[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 101 (Tuesday, July 16, 2013)]
[House]
[Page H4490]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
THE FARM BILL AND POLLINATORS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) for 5 minutes.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Last week's farm bill debacle in the House of
Representatives highlighted a fundamental disconnect. My friends in the
Republican majority felt that nutrition for poor people was not a
priority because they were concerned about increasing government
dependence for lower-income Americans.
Yes, there are more people receiving SNAP, or what we used to call
food stamp benefits, because that's how the system is supposed to work.
After our Nation suffered a near collapse of the economy, and with a
much larger population of over 313 million people, we would expect
that, in the face of persistent unemployment and job loss, more people
would be on food stamps. We want them to get this assistance. It helps
those families and it helps the economy.
Yet, by the same action, my friends passed the most expensive farm
bill provisions in our Nation's history. Just like the direct payment
program, which gave 75 percent of the payments to 10 percent of all
farmers, the new price targets and crop insurance programs manipulate
the market, concentrate wealth in the hands of the few, and fail to
implement any basic reforms such as means testing and payment limits.
The irony was not lost on many who watched the price tag go up and the
benefits be concentrated in the hands of those who need it the least.
The bill lacked meaningful reform. The long overdue elimination of
direct payments was coupled with a lavish increase in a new
entitlement, shallow loss provisions of crop insurance. It locked in
the currently high commodity prices as a threshold going forward. There
were additional direct payments for cotton and a refusal to reform
egregious sugar provisions. Subsidies for wealthy farmers are supported
over innovation, research, and conservation. The bill lavished support
on those that needed it the least, while stripping out nutrition
support through the SNAP program, because they didn't want to foster
dependence, all while a blind eye was turned to abuses in the lavish
crop insurance program where fraud is 50 percent higher than in the
maligned SNAP, or food stamp program.
I am hopeful that if this bill goes on to conference, we'll be able
to reduce the costs, provide adequate support by reinstituting
nutrition programs, and address long overdue reform for crop insurance.
At the same time, there would be some provisions that could actually
bring people together. For years, I've been working in areas of
protecting the pollinators. There are 250,000 little species that
pollinate our food and help create $200 billion worth of food crops
worldwide. One in every three forks of foods that we eat is due to
pollination, as well as the flowers we enjoy, fruits, chocolate, and
even tequila. Many of these things depend on these humble workers. Yet
we've watched real threats to the critical habitat for pollinators. I'm
hopeful that we can add a simple, nonpartisan provision that will make
a difference for these protections.
Neonicotinoids are insecticides which have been linked to large bee
die-offs. In one instance, it happened to 50,000 bees in Oregon last
week. These insecticides have been banned for 2 years in Europe. I'm
hopeful that as the farm bill goes forward, we can address putting a
temporary ban on their sale here in the United States, taking a deeper
dive on the impact they have on pollinators and, indeed, on the entire
food chain for this very persistent substance that has the potential of
affecting the impact not just of the health of bees but of our families
as well. I'm also hopeful that we'll have a farm bill that can include
low- or no-cost provisions like pollinating protection to bring people
together to strengthen agriculture. These are vital parts of nature and
of our food chain.
In the past, the farm bill wasn't a partisan battlefield. If we can
focus on providing help for people who need it the most, rather than
lavish subsidies for people that need it the least, and focus on
innovation, conservation, and, yes, pollinator protection, things like
this can strengthen our food supply, save money, protect the
environment, and maybe enable us to make some progress in an area so
far that looks embarrassingly remote.
____________________