[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 108 (Wednesday, June 26, 2019)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E846]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]





   FINANCIAL SERVICES AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2020

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                      HON. SANFORD D. BISHOP, JR.

                               of georgia

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, June 25, 2019

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the state of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 3351) making 
     appropriations for financial services and general government 
     for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2020, and for other 
     purposes:

  Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I can tell my colleagues with great 
confidence that USDA's proposal to move the Economic Research Service 
(ERS) and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) outside 
the National Capital Region is a bad idea.
  We held a hearing on the issue last March, at which four former 
senior USDA officials with 70 years of combined experience at the two 
agencies, from both parties, expressed their deep opposition to this 
proposal.
  Numerous stakeholders have expressed strong opposition, including the 
National Farmers Union, the Association of American Veterinary Colleges 
and nearly 1700 other organizations, university officials, and 
individuals from 47 states.
  We have not received a single letter in support of this proposal.
  USDA violated the Appropriations Committee's statutorily required 30-
day waiting period for such proposals when it took action to implement 
the proposal six days after notifying the Committee.
  It failed utterly to comply with the requirements of the conferees in 
the 2019 omnibus appropriations report to submit all cost benefits for 
the move and a detailed analysis of any research benefits of a 
relocation when it submitted the 2020 budget.
  USDA has also refused numerous requests from Members of the House and 
Senate that it provide the original cost-benefit analysis developed 
before the proposal was announced.
  It finally gave us a so-called ``cost-benefit analysis'' after the 
final site was selected.
  But an independent analysis of this supposed analysis found that 
``USDA leadership failed to follow federal guidelines for the benefit 
cost analysis'' and that ``the move to Kansas City will cost taxpayers 
between $83 and $182 million dollars, rather than saving them $300 
million dollars.''
  Large numbers of ERS and NIFA employees have left as a result of this 
proposal.
  I fear that ultimately, these agencies will become mere shadows of 
their former selves, with the loss of hundreds of years of expertise.
  These agencies' mission is to achieve the best science through 
research that advances U.S. agriculture and our understanding of the 
agricultural economy.
  I believe that the Department's proposal puts that mission at great 
risk.
  I urge a yes vote on the Norton amendment.

                          ____________________