brad was born on April 14, 1954 in Breckenridge, MN, the
son of Joseph & Marcella (Havlena) Hejtmanek. He attended
school in Mantador and graduated from Hankinson in 1972. He
earned his associate degree from Chaminade University,
Honolulu, Hawaii in 1976.
Brad was very active in Mantador & the surrounding area. He
enjoyed all sports, especially the Twins, Vikings, Wild & UND
hockey. He enjoyed time spent with family & friends, reading,
t.v. & of course, popcorn.
He is survived by his wife, Karen, 2 sons, Doug (Chaska
Guemmer) & Jason (Bri Huotari), granddaughter, Aubrey, 2
brothers, Richard (Ann), Jay (Denise), a sister, Joy (Mike)
Schreder, several nieces & nephews, father-in-law, George
Thompson, 2 brothers-in-law, Terry (Kathy) Thompson & Brian
Thompson.
He was preceded in death by his parents, brother, Douglas,
nephew, Joseph & mother-in-law, Janice Thompson.
Frank Family Funeral Home, Hankinson, ND is in charge of
the arrangements.
In-line guestbook: www.frankfamily
funeralhome.com
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
Order for Moment of Silence
Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, first, I would I ask unanimous consent
that at 12 noon today the Senate observe a moment of silence for the
victims of the tornado in Oklahoma.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, we know we have other colleagues who
will be coming to the floor to talk about the very important jobs bill,
reform bill, and food bill we have in front of us--a conservation bill
as well--but I just wish to take a moment to say to our colleagues, if
there are amendments they have, as we are moving through the bill--and
we are doing our best to finish this by the end of the week or
certainly get as close as we can--we are very interested in working
with colleagues to get to their amendments. We would appreciate it if
they would let us know what they are and bring them down so we can be
working with them on any of their amendments.
We are very proud of the product we have in front of the Senate right
now. There are 16 million people who work in agriculture. I would say
that is a jobs bill. I think it is probably the biggest jobs bill we
will have in front of the Senate--agricultural jobs directly with those
who are producing the food, who are producing the equipment for our
food, and who are doing all the pieces around food production and
processing and the efforts in trade around the globe, where we are
proud to say agriculture is No. 1 in creating a trade surplus for our
country. Other countries are looking to us. There are 7 billion mouths
to feed in the world today, and American agriculture is at the front of
the line feeding families and supporting efforts around the globe. We
know that number is growing every day and the leadership of American
agriculture is going to be even more important in that process.
We also know this is a bill that conserves our land, our water, our
air, and our forests. This is the piece of legislation that focuses on
conservation for working lands--lands that are owned by someone in this
country, which is the majority of land, and there are incredibly
important partnership efforts that go on. The farm bill improves 1.9
million acres of fish and wildlife habitat. That is why our
conservation title is supported by over 650 conservation and
environmental groups all across the country.
We have the same conservation title we had last year, and I am very
pleased to say the House also has adopted the structure of reform we
have in our bill. It is very similar in the House and Senate bills on
conservation, and so this is a real landmark piece of legislation as it
relates to preserving our soil, our land, our water, our air, and our
forests, and it is a commitment we make as Americans to future
generations.
We have also added in this legislation a commitment brought to us by
the commodity farm groups and environmental and conservation groups to
make sure, when farmers are using critically needed tools such as crop
insurance--which is the mainstay for farmers now, buying crop insurance
and hoping, in fact, they do not have to get a payout because it means
they have had a loss or a disaster; that it is now the foundation of
what we are doing to support farmers across the country--they have
agreed to tie compliance for conservation practices to crop insurance,
which is a very important policy. This is a historic agreement between
agricultural groups and conservation and environmental groups. As a
result of their agreement and their urging, we have added that to this
bill, which is a very significant addition and strengthens what we are
already doing on conservation.
We make a strong nutrition commitment to families. We make sure every
family who currently qualifies for nutrition assistance in our country
continues to receive that assistance. We create savings by looking at
areas where there has been abuse or misuse by a few States on one
policy and by individuals or retailers in other areas and we tighten
that up so we have more integrity in the process. We make it clear we
stand with families who need help; we stand with families who find
their own personal disaster because of the economy, just as we stand
with farmers for a strong crop insurance program when a farmer has a
disaster as well, but we do make sure there is integrity in the
programs, which is very important.
We have had at least two cases in Michigan where two people won the
lottery and continued on food assistance--pretty outrageous. And we
make sure that cannot happen again. There have been abuses in other
areas, where retailers have allowed people to turn in their food
assistance cards for money for drugs or other illegal activities, and
we make sure we clamp down on that. We have gone through the bill and
we address misuse, waste, fraud, and abuse in every part of the farm
programs but certainly in this area as well. So we can stand before our
colleagues and say this is about making sure folks who have worked all
their lives, who have paid taxes all their lives, who suddenly find
themselves, through no fault of their own, in a situation where they
need some temporary food help are able to get that help for their
family.
The good news is those dollars--that part of the farm bill--are
actually decreasing. The costs are going down and not because we are
cutting back on support for families but because the economy is
improving, so more people are going back to work and don't need the
temporary help. That is the way we should be reducing the costs, and
that is in fact what we do.
I am also very pleased with the fact we focus on rural development
and reforms that are very significant and very important. Right now,
there are actually 11 different definitions of the term ``rural.'' We
had local mayors and county supervisors and village residents come to
us and say: We appreciate the fact that rural development funds allow
us to provide financing for our businesses and water and sewer projects
and housing projects and road projects, but could you just give us one
definition, rather than trying to figure out 11 different ways to
define rural. It may sound simple, but it wasn't simple. But we did
actually get it down to one definition, and we have streamlined the
process and the paperwork so communities, small towns, and folks who
support and need rural economic development help can get that with a
minimal amount of paperwork.
We have done that through this entire bill. Frankly, I truly believe
that if, in every part of government, we did what we have done in
agricultural programs, we would not only be doing what the public wants
but we would balance the budget. We have 100 different programs or
authorizations we have eliminated because they didn't make sense
anymore. They were duplicative, not wise spending for taxpayers--things
such as direct subsidy payments for farmers that did not make sense,
cutting from 23 conservation programs to 13 and putting them
[[Page S3636]]
in 4 different subject areas with a lot of flexibility so we can
stretch it out and get more bang for our buck and do a better job
without in any way reducing the commitment to conservation.
We have gone through the entire farm bill and made tough decisions,
smart decisions. We have saved about $24 billion--more than even we did
last year--while having a set of policies that is broadly supported in
the conservation community and the agricultural community and the
energy community and those who represent small towns across this
country. We did it, again, by making tough decisions and by working
together on a bipartisan basis.
I am proud that even though these arbitrary, across-the-board cuts
called sequester, cuts that make no sense--even though those cuts would
require $6 billion in cuts in agricultural programs, we have been
willing, voluntarily, to come up with four times that level of cuts. We
ask for your support for a set of policies that works better, that
streamlines the system, that cuts back on that which does not make
sense to do but strengthens the priorities that are important for
economic growth, for families, for conservation, for communities all
across this country.
We are willing and have done our part to step up and meet the
challenges of deficit reduction, of balancing our Federal budget, but
keeping our commitment to our farmers and ranchers who have the most
risky jobs in the world. As I said yesterday, nobody else has to worry
about whether it is going to rain or not rain--too much rain, no rain;
whether it is going to freeze, as it did in northern Michigan after the
cherry blossoms came on the trees and the freeze wiped everything out.
Nobody else is in a business where they cannot control the most
important factor, which is the weather. We have certainly seen the
havoc the weather has played on families across this country, including
what happened yesterday in Oklahoma.
We stand here proudly to say we support an effort that is creating
reform, that is saving money, that is standing up for the folks who
have helped create the most affordable and safest food supply in the
world--America's farmers and ranchers. We stand here supporting
American families who need to make sure that when times are tough the
very best of America's values are in place, which is to make sure they
have the ability to put food on the table for their families.
I believe we have others who will be coming to the floor. At the
moment I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Ms. STABENOW. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Heitkamp). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Ms. STABENOW. I ask unanimous consent that following a moment of
silence at noon today, the Senate proceed to a vote in relation to
Cantwell amendment No. 919; that upon disposition of the Cantwell
amendment, Senator Gillibrand be recognized.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is
so ordered.
Ms. STABENOW. We are also working on a Sessions amendment No. 945,
which we had hoped to line up as well. I understand there is an
additional modification being made. If that modification is agreeable
to both sides, it is our intention to adopt that amendment, as
modified, prior to the caucus meetings.
I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. REID. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Moment of Silence
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will now be a
moment of silence for the victims of the tornadoes in Oklahoma.
(Moment of silence.)
Amendment No. 919
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the question is on
agreeing to amendment No. 919, offered by the Senator from Washington,
Ms. Cantwell.
The Senator from Michigan.
Ms. STABENOW. Let me indicate that this amendment would require
tribes to be included in the development of Resource Conservation Act
appraisals. It is something that is supported by Senator Cochran and
me.
I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second. There is a sufficient
second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Mexico (Mr.
Heinrich) and the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Lautenberg) are
necessarily absent.
Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the
Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Coburn), the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr.
Inhofe), and the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. Vitter).
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 87, nays 8, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 129 Leg.]
YEAS--87
Alexander
Ayotte
Baldwin
Barrasso
Baucus
Begich
Bennet
Blumenthal
Blunt
Boozman
Boxer
Brown
Burr
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Chambliss
Coats
Cochran
Collins
Coons
Corker
Cowan
Crapo
Donnelly
Durbin
Enzi
Feinstein
Fischer
Flake
Franken
Gillibrand
Graham
Grassley
Hagan
Harkin
Hatch
Heitkamp
Heller
Hirono
Hoeven
Isakson
Johanns
Johnson (SD)
Kaine
King
Klobuchar
Landrieu
Leahy
Levin
Manchin
McCain
McCaskill
McConnell
Menendez
Merkley
Mikulski
Moran
Murkowski
Murphy
Murray
Nelson
Portman
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Risch
Roberts
Rockefeller
Sanders
Schatz
Schumer
Scott
Sessions
Shaheen
Shelby
Stabenow
Tester
Thune
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Warner
Warren
Whitehouse
Wicker
Wyden
NAYS--8
Cornyn
Cruz
Johnson (WI)
Kirk
Lee
Paul
Rubio
Toomey
NOT VOTING--5
Coburn
Heinrich
Inhofe
Lautenberg
Vitter
The amendment (No. 919) was agreed to.
Ms. STABENOW. I move to reconsider the vote and to lay that motion
upon the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Amendment No. 931
Mrs. GILLIBRAND. Madam President, I call up my amendment No. 931 for
a vote at a time to be determined by the manager of the bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
The bill clerk read as follows:
The Senator from New York [Mrs. Gillibrand], for herself,
Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Cowan, Mr. Reed, Mr.
Blumenthal, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Casey, Mr. King, Mr. Schumer, Ms.
Warren, Mrs. Murray, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Sanders, Ms. Baldwin,
Mr. Murphy, and Mr. Menendez, proposes an amendment numbered
931.
Mrs. GILLIBRAND. I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the
amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To strike a reduction in the supplemental nutrition
assistance program, with an offset that limits crop insurance
reimbursements to providers)
Beginning on page 355, strike line 8 and all that follows
through page 357, line 15.
On page 1065, after line 25, add the following:
SEC. 11011. ANNUAL LIMITATION ON DELIVERY EXPENSES AND
REDUCED RATE OF RETURN.
(a) Annual Limitation on Delivery Expenses.--Section
508(k)(4) of the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C.
1508(k)(4)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(G) Annual limitation on delivery expenses.--Beginning
with the 2014 reinsurance year, the amount paid by the
Corporation to reimburse approved insurance providers and
agents for the administrative and
[[Page S3637]]
operating costs of the approved insurance providers and
agents shall not exceed $924,000,000 per year.''.
(b) Reduced Rate of Return.--Section 508(k)(8) of the
Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 1508(k)(8)) (as amended
by section 11011) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(G) Reduced rate of return.--Beginning with the 2014
reinsurance year, the Standard Reinsurance Agreement shall be
adjusted to ensure a projected rate of return for the
approved insurance producers not to exceed 12 percent, as
determined by the Corporation.''.
Mrs. GILLIBRAND. I yield to the chairman of the committee for other
business.
Ms. STABENOW. I thank the Senator.
Madam President, we have a great start here with our first vote.
Amendment No. 945, As Modified
Ms. STABENOW. Before proceeding with Senator Gillibrand's amendment,
I ask unanimous consent that the Sessions amendment No. 945, with the
changes at the desk, as modified, be agreed to.
The amendment, as modified, was agreed to, as follows:
(Purpose: To clarify eligibility criteria for agricultural irrigation
assistance)
On page 263, between lines 20 and 21, insert the following:
``(iii) Irrigation.--In States where irrigation has not
been used significantly for agricultural purposes, as
determined by the Secretary, the Secretary shall not limit
eligibility under section 1271B or this section on the basis
of prior irrigation history.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York.
Amendment No. 931
Mrs. GILLIBRAND. I rise today to urge my colleagues on both sides of
the aisle to join my effort to fight off the proposed $4 billion worth
of cuts to SNAP, better known as food stamps.
I ask that my amendment, No. 931, be called up for a vote at a time
determined by the manager of the bill.
When Congress proposes to cut the food stamp program, it is not a
nameless, faceless person looking for a handout who suffers--it is
hungry children, hardworking adults, seniors on fixed incomes,
veterans, active-duty servicemembers fighting our wars, and the
families who stand by them.
I heard from a single mom in Queens, working full time at a
supermarket, doing all she could to make ends meet but still struggles
in this very tough economy. Her son came home one day from school with
a bag in his hand and told her he saved his lunch for their dinner, and
that he asked his best friend if he could have his sandwich to bring
home for his brother. Obviously that mother broke down in tears. She
needs food stamp assistance.
I heard from a senior in Washington Heights in New York City. She
receives a limited fixed income, not enough to live on. She relies on
SNAP to pay for food and for some peace of mind. Without that help,
putting food on the table will become impossible.
I have heard from veterans all across the country who are making
their voices heard to prevent these cuts, such as one very brave
veteran from Colorado Springs. He served in Iraq, but was declared
medically unfit to continue his service. He was released from the
military and returned home. As he was looking for a job and waited for
the VA to activate his benefits, he relied on SNAP to help his family
make ends meet. Going from active duty to food stamps, he described,
was a culture shock. It was never his plan to go on food stamps.
Without that little bit of support, this veteran, his wife, and his
children would have needlessly suffered. Today he is back on his feet
working full time, but the program was there for him when he needed it,
as it should be.
These are the people who rely on this critically needed assistance to
put food on the table and who stand to lose if Congress follows through
with these deep cuts to SNAP. Half of all food stamp recipients are
children, 8 percent are seniors, and 1.4 million veteran households
receive food stamps. There are some of you here who would have us
believe that these children, seniors, and veterans are gaming the
system just to take advantage of taxpayers. The fact is, it is less
than 1 percent of every dollar that goes into this program that is
wasted, less than 1 percent is evidence of fraud. Imagine if we had
that level of efficiency anywhere else in government.
In fact, SNAP keeps our economy moving. This money goes straight to
the grocery stores, the store clerks, the truckers who haul the food,
and producers all across the country. Sixteen cents of every SNAP
dollar actually goes right back to the farmer who grew the crop,
according to the USDA. When we cut $4 billion from SNAP, it means there
is $90 less a month going to half a million households. To folks in
this Chamber, $90 a month may not seem like a lot of money, but for a
struggling family that is a week's worth of groceries. Imagine telling
your children they can't eat the last week of every month. Imagine
telling your child at night when he says to you: Mommy, I am still
hungry, that there is nothing you can do about it.
As a mother, as a lawmaker, watching a child, a senior, and a brave
veteran going hungry is something I will not stand for, and neither
should anyone else in this body. Clearly we have to reduce the debt and
the deficit, but hardworking parents, their children, seniors, troops,
and veterans are just trying to keep the lights on, trying to make ends
meet, trying to put food on the table. They did not spend this Nation
into debt, and we should not be trying to balance the budget on their
back. They deserve better from us. These are the wrong priorities for
America.
Instead, the amendment I am proposing would reduce a real source of
waste in this budget, and that is corporate welfare for large
corporations that do not need it, including insurance companies that
are based in Bermuda, Australia, and Switzerland.
My amendment already has the support and advocacy of a third of this
body. Thirty-three Senators have signed a letter saying do not cut food
stamps, because it protects half a million struggling Americans who too
often do not have a voice in Washington when they desperately need it.
It makes modest cuts to an already overgenerous corporate welfare
system. It is common sense. Standing by those who are suffering is the
core. It is a core value of who we are as Americans.
If it is in your heart, and if you believe feeding hungry children is
the right thing to do, then stand with us. Stand with America's
veterans. Stand with the AARP and America's seniors. Stand with
struggling families and children all across this Nation. Let's keep
food on the tables of people who need it. When we do, America will be
stronger, and this body will be stronger.
I yield the floor.
____________________