[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 156 (Tuesday, September 26, 2023)]
[House]
[Pages H4505-H4566]
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, 2024
General Leave
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include
extraneous material on H.R. 4368, and that I may include tabular
material on the same.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Collins). Is there objection to the
request of the gentleman from Maryland?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 723 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 4368.
The Chair appoints the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Bentz) to preside
over the Committee of the Whole.
{time} 2027
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 4368) making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development,
Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and for other purposes, with Mr.
Bentz in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the
first time.
General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed 1
hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority
member of the Committee on Appropriations or their respective
designees.
The gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Harris) and the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Bishop) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Maryland.
{time} 2030
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chair, I rise today to bring before the House H.R. 4368, the
Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2024 appropriations bill.
I thank Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Granger and commend her
for her leadership in moving this bill and the fiscal year 2024
appropriations process forward.
I also recognize the ranking member of the Appropriations Committee
(Ms. DeLauro), and the ranking member of the Agriculture, Rural
Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Subcommittee (Mr. Bishop).
I appreciate the conversations he and I have had regarding the bill.
While I know we don't agree on everything, we have reached areas of
consensus that will keep our ag communities strong.
As Americans know all too well, our country continues to battle high
inflation driven by the overspending of the last Congress and the Biden
administration.
The fiscal situation in the United States, in fact, has changed since
the Appropriations Committee passed this bill in June.
While we were on the August recess, the Congressional Budget Office
projected the deficit to reach $2 trillion for this fiscal year,
doubling last year's deficit of $1 trillion, and the deficit outlook
for the future has gotten much worse.
We simply cannot continue down this path of spending large sums of
money without regard to the fiscal future of our Nation.
This bill takes the same approach American families take every day.
They simply have to do more with less under the Biden economy.
American families decide every single day where to cut back spending
to pay for what is most important for them. For them, those decisions
are difficult.
Likewise, we have to make tough, difficult decisions for the good of
the Nation. This is why the rule implements further reductions totaling
$2.7 billion across the discretionary accounts in this bill, except for
the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women Infants and
Children, or WIC.
With this reduction, the fiscal year 2024 Agriculture appropriation
bill's discretionary allocation is $15.1 billion.
By redirecting nearly $7.5 billion in unobligated funds from the
Inflation Reduction Act, this bill funds the Department of Agriculture,
the Food and Drug Administration, and the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission with an effective program level of $22.5 billion--a decrease
of 12.8 percent from the current fiscal year.
This legislation prioritizes critical ag research and plant and
animal health programs, invests in our rural communities, provides
nutrition assistance to those in need, and ensures that American
consumers have a safe food and drug supply.
This legislation rejects the Biden administration's unrealistic
proposed spending levels that disregard the dire fiscal reality our
country faces.
It also rejects the administration's continued push to bloat inside
the beltway Federal bureaucracy by halting new hires in the Washington,
D.C., office; instead, focusing on hiring an increased USDA workforce
outside of the Capital Beltway in the offices that directly serve and
support rural America.
I will highlight a few areas where this legislation prioritizes
essential functions while being responsible stewards of taxpayer
dollars.
[[Page H4506]]
In regard to supporting the core mission, the bill provides $1
billion for the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service to support
the Department's efforts to protect our producers from foreign plant
and animal diseases.
The bill continues to invest in the delivery of farm programs,
disaster assistance, and crop insurance to farmers and ranchers by
maintaining funding for the Farm Service Agency and the Risk Management
Agency.
The bill provides $1 billion for the Food Safety and Inspection
Service to fund our Nation's frontline inspectors of meat and poultry
products.
We also continue to make important investments in critical
agriculture research that will keep our producers on the cutting edge
of technology and production practices.
We continue to fund rural development programs, including critical
infrastructure investments in water and wastewater systems, broadband,
and rural housing programs.
For the Food and Drug Administration, the bill provides just over $6
billion in direct appropriations and user fees to enable the agency to
keep food, drugs, and medical devices safe and effective.
The bill includes $296 million for the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission to continue to oversee and ensure the integrity of U.S.
derivative markets.
With regards to fiscal responsibility, at the same time, this
legislation reins in some of the administration's wasteful, out-of-
control spending.
For instance, it removes the Secretary's discretionary use of the
Commodity Credit Corporation to fund unauthorized, nonemergency
programs by returning statutory language to its pre-COVID language that
didn't have that discretionary authority.
The CCC is not intended to allow USDA to completely bypass Congress
in establishing new programs. Yet, the USDA apparently just can't help
themselves, and that is exactly what they have been doing with the
Commodity Credit Corporation.
According to a recent article in AgriPost, the USDA intends to use
the Commodity Credit Corporation to spend nearly $1.4 billion on trade
programs and another $1.1 billion to pay for ``commodity-based
international food aid.'' That sounds a lot like the Food for Peace
program.
Since the USDA has provided $1.1 billion for food aid that will be
distributed during fiscal year 2024, the rule amendment reduces Food
for Peace to $532 million.
This bill will put an end to the habitual abuse of the CCC. In doing
so, the bill saves $1 billion in fiscal year 2024 alone.
Given that the USDA used these discretionary powers to spend another
$2.5 billion and $6.6 billion in the last 2 fiscal years, respectively,
I would submit to my colleagues that the real savings to taxpayers of
taking these discretionary authorities away will be much higher than
the CBO score.
Mr. Chair, that is exactly what we need in times of the fiscal crisis
we are in. Let me be clear: Restricting these authorities in the CCC
will have no impact on farm bill and conservation programs, crop
insurance, or the Secretary's ability to access the CCC in an animal or
plant health emergency, the uses for which the program was created, not
as a de facto slush fund for the department. All of those important
duties and functions will continue under this bill.
This legislation also rescinds wasteful spending from the Inflation
Reduction Act. It is finally time to be responsible stewards of
taxpayer dollars by rescinding these new government giveaways.
We must work to rightsize programs, especially since the pandemic is
over and President Biden ended the public health emergency in May.
It, in fact, is time to return to pre-COVID spending levels. Perhaps,
Mr. Chair, we can return to pre-COVID inflationary levels, too, which I
am sure the American public would, indeed, welcome.
Well, this is why we are returning the WIC cash value voucher
benefits to a normal, sustainable inflation-adjusted funding level.
The American Rescue Plan provided a one-time increase in these
benefits due to the pandemic, but these increases continue to be built
into the WIC program in fiscal years 2022 and 2023 after they were due
to expire. Keeping these increases on autopilot adds an additional $1
billion to the program.
This bill does provide cash value vouchers above prepandemic levels
to help with the food price inflation caused by the Biden economy. With
the end of the public health emergency, it is time to return this
program to normal pre-COVID operations.
On the regulatory front, this legislation puts a stop to USDA's
efforts under the Packers and Stockyards Act to dictate how poultry and
livestock producers raise and market their animals.
This bill also prevents the purchase of farmland by our foreign
adversaries, while providing funds for the Farm Service Agency to
fulfill its duty to track foreign ownership of land.
The bill also returns the use of mifepristone to in-person dispensing
by a healthcare provider. This is a drug that should not be used
without the supervision of a physician or a similarly licensed
provider.
Anyone who truly cares, who genuinely cares about women's health and
safety, should support this commonsense provision.
Finally, as I said earlier, this bill takes the same approach
American families take every single day now. They have to do more with
less under the Biden inflation economy. American families decide every
day where to cut back spending to pay for what is most important.
We are not appropriating monopoly money, Mr. Chair. It is hard-earned
taxpayer dollars, and sometimes tough decisions have to be made, and
this bill makes them.
In closing, I ask for your support for this important piece of
legislation. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chair, every day when I anticipate the Agriculture appropriations
bill coming to the floor, I wake up with my usual admonition that this
is the day that the Lord has made. Let us rejoice and be glad in it.
Today as we take up this Agriculture appropriations bill, it
stretches my faith to say that this is a good day because I rise in
very, very strong opposition to H.R. 4368.
As the ranking member of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and
Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee,
I am extremely disappointed to see this bill does not meet the needs of
Americans who rely on this funding to ensure safe food and medicines,
healthy and resilient farmlands, and strong rural infrastructure.
The programs contained in the Agriculture funding bill are important
for all Americans, and they affect our country in so many ways.
These programs help Americans by helping American farmers produce the
highest quality, safest, most abundant, and most economical food and
fiber in the world through the assistance provided through the Farm
Service Agency in almost every county in America.
They help future generations by funding conservation practices, which
preserve our farmland and our national resources for years to come.
These programs are essential to those who live in rural areas and
ensure quality of life through access to clean drinking water,
electricity, telecommunication, broadband, sewer infrastructure, and
housing.
They help feed every American, including our most vulnerable
families, children, and seniors in difficult times.
They fund USDA meat and poultry inspectors and FDA inspectors of all
other food products so that the food on Americans' tables is safe and
nutritious. It funds the CFTC and the Farm Credit Administration, so
this bill affects our financial space.
I cannot think of a funding subcommittee with as broad a reach as our
bill has. A bill with such a broad reach deserves to have these
programs adequately funded.
However, the bill passed in our full committee markup only provided
$17.8 billion in funding, which takes us back to the 2007 funding
level.
That is entirely inadequate for the needs of the American people, and
it had no chance of being passed into law when it came out of
committee.
[[Page H4507]]
Unfortunately, rather than moving in a more productive direction, the
majority used a procedural gimmick to impose even greater cuts of 69
percent to the Food for Peace program and 14.2 percent to all other
discretionary programs.
Instead of improving the bill, the Rules Committee made it even
worse. In total, the cuts to the bill have reduced funding 41 percent
lower than last year. The bill before us today will take us back to
2001 levels. That is totally irresponsible.
The bill will harm rural America by taking money from programs
supporting rural communities such as it cuts $500 million from the
Rural Energy for America Program, the REAP program, and it eliminates
grants under the program, which will raise the energy costs for over
15,000 rural farmers and small businesses.
It takes $1 billion from rural electric cooperatives, 900
cooperatives that serve over 40 million people in 48 States.
It slashes $800 million from the WIC program, which drastically also
cuts the cash value voucher benefit for fruit and vegetable purchases,
affecting nearly 5 million hungry women and children.
It strips loan assistance needed by 100,000 economically distressed
farmers, which could literally cost folks the family farm.
It cuts rural development programs by over 40 percent, which means
thousands of rural families will no longer be able to get a loan to
afford a home.
Hundreds of projects meant to provide clean water and wastewater
systems will be eliminated, and thousands of families will not be able
to turn on the tap and count on drinkable water.
It completely guts the Food for Peace international food aid program.
It cuts the McGovern-Dole program by 14 percent, which will further
exacerbate the global hunger and instability and the risk of conflicts
abroad, which will weaken American security.
The bill also strips the Secretary, as you have heard, of
discretionary use of the Commodity Credit Corporation funding.
The CCC is a tool authorized by law to benefit our farmers and the
thousands of church and community food banks that it helps to fund.
No matter which party is in the White House, the only folks that
suffer when any administration is not allowed to use the CCC at its
discretion are our ag producers and American families.
Our farmers benefited tremendously under the Trump administration
when Secretary of Agriculture Perdue used the CCC to give our farmers
relief from the trade wars with China.
As I look at it, the path this bill has taken so far and the proposed
amendments that we will see tonight would make it even worse.
I ask myself for any farmers that are watching tonight who are trying
to do what is best for their land, for their businesses and their
family, what will they see?
{time} 2045
For people in rural communities facing the challenges of providing
clean water, affordable housing, and dependable utilities, what will
they see?
For those same communities trying to ensure that their law
enforcement and first responders have the vehicles, the communications
equipment, and the other resources they need to keep their rural
communities safe, what will they see?
For struggling families trying to put food on the table for their
children, what will they see?
Sadly, if those Americans are watching us tonight, what they will see
is a majority which is focused on overriding medical science to take
away a woman's freedom to control their own reproductive health
choices, but not a majority focused on ensuring that those women and
their children are able to afford food.
They will see a majority that is focused on an undefined so-called
critical race theory while pushing this bill to jeopardize the safety
of our food and our medicine, slowing down our supply chain, and
ironically, making these things harder to get and more expensive to
buy.
Make no mistake, the majority would have a person who is watching at
home to believe that this bill fights against some undeserving citizens
who don't need the help. The hard truth is that this bill is a nuclear
bomb against the needs of every single American.
The majority wants the people to be distracted by their culture war
while they cut the crucial programs that every American depends on for
the safest, the highest quality of affordable food, fiber, and medicine
in the world. It appears that tonight we will see more amendments from
the majority that further push the bill in a terribly harmful
direction.
It astonishes me that we are 4 days away from a government shutdown,
yet we are not debating a bipartisan bill to keep the government open.
Instead, we are debating an extreme messaging bill that does nothing to
bring us closer to the bipartisan agreement we will need to eventually
pass a 4-year government spending bill.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill, and I look
forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to
craft a responsible bill that meets the needs of all Americans.
Mr. Chairman, I thank my personal staff, including Tynesha Boomer,
and the subcommittee staff, including Martha Foley, Alex Swann, and
Tyler Coe for their hard work on this bill. I thank the majority staff
for their efforts. I pray that the majority Members of Congress and the
majority of Congress will have an epiphany and deliver a much better
work product to the American people by the end of this funding process.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, what is really harmful is a $2 trillion
deficit, not the legislation before us.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr.
Miller).
Mr. MILLER of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to support a vital
amendment included within the bipartisan en bloc amendment to foster
rural skills training and workforce development.
The amendment that I offered with several of my colleagues would
restore funding for one of USDA's primary rural skills and workforce
programs, the Rural Innovation Stronger Economy, also known as the RISE
Grant Program.
As authorized in the 2018 farm bill, this workforce training
initiative provides assistance to rural areas to establish job
accelerators to cultivate the growth of high-wage jobs and support
rural economies.
Rural America and regions throughout the country face economic
challenges that are compounded by a lack of access to training and
workplace skills.
This is an urgent issue that requires our attention; therefore, I
urge all of my colleagues to support the amendment.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the
gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), the ranking member of the
Appropriations Committee.
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food
and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies appropriations bill cuts
funding for critical programs relied on by America's farmers, rural
communities, and working families. This bill slashes loans and it
weakens support for rural communities.
This bill inserts government into the personal healthcare decisions
by limiting women's access to abortion. Shamefully, it cuts assistance
for the most vulnerable children and families.
That we are debating this bill on September 26, 4 days before the end
of the fiscal year, when House Republicans have provided no path
forward to keep our government open, is as absurd as it is
reprehensible.
The House Republican plan demonstrates an inability and an
unwillingness to govern. Rather than working to keep the lights on and
ensuring Federal workers and servicemembers get paid, Republicans are
pursuing a path explicitly designed to shut down the government.
Republicans will claim to support farmers, but this bill makes it
harder for small farmers to make ends meet. This bill will inflict
increasing energy costs in rural communities, making it harder or
impossible for farmers to get a loan, and making our food less safe.
This bill takes away billions of dollars in investments from rural
communities by gutting funding provided to
[[Page H4508]]
rural electric co-ops used to help support the long-term resiliency,
reliability, and affordability of rural electric systems. These co-ops
serve 92 percent of persistent poverty counties and power to over 21
million businesses, homes, schools, and farms in 48 States.
This bill cuts the Rural Energy for America Program, the REAP
program, by over $500 million. It raises energy costs on 15,000 rural
small businesses, and cuts farmers out of the green energy economy. It
eliminates payments intended to serve as a financial lifeline for
distressed farmers, which have already helped more than 20,000
producers avoid going into foreclosure.
This bill abandons the most vulnerable by slashing the Women,
Infants, and Children, the WIC program, by $800 million. Some 4.6
million women and children would also get severely reduced fruit and
vegetable vouchers.
I do not believe we should practice this so-called fiscal
responsibility by taking food out of the mouths of moms and children.
Republicans seek to sell their spending cuts to the American people by
taking food from the most vulnerable.
Finally, the majority has included shameful political riders in each
of these appropriations bills that attack women and minorities and
pander to various extreme rightwing issues, all while protecting
billionaires and the biggest corporations.
Republicans are determined to make abortion illegal nationally. An
attachment to this bill would reverse the FDA decision to allow
mifepristone to be dispensed in certified pharmacies to patients with a
prescription from a certified prescriber, instead of only in hospitals,
clinics, and medical offices.
Mifepristone has been safely and legally used in the United States by
over 5 million women since the FDA approved its use more than 20 years
ago. This policy would overrule the established scientific process for
FDA approval in order to restrict women's access to healthcare. My
amendment to remove this rider was blocked.
This bill is not serious, but it will, like the majority's shutdown,
have serious consequences that will be borne by the American people.
This bill is shameful, this bill is dangerous, and this bill leaves
rural Americans, farmers, seniors, children, and hungry families
behind.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I remind Americans, if they are watching, that we are not dealing
with Monopoly money.
Where are the ideas to solve a $2 trillion budget deficit?
The President didn't have any. In fact, the President submitted a
budget to Congress that never ever balanced and was supposed to have $1
trillion deficits, but in fact, we had overspending in the so-called
Inflation Reduction Act, which is one of the biggest misnomers we ever
had in the history of Congress.
The American people know, when you increase spending by hundreds and
hundreds of billions of dollars, you increase inflation. You don't
reduce it, you increase it. The fact of the matter is, our deficit is
now $2 trillion, not $1 trillion.
Mr. Chair, I am hoping to hear from the other side of the aisle: How
do we pay for all of this?
We have to borrow every single penny of this bill, and it has to be
paid back by our children, our great-grandchildren--those are the
facts. I know the facts are disturbing, but we have a $2 trillion
deficit, and it is the House Republicans who are taking the responsible
position in Washington and dealing with it.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Chairman, let me just say that we are in this deficit situation
largely because we don't collect the revenue from the people who owe
taxes, the wealthy millionaires and billionaires that the Republican
majority is protecting by not funding enough agents to collect the
money for the Internal Revenue Service so that we can fund the
government.
We wouldn't have the deficit that we have today were they willing to
put sufficient agents on the job to be able to collect the money that
is lawfully due. People should pay their taxes and they shouldn't
protect those tax cheats.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Maine (Ms.
Pingree), the ranking member of the Interior, Environment, and Related
Agencies Subcommittee, and a member of the Agriculture, Rural
Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies
Subcommittee.
Ms. PINGREE. Mr. Chairman, I thank my good friend from Georgia for
yielding me the time.
I rise in opposition to this bill. This bill will hurt our farmers,
it will hurt women and children, and it will hurt rural America. It
provides $17.8 billion, the lowest level of funding for 16 years.
This bill hurts our ability to fight the climate crisis by limiting
the flexibility of the Credit Commodity Corporation that the USDA uses
to give farmers the tools they need to respond to climate change.
It slashes funds for climate hubs and climate research, following the
hottest months ever recorded on Earth.
It strips resources for the Rural Energy for America Program, which
will make electricity more expensive for over 1,600 residents in my
district. It zeros out funding for the Office of Urban Agriculture and
Innovative Production that handles composting and food waste. This
means even more greenhouse gases will be released into our atmosphere.
This bill includes language to prevent the USDA from implementing a
rule to protect farmers and ranchers from anticompetitive behavior in
the meat and poultry industry.
Mr. Chairman, I want to be very clear about the cuts Republicans are
making to WIC, the nutrition program for women, infants, and children.
This bill cuts WIC by $800 million. This bill also slashes the
available funds for families to buy fruits and vegetables. This bill
cuts WIC fruit and vegetable benefits by 56 percent for children and up
to 70 percent for women.
Pregnant and postpartum participants would see their benefits drop
from $44 to $13. That is $13. Anyone who has been grocery shopping in
the past few months knows this is not enough--if you buy a bag of
apples, some carrots, and onions, you spent your allotment for the
month.
Almost one-third of children in the United States don't consume
enough fruit and vegetables daily, and almost half don't consume enough
vegetables daily. This program is critical to address the disparities
people face in assessing healthy food.
At a time when food pantries in States like Maine are facing empty
shelves, while they have huge increases in demand, I cannot fathom how
Republicans can justify the cuts in this bill. Please vote against this
bill.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, it is only in Washington that this can happen. Last
year's bill, from the other side of the aisle when they were in the
majority, funded WIC at $6.0 billion. This year's bill in front of us
funds WIC at $6.0 billion. That is a slash, if you listen to the other
side of the aisle.
The average American is going: What? Wait a minute. We are funding it
at exactly the same level as last year and they are accusing us of
taking food out of the mouths of women, infants, and children.
{time} 2100
This is the same level they did last year. That is what the American
people can't stand about Washington. The average American understands
that $6.0 billion last year is the same as $6.0 billion this year.
All they see is a partisan struggle going on. They don't see
Americans and the House of Representatives wanting to solve their
problems.
The price of food in the grocery store, the price of gas, the price
of everything, the inflation, they don't want to solve the problem at
the southern border. What they want to do is accuse us of slashing
things when we fund it at exactly the same level.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), the ranking member of the Energy
and Water Development, and Related Agencies Subcommittee, and a member
of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and
[[Page H4509]]
Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Subcommittee.
Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I thank Ranking Member Bishop for yielding
time for me to oppose this quite unfortunate piece of legislation and
quite harmful to agriculture.
The majority can't produce a real farm bill, and they can't produce a
budget on time. Now, this legislation today, as it stands, is riddled
with divisive policy riders and detrimental funding cuts galore that
will hurt American farmers and the American people.
Republicans' efforts to slash funding by 41 percent across
agriculture programs to 2000 levels cannot go unchecked. With the
lowest funding in more than two decades, this bill weakens American
competitiveness in the international marketplace and abandons our
farmers.
Our country already imports a third of our fresh fruits and
vegetables. We need to produce those in our country because what
America makes and grows, makes and grows America.
Through this bill, Republicans also seek to starve the most exploited
and vulnerable Americans of food, literally starve infants born to poor
women by slashing the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women,
Infants, and Children by $800 million, slashing hundreds of millions in
farmers' procurement contracts in the process.
Ohio has 179,262 WIC recipients, so if this bill would pass, many of
these recipients--infants, toddlers, pregnant women, breastfeeding
women, and postpartum women--will see their allotment drop to as little
as, get ready, $11 per month or simply disappear entirely.
A child's brain is largely formed by age 4 and its strength depends
on what it eats. If you starve children, you permanently harm their
ability to learn, and you impact them for life.
The last thing I will mention is the majority's lack of concern for
the exploitation of farmers. One of the many dangerous provisions in
this bill is rolling back protections for farmers that prevent
megacorporations from imposing debt servitude on farmers. This bill
prohibits farmers from being protected from, and I quote, unfair,
unjustly discriminatory, or deceptive business practices.
The CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 30 seconds to
the gentlewoman from Ohio.
Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, lack of enforcement of the 1921 Packers and
Stockyards Act, along with unchecked corporate mergers, has allowed
megacorporations, even foreign corporations, extreme power at the
expense of our livestock producers and contract growers.
This bill blocks fair competition. If we don't support our
hardworking farmers, what is this bill supposed to be about? I urge my
colleagues to vote ``no'' on this harmful, ill-considered piece of
legislation.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chair, I guess we are just going to have to be fact-checking all
night long. Once again, the gentlewoman said that we are slashing $800
million from the WIC program.
Now, maybe this is new math. Maybe this is why our public schools are
failing our children, but $6.0 billion this year, our amount, is
exactly the same as the $6.0 billion last year--6.0 minus 6.0, for
those of you watching on TV, take note, is exactly the same. It is not
$800 million less.
Now, I think I heard that we are taking this down to FY 2000 funding
levels. Well, that is interesting because we just looked up the FY 2000
funding levels, and the ag bill was funded at $14 billion. We are
funding it at $25 billion. Now, again, this might be new math, 14 might
be more than 25, maybe in some alternate universe. That is the way this
government functions. It is in an alternate universe. It doesn't
understand what every American family knows: Inflation is what our
problem is. Inflation is driven by out-of-control government spending,
by a $2 trillion deficit, and then we are accused of cutting spending
to the FY 2000 levels. Again, for those who weren't paying attention
the first time, FY 2000, look it up. It is easy. Google it--$14
billion. Our bill, $25 billion.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Every time I hear Republicans talk, they are talking about the cost
of everything going up. Assuming, which is not true, that the $6
billion is the same as the last year, they say over and over and over
how much the cost of living has gone up, how much more it costs to buy
groceries. That is what they talk about every single day when they are
not talking about what they want to slash.
Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms.
Wasserman Schultz), the ranking member of the Military Construction,
Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Subcommittee and a hardworking
member of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug
Administration, and Related Agencies Subcommittee.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this
heartless bill which cuts nutrition assistance to mothers and children
and needed relief to our hardworking farmers.
If my Republican colleagues insist on preserving their tax cuts for
the rich at all costs, please have the decency not to do it on the
backs of women, children, and farmers.
Yet, as cruel as these cuts are, it is enough to satisfy the small
band of MAGA extremists now running this House. Republican leaders have
caved to them again by adding harmful, divisive riders just to bring
these bills for a vote. This legislation should have a toxic hazard
warning on it.
One rider blocks women from accessing mifepristone via telemedicine
or the mail, even in States that allow it. This sneak attack on
abortion medication would vastly restrict a woman's right to control
her own body. Since it is so unpopular, of course, Republicans are
adding this healthcare access barrier now in the dead of night.
This isn't the only extreme rider on this bill. Instead of putting
children and farmers first, this bill blocks the FDA from regulating
nicotine standards.
You are a doctor. That is shocking.
It does this, mind you, despite scientific data showing that it will
mean more addicted kids and fewer saved lives. In Florida alone, 32,300
people die each year from smoking-related deaths. Instead of helping
hungry children and struggling families, Republicans give handouts to
big tobacco in this bill.
Look, I know Americans are divided on many issues, but there is one
thing we can all agree on: We do not take food assistance away from
children, families, seniors, veterans, and the disabled that
desperately rely on that funding. Yet this extremist MAGA bill does
just that.
Mr. Chairman, as an appropriator, I always echo the adage: Show me
your budget, and I will show you what you really value.
This bill exemplifies the ugliest of all values if it takes food from
the mouths of the hungry, if it blocks women's reproductive care, and
if it cuts funds to American farmers.
For these reasons, I strongly urge my colleagues to reject these
cold-hearted values and vote ``no'' on this bill.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chair, I am going to fact check myself. Our budget, the bill that
is coming to the floor is $22.5 billion, not $25 billion, but that is
still a whole lot more than $14 billion.
The toxic hazard is not this bill. Rather, it is a $2 trillion
deficit and an open southern border. That is what the toxic hazard is,
and we are not discussing that in Washington. We should be discussing
it in Washington.
Mr. Chair, I just have a question. Aren't the remarks supposed to be
directed to the chair, the speaker's comments?
The CHAIR. The gentleman is correct.
Mr. HARRIS. Okay. I thought so. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I hope that the people who are watching tonight will take note of the
fact that they don't have to take our word for it. The Congressional
Budget Office has scored this bill, and they have
[[Page H4510]]
scored the manager's amendment. The gentleman says that the bill is $22
billion. After the amendments that they are going to be offering on
this bill tonight, CBO has scored it at $15.1 billion. It is clearly
not what he is representing. After the manager's amendment, which is
the first amendment that we will be considering tonight, the CBO has
scored this bill at $15.1 billion, which is a drastic cut to the needs
of the American people.
Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Pocan), a member of the Appropriations Committee.
Mr. POCAN. Mr. Chair, I am in disbelief over the ridiculously low
spending levels proposed by the Republicans in the Agriculture
appropriations bill. They slashed funding to 2001 levels, funding from
over 20 years ago. That is a 41 percent cut, $10 billion, to the people
that feed America, our farmers.
I don't see how any Member of Congress who represents rural America
can show this much disrespect to their constituents. Certainly no
Member from Wisconsin.
Here are a few examples of what the bill does:
It zeroes out the Dairy Business Innovation Initiatives completely,
from $25 million to nothing. That is assistance for new and growing
dairy businesses that want to get products like milk and specialty
cheeses to market.
If you are an economically distressed farmer, of which,
unfortunately, there are plenty, this strips assistance for 104,000
farm loan borrowers.
If you are a farmer who uses the Farm Service Agency for things like
loans or disaster relief, this bill cuts FSA in addition to
conservation programs like EQUIP that help farmers improve their
operations and output.
If you get energy assistance as a farmer, good luck with that. The
REAP fund will be cut by over $500 million, making your energy costs go
up in rural America.
If you farm and supply food through international food programs, you
are really out of luck because they cut it by $1.2 billion, a 69
percent cut.
With this level of cuts, I would assume this was a satire, a
``Saturday Night Live'' episode, but it is just another Tuesday night
in the U.S. Congress where farmers apparently aren't valued by the
House Republican majority.
No one who claims to support rural America could write or vote for an
agricultural funding bill this bad. No one. I, for one, won't be
supporting this kind of disrespect to the farmers in my district.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I guess it is fact-check time again for the American people. FY 2000
was $14 billion. I think I demonstrated that 22.5 is more than 14. The
gentleman says we are cutting it to FY 2001 levels. Well, Mr. Chair,
that was $15 billion. Again, it might be new math, but when I went to
school, I was taught that 15 was less than 22.5. No matter how many
times you say it on the floor of this House, we are not cutting
spending to FY 2001 levels. We are cutting them to pre-COVID levels
because, Mr. Chair, the pandemic is over.
The free-wheeling spending during the pandemic has to end. A $2
trillion deficit and an open southern border are existential threats to
this country, and the Republican House majority is dealing with it.
Mr. Chair, I remind the body that the Senate is not controlled by
Republicans, and they haven't passed a single appropriations bill to
the floor. Now, we only passed one, but, again, when I went to school,
one was more than none.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the
gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Budzinski).
Ms. BUDZINSKI. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 4368, which
has been weaponized to further limit Americans' access to reproductive
healthcare. Hidden in this bill is an attempt to reinstate medically
unnecessary and outdated FDA policies that restrict access to
mifepristone, a safe, effective drug used in medication abortion and
miscarriage management care.
From the courts to Congress, my colleagues in the majority are
continuing their efforts to force burdensome restrictions that attack
our fundamental freedoms to make our own decisions about our own
bodies.
{time} 2115
This funding bill is yet another example of political interference
into the scientific review process entrusted to the FDA by Congress. It
is a draconian attempt to strip away people's fundamental freedom to
make their own decisions, make their own medical decisions, rejecting
years of scientific and medical expertise and an extensive evidence-
based review that showed mifepristone to be incredibly safe.
Mifepristone is safe and effective, and it is not the business of
Congress to substitute political judgments for the judgments of the
scientific and medical experts who determine FDA policy governing this
medication.
What is even more unfortunate is that this is just one of many
problematic aspects of this bill. As a member of the House Committee on
Agriculture, I could spend hours walking my colleagues through how
cutting funding to 2003 levels leaves our farmers and working families
behind.
I know my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who sit on the
Agriculture Committee with me do not view this to be a serious
proposal. I challenge them to think long and hard about how they will
communicate this to farmers back home before voting ``yes'' on this
bill.
For these reasons, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to
recommit this bill back to committee.
If the House rules permitted, I would have offered the motion with an
important amendment to this bill. My amendment would strike the
provisions rolling back FDA's guidance.
Mr. Chair, I include in the Record the text of my amendment, and I
hope my colleagues will join me in voting for the motion to recommit.
Ms. Budzinski moves to recommit the bill H.R. 4368 to the
Committee on Appropriations with the following amendment:
Page 109, beginning on line 1, strike section 761.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chair, first, it was that we are cutting it to FY
2000 levels, then it was 2001 levels. Now, they raised the ante. It is
FY 2003 levels. The FY 2003 funding level in this bill was $17.55
billion. I will remind all the Americans watching that 17.5 is less
than 22.5. In fact, we are $5 billion above that.
We are not cutting spending to FY 2003 levels. Now, maybe the next
speaker will suggest 2005, 2007. If they get to FY 2019, pre-COVID,
yes, we are.
The floor leader on the other side of the aisle said Republicans talk
of everything going up. Mr. Chair, if that were true, if it were only
Republicans that talk of everything going up, we would be getting 95
percent of the vote in America because everybody is talking about
everything going up. You can't go anywhere without someone saying they
have to pay $4.80 a gallon for diesel, or they have to pay so much for
milk, pay $2 for a loaf of bread that they used to pay $1.20 for.
It is not Republicans talking about that. We are just listening to
what Americans say. That is why we are returning spending to the pre-
COVID levels.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, over the past two decades, our
country and the agriculture industry have grown. Our population has
grown, yet this bill initially withdrew funding for America's
agriculture, as you have heard, back to 2006 funding levels with an
allocation of $17.1 billion, which is nearly $8 billion below last
year's enacted bill.
Sadly, we are here tonight with a bill that the majority made even
worse this past weekend by gutting Congress' commitment to American
farmers, producers, rural communities, and families to levels last seen
in 2001. This bill keeps moving in the wrong direction.
Also, many of the amendments that we will be debating tonight, which
lower this allocation much lower than the American people need, will be
an attempt to circumvent the ongoing negotiations in the House
authorizing committee, the Agriculture Committee, which is working so
desperately to get our farmers, our rural communities, and our lenders
in America our 2023 farm bill, which is the blueprint that our farmers
and our stakeholders need to plan for agriculture in America going
forward.
[[Page H4511]]
This will jeopardize the consensus that we hope to build and to pass
for the 2023 farm bill.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to defeat this bill. Let's send it
back to the committee, and let's begin to put together a better work
product for the American people.
This bill is a disgrace. It really does not rise to the level that
the American people deserve. We have to continue to keep our farmers
and Americans in a position to consume and produce the highest quality,
the safest, the most abundant food and fiber anywhere, and to have the
safest medications and medical devices.
Mr. Chair, I urge us to defeat this. We need to do better, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chair, the Republicans were sent back to the majority
this term of Congress to get things in order in Washington.
Mr. Chair, I ask my colleagues to support the fiscal year 2024
Agriculture appropriations bill, which returns to pre-COVID spending
levels and starts us on a path to decreasing our Federal spending and
decreasing inflation. That is what the American people want.
This legislation does prioritize critical programs that support our
Nation's farmers, ranchers, and rural communities.
The bill importantly reins in Federal spending and regulatory
overreach as well as includes a number of conservative policy victories
to stop the Biden administration's woke agenda.
Mr. Chair, again, I ask my colleagues to support the bill, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment
under the
5-minute rule.
The amendment printed in part E of House Report 118-216, shall be
considered as adopted and the bill, as amended, shall be considered as
read.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 4368
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the
following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the
Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for Agriculture, Rural
Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related
Agencies programs for fiscal year ending September 30, 2024,
and for other purposes, namely:
TITLE I
AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS
Processing, Research, and Marketing
Office of the Secretary
(including transfers of funds)
For necessary expenses of the Office of the Secretary,
$41,072,000 of which not to exceed $5,051,000 shall be
available for the immediate Office of the Secretary; not to
exceed $1,578,000 shall be available for the Office of
Homeland Security; not to exceed $2,215,000 shall be
available for the Office of Tribal Relations; not to exceed
$7,044,000 shall be available for the Office of Partnerships
and Public Engagement; not to exceed $21,315,000 shall be
available for the Office of the Assistant Secretary for
Administration, of which $20,440,000 shall be available for
Departmental Administration to provide for necessary expenses
for management support services to offices of the Department
and for general administration, security, repairs and
alterations, and other miscellaneous supplies and expenses
not otherwise provided for and necessary for the practical
and efficient work of the Department: Provided, That funds
made available by this Act to an agency in the Administration
mission area for salaries and expenses are available to fund
up to one administrative support staff for the Office; and
not to exceed $3,869,000 shall be available for the Office of
Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations and
Intergovernmental Affairs to carry out the programs funded by
this Act, including programs involving intergovernmental
affairs and liaison within the executive branch: Provided
further, That the Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to
transfer funds appropriated for any office of the Office of
the Secretary to any other office of the Office of the
Secretary: Provided further, That no appropriation for any
office shall be increased or decreased by more than 5
percent: Provided further, That the amount made available
under this heading for Departmental Administration shall be
reimbursed from applicable appropriations in this Act for
travel expenses incident to the holding of hearings as
required by 5 U.S.C. 551-558: Provided further, That funds
made available under this heading for the Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations and
Intergovernmental Affairs shall be transferred to agencies of
the Department of Agriculture funded by this Act to maintain
personnel at the agency level: Provided further, That no
funds made available under this heading for the Office of
Assistant Secretary for Congressional Relations may be
obligated after 30 days from the date of enactment of this
Act, unless the Secretary has notified the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress on the allocation
of these funds by USDA agency: Provided further, That during
any 30 day notification period referenced in section 716 of
this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture shall take no action
to begin implementation of the action that is subject to
section 716 of this Act or make any public announcement of
such action in any form.
Executive Operations
office of the chief economist
For necessary expenses of the Office of the Chief
Economist, $29,181,000, of which $8,000,000 shall be for
grants or cooperative agreements for policy research under 7
U.S.C. 3155: Provided, That of the amounts made available
under this heading, $500,000 shall be available to carry out
section 224 of subtitle A of the Department of Agriculture
Reorganization Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 6924), as amended by
section 12504 of Public Law 115-334.
office of hearings and appeals
For necessary expenses of the Office of Hearings and
Appeals, $16,173,000.
office of budget and program analysis
For necessary expenses of the Office of Budget and Program
Analysis, $11,337,000.
Office of the Chief Information Officer
For necessary expenses of the Office of the Chief
Information Officer, $79,442,000, of which not less than
$66,731,000 is for cybersecurity requirements of the
department.
Office of the Chief Financial Officer
For necessary expenses of the Office of the Chief Financial
Officer, $7,118,000.
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights
For necessary expenses of the Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Civil Rights, $901,000: Provided, That funds
made available by this Act to an agency in the Civil Rights
mission area for salaries and expenses are available to fund
up to one administrative support staff for the Office.
Office of Civil Rights
For necessary expenses of the Office of Civil Rights,
$22,789,000.
Office of Safety, Security, and Protection
For necessary expenses of the Office of Safety, Security,
and Protection, $18,800,000.
Office of Inspector General
For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General,
including employment pursuant to the Inspector General Act of
1978 (Public Law 95-452; 5 U.S.C. App.), $109,561,000,
including such sums as may be necessary for contracting and
other arrangements with public agencies and private persons
pursuant to section 6(a)(9) of the Inspector General Act of
1978 (Public Law 95-452; 5 U.S.C. App.), and including not to
exceed $125,000 for certain confidential operational
expenses, including the payment of informants, to be expended
under the direction of the Inspector General pursuant to the
Inspector General Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-452; 5 U.S.C.
App.) and section 1337 of the Agriculture and Food Act of
1981 (Public Law 97-98).
Office of the General Counsel
For necessary expenses of the Office of the General
Counsel, $44,408,000.
Office of Ethics
For necessary expenses of the Office of Ethics, $4,277,000.
Office of the Under Secretary for Research, Education, and Economics
For necessary expenses of the Office of the Under Secretary
for Research, Education, and Economics, $1,800,000:
Provided, That funds made available by this Act to an agency
in the Research, Education, and Economics mission area for
salaries and expenses are available to fund up to one
administrative support staff for the Office: Provided
further, That of the amounts made available under this
heading, $1,000,000 shall be made available for the Office of
the Chief Scientist.
Economic Research Service
For necessary expenses of the Economic Research Service,
$90,612,000.
National Agricultural Statistics Service
For necessary expenses of the National Agricultural
Statistics Service, $187,513,000, of which up to $46,850,000
shall be available until expended for the Census of
Agriculture: Provided, That amounts made available for the
Census of Agriculture may be used to conduct Current
Industrial Report surveys subject to 7 U.S.C. 2204g(d) and
(f).
Agricultural Research Service
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the Agricultural Research Service
and for acquisition of lands by donation, exchange, or
purchase at a nominal cost not to exceed $100,000 and with
prior notification and approval of the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress, and for land
exchanges where the lands exchanged shall be of equal value
or shall be equalized by a payment of money to the grantor
which shall not exceed 25 percent of the total value of the
land or interests transferred out of Federal ownership,
$1,745,542,000: Provided, That appropriations hereunder
shall be available for the operation and maintenance of
aircraft and the purchase of not to exceed one for
replacement only: Provided further, That appropriations
hereunder shall be available pursuant to 7 U.S.C. 2250 for
the construction, alteration, and repair of buildings and
improvements, but unless otherwise provided, the
[[Page H4512]]
cost of constructing any one building shall not exceed
$500,000, except for headhouses or greenhouses which shall
each be limited to $1,800,000, except for 10 buildings to be
constructed or improved at a cost not to exceed $1,100,000
each, and except for four buildings to be constructed at a
cost not to exceed $5,000,000 each, and the cost of altering
any one building during the fiscal year shall not exceed 10
percent of the current replacement value of the building or
$500,000, whichever is greater: Provided further, That
appropriations hereunder shall be available for entering into
lease agreements at any Agricultural Research Service
location for the construction of a research facility by a
non-Federal entity for use by the Agricultural Research
Service and a condition of the lease shall be that any
facility shall be owned, operated, and maintained by the non-
Federal entity and shall be removed upon the expiration or
termination of the lease agreement: Provided further, That
the limitations on alterations contained in this Act shall
not apply to modernization or replacement of existing
facilities at Beltsville, Maryland: Provided further, That
appropriations hereunder shall be available for granting
easements at the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center:
Provided further, That the foregoing limitations shall not
apply to replacement of buildings needed to carry out the Act
of April 24, 1948 (21 U.S.C. 113a): Provided further, That
appropriations hereunder shall be available for granting
easements at any Agricultural Research Service location for
the construction of a research facility by a non-Federal
entity for use by, and acceptable to, the Agricultural
Research Service and a condition of the easements shall be
that upon completion the facility shall be accepted by the
Secretary, subject to the availability of funds herein, if
the Secretary finds that acceptance of the facility is in the
interest of the United States: Provided further, That funds
may be received from any State, other political subdivision,
organization, or individual for the purpose of establishing
or operating any research facility or research project of the
Agricultural Research Service, as authorized by law.
buildings and facilities
For the acquisition of land, construction, repair,
improvement, extension, alteration, and purchase of fixed
equipment or facilities as necessary to carry out the
agricultural research programs of the Department of
Agriculture, where not otherwise provided, up to $16,700,000
to remain available until expended, shall be for the
purposes, and in the amounts, specified for this account in
the table titled ``Community Project Funding'' in the report
accompanying this Act.
National Institute of Food and Agriculture
research and education activities
For payments to agricultural experiment stations, for
cooperative forestry and other research, for facilities, and
for other expenses, $1,085,221,000 which shall be for the
purposes, and in the amounts, specified in the table titled
``National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Research and
Education Activities'' in the report accompanying this Act:
Provided, That funds for research grants for 1994
institutions, education grants for 1890 institutions,
Hispanic serving institutions education grants, capacity
building for non-land-grant colleges of agriculture, the
agriculture and food research initiative, veterinary medicine
loan repayment, multicultural scholars, graduate fellowship
and institution challenge grants, grants management systems,
tribal colleges education equity grants, and scholarships at
1890 institutions shall remain available until expended:
Provided further, That each institution eligible to receive
funds under the Evans-Allen program receives no less than
$1,000,000: Provided further, That funds for education
grants for Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian-serving
institutions be made available to individual eligible
institutions or consortia of eligible institutions with funds
awarded equally to each of the States of Alaska and Hawaii:
Provided further, That funds for providing grants for food
and agricultural sciences for Alaska Native and Native
Hawaiian-Serving institutions and for Insular Areas shall
remain available until September 30, 2025: Provided further,
That funds for education grants for 1890 institutions shall
be made available to institutions eligible to receive funds
under 7 U.S.C. 3221 and 3222: Provided further, That not
more than 5 percent of the amounts made available by this or
any other Act to carry out the Agriculture and Food Research
Initiative under 7 U.S.C. 3157 may be retained by the
Secretary of Agriculture to pay administrative costs incurred
by the Secretary in carrying out that authority.
native american institutions endowment fund
For the Native American Institutions Endowment Fund
authorized by Public Law 103-382 (7 U.S.C. 301 note),
$11,880,000, to remain available until expended.
extension activities
For payments to States, the District of Columbia, Puerto
Rico, Guam, the Virgin Islands, Micronesia, the Northern
Marianas, and American Samoa, $564,860,000 which shall be for
the purposes, and in the amounts, specified in the table
titled ``National Institute of Food and Agriculture,
Extension Activities'' in the report accompanying this Act:
Provided, That funds for extension services at 1994
institutions and for facility improvements at 1890
institutions shall remain available until expended: Provided
further, That institutions eligible to receive funds under 7
U.S.C. 3221 for cooperative extension receive no less than
$1,000,000: Provided further, That funds for cooperative
extension under sections 3(b) and (c) of the Smith-Lever Act
(7 U.S.C. 343(b) and (c)) and section 208(c) of Public Law
93-471 shall be available for retirement and employees'
compensation costs for extension agents.
integrated activities
For the integrated research, education, and extension
grants programs, including necessary administrative expenses,
$41,500,000, which shall be for the purposes, and in the
amounts, specified in the table titled ``National Institute
of Food and Agriculture, Integrated Activities'' in the
report accompanying this Act: Provided, That funds for the
Food and Agriculture Defense Initiative shall remain
available until September 30, 2025: Provided further, That
notwithstanding any other provision of law, indirect costs
shall not be charged against any Extension Implementation
Program Area grant awarded under the Crop Protection/Pest
Management Program (7 U.S.C. 7626).
Office of the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs
For necessary expenses of the Office of the Under Secretary
for Marketing and Regulatory Programs, $800,000: Provided,
That funds made available by this Act to an agency in the
Marketing and Regulatory Programs mission area for salaries
and expenses are available to fund up to one administrative
support staff for the Office.
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
salaries and expenses
(including transfers of funds)
For necessary expenses of the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, including up to $30,000 for
representation allowances and for expenses pursuant to the
Foreign Service Act of 1980 (22 U.S.C. 4085), $1,168,964,000;
of which $514,000, to remain available until expended, shall
be available for the control of outbreaks of insects, plant
diseases, animal diseases and for control of pest animals and
birds (``contingency fund'') to the extent necessary to meet
emergency conditions; of which $15,450,000, to remain
available until expended, shall be used for the cotton pests
program, including for cost share purposes or for debt
retirement for active eradication zones; of which
$49,683,000, to remain available until expended, shall be for
Animal Health Technical Services; of which $3,096,000 shall
be for activities under the authority of the Horse Protection
Act of 1970, as amended (15 U.S.C. 1831); of which
$67,430,000, to remain available until expended, shall be
used to support avian health; of which $4,251,000, to remain
available until expended, shall be for information technology
infrastructure; of which $224,521,000, to remain available
until expended, shall be for specialty crop pests; of which,
$13,637,000, to remain available until expended, shall be for
field crop and rangeland ecosystem pests; of which
$21,567,000, to remain available until expended, shall be for
zoonotic disease management; of which $44,617,000, to remain
available until expended, shall be for emergency preparedness
and response; of which $55,562,000, to remain available until
expended, shall be for tree and wood pests; of which
$6,500,000, to remain available until expended, shall be for
the National Veterinary Stockpile; of which up to $1,500,000,
to remain available until expended, shall be for the scrapie
program for indemnities; of which $2,500,000, to remain
available until expended, shall be for the wildlife damage
management program for aviation safety: Provided, That of
amounts available under this heading for wildlife services
methods development, $1,000,000 shall remain available until
expended: Provided further, That of amounts available under
this heading for the screwworm program, $4,990,000 shall
remain available until expended; of which $24,527,000, to
remain available until expended, shall be used to carry out
the science program and transition activities for the
National Bio and Agro-defense Facility located in Manhattan,
Kansas: Provided further, That no funds shall be used to
formulate or administer a brucellosis eradication program for
the current fiscal year that does not require minimum
matching by the States of at least 40 percent: Provided
further, That this appropriation shall be available for the
purchase, replacement, operation, and maintenance of
aircraft: Provided further, That in addition, in emergencies
which threaten any segment of the agricultural production
industry of the United States, the Secretary may transfer
from other appropriations or funds available to the agencies
or corporations of the Department such sums as may be deemed
necessary, to be available only in such emergencies for the
arrest and eradication of contagious or infectious disease or
pests of animals, poultry, or plants, and for expenses in
accordance with sections 10411 and 10417 of the Animal Health
Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 8310 and 8316) and sections 431 and
442 of the Plant Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 7751 and 7772), and
any unexpended balances of funds transferred for such
emergency purposes in the preceding fiscal year shall be
merged with such transferred amounts: Provided further, That
appropriations hereunder shall be available pursuant to law
(7 U.S.C. 2250) for the repair and alteration of leased
buildings and improvements, but unless otherwise provided the
cost of altering any one building
[[Page H4513]]
during the fiscal year shall not exceed 10 percent of the
current replacement value of the building.
In fiscal year 2024, the agency is authorized to collect
fees to cover the total costs of providing technical
assistance, goods, or services requested by States, other
political subdivisions, domestic and international
organizations, foreign governments, or individuals, provided
that such fees are structured such that any entity's
liability for such fees is reasonably based on the technical
assistance, goods, or services provided to the entity by the
agency, and such fees shall be reimbursed to this account, to
remain available until expended, without further
appropriation, for providing such assistance, goods, or
services.
Agricultural Marketing Service
marketing services
For necessary expenses of the Agricultural Marketing
Service, $184,668,000, of which $5,004,000 shall be available
for the purposes of section 12306 of Public Law 113-79:
Provided, That this appropriation shall be available pursuant
to law (7 U.S.C. 2250) for the alteration and repair of
buildings and improvements, but the cost of altering any one
building during the fiscal year shall not exceed 10 percent
of the current replacement value of the building.
Fees may be collected for the cost of standardization
activities, as established by regulation pursuant to law (31
U.S.C. 9701), except for the cost of activities relating to
the development or maintenance of grain standards under the
United States Grain Standards Act, 7 U.S.C. 71 et seq.
limitation on administrative expenses
Not to exceed $62,596,000 (from fees collected) shall be
obligated during the current fiscal year for administrative
expenses: Provided, That if crop size is understated and/or
other uncontrollable events occur, the agency may exceed this
limitation by up to 10 percent with notification to the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress.
funds for strengthening markets, income, and supply (section 32)
(including transfers of funds)
Funds available under section 32 of the Act of August 24,
1935 (7 U.S.C. 612c), shall be used only for commodity
program expenses as authorized therein, and other related
operating expenses, except for: (1) transfers to the
Department of Commerce as authorized by the Fish and Wildlife
Act of 1956 (16 U.S.C. 742a et seq.); (2) transfers otherwise
provided in this Act; and (3) not more than $21,501,000 for
formulation and administration of marketing agreements and
orders pursuant to the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act
of 1937 and the Agricultural Act of 1961 (Public Law 87-128).
payments to states and possessions
For payments to departments of agriculture, bureaus and
departments of markets, and similar agencies for marketing
activities under section 204(b) of the Agricultural Marketing
Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1623(b)), $1,235,000.
limitation on inspection and weighing services expenses
Not to exceed $55,000,000 (from fees collected) shall be
obligated during the current fiscal year for inspection and
weighing services: Provided, That if grain export activities
require additional supervision and oversight, or other
uncontrollable factors occur, this limitation may be exceeded
by up to 10 percent with notification to the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress.
Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety
For necessary expenses of the Office of the Under Secretary
for Food Safety, $800,000: Provided, That funds made
available by this Act to an agency in the Food Safety mission
area for salaries and expenses are available to fund up to
one administrative support staff for the Office.
Food Safety and Inspection Service
For necessary expenses to carry out services authorized by
the Federal Meat Inspection Act, the Poultry Products
Inspection Act, and the Egg Products Inspection Act,
including not to exceed $10,000 for representation allowances
and for expenses pursuant to section 8 of the Act approved
August 3, 1956 (7 U.S.C. 1766), $1,197,067,000; and in
addition, $1,000,000 may be credited to this account from
fees collected for the cost of laboratory accreditation as
authorized by section 1327 of the Food, Agriculture,
Conservation and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 138f):
Provided, That funds provided for the Public Health Data
Communication Infrastructure system shall remain available
until expended: Provided further, That no fewer than 148
full-time equivalent positions shall be employed during
fiscal year 2024 for purposes dedicated solely to inspections
and enforcement related to the Humane Methods of Slaughter
Act (7 U.S.C. 1901 et seq.): Provided further, That this
appropriation shall be available pursuant to law (7 U.S.C.
2250) for the alteration and repair of buildings and
improvements, but the cost of altering any one building
during the fiscal year shall not exceed 10 percent of the
current replacement value of the building.
TITLE II
FARM PRODUCTION AND CONSERVATION PROGRAMS
Office of the Under Secretary for Farm Production and Conservation
For necessary expenses of the Office of the Under Secretary
for Farm Production and Conservation, $901,000: Provided,
That funds made available by this Act to an agency in the
Farm Production and Conservation mission area for salaries
and expenses are available to fund up to one administrative
support staff for the Office.
Farm Production and Conservation Business Center
salaries and expenses
(including transfers of funds)
For necessary expenses of the Farm Production and
Conservation Business Center, $231,302,000: Provided, That
$60,228,000 of amounts appropriated for the current fiscal
year pursuant to section 1241(a) of the Farm Security and
Rural Investment Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3841(a)) shall be
transferred to and merged with this account.
Farm Service Agency
salaries and expenses
(including transfers of funds)
For necessary expenses of the Farm Service Agency,
$1,215,307,000, of which not less than $15,000,000 shall be
for the hiring of new employees to fill vacancies and
anticipated vacancies at Farm Service Agency county offices
and farm loan officers and shall be available until September
30, 2025: Provided, That not more than 50 percent of the
funding made available under this heading for information
technology related to farm program delivery may be obligated
until the Secretary submits to the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress, and receives
written or electronic notification of receipt from such
Committees of, a plan for expenditure that (1) identifies for
each project/investment over $25,000 (a) the functional and
performance capabilities to be delivered and the mission
benefits to be realized, (b) the estimated lifecycle cost for
the entirety of the project/investment, including estimates
for development as well as maintenance and operations, and
(c) key milestones to be met; (2) demonstrates that each
project/investment is, (a) consistent with the Farm Service
Agency Information Technology Roadmap, (b) being managed in
accordance with applicable lifecycle management policies and
guidance, and (c) subject to the applicable Department's
capital planning and investment control requirements; and (3)
has been reviewed by the Government Accountability Office and
approved by the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses
of Congress: Provided further, That the agency shall submit
a report by the end of the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2024
to the Committees on Appropriations and the Government
Accountability Office, that identifies for each project/
investment that is operational (a) current performance
against key indicators of customer satisfaction, (b) current
performance of service level agreements or other technical
metrics, (c) current performance against a pre-established
cost baseline, (d) a detailed breakdown of current and
planned spending on operational enhancements or upgrades, and
(e) an assessment of whether the investment continues to meet
business needs as intended as well as alternatives to the
investment: Provided further, That the Secretary is
authorized to use the services, facilities, and authorities
(but not the funds) of the Commodity Credit Corporation to
make program payments for all programs administered by the
Agency: Provided further, That other funds made available to
the Agency for authorized activities may be advanced to and
merged with this account: Provided further, That of the
amount appropriated under this heading, $696,594,000 shall be
made available to county committees, to remain available
until expended: Provided further, That, notwithstanding the
preceding proviso, any funds made available to county
committees in the current fiscal year that the Administrator
of the Farm Service Agency deems to exceed or not meet the
amount needed for the county committees may be transferred to
or from the Farm Service Agency for necessary expenses:
Provided further, That none of the funds available to the
Farm Service Agency shall be used to close Farm Service
Agency county offices: Provided further, That none of the
funds available to the Farm Service Agency shall be used to
permanently relocate county based employees that would result
in an office with two or fewer employees without prior
notification and approval of the Committees on Appropriations
of both Houses of Congress.
state mediation grants
For grants pursuant to section 502(b) of the Agricultural
Credit Act of 1987, as amended (7 U.S.C. 5101-5106),
$6,000,000.
grassroots source water protection program
For necessary expenses to carry out wellhead or groundwater
protection activities under section 1240O of the Food
Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3839bb-2), $7,500,000, to
remain available until expended.
dairy indemnity program
(including transfer of funds)
For necessary expenses involved in making indemnity
payments to dairy farmers and manufacturers of dairy products
under a dairy indemnity program, such sums as may be
necessary, to remain available until expended: Provided,
That such program is carried out by the Secretary in the same
manner as the dairy indemnity program described in the
Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration,
and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2001 (Public Law
106-387, 114 Stat. 1549A-12).
[[Page H4514]]
agricultural credit insurance fund program account
(including transfers of funds)
For gross obligations for the principal amount of direct
and guaranteed farm ownership (7 U.S.C. 1922 et seq.) and
operating (7 U.S.C. 1941 et seq.) loans, emergency loans (7
U.S.C. 1961 et seq.), Indian tribe land acquisition loans (25
U.S.C. 5136), boll weevil loans (7 U.S.C. 1989), guaranteed
conservation loans (7 U.S.C. 1924 et seq.), relending program
(7 U.S.C. 1936c), and Indian highly fractionated land loans
(25 U.S.C. 5136) to be available from funds in the
Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund, as follows:
$3,500,000,000 for guaranteed farm ownership loans and
$3,100,000,000 for farm ownership direct loans;
$2,118,491,000 for unsubsidized guaranteed operating loans
and $1,633,000,000 for direct operating loans; emergency
loans, $37,667,000; Indian tribe land acquisition loans,
$20,000,000; guaranteed conservation loans, $150,000,000;
relending program, $61,426,000; Indian highly fractionated
land loans, $5,000,000; and for boll weevil eradication
program loans, $60,000,000: Provided, That the Secretary
shall deem the pink bollworm to be a boll weevil for the
purpose of boll weevil eradication program loans.
For the cost of direct and guaranteed loans and grants,
including the cost of modifying loans as defined in section
502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as follows:
$3,507,000 for emergency loans, to remain available until
expended; and $27,598,000 for direct farm operating loans,
$1,483,000 for unsubsidized guaranteed farm operating loans,
$19,368,000 for the relending program,$1,577,000 for Indian
highly fractionated land loans, and $258,000 for boll weevil
eradication program loans.
In addition, for administrative expenses necessary to carry
out the direct and guaranteed loan programs, $326,053,000:
Provided, That of this amount, $305,803,000 shall be
transferred to and merged with the appropriation for ``Farm
Service Agency, Salaries and Expenses''.
Funds appropriated by this Act to the Agricultural Credit
Insurance Program Account for farm ownership, operating and
conservation direct loans and guaranteed loans may be
transferred among these programs: Provided, That the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress are
notified at least 15 days in advance of any transfer.
Risk Management Agency
salaries and expenses
For necessary expenses of the Risk Management Agency,
$63,637,000: Provided, That $1,000,000 of the amount
appropriated under this heading in this Act shall be
available for compliance and integrity activities required
under section 516(b)(2)(C) of the Federal Crop Insurance Act
of 1938 (7 U.S.C. 1516(b)(2)(C)), and shall be in addition to
amounts otherwise provided for such purpose: Provided
further, That not to exceed $1,000 shall be available for
official reception and representation expenses, as authorized
by 7 U.S.C. 1506(i).
Natural Resources Conservation Service
conservation operations
For necessary expenses for carrying out the provisions of
the Act of April 27, 1935 (16 U.S.C. 590a-f), including
preparation of conservation plans and establishment of
measures to conserve soil and water (including farm
irrigation and land drainage and such special measures for
soil and water management as may be necessary to prevent
floods and the siltation of reservoirs and to control
agricultural related pollutants); operation of conservation
plant materials centers; classification and mapping of soil;
dissemination of information; acquisition of lands, water,
and interests therein for use in the plant materials program
by donation, exchange, or purchase at a nominal cost not to
exceed $100 pursuant to the Act of August 3, 1956 (7 U.S.C.
2268a); purchase and erection or alteration or improvement of
permanent and temporary buildings; and operation and
maintenance of aircraft, $911,399,000, to remain available
until September 30, 2025, of which up to $18,748,000, to
remain available until expended, shall be for the purposes,
and in the amounts, specified for this account in the table
titled ``Community Project Funding'' in the report
accompanying this Act: Provided further, That appropriations
hereunder shall be available pursuant to 7 U.S.C. 2250 for
construction and improvement of buildings and public
improvements at plant materials centers, except that the cost
of alterations and improvements to other buildings and other
public improvements shall not exceed $250,000: Provided
further, That when buildings or other structures are erected
on non-Federal land, that the right to use such land is
obtained as provided in 7 U.S.C. 2250a.
CORPORATIONS
The following corporations and agencies are hereby
authorized to make expenditures, within the limits of funds
and borrowing authority available to each such corporation or
agency and in accord with law, and to make contracts and
commitments without regard to fiscal year limitations as
provided by section 104 of the Government Corporation Control
Act as may be necessary in carrying out the programs set
forth in the budget for the current fiscal year for such
corporation or agency, except as hereinafter provided.
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Fund
For payments as authorized by section 516 of the Federal
Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 1516), such sums as may be
necessary, to remain available until expended.
Commodity Credit Corporation Fund
reimbursement for net realized losses
(including transfers of funds)
For the current fiscal year, such sums as may be necessary
to reimburse the Commodity Credit Corporation for net
realized losses sustained, but not previously reimbursed,
pursuant to section 2 of the Act of August 17, 1961 (15
U.S.C. 713a-11): Provided, That of the funds available to
the Commodity Credit Corporation under section 11 of the
Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act (15 U.S.C. 714i) for
the conduct of its business with the Foreign Agricultural
Service, up to $5,000,000 may be transferred to and used by
the Foreign Agricultural Service for information resource
management activities of the Foreign Agricultural Service
that are not related to Commodity Credit Corporation
business: Provided further, That the Secretary shall notify
the Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate in
writing 15 days prior to the obligation or commitment of any
emergency funds from the Commodity Credit Corporation.
hazardous waste management
(limitation on expenses)
For the current fiscal year, the Commodity Credit
Corporation shall not expend more than $15,000,000 for site
investigation and cleanup expenses, and operations and
maintenance expenses to comply with the requirement of
section 107(g) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (42 U.S.C. 9607(g)), and
section 6001 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C.
6961).
TITLE III
RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS
Office of the Under Secretary for Rural Development
For necessary expenses of the Office of the Under Secretary
for Rural Development, $800,000: Provided, That funds made
available by this Act to an agency in the Rural Development
mission area for salaries and expenses are available to fund
up to one administrative support staff for the Office.
Rural Development
salaries and expenses
(including transfers of funds)
For necessary expenses for carrying out the administration
and implementation of Rural Development programs, including
activities with institutions concerning the development and
operation of agricultural cooperatives; and for cooperative
agreements; $331,087,000: Provided further, That of the
amount made available under this heading, no less than
$75,000,000, to remain available until expended, shall be for
information technology expenses. Provided, That
notwithstanding any other provision of law, funds
appropriated under this heading may be used for advertising
and promotional activities that support Rural Development
programs: Provided further, That in addition to any other
funds appropriated for purposes authorized by section 502(i)
of the Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1472(i)), any amounts
collected under such section, as amended by this Act, will
immediately be credited to this account and will remain
available until expended for such purposes.
Rural Housing Service
rural housing insurance fund program account
(including transfers of funds)
For gross obligations for the principal amount of direct
and guaranteed loans as authorized by title V of the Housing
Act of 1949, to be available from funds in the rural housing
insurance fund, as follows: $880,691,000 shall be for Section
502 direct loans; $5,000,000 for a Single Family Housing
Relending demonstration program for Native American Tribes;
and $30,000,000,000 for Section 502 unsubsidized guaranteed
loans; $25,000,000 for section 504 housing repair loans;
$60,000,000 for section 515 rental housing; $400,000,000 for
section 538 guaranteed multi-family housing loans;
$10,000,000 for credit sales of single family housing
acquired property; $5,000,000 for section 523 self-help
housing land development loans; and $5,000,000 for section
524 site development loans.
For the cost of direct and guaranteed loans, including the
cost of modifying loans, as defined in section 502 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as follows: section 502
loans, $86,660,000 shall be for direct loans; Single Family
Housing Relending demonstration program for Native American
Tribes, $2,288,000; section 504 housing repair loans,
$4,337,000; section 523 self-help housing land development
loans, $637,000; section 524 site development loans,
$477,000; and repair, rehabilitation, and new construction of
section 515 rental housing, $20,998,000: Provided, That to
support the loan program level for section 538 guaranteed
loans made available under this heading the Secretary may
charge or adjust any fees to cover the projected cost of such
loan guarantees pursuant to the provisions of the Credit
Reform Act of 1990 (2 U.S.C. 661 et seq.), and the interest
on such loans may not be subsidized: Provided further, That
applicants in communities that have a current rural area
waiver under section 541 of the Housing Act of 1949 (42
U.S.C. 1490q) shall be treated as living in a rural area for
purposes of section 502 guaranteed loans provided under this
heading: Provided further, That of the amounts available
under this paragraph for section 502 direct loans, no less
than $5,000,000 shall be available for direct loans for
individuals whose homes will be built pursuant to a program
funded with a
[[Page H4515]]
mutual and self-help housing grant authorized by section 523
of the Housing Act of 1949 until June 1, 2024: Provided
further, That the Secretary shall implement provisions to
provide incentives to nonprofit organizations and public
housing authorities to facilitate the acquisition of Rural
Housing Service (RHS) multifamily housing properties by such
nonprofit organizations and public housing authorities that
commit to keep such properties in the RHS multifamily housing
program for a period of time as determined by the Secretary,
with such incentives to include, but not be limited to, the
following: allow such nonprofit entities and public housing
authorities to earn a Return on Investment on their own
resources to include proceeds from low income housing tax
credit syndication, own contributions, grants, and developer
loans at favorable rates and terms, invested in a deal; and
allow reimbursement of organizational costs associated with
owner's oversight of asset referred to as ``Asset Management
Fee'' of up to $7,500 per property.
In addition, for the cost of direct loans and grants,
including the cost of modifying loans, as defined in section
502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, $34,000,000, to
remain available until expended, for a demonstration program
for the preservation and revitalization of the sections 514,
515, and 516 multi-family rental housing properties to
restructure existing USDA multi-family housing loans, as the
Secretary deems appropriate, expressly for the purposes of
ensuring the project has sufficient resources to preserve the
project for the purpose of providing safe and affordable
housing for low-income residents and farm laborers including
reducing or eliminating interest; deferring loan payments,
subordinating, reducing or re-amortizing loan debt; and other
financial assistance including advances, payments and
incentives (including the ability of owners to obtain
reasonable returns on investment) required by the Secretary:
Provided, That the Secretary shall, as part of the
preservation and revitalization agreement, obtain a
restrictive use agreement consistent with the terms of the
restructuring.
In addition, for the cost of direct loans, grants, and
contracts, as authorized by sections 514 and 516 of the
Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1484, 1486), $9,525,000, to
remain available until expended, for direct farm labor
housing loans and domestic farm labor housing grants and
contracts.
In addition, for administrative expenses necessary to carry
out the direct and guaranteed loan programs, $412,254,000
shall be paid to the appropriation for ``Rural Development,
Salaries and Expenses''.
rental assistance program
For rental assistance agreements entered into or renewed
pursuant to the authority under section 521(a)(2) of the
Housing Act of 1949 or agreements entered into in lieu of
debt forgiveness or payments for eligible households as
authorized by section 502(c)(5)(D) of the Housing Act of
1949, $1,606,926,000, and in addition such sums as may be
necessary, as authorized by section 521(c) of the Act, to
liquidate debt incurred prior to fiscal year 1992 to carry
out the rental assistance program under section 521(a)(2) of
the Act: Provided, That rental assistance agreements entered
into or renewed during the current fiscal year shall be
funded for a one-year period: Provided further, That upon
request by an owner of a project financed by an existing loan
under section 514 or 515 of the Act, the Secretary may renew
the rental assistance agreement for a period of 20 years or
until the term of such loan has expired, subject to annual
appropriations: Provided further, That any unexpended
balances remaining at the end of such one-year agreements may
be transferred and used for purposes of any debt reduction,
maintenance, repair, or rehabilitation of any existing
projects; preservation; and rental assistance activities
authorized under title V of the Act: Provided further, That
notwithstanding any other provision of the Act, the Secretary
may recapture rental assistance provided under agreements
entered into prior to fiscal year 2024 for a project the
Secretary determines no longer needs rental assistance and
use such recaptured funds for current needs: Provided
further, That such recaptured funds shall remain available
for obligation in fiscal year 2024 for the purposes specified
under the heading: Provided further, That such recaptured
rental assistance shall, to the extent practicable, be
applied to another farm labor multi-family housing project
financed under section 514 or 516 of the Act.
rural housing voucher account
For the rural housing voucher program as authorized under
section 542 of the Housing Act of 1949, but notwithstanding
subsection (b) of such section, $48,000,000, to remain
available until expended: Provided, That the funds made
available under this heading shall be available for rural
housing vouchers to any low-income household (including those
not receiving rental assistance) residing in a property
financed with a section 515 loan which has been prepaid or
otherwise paid off after September 30, 2005: Provided
further, That the amount of such voucher shall be the
difference between comparable market rent for the section 515
unit and the tenant paid rent for such unit: Provided
further, That funds made available for such vouchers shall be
subject to the availability of annual appropriations:
Provided further, That the Secretary shall, to the maximum
extent practicable, administer such vouchers with current
regulations and administrative guidance applicable to section
8 housing vouchers administered by the Secretary of the
Department of Housing and Urban Development: Provided
further, That in addition to any other available funds, the
Secretary may expend not more than $1,000,000 total, from the
program funds made available under this heading, for
administrative expenses for activities funded under this
heading.
mutual and self-help housing grants
For grants and contracts pursuant to section 523(b)(1)(A)
of the Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1490c), $25,000,000, to
remain available until expended.
rural housing assistance grants
For grants for very low-income housing repair and rural
housing preservation made by the Rural Housing Service, as
authorized by 42 U.S.C. 1474, and 1490m, $35,000,000, to
remain available until expended.
rural community facilities program account
(including transfers of funds)
For gross obligations for the principal amount of direct
and guaranteed loans as authorized by section 306 and
described in section 381E(d)(1) of the Consolidated Farm and
Rural Development Act, $2,800,000,000 for direct loans and
$650,000,000 for guaranteed loans.
For the cost of direct loans, loan guarantees and grants,
including the cost of modifying loans, as defined in section
502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, for rural
community facilities programs as authorized by section 306
and described in section 381E(d)(1) of the Consolidated Farm
and Rural Development Act, $327,636,000, to remain available
until expended, of which up to $312,037,648 shall be for the
purposes, and in the amounts, specified for this account in
the table titled ``Community Project Funding'' in the report
accompanying this Act: Provided, That $5,000,000 of the
amount appropriated under this heading shall be available for
a Rural Community Development Initiative: Provided further,
That such funds shall be used solely to develop the capacity
and ability of private, nonprofit community-based housing and
community development organizations, low-income rural
communities, and Federally Recognized Native American Tribes
to undertake projects to improve housing, community
facilities, community and economic development projects in
rural areas: Provided further, That such funds shall be made
available to qualified private, nonprofit and public
intermediary organizations proposing to carry out a program
of financial and technical assistance: Provided further,
That such intermediary organizations shall provide matching
funds from other sources, including Federal funds for related
activities, in an amount not less than funds provided:
Provided further, That any unobligated balances from prior
year appropriations under this heading for the cost of direct
loans, loan guarantees and grants, including amounts
deobligated or cancelled, may be made available to cover the
subsidy costs for direct loans and or loan guarantees under
this heading in this fiscal year: Provided further, That no
amounts may be made available pursuant to the preceding
proviso from amounts that were designated by the Congress as
an emergency requirement pursuant to a Concurrent Resolution
on the Budget or the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985, or that were specified in the table
titled ``Community Project Funding/Congressionally Directed
Spending'' in the explanatory statement for division A of
Public Law 117-328 described in section 4 in the matter
preceding such division A: Provided further, That $6,000,000
of the amount appropriated under this heading shall be
available for community facilities grants to tribal colleges,
as authorized by section 306(a)(19) of such Act: Provided
further, That sections 381E-H and 381N of the Consolidated
Farm and Rural Development Act are not applicable to the
funds made available under this heading.
Rural Business--Cooperative Service
rural business program account
For the cost of loan guarantees and grants, for the rural
business development programs authorized by section 310B and
described in subsections (a), (c), (f) and (g) of section
310B of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act,
$68,840,000, to remain available until expended: Provided,
That of the amount appropriated under this heading, not to
exceed $500,000 shall be made available for one grant to a
qualified national organization to provide technical
assistance for rural transportation in order to promote
economic development and $6,000,000 shall be for grants to
the Delta Regional Authority (7 U.S.C. 2009aa et seq.), the
Northern Border Regional Commission (40 U.S.C. 15101 et
seq.), and the Appalachian Regional Commission (40 U.S.C.
14101 et seq.) for any Rural Community Advancement Program
purpose as described in section 381E(d) of the Consolidated
Farm and Rural Development Act, of which not more than 5
percent may be used for administrative expenses: Provided
further, That of the amount appropriated under this heading,
not to exceed $100,000 shall be made available for one or
more qualified state technology councils to promote private-
sector economic development in the bio-sciences: Provided
further, That $4,000,000 of the amount appropriated under
this heading shall be for business grants to benefit
Federally Recognized Native American Tribes, including
$250,000 for a grant to a qualified national organization to
provide technical assistance for rural
[[Page H4516]]
transportation in order to promote economic development:
Provided further, That sections 381E-H and 381N of the
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act are not
applicable to funds made available under this heading.
intermediary relending program fund account
(including transfer of funds)
For the principal amount of direct loans, as authorized by
the Intermediary Relending Program Fund Account (7 U.S.C.
1936b), $16,000,000.
For the cost of direct loans, $4,856,000, as authorized by
the Intermediary Relending Program Fund Account (7 U.S.C.
1936b), of which $331,000 shall be available through June 30,
2024, for Federally Recognized Native American Tribes; and of
which $663,000 shall be available through June 30, 2024, for
Mississippi Delta Region counties (as determined in
accordance with Public Law 100-460): Provided, That such
costs, including the cost of modifying such loans, shall be
as defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974.
In addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the
direct loan programs, $4,468,000 shall be paid to the
appropriation for ``Rural Development, Salaries and
Expenses''.
rural economic development loans program account
For the principal amount of direct loans, as authorized
under section 313B(a) of the Rural Electrification Act, for
the purpose of promoting rural economic development and job
creation projects, $75,000,000.
The cost of grants authorized under section 313B(a) of the
Rural Electrification Act, for the purpose of promoting rural
economic development and job creation projects shall not
exceed $15,000,000.
rural cooperative development grants
For rural cooperative development grants authorized under
section 310B(e) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural
Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1932), $19,600,000, of which
$2,800,000 shall be for cooperative agreements for the
appropriate technology transfer for rural areas program:
Provided, That not to exceed $3,000,000 shall be for grants
for cooperative development centers, individual cooperatives,
or groups of cooperatives that serve socially disadvantaged
groups and a majority of the boards of directors or governing
boards of which are comprised of individuals who are members
of socially disadvantaged groups; and of which $8,000,000, to
remain available until expended, shall be for value-added
agricultural product market development grants, as authorized
by section 210A of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946.
rural microentrepreneur assistance program
For the principal amount of direct loans as authorized by
section 379E of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development
Act (7 U.S.C. 2008s), $5,000,000.
For the cost of loans and grants, $6,000,000 under the same
terms and conditions as authorized by section 379E of the
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 2008s).
rural energy for america program
For the principal amount of loan guarantees, under the same
terms and conditions as authorized by section 9007 of the
Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C.
8107), $50,000,000.
Rural Utilities Service
rural water and waste disposal program account
(including transfers of funds)
For gross obligations for the principal amount of direct
and guaranteed loans as authorized by section 306 and
described in section 381E(d)(2) of the Consolidated Farm and
Rural Development Act, as follows: $1,000,000,000 for direct
loans; and $50,000,000 for guaranteed loans.
For the cost of direct loans, loan guarantees and grants,
including the cost of modifying loans, as defined in section
502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, for rural water,
waste water, waste disposal, and solid waste management
programs authorized by sections 306, 306A, 306C, 306D, 306E,
and 310B and described in sections 306C(a)(2), 306D, 306E,
and 381E(d)(2) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development
Act, $587,120,000, to remain available until expended, of
which up to $120,101,362 shall be for the purposes, and in
the amounts, specified for this account in the table titled
``Community Project Funding'' in the report accompanying this
Act, of which not to exceed $1,000,000 shall be available for
the rural utilities program described in section 306(a)(2)(B)
of such Act, and of which not to exceed $4,000,000 shall be
available for the rural utilities program described in
section 306E of such Act: Provided, That not to exceed
$10,000,000 of the amount appropriated under this heading
shall be for grants authorized by section 306A(i)(2) of the
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act in addition to
funding authorized by section 306A(i)(1) of such Act:
Provided further, That $30,000,000 of the amount appropriated
under this heading shall be for loans and grants including
water and waste disposal systems grants authorized by section
306C(a)(2)(B) and section 306D of the Consolidated Farm and
Rural Development Act, and Federally Recognized Native
American Tribes authorized by 306C(a)(1) of such Act:
Provided further, That funding provided for section 306D of
the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act may be
provided to a consortium formed pursuant to section 325 of
Public Law 105-83: Provided further, That not more than 2
percent of the funding provided for section 306D of the
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act may be used by
the State of Alaska for training and technical assistance
programs and not more than 2 percent of the funding provided
for section 306D of the Consolidated Farm and Rural
Development Act may be used by a consortium formed pursuant
to section 325 of Public Law 105-83 for training and
technical assistance programs: Provided further, That not to
exceed $37,500,000 of the amount appropriated under this
heading shall be for technical assistance grants for rural
water and waste systems pursuant to section 306(a)(14) of
such Act, unless the Secretary makes a determination of
extreme need, of which $8,500,000 shall be made available for
a grant to a qualified nonprofit multi-State regional
technical assistance organization, with experience in working
with small communities on water and waste water problems, the
principal purpose of such grant shall be to assist rural
communities with populations of 3,300 or less, in improving
the planning, financing, development, operation, and
management of water and waste water systems, and of which not
less than $800,000 shall be for a qualified national Native
American organization to provide technical assistance for
rural water systems for tribal communities: Provided
further, That not to exceed $21,817,000 of the amount
appropriated under this heading shall be for contracting with
qualified national organizations for a circuit rider program
to provide technical assistance for rural water systems:
Provided further, That not to exceed $4,000,000 of the
amounts made available under this heading shall be for solid
waste management grants.
rural electrification and telecommunications loans program account
(including transfer of funds)
The principal amount of loans and loan guarantees as
authorized by sections 4, 305, 306, 313A, and 317 of the
Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (7 U.S.C. 904, 935, 936,
940c-1, and 940g) shall be made as follows: guaranteed rural
electric loans made pursuant to section 306 of that Act,
$2,167,000,000; cost of money direct loans made pursuant to
sections 4, notwithstanding the one-eighth of one percent in
4(c)(2), and 317, notwithstanding 317(c), of that Act,
$4,333,000,000; guaranteed underwriting loans pursuant to
section 313A of that Act, $900,000,000; and for cost-of-money
rural telecommunications loans made pursuant to section
305(d)(2) of that Act, $690,000,000: Provided, That up to
$2,000,000,000 shall be used for the construction,
acquisition, design, engineering or improvement of fossil-
fueled electric generating plants (whether new or existing)
that utilize carbon subsurface utilization and storage
systems.
For the cost of direct loans as authorized by section
305(d)(2) of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (7 U.S.C.
935(d)(2)), including the cost of modifying loans, as defined
in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, cost
of money rural telecommunications loans, $7,176,000.
In addition, $3,578,000 to remain available until expended,
to carry out section 6407 of the Farm Security and Rural
Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 8107a): Provided, That the
energy efficiency measures supported by the funding in this
paragraph shall contribute in a demonstrable way to the
reduction of greenhouse gases.
In addition, for administrative expenses necessary to carry
out the direct and guaranteed loan programs, $33,270,000,
which shall be paid to the appropriation for ``Rural
Development, Salaries and Expenses''.
distance learning, telemedicine, and broadband program
For grants for telemedicine and distance learning services
in rural areas, as authorized by 7 U.S.C. 950aaa et seq.,
$56,973,000, to remain available until expended, of which up
to $6,972,570 shall be for the purposes, and in the amounts,
specified for this account in the table titled ``Community
Project Funding'' in the report accompanying this Act:
Provided, That $3,000,000 shall be made available for grants
authorized by section 379G of the Consolidated Farm and Rural
Development Act: Provided further, That funding provided
under this heading for grants under section 379G of the
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act may only be
provided to entities that meet all of the eligibility
criteria for a consortium as established by this section.
For the cost of broadband loans, as authorized by sections
601 and 602 of the Rural Electrification Act, $2,037,000, to
remain available until expended: Provided, That the cost of
direct loans shall be as defined in section 502 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
For the cost to continue a broadband loan and grant pilot
program established by section 779 of division A of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 (Public Law 115-141)
under the Rural Electrification Act of 1936, as amended (7
U.S.C. 901 et seq.), $269,385,000, to remain available until
expended, of which up to $10,385,000 shall be for the
purposes, and in the amounts, specified for this account in
the table titled ``Community Project Funding'' in the report
accompanying this Act: Provided, That the Secretary may
award grants described in section 601(a) of the Rural
Electrification Act of 1936, as amended (7 U.S.C. 950bb(a))
for the purposes of carrying out such pilot program:
Provided further, That the cost of direct loans shall be
[[Page H4517]]
defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of
1974: Provided further, That at least 90 percent of the
households to be served by a project receiving a loan or
grant under the pilot program shall be in a rural area
without sufficient access to broadband: Provided further,
That for purposes of such pilot program, a rural area without
sufficient access to broadband shall be defined as twenty-
five megabits per second downstream and three megabits per
second upstream: Provided further, That to the extent
possible, projects receiving funds provided under the pilot
program must build out service to at least one hundred
megabits per second downstream, and twenty megabits per
second upstream: Provided further, That an entity to which a
loan or grant is made under the pilot program shall not use
the loan or grant to overbuild or duplicate broadband service
in a service area by any entity that has received a broadband
loan from the Rural Utilities Service unless such service is
not provided sufficient access to broadband at the minimum
service threshold: Provided further, That not more than four
percent of the funds made available in this paragraph can be
used for administrative costs to carry out the pilot program
and up to three percent of funds made available in this
paragraph may be available for technical assistance and pre-
development planning activities to support the most rural
communities: Provided further, That the Rural Utilities
Service is directed to expedite program delivery methods that
would implement this paragraph: Provided further, That for
purposes of this paragraph, the Secretary shall adhere to the
notice, reporting and service area assessment requirements
set forth in section 701 of the Rural Electrification Act (7
U.S.C. 950cc).
In addition, $30,000,000, to remain available until
expended, for the Community Connect Grant Program authorized
by 7 U.S.C. 950bb-3.
TITLE IV
DOMESTIC FOOD PROGRAMS
Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer
Services
For necessary expenses of the Office of the Under Secretary
for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services, $800,000:
Provided, That funds made available by this Act to an agency
in the Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services mission area for
salaries and expenses are available to fund up to one
administrative support staff for the Office.
Food and Nutrition Service
child nutrition programs
(including transfers of funds)
For necessary expenses to carry out the Richard B. Russell
National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1751 et seq.), except
section 21, and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C.
1771 et seq.), except sections 17 and 21; $31,996,363,000 to
remain available through September 30, 2025, of which such
sums as are made available under section 14222(b)(1) of the
Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-
246), as amended by this Act, shall be merged with and
available for the same time period and purposes as provided
herein: Provided, That of the total amount available,
$18,004,000 shall be available to carry out section 19 of the
Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.):
Provided further, That of the total amount available,
$21,005,000 shall be available to carry out studies and
evaluations and shall remain available until expended:
Provided further, That of the total amount available,
$3,000,000 shall remain available until expended to carry out
section 18(g) of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch
Act (42 U.S.C. 1769(g)): Provided further, That
notwithstanding section 18(g)(3)(C) of the Richard B. Russell
National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1769(g)(3)(c)), the
total grant amount provided to a farm to school grant
recipient in fiscal year 2024 shall not exceed $500,000:
Provided further, That of the total amount available,
$20,000,000 shall be available to provide competitive grants
to State agencies for subgrants to local educational agencies
and schools to purchase the equipment, with a value of
greater than $1,000, needed to serve healthier meals, improve
food safety, and to help support the establishment,
maintenance, or expansion of the school breakfast program:
Provided further, That section 26(d) of the Richard B.
Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1769g(d)) is
amended in the first sentence by striking ``2010 through
2024'' and inserting ``2010 through 2025'': Provided
further, That section 9(h)(3) of the Richard B. Russell
National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1758(h)(3)) is amended
in the first sentence by striking ``For fiscal year 2023''
and inserting ``For fiscal year 2024'': Provided further,
That section 9(h)(4) of the Richard B. Russell National
School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1758(h)(4)) is amended in the
first sentence by striking ``For fiscal year 2023'' and
inserting ``For fiscal year 2024''.
special supplemental nutrition program for women, infants, and children
(wic)
For necessary expenses to carry out the special
supplemental nutrition program as authorized by section 17 of
the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786),
$6,000,000,000, to remain available through September 30,
2025: Provided, That notwithstanding section 17(h)(10) of
the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786(h)(10)), up
to $90,000,000 shall be used for breastfeeding peer
counselors and other related activities, and up to
$14,000,000 shall be used for infrastructure: Provided
further, That the Secretary shall use funds made available
under this heading to increase the amount of a cash-value
voucher to $11 for child participants, $13 for pregnant and
postpartum women, and $15 for fully and partially
breastfeeding women and adjusted for inflation beginning in
fiscal year 2025: Provided further, That none of the funds
provided in this account shall be available for the purchase
of infant formula except in accordance with the cost
containment and competitive bidding requirements specified in
section 17 of such Act: Provided further, That none of the
funds provided shall be available for activities that are not
fully reimbursed by other Federal Government departments or
agencies unless authorized by section 17 of such Act:
Provided further, That upon termination of a federally
mandated vendor moratorium and subject to terms and
conditions established by the Secretary, the Secretary may
waive the requirement at 7 CFR 246.12(g)(6) at the request of
a State agency.
supplemental nutrition assistance program
For necessary expenses to carry out the Food and Nutrition
Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.), $121,996,757,000, of
which $3,000,000,000, to remain available through September
30, 2026, shall be placed in reserve for use only in such
amounts and at such times as may become necessary to carry
out program operations: Provided, That funds provided herein
shall be expended in accordance with section 16 of the Food
and Nutrition Act of 2008: Provided further, That of the
funds made available under this heading, $998,000 may be used
to provide nutrition education services to State agencies and
Federally Recognized Tribes participating in the Food
Distribution Program on Indian Reservations: Provided
further, That of the funds made available under this heading,
$3,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2025,
shall be used to carry out section 4003(b) of Public Law 115-
334 relating to demonstration projects for tribal
organizations: Provided further, That of the funds made
available under this heading, $2,000,000 shall be used to
carry out section 4208 of Public law 115-334; Provided
further, That this appropriation shall be subject to any work
registration or workfare requirements as may be required by
law: Provided further, That funds made available for
Employment and Training under this heading shall remain
available through September 30, 2025: Provided further, That
funds made available under this heading for section 28(d)(1),
section 4(b), and section 27(a) of the Food and Nutrition Act
of 2008 shall remain available through September 30, 2025:
Provided further, That none of the funds made available under
this heading may be obligated or expended in contravention of
section 213A of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
1183A): Provided further, That funds made available under
this heading may be used to enter into contracts and employ
staff to conduct studies, evaluations, or to conduct
activities related to program integrity provided that such
activities are authorized by the Food and Nutrition Act of
2008.
commodity assistance program
For necessary expenses to carry out disaster assistance and
the Commodity Supplemental Food Program as authorized by
section 4(a) of the Agriculture and Consumer Protection Act
of 1973 (7 U.S.C. 612c note); the Emergency Food Assistance
Act of 1983; special assistance for the nuclear affected
islands, as authorized by section 103(f)(2) of the Compact of
Free Association Amendments Act of 2003 (Public Law 108-188);
and the Farmers' Market Nutrition Program, as authorized by
section 17(m) of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966,
$472,563,000, to remain available through September 30, 2025:
Provided, That none of these funds shall be available to
reimburse the Commodity Credit Corporation for commodities
donated to the program: Provided further, That
notwithstanding any other provision of law, effective with
funds made available in fiscal year 2024 to support the
Seniors Farmers' Market Nutrition Program, as authorized by
section 4402 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of
2002, such funds shall remain available through September 30,
2025: Provided further, That of the funds made available
under section 27(a) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7
U.S.C. 2036(a)), the Secretary may use up to 20 percent for
costs associated with the distribution of commodities.
nutrition programs administration
For necessary administrative expenses of the Food and
Nutrition Service for carrying out any domestic nutrition
assistance program, $136,861,000: Provided, That of the
funds provided herein, $2,000,000 shall be used for the
purposes of section 4404 of Public Law 107-171, as amended by
section 4401 of Public Law 110-246.
TITLE V
FOREIGN ASSISTANCE AND RELATED PROGRAMS
Office of the Under Secretary for Trade and Foreign Agricultural
Affairs
For necessary expenses of the Office of the Under Secretary
for Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs, $875,000:
Provided, That funds made available by this Act to any agency
in the Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs mission area
for salaries and expenses are available to fund up to one
administrative support staff for the Office.
Foreign Agricultural Service
salaries and expenses
(including transfers of funds)
For necessary expenses of the Foreign Agricultural Service,
including not to exceed
[[Page H4518]]
$250,000 for representation allowances and for expenses
pursuant to section 8 of the Act approved August 3, 1956 (7
U.S.C. 1766), $237,330,000, of which no more than 6 percent
shall remain available until September 30, 2025, for overseas
operations to include the payment of locally employed staff:
Provided, That the Service may utilize advances of funds, or
reimburse this appropriation for expenditures made on behalf
of Federal agencies, public and private organizations and
institutions under agreements executed pursuant to the
agricultural food production assistance programs (7 U.S.C.
1737) and the foreign assistance programs of the United
States Agency for International Development: Provided
further, That funds made available for middle-income country
training programs, funds made available for the Borlaug
International Agricultural Science and Technology Fellowship
program, and up to $2,000,000 of the Foreign Agricultural
Service appropriation solely for the purpose of offsetting
fluctuations in international currency exchange rates,
subject to documentation by the Foreign Agricultural Service,
shall remain available until expended.
food for peace title ii grants
For expenses during the current fiscal year, not otherwise
recoverable, and unrecovered prior years' costs, including
interest thereon, under the Food for Peace Act (Public Law
83-480), for commodities supplied in connection with
dispositions abroad under title II of said Act,
$1,740,000,000 (reduced by $1,207,900,000), to remain
available until expended.
mcgovern-dole international food for education and child nutrition
program grants
For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of
section 3107 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of
2002 (7 U.S.C. 1736o-1), $240,000,000, to remain available
until expended: Provided, That the Commodity Credit
Corporation is authorized to provide the services,
facilities, and authorities for the purpose of implementing
such section, subject to reimbursement from amounts provided
herein: Provided further, That of the amount made available
under this heading, not more than 10 percent, but not less
than $24,000,000, shall remain available until expended to
purchase agricultural commodities as described in subsection
3107(a)(2) of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of
2002 (7 U.S.C. 1736o-1(a)(2)).
commodity credit corporation export (loans) credit guarantee program
account
(including transfers of funds)
For administrative expenses to carry out the Commodity
Credit Corporation's Export Guarantee Program, GSM 102 and
GSM 103, $6,063,000, to cover common overhead expenses as
permitted by section 11 of the Commodity Credit Corporation
Charter Act and in conformity with the Federal Credit Reform
Act of 1990, which shall be paid to the appropriation for
``Foreign Agricultural Service, Salaries and Expenses''.
TITLE VI
RELATED AGENCIES AND FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
Department of Health and Human Services
food and drug administration
salaries and expenses
(including transfers of funds)
For necessary expenses of the Food and Drug Administration,
including hire and purchase of passenger motor vehicles; for
payment of space rental and related costs pursuant to Public
Law 92-313 for programs and activities of the Food and Drug
Administration which are included in this Act; for rental of
special purpose space in the District of Columbia or
elsewhere; in addition to amounts appropriated to the FDA
Innovation Account, for carrying out the activities described
in section 1002(b)(4) of the 21st Century Cures Act (Public
Law 114-255); for miscellaneous and emergency expenses of
enforcement activities, authorized and approved by the
Secretary and to be accounted for solely on the Secretary's
certificate, not to exceed $25,000; and notwithstanding
section 521 of Public Law 107-188; $6,579,030,000: Provided,
That of the amount provided under this heading,
$1,336,525,000 shall be derived from prescription drug user
fees authorized by 21 U.S.C. 379h, and shall be credited to
this account and remain available until expended;
$331,273,000 shall be derived from medical device user fees
authorized by 21 U.S.C. 379j, and shall be credited to this
account and remain available until expended; $594,150,000
shall be derived from human generic drug user fees authorized
by 21 U.S.C. 379j-42, and shall be credited to this account
and remain available until expended; $42,432,000 shall be
derived from biosimilar biological product user fees
authorized by 21 U.S.C. 379j-52, and shall be credited to
this account and remain available until expended; $33,500,000
shall be derived from animal drug user fees authorized by 21
U.S.C. 379j-12, and shall be credited to this account and
remain available until expended; $25,000,000 shall be derived
from generic new animal drug user fees authorized by 21
U.S.C. 379j-21, and shall be credited to this account and
remain available until expended; $712,000,000 shall be
derived from tobacco product user fees authorized by 21
U.S.C. 387s, and shall be credited to this account and remain
available until expended: Provided further, That in addition
to and notwithstanding any other provision under this
heading, amounts collected for prescription drug user fees,
medical device user fees, human generic drug user fees,
biosimilar biological product user fees, animal drug user
fees, and generic new animal drug user fees that exceed the
respective fiscal year 2024 limitations are appropriated and
shall be credited to this account and remain available until
expended: Provided further, That fees derived from
prescription drug, medical device, human generic drug,
biosimilar biological product, animal drug, and generic new
animal drug assessments for fiscal year 2024, including any
such fees collected prior to fiscal year 2024 but credited
for fiscal year 2024, shall be subject to the fiscal year
2024 limitations: Provided further, That the Secretary may
accept payment during fiscal year 2024 of user fees specified
under this heading and authorized for fiscal year 2025, prior
to the due date for such fees, and that amounts of such fees
assessed for fiscal year 2025 for which the Secretary accepts
payment in fiscal year 2024 shall not be included in amounts
under this heading: Provided further, That none of these
funds shall be used to develop, establish, or operate any
program of user fees authorized by 31 U.S.C. 9701: Provided
further, That of the total amount appropriated: (1)
$1,190,536,000 shall be for the Center for Food Safety and
Applied Nutrition and related field activities in the Office
of Regulatory Affairs, of which no less than $15,000,000
shall be used for inspections of foreign seafood
manufacturers and field examinations of imported seafood; (2)
$2,316,063,000 shall be for the Center for Drug Evaluation
and Research and related field activities in the Office of
Regulatory Affairs, of which no less than $10,000,000 shall
be for pilots to increase unannounced foreign inspections and
shall remain available until expended; (3) $492,314,000 shall
be for the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research and
for related field activities in the Office of Regulatory
Affairs; (4) $283,678,000 shall be for the Center for
Veterinary Medicine and for related field activities in the
Office of Regulatory Affairs; (5) $739,854,000 shall be for
the Center for Devices and Radiological Health and for
related field activities in the Office of Regulatory Affairs;
(6) $76,534,000 shall be for the National Center for
Toxicological Research; (7) $677,165,000 shall be for the
Center for Tobacco Products and for related field activities
in the Office of Regulatory Affairs; (8) $214,304,000 shall
be for Rent and Related activities, of which $55,729,000 is
for White Oak Consolidation, other than the amounts paid to
the General Services Administration for rent; (9)
$227,708,000 shall be for payments to the General Services
Administration for rent; and (10) $360,874,000 shall be for
other activities, including the Office of the Commissioner of
Food and Drugs, the Office of Food Policy and Response, the
Office of Operations, the Office of the Chief Scientist, and
central services for these offices: Provided further, That
not to exceed $25,000 of this amount shall be for official
reception and representation expenses, not otherwise provided
for, as determined by the Commissioner: Provided further,
That any transfer of funds pursuant to, and for the
administration of, section 770(n) of the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 379dd(n)) shall only be from
amounts made available under this heading for other
activities and shall not exceed $2,000,000: Provided
further, That of the amounts that are made available under
this heading for ``other activities'', and that are not
derived from user fees, $1,500,000 shall be transferred to
and merged with the appropriation for ``Department of Health
and Human Services--Office of Inspector General'' for
oversight of the programs and operations of the Food and Drug
Administration and shall be in addition to funds otherwise
made available for oversight of the Food and Drug
Administration: Provided further, That funds may be
transferred from one specified activity to another with the
prior approval of the Committees on Appropriations of both
Houses of Congress.
In addition, mammography user fees authorized by 42 U.S.C.
263b, export certification user fees authorized by 21 U.S.C.
381, priority review user fees authorized by 21 U.S.C. 360n
and 360ff, food and feed recall fees, food reinspection fees,
and voluntary qualified importer program fees authorized by
21 U.S.C. 379j-31, outsourcing facility fees authorized by 21
U.S.C. 379j-62, prescription drug wholesale distributor
licensing and inspection fees authorized by 21 U.S.C.
353(e)(3), third-party logistics provider licensing and
inspection fees authorized by 21 U.S.C. 360eee-3(c)(1),
third-party auditor fees authorized by 21 U.S.C. 384d(c)(8),
medical countermeasure priority review voucher user fees
authorized by 21 U.S.C. 360bbb-4a, and fees relating to over-
the-counter monograph drugs authorized by 21 U.S.C. 379j-72
shall be credited to this account, to remain available until
expended.
fda innovation account, cures act
(including transfer of funds)
For necessary expenses to carry out the purposes described
under section 1002(b)(4) of the 21st Century Cures Act, in
addition to amounts available for such purposes under the
heading ``Salaries and Expenses'', $50,000,000, to remain
available until expended: Provided, That amounts
appropriated in this paragraph are appropriated pursuant to
section 1002(b)(3) of the 21st Century Cures Act, are to be
derived from amounts transferred under section 1002(b)(2)(A)
of such Act, and may be transferred by the Commissioner of
Food and Drugs to the appropriation for ``Department of
Health and Human Services
[[Page H4519]]
Food and Drug Administration Salaries and Expenses'' solely
for the purposes provided in such Act: Provided further,
That upon a determination by the Commissioner that funds
transferred pursuant to the previous proviso are not
necessary for the purposes provided, such amounts may be
transferred back to the account: Provided further, That such
transfer authority is in addition to any other transfer
authority provided by law.
INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
Commodity Futures Trading Commission
(including transfer of funds)
For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of the
Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 1 et seq.), including the
purchase and hire of passenger motor vehicles, and the rental
of space (to include multiple year leases), in the District
of Columbia and elsewhere, $345,000,000, including not to
exceed $3,000 for official reception and representation
expenses, and not to exceed $25,000 for the expenses for
consultations and meetings hosted by the Commission with
foreign governmental and other regulatory officials, of which
not less than $20,000,000 shall remain available until
September 30, 2025, and of which not less than $4,218,000
shall be for expenses of the Office of the Inspector General:
Provided, That notwithstanding the limitations in 31 U.S.C.
1553, amounts provided under this heading are available for
the liquidation of obligations equal to current year payments
on leases entered into prior to the date of enactment of this
Act: Provided further, That for the purpose of recording and
liquidating any lease obligations that should have been
recorded and liquidated against accounts closed pursuant to
31 U.S.C. 1552, and consistent with the preceding proviso,
such amounts shall be transferred to and recorded in a no-
year account in the Treasury, which has been established for
the sole purpose of recording adjustments for and liquidating
such unpaid obligations.
Farm Credit Administration
limitation on administrative expenses
Not to exceed $94,300,000 (from assessments collected from
farm credit institutions, including the Federal Agricultural
Mortgage Corporation) shall be obligated during the current
fiscal year for administrative expenses as authorized under
12 U.S.C. 2249: Provided, That this limitation shall not
apply to expenses associated with receiverships: Provided
further, That the agency may exceed this limitation by up to
10 percent with notification to the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress: Provided further,
That the purposes of section 3.7(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Farm
Credit Act of 1971 (12 U.S.C. 2128(b)(2)(A)(i)), the Farm
Credit Administration may exempt, an amount in its sole
discretion, from the application of the limitation provided
in that clause of export loans described in the clause
guaranteed or insured in a manner other than described in
subclause (II) of the clause.
TITLE VII
GENERAL PROVISIONS
(including rescissions and transfers of funds)
Sec. 701. The Secretary may use any appropriations made
available to the Department of Agriculture in this Act to
purchase new passenger motor vehicles, in addition to
specific appropriations for this purpose, so long as the
total number of vehicles purchased in fiscal year 2024 does
not exceed the number of vehicles owned or leased in fiscal
year 2018: Provided, That, prior to purchasing additional
motor vehicles, the Secretary must determine that such
vehicles are necessary for transportation safety, to reduce
operational costs, and for the protection of life, property,
and public safety: Provided further, That the Secretary may
not increase the Department of Agriculture's fleet above the
2018 level unless the Secretary notifies in writing, and
receives approval from, the Committees on Appropriations of
both Houses of Congress within 30 days of the notification.
Sec. 702. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act,
the Secretary of Agriculture may transfer unobligated
balances of discretionary funds appropriated by this Act or
any other available unobligated discretionary balances that
are remaining available of the Department of Agriculture to
the Working Capital Fund for the acquisition of property,
plant and equipment and for the improvement, delivery, and
implementation of Department financial, and administrative
information technology services, and other support systems
necessary for the delivery of financial, administrative, and
information technology services, including cloud adoption and
migration, of primary benefit to the agencies of the
Department of Agriculture, such transferred funds to remain
available until expended: Provided, That none of the funds
made available by this Act or any other Act shall be
transferred to the Working Capital Fund without the prior
approval of the agency administrator: Provided further, That
none of the funds transferred to the Working Capital Fund
pursuant to this section shall be available for obligation
without written notification to and the prior approval of the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress:
Provided further, That none of the funds appropriated by this
Act or made available to the Department's Working Capital
Fund shall be available for obligation or expenditure to make
any changes to the Department's National Finance Center
without written notification to and prior approval of the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress as
required by section 716 of this Act: Provided further, That
none of the funds appropriated by this Act or made available
to the Department's Working Capital Fund shall be available
for obligation or expenditure to initiate, plan, develop,
implement, or make any changes to remove or relocate any
systems, missions, personnel, or functions of the offices of
the Chief Financial Officer and the Chief Information
Officer, co-located with or from the National Finance Center
prior to written notification to and prior approval of the
Committee on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress and in
accordance with the requirements of section 716 of this Act:
Provided further, That the National Finance Center
Information Technology Services Division personnel and data
center management responsibilities, and control of any
functions, missions, and systems for current and future human
resources management and integrated personnel and payroll
systems (PPS) and functions provided by the Chief Financial
Officer and the Chief Information Officer shall remain in the
National Finance Center and under the management
responsibility and administrative control of the National
Finance Center: Provided further, That the Secretary of
Agriculture and the offices of the Chief Financial Officer
shall actively market to existing and new Departments and
other government agencies National Finance Center shared
services including, but not limited to, payroll, financial
management, and human capital shared services and allow the
National Finance Center to perform technology upgrades:
Provided further, That of annual income amounts in the
Working Capital Fund of the Department of Agriculture
attributable to the amounts in excess of the true costs of
the shared services provided by the National Finance Center
and budgeted for the National Finance Center, the Secretary
shall reserve not more than 4 percent for the replacement or
acquisition of capital equipment, including equipment for the
improvement, delivery, and implementation of financial,
administrative, and information technology services, and
other systems of the National Finance Center or to pay any
unforeseen, extraordinary cost of the National Finance
Center: Provided further, That none of the amounts reserved
shall be available for obligation unless the Secretary
submits written notification of the obligation to the
Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress:
Provided further, That the limitations on the obligation of
funds pending notification to Congressional Committees shall
not apply to any obligation that, as determined by the
Secretary, is necessary to respond to a declared state of
emergency that significantly impacts the operations of the
National Finance Center; or to evacuate employees of the
National Finance Center to a safe haven to continue
operations of the National Finance Center.
Sec. 703. No part of any appropriation contained in this
Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current
fiscal year unless expressly so provided herein.
Sec. 704. No funds appropriated by this Act may be used to
pay negotiated indirect cost rates on cooperative agreements
or similar arrangements between the United States Department
of Agriculture and nonprofit institutions in excess of 10
percent of the total direct cost of the agreement when the
purpose of such cooperative arrangements is to carry out
programs of mutual interest between the two parties. This
does not preclude appropriate payment of indirect costs on
grants and contracts with such institutions when such
indirect costs are computed on a similar basis for all
agencies for which appropriations are provided in this Act.
Sec. 705. Appropriations to the Department of Agriculture
for the cost of direct and guaranteed loans made available in
the current fiscal year shall remain available until expended
to disburse obligations made in the current fiscal year for
the following accounts: the Rural Development Loan Fund
program account, the Rural Electrification and
Telecommunication Loans program account, and the Rural
Housing Insurance Fund program account.
Sec. 706. None of the funds made available to the
Department of Agriculture by this Act may be used to acquire
new information technology systems or significant upgrades,
as determined by the Office of the Chief Information Officer,
without the approval of the Chief Information Officer and the
concurrence of the Executive Information Technology
Investment Review Board: Provided, That notwithstanding any
other provision of law, none of the funds appropriated or
otherwise made available by this Act may be transferred to
the Office of the Chief Information Officer without written
notification to and the prior approval of the Committees on
Appropriations of both Houses of Congress: Provided further,
That notwithstanding section 11319 of title 40, United States
Code, none of the funds available to the Department of
Agriculture for information technology shall be obligated for
projects, contracts, or other agreements over $25,000 prior
to receipt of written approval by the Chief Information
Officer: Provided further, That the Chief Information
Officer may authorize an agency to obligate funds without
written approval from the Chief Information Officer for
projects, contracts, or other agreements up to $250,000 based
upon the performance of an agency measured against the
performance plan requirements described in the explanatory
statement accompanying Public Law 113-235.
[[Page H4520]]
Sec. 707. Funds made available under section 524(b) of the
Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 1524(b)) in the current
fiscal year shall remain available until expended to disburse
obligations made in the current fiscal year.
Sec. 708. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any
former Rural Utilities Service borrower that has repaid or
prepaid an insured, direct or guaranteed loan under the Rural
Electrification Act of 1936, or any not-for-profit utility
that is eligible to receive an insured or direct loan under
such Act, shall be eligible for assistance under section
313B(a) of such Act in the same manner as a borrower under
such Act.
Sec. 709. Except as otherwise specifically provided by
law, not more than $20,000,000 in unobligated balances from
appropriations made available for salaries and expenses in
this Act for the Farm Service Agency shall remain available
through September 30, 2025, for information technology
expenses.
Sec. 710. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act may be used for first-class travel by
the employees of agencies funded by this Act in contravention
of sections 301-10.122 through 301-10.124 of title 41, Code
of Federal Regulations.
Sec. 711. In the case of each program established or
amended by the Agricultural Act of 2014 (Public Law 113-79)
or by a successor to that Act, other than by title I or
subtitle A of title III of such Act, or programs for which
indefinite amounts were provided in that Act, that is
authorized or required to be carried out using funds of the
Commodity Credit Corporation--
(1) such funds shall be available for salaries and related
administrative expenses, including technical assistance,
associated with the implementation of the program, without
regard to the limitation on the total amount of allotments
and fund transfers contained in section 11 of the Commodity
Credit Corporation Charter Act (15 U.S.C. 714i); and
(2) the use of such funds for such purpose shall not be
considered to be a fund transfer or allotment for purposes of
applying the limitation on the total amount of allotments and
fund transfers contained in such section.
Sec. 712. Of the funds made available by this Act, not
more than $2,900,000 shall be used to cover necessary
expenses of activities related to all advisory committees,
panels, commissions, and task forces of the Department of
Agriculture, except for panels used to comply with negotiated
rule makings and panels used to evaluate competitively
awarded grants.
Sec. 713. (a) None of the funds made available in this Act
may be used to maintain or establish a computer network
unless such network blocks the viewing, downloading, and
exchanging of pornography.
(b) Nothing in subsection (a) shall limit the use of funds
necessary for any Federal, State, tribal, or local law
enforcement agency or any other entity carrying out criminal
investigations, prosecution, or adjudication activities.
Sec. 714. Notwithstanding subsection (b) of section 14222
of Public Law 110-246 (7 U.S.C. 612c-6; in this section
referred to as ``section 14222''), none of the funds
appropriated or otherwise made available by this or any other
Act shall be used to pay the salaries and expenses of
personnel to carry out a program under section 32 of the Act
of August 24, 1935 (7 U.S.C. 612c; in this section referred
to as ``section 32'') in excess of $1,573,666,000, as
follows: Child Nutrition Programs Entitlement Commodities--
$485,000,000; State Option Contracts--$5,000,000; Removal of
Defective Commodities--$2,500,000; Administration of section
32 Commodity Purchases--$37,178,000: Provided, That none of
the funds made available in this Act or any other Act shall
be used for salaries and expenses to carry out in this fiscal
year section 19(i)(1)(E) of the Richard B. Russell National
School Lunch Act, as amended, except in an amount that
excludes the transfer of $195,000,000 of the funds to be
transferred under subsection (c) of section 14222 of Public
Law 110-246, until October 1, 2024: Provided further, That
$195,000,000 made available on October 1, 2024, to carry out
section 19(i)(1)(E) of the Richard B. Russell National School
Lunch Act, as amended, shall be excluded from the limitation
described in subsection (b)(2)(A)(x) of section 14222 of
Public Law 110-246 for fiscal year 2025: Provided further,
That, none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this or any other Act shall be used during
fiscal year 2024 to pay the salaries or expenses of any
employee of the Department of Agriculture to carry out clause
(3) of section 32 of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1935
(Public Law 74-320, 7 U.S.C. 612c, as amended), or
subsections (a) through (g) of section 5 of the Commodity
Credit Corporation Charter Act: Provided further, That of the
available unobligated balances under (b)(2)(A)(x) for fiscal
year 2024 of section 14222 of Public Law 110-246,
$505,000,000 are rescinded.
Sec. 715. None of the funds appropriated by this or any
other Act shall be used to pay the salaries and expenses of
personnel who prepare or submit appropriations language as
part of the President's budget submission to the Congress for
programs under the jurisdiction of the Appropriations
Subcommittees on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and
Drug Administration, and Related Agencies that assumes
revenues or reflects a reduction from the previous year due
to user fees proposals that have not been enacted into law
prior to the submission of the budget unless such budget
submission identifies which additional spending reductions
should occur in the event the user fees proposals are not
enacted prior to the date of the convening of a committee of
conference for the fiscal year 2024 appropriations Act.
Sec. 716. (a) None of the funds provided by this Act, or
provided by previous appropriations Acts to the agencies
funded by this Act that remain available for obligation or
expenditure in the current fiscal year, or provided from any
accounts in the Treasury derived by the collection of fees
available to the agencies funded by this Act, shall be
available for obligation or expenditure through a
reprogramming, transfer of funds, or reimbursements as
authorized by the Economy Act, or in the case of the
Department of Agriculture, through use of the authority
provided by section 702(b) of the Department of Agriculture
Organic Act of 1944 (7 U.S.C. 2257) or section 8 of Public
Law 89-106 (7 U.S.C. 2263), that--
(1) creates new programs;
(2) eliminates a program, project, or activity;
(3) increases funds or personnel by any means for any
project or activity for which funds have been denied or
restricted;
(4) relocates an office or employees;
(5) reorganizes offices, programs, or activities; or
(6) contracts out or privatizes any functions or activities
presently performed by Federal employees;
unless the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Health
and Human Services, or the Chairman of the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission (as the case may be) notifies in writing
and receives approval from the Committees on Appropriations
of both Houses of Congress at least 30 days in advance of the
reprogramming of such funds or the use of such authority.
(b) None of the funds provided by this Act, or provided by
previous Appropriations Acts to the agencies funded by this
Act that remain available for obligation or expenditure in
the current fiscal year, or provided from any accounts in the
Treasury derived by the collection of fees available to the
agencies funded by this Act, shall be available for
obligation or expenditure for activities, programs, or
projects through a reprogramming or use of the authorities
referred to in subsection (a) involving funds in excess of
$500,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less, that--
(1) augments existing programs, projects, or activities;
(2) reduces by 10 percent funding for any existing program,
project, or activity, or numbers of personnel by 10 percent
as approved by Congress; or
(3) results from any general savings from a reduction in
personnel which would result in a change in existing
programs, activities, or projects as approved by Congress;
unless the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Health
and Human Services, or the Chairman of the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission (as the case may be) notifies in writing
and receives approval from the Committees on Appropriations
of both Houses of Congress at least 30 days in advance of the
reprogramming or transfer of such funds or the use of such
authority.
(c) The Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Health
and Human Services, or the Chairman of the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission shall notify in writing and receive
approval from the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses
of Congress before implementing any program or activity not
carried out during the previous fiscal year unless the
program or activity is funded by this Act or specifically
funded by any other Act.
(d) None of the funds provided by this Act, or provided by
previous Appropriations Acts to the agencies funded by this
Act that remain available for obligation or expenditure in
the current fiscal year, or provided from any accounts in the
Treasury derived by the collection of fees available to the
agencies funded by this Act, shall be available for--
(1) modifying major capital investments funding levels,
including information technology systems, that involves
increasing or decreasing funds in the current fiscal year for
the individual investment in excess of $500,000 or 10 percent
of the total cost, whichever is less;
(2) realigning or reorganizing new, current, or vacant
positions or agency activities or functions to establish a
center, office, branch, or similar entity with three or more
personnel; or
(3) carrying out activities or functions that were not
described in the budget request;
unless the agencies funded by this Act notify, in writing,
the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress
at least 30 days in advance of using the funds for these
purposes.
(e) As described in this section, no funds may be used for
any activities unless the Secretary of Agriculture, the
Secretary of Health and Human Services, or the Chairman of
the Commodity Futures Trading Commission receives from the
Committee on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress
written or electronic mail confirmation of receipt of the
notification as required in this section.
Sec. 717. Notwithstanding section 310B(g)(5) of the
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C.
1932(g)(5)), the Secretary may assess a one-time fee for any
guaranteed business and industry loan in an amount that does
not exceed 3 percent of the guaranteed principal portion of
the loan.
[[Page H4521]]
Sec. 718. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available to the Department of Agriculture, the Food and Drug
Administration, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, or
the Farm Credit Administration shall be used to transmit or
otherwise make available reports, questions, or responses to
questions that are a result of information requested for the
appropriations hearing process to any non-Department of
Agriculture, non-Department of Health and Human Services,
non-Commodity Futures Trading Commission, or non-Farm Credit
Administration employee.
Sec. 719. Unless otherwise authorized by existing law,
none of the funds provided in this Act, may be used by an
executive branch agency to produce any prepackaged news story
intended for broadcast or distribution in the United States
unless the story includes a clear notification within the
text or audio of the prepackaged news story that the
prepackaged news story was prepared or funded by that
executive branch agency.
Sec. 720. No employee of the Department of Agriculture may
be detailed or assigned from an agency or office funded by
this Act or any other Act to any other agency or office of
the Department for more than 60 days in a fiscal year unless
the individual's employing agency or office is fully
reimbursed by the receiving agency or office for the salary
and expenses of the employee for the period of assignment.
Sec. 721. Not later than 30 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture, the
Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, the
Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and the
Chairman of the Farm Credit Administration shall submit to
the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses of Congress a
detailed spending plan by program, project, and activity for
all the funds made available under this Act including
appropriated user fees, as defined in the report accompanying
this Act.
Sec. 722. Of the unobligated balances from amounts made
available to the Secretary of Agriculture in section
22002(a)(1) of Public Law 117-169, $500,000,000 are hereby
rescinded.
Sec. 723. For the purposes of determining eligibility or
level of program assistance for Rural Development programs
the Secretary shall not include incarcerated prison
populations.
Sec. 724. For loans and loan guarantees that do not
require budget authority and the program level has been
established in this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture may
increase the program level for such loans and loan guarantees
by not more than 25 percent: Provided, That prior to the
Secretary implementing such an increase, the Secretary
notifies, in writing, the Committees on Appropriations of
both Houses of Congress at least 15 days in advance.
Sec. 725. None of the credit card refunds or rebates
transferred to the Working Capital Fund pursuant to section
729 of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug
Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2002
(7 U.S.C. 2235a; Public Law 107-76) shall be available for
obligation without written notification to, and the prior
approval of, the Committees on Appropriations of both Houses
of Congress: Provided, That the refunds or rebates so
transferred shall be available for obligation only for the
acquisition of property, plant and equipment, including
equipment for the improvement, delivery, and implementation
of Departmental financial management, information technology,
and other support systems necessary for the delivery of
financial, administrative, and information technology
services, including cloud adoption and migration, of primary
benefit to the agencies of the Department of Agriculture.
Sec. 726. For fiscal year 2024, the Secretary shall
establish a process under which an establishment that is
subject to examination and inspection under section 6 of the
Federal Meat Inspection Act solely due to the establishment's
processing of domestic, wild caught, invasive blue catfish
(Ictalurus furcatus) solely for domestic consumption or use,
may apply for a waiver of such examination and inspection
requirements if the establishment is subject to inspection
under the Seafood Hazard Analysis Critical Control Points
Program of the Food and Drug Administration and the
establishment attests that it applies existing Seafood Hazard
Critical Control Points Program for all species processed at
the establishment.
Sec. 727. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to implement, administer, or enforce the ``variety''
requirements of the final rule entitled ``Enhancing Retailer
Standards in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
(SNAP)'' published by the Department of Agriculture in the
Federal Register on December 15, 2016 (81 Fed. Reg. 90675)
until the Secretary of Agriculture amends the definition of
the term ``variety'' as defined in section 278.1(b)(1)(ii)(C)
of title 7, Code of Federal Regulations, and ``variety'' as
applied in the definition of the term ``staple food'' as
defined in section 271.2 of title 7, Code of Federal
Regulations, to increase the number of items that qualify as
acceptable varieties in each staple food category so that the
total number of such items in each staple food category
exceeds the number of such items in each staple food category
included in the final rule as published on December 15, 2016:
Provided, That until the Secretary promulgates such
regulatory amendments, the Secretary shall apply the
requirements regarding acceptable varieties and breadth of
stock to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program retailers
that were in effect on the day before the date of the
enactment of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (Public Law 113-
79).
Sec. 728. Section 756 of division N of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2021 (7 U.S.C. 2254c), is amended by
striking ``each of fiscal years 2021 and 2022'' and inserting
``fiscal year 2021 and each fiscal year thereafter''.
Sec. 729. In carrying out subsection (h) of section 502 of
the Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1472), the Secretary of
Agriculture shall have the same authority with respect to
loans guaranteed under such section and eligible lenders for
such loans as the Secretary has under subsections (h) and (j)
of section 538 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1490p-2) with respect
to loans guaranteed under such section 538 and eligible
lenders for such loans.
Sec. 730. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act shall be available for the United
States Department of Agriculture to propose, finalize or
implement any regulation that would promulgate new user fees
pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 9701 after the date of the enactment of
this Act.
Sec. 731. Of the unobligated balances from amounts made
available for the supplemental nutrition program as
authorized by section 17 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966
(42 U.S.C. 1786), $500,000,000 are hereby rescinded:
Provided, That no amounts may be rescinded from amounts that
were designated by the Congress as an emergency requirement
pursuant to a Concurrent Resolution on the Budget or the
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
Sec. 732. Notwithstanding any provision of law that
regulates the calculation and payment of overtime and holiday
pay for FSIS inspectors, the Secretary may charge
establishments subject to the inspection requirements of the
Poultry Products Inspection Act, 21 U.S.C. 451 et seq., the
Federal Meat Inspection Act, 21 U.S.C. 601 et seq, and the
Egg Products Inspection Act, 21 U.S.C. 1031 et seq., for the
cost of inspection services provided outside of an
establishment's approved inspection shifts, and for
inspection services provided on Federal holidays: Provided,
That any sums charged pursuant to this paragraph shall be
deemed as overtime pay or holiday pay under section 1001(d)
of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (Public Law 117-2,
135 Stat. 242): Provided further, That sums received by the
Secretary under this paragraph shall, in addition to other
available funds, remain available until expended to the
Secretary without further appropriation for the purpose of
funding all costs associated with FSIS inspections.
Sec. 733. Of the unobligated balances from amounts made
available to the Secretary of Agriculture in section
9003(j)(1) of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of
2002, $1,000,000,000 are hereby rescinded.
Sec. 734. (a) The Secretary of Agriculture shall--
(1) conduct audits in a manner that evaluates the following
factors in the country or region being audited, as
applicable--
(A) veterinary control and oversight;
(B) disease history and vaccination practices;
(C) livestock demographics and traceability;
(D) epidemiological separation from potential sources of
infection;
(E) surveillance practices;
(F) diagnostic laboratory capabilities; and
(G) emergency preparedness and response; and
(2) promptly make publicly available the final reports of
any audits or reviews conducted pursuant to subsection (1).
(b) This section shall be applied in a manner consistent
with United States obligations under its international trade
agreements.
Sec. 735. (a)(1) No Federal funds made available for this
fiscal year for the rural water, waste water, waste disposal,
and solid waste management programs authorized by sections
306, 306A, 306C, 306D, 306E, and 310B of the Consolidated
Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1926 et seq.) shall
be used for a project for the construction, alteration,
maintenance, or repair of a public water or wastewater system
unless all of the iron and steel products used in the project
are produced in the United States.
(2) In this section, the term ``iron and steel products''
means the following products made primarily of iron or steel:
lined or unlined pipes and fittings, manhole covers and other
municipal castings, hydrants, tanks, flanges, pipe clamps and
restraints, valves, structural steel, reinforced precast
concrete, and construction materials.
(b) Subsection (a) shall not apply in any case or category
of cases in which the Secretary of Agriculture (in this
section referred to as the ``Secretary'') or the designee of
the Secretary finds that--
(1) applying subsection (a) would be inconsistent with the
public interest;
(2) iron and steel products are not produced in the United
States in sufficient and reasonably available quantities or
of a satisfactory quality; or
(3) inclusion of iron and steel products produced in the
United States will increase the cost of the overall project
by more than 25 percent.
(c) If the Secretary or the designee receives a request for
a waiver under this section, the Secretary or the designee
shall make available to the public on an informal basis a
copy of the request and information available to the
Secretary or the designee
[[Page H4522]]
concerning the request, and shall allow for informal public
input on the request for at least 15 days prior to making a
finding based on the request. The Secretary or the designee
shall make the request and accompanying information available
by electronic means, including on the official public
Internet Web site of the Department.
(d) This section shall be applied in a manner consistent
with United States obligations under international
agreements.
(e) The Secretary may retain up to 0.25 percent of the
funds appropriated in this Act for ``Rural Utilities
Service--Rural Water and Waste Disposal Program Account'' for
carrying out the provisions described in subsection (a)(1)
for management and oversight of the requirements of this
section.
(f) Subsection (a) shall not apply with respect to a
project for which the engineering plans and specifications
include use of iron and steel products otherwise prohibited
by such subsection if the plans and specifications have
received required approvals from State agencies prior to the
date of enactment of this Act.
(g) For purposes of this section, the terms ``United
States'' and ``State'' shall include each of the several
States, the District of Columbia, and each Federally
recognized Indian Tribe.
Sec. 736. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may
be used in any way, directly or indirectly, to influence
congressional action on any legislation or appropriation
matters pending before Congress, other than to communicate to
Members of Congress as described in 18 U.S.C. 1913.
Sec. 737. None of the funds made available by this or any
other Act thereafter may be used to write, prepare, or
publish a proposed rule, final rule, or an interim final rule
in furtherance of, or otherwise to implement or enforce the
proposed rule entitled ``Transparency in Poultry Grower
Contracting and Tournaments,'' published by the Department of
Agriculture in the Federal Register on June 8, 2022 (87 Fed.
Reg. 34980 et seq.), the advance notice of proposed
rulemaking entitled ``Poultry Growing Tournament Systems:
Fairness and Related Concerns,'' published by the Department
of Agriculture in the Federal Register on June 8, 2022 (87
Fed. Reg. 34814) (also identified in the White House Office
of Management and Budget's Fall 2022 Unified Agenda of
Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions as ``Poultry Growing
Tournament Systems: Fairness and Related Concerns--Harm to
Competition (AMS-FTPP-22-0046),'' RIN 0581-AE18), the
proposed rule entitled ``Inclusive Competition and Market
Integrity Under the Packers and Stockyards Act,'' published
by the Department of Agriculture in the Federal Register on
October 3, 2022 (87 Fed. Reg. 60010 et seq.), the rulemaking
identified in the White House Office of Management and
Budget's Fall 2022 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and
Deregulatory Actions as ``Unfair Practices, Undue
Preferences, and Harm to Competition Under the Packers and
Stockyards Act (AMS-FTPP-21-0046),'' RIN 0581-AE04, or any
subsequent substantially similar rulemaking effort, except
that funds may be used to, and the Secretary of Agriculture
shall, withdraw or rescind any such proposed rules, advance
notices of proposed rulemaking, and any such rules that may
have been finalized.
Sec. 738. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available to the U.S. Department of Agriculture may be used
to increase the number of positions in the Department
(measured on a full-time equivalent basis) for which the
primary duty station is located in the National Capital
Region unless otherwise specified in the report accompanying
this Act.
(1) The term ``National Capital Region'' means the District
of Columbia; Montgomery and Prince George's Counties of
Maryland; and Arlington, Fairfax, Loudoun, and Prince William
Counties of Virginia.
Sec. 739. (a) There is hereby appropriated $2,000,000, to
remain available until expended, for the Secretary of
Agriculture to carry out no more than 5 pilot projects, under
the terms and conditions determined by the Secretary for a
period not to exceed 3 years and without increasing household
benefit allotments as authorized by section 8 of the Food and
Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2017), that allow the use of
supplemental nutrition assistance program benefits to
purchase only nutrient-dense foods and beverages (as defined
in the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans), of which
1 or more of such projects shall be carried out before
December 21, 2024.
(b) Not later than 6 months after the first pilot project
under subsection (a) begins, the Secretary shall enter into a
contract with the National Academies of Sciences,
Engineering, and Medicine to--
(1) evaluate the pilot project or projects carried out
under subsection (a); and
(2) provide the results of such evaluation not later than
18 months after the date of such contract.
Sec. 740. Of the total amounts made available by this Act
for direct loans and grants under the following headings:
``Rural Housing Service--Rural Housing Insurance Fund Program
Account''; ``Rural Housing Service--Mutual and Self-Help
Housing Grants''; ``Rural Housing Service--Rural Housing
Assistance Grants''; ``Rural Housing Service--Rural Community
Facilities Program Account''; ``Rural Business-Cooperative
Service--Rural Business Program Account''; ``Rural Business-
Cooperative Service--Rural Economic Development Loans Program
Account''; ``Rural Business-Cooperative Service--Rural
Cooperative Development Grants''; ``Rural Business-
Cooperative Service--Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance
Program''; ``Rural Utilities Service--Rural Water and Waste
Disposal Program Account''; ``Rural Utilities Service--Rural
Electrification and Telecommunications Loans Program
Account''; and ``Rural Utilities Service--Distance Learning,
Telemedicine, and Broadband Program'', to the maximum extent
feasible, at least 10 percent of the funds shall be allocated
for assistance in persistent poverty counties under this
section, including, notwithstanding any other provision
regarding population limits, any county seat of such a
persistent poverty county that has a population that does not
exceed the authorized population limit by more than 10
percent: Provided, That for purposes of this section, the
term ``persistent poverty counties'' means any county that
has had 20 percent or more of its population living in
poverty over the past 30 years, as measured by the 1990 and
2000 decennial censuses, and 2007-2011 American Community
Survey 5-year average, or any territory or possession of the
United States: Provided further, That with respect to
specific activities for which program levels have been made
available by this Act that are not supported by budget
authority, the requirements of this section shall be applied
to such program level.
Sec. 741. There is rescinded the unobligated balances of
amounts made available under section 1006 of the American
Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (7 U.S.C. 2279 note).
Sec. 742. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to notify a sponsor or otherwise acknowledge receipt
of a submission for an exemption for investigational use of a
drug or biological product under section 505(i) of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355(i)) or
section 351(a)(3) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C.
262(a)(3)) in research in which a human embryo is
intentionally created or modified to include a heritable
genetic modification. Any such submission shall be deemed to
have not been received by the Secretary, and the exemption
may not go into effect.
Sec. 743. None of the funds made available by this or any
other Act may be used to enforce the final rule promulgated
by the Food and Drug Administration entitled ``Standards for
the Growing, Harvesting, Packing, and Holding of Produce for
Human Consumption,'' and published on November 27, 2015, with
respect to the regulation of entities that grow, harvest,
pack, or hold wine grapes, hops, pulse crops, or almonds.
Sec. 744. For school years 2023-2024 and 2024-2025, none
of the funds made available by this Act may be used to
implement or enforce the matter following the first comma in
the second sentence of footnote (c) of section 220.8(c) of
title 7, Code of Federal Regulations, with respect to the
substitution of vegetables for fruits under the school
breakfast program established under section 4 of the Child
Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773).
Sec. 745. None of the funds made available by this Act or
any other Act may be used--
(1) in contravention of section 7606 of the Agricultural
Act of 2014 (7 U.S.C. 5940), subtitle G of the Agricultural
Marketing Act of 1946, or section 10114 of the Agriculture
Improvement Act of 2018; or
(2) to prohibit the transportation, processing, sale, or
use of hemp, or seeds of such plant, that is grown or
cultivated in accordance with section 7606 of the
Agricultural Act of 2014 or subtitle G of the Agricultural
Marketing Act of 1946, within or outside the State in which
the hemp is grown or cultivated.
Sec. 746. The Secretary of Agriculture may waive the
matching funds requirement under section 412(g) of the
Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of
1998 (7 U.S.C. 7632(g)).
Sec. 747. The Secretary, as part of the report on foreign
landholding required under the Agricultural Foreign
Investment Disclosure Act (Public Law 95-460), shall report
to Congress on foreign investments in agricultural land in
the United States, including the impact foreign ownership has
on family farms, rural communities, and the domestic food
supply: Provided, That within 2 years after the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary shall establish a streamlined process
for electronic submission and retention of disclosures made
under the Agricultural Foreign Investment Disclosure Act,
including an internet database that contains disaggregated
data from each disclosure submitted: Provided further,That
all prior year disclosures of foreign investments in
agricultural land in the United States are published in the
database: Provided further, That the plan includes a process
to ensure the protection of personally identifiable
information and that all disclosures of foreign investments
in agricultural land on the USDA website be disaggregated by:
(1) in any case in which such foreign person is an
individual, the citizenship of such foreign person; and (2)
in any case in which such foreign person is not an individual
or a government, the nature of the legal entity holding the
interest, the country in which such foreign person is created
or organized, and the principal place of business of such
foreign person.
Sec. 748. There is rescinded the unobligated balances of
amounts made available under section 22006 of Public Law 117-
169 (136 Stat. 2021).
Sec. 749. (a) After the effective date of any final rule
FDA publishes in connection with its proposed rule to update
these requirements (87 Federal Register 59168, issued on
[[Page H4523]]
September 29, 2022), manufacturers may also continue to
comply with the previous requirements promulgated by the FDA
for the implied nutrient content claim ``healthy'' through
the ``compliance date'' FDA provides in the final rule.
(b) Any food product manufactured and labeled as
``healthy'' during the compliance period FDA provides in that
final rule shall not be directly or indirectly subject to any
state-law requirements that are not identical to either (i)
the federal requirements for the implied nutrition content
claim ``healthy'' that were in effect as of the date FDA
issues the final rule, or (ii) the updated federal
requirements that FDA promulgates in the final rule, assuming
the updated requirements go into effect during the regulatory
compliance period.
Sec. 750. Funds made available under title II of the Food
for Peace Act (7 U.S.C. 1721 et seq.) may only be used to
provide assistance to recipient nations if adequate
monitoring and controls, as determined by the Administrator,
are in place to ensure that emergency food aid is received by
the intended beneficiaries in areas affected by food
shortages and not diverted for unauthorized or inappropriate
purposes.
Sec. 751. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to procure raw or processed poultry products imported
into the United States from the People's Republic of China
for use in the school lunch program under the Richard B.
Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1751 et seq.),
the Child and Adult Care Food Program under section 17 of
such Act (42 U.S.C. 1766), the Summer Food Service Program
for Children under section 13 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1761),
or the school breakfast program under the Child Nutrition Act
of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.).
Sec. 752. (a) Subject to subsection (c), none of the funds
made available by this Act may be used to finalize, issue,
implement, administer, or enforce any rule, regulation, or
order that, pursuant to any revisions to the whole grain
requirements under section 246.10 of title 7, Code of Federal
Regulations, required by such rule, regulation, or order,
would reduce the availability of WIC-eligible breakfast
cereals, including the rule entitled ``Special Supplemental
Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC):
Revisions to the WIC Food Packages'' published by the
Department of Agriculture in the Federal Register on November
21, 2022 (87 Fed. Reg. 71090).
(b) The Secretary of Agriculture shall carry out a study--
(1) on the revisions of such whole grain requriements
pursuant to such rule; and
(2) that is representative of all States.
(c) If the study required under subsection (b) demonstrates
that such revisions will not limit consumption due to
marketplace availability or reduce the redemption of WIC-
authorized breakfast cereal, beginning on the date on which
the Secretary publishes the results of such study, the
limitation under subsection (a) shall not apply.
Sec. 753. For school year 2024-2025, only a school food
authority that had a negative balance in the nonprofit school
food service account as of June 30, 2023, shall be required
to establish a price for paid lunches in accordance with
section 12(p) of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch
Act (42 U.S.C. 1760(p)).
Sec. 754. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be made available to support, directly or indirectly, the
Wuhan Institute of Virology, or any laboratory owned or
controlled by the governments of the People's Republic of
China, the Republic of Cuba, the Islamic Republic of Iran,
the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the Russian
Federation, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela under the
regime of Nicolas Maduro Moros, or any other country
determined by the Secretary of State to be a foreign
adversary.
Sec. 755. Any funds made available by this or any other
Act that the Secretary withholds pursuant to section
1668(g)(2) of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade
Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5921(g)(2)), as amended, shall be
available for grants for biotechnology risk assessment
research: Provided, That the Secretary may transfer such
funds among appropriations of the Department of Agriculture
for purposes of making such grants.
Sec. 756. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no
funds available to the Department of Agriculture may be used
to move any staff office or any agency from the mission area
in which it was located on August 1, 2018, to any other
mission area or office within the Department in the absence
of the enactment of specific legislation affirming such move.
Sec. 757. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to carry out any program, project, or activity that
promotes or advances Critical Race Theory or any concept
associated with Critical Race Theory.
Sec. 758. The Secretary, acting through the Chief of the
Natural Resources Conservation Service, may use funds
appropriated under this Act or any other Act for the
Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations Program and the
Watershed Rehabilitation Program carried out pursuant to the
Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act (16 U.S.C. 1001
et seq.), and for the Emergency Watershed Protection Program
carried out pursuant to section 403 of the Agricultural
Credit Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2203) to provide technical
services for such programs pursuant to section 1252(a)(1) of
the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3851(a)(1)),
notwithstanding subsection (c) of such section.
Sec. 759. In administering the pilot program established
by section 779 of division A of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2018 (Public Law 115-141), the Secretary
of Agriculture may, for purposes of determining entities
eligible to receive assistance, consider those communities
which are ``Areas Rural in Character'': Provided, That not
more than 10 percent of the funds made available under the
heading ``Distance Learning, Telemedicine, and Broadband
Program'' for the purposes of the pilot program established
by section 779 of Public Law 115-141 may be used for this
purpose.
Sec. 760. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to pay the salaries or expenses of personnel--
(1) to inspect horses under section 3 of the Federal Meat
Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 603);
(2) to inspect horses under section 903 of the Federal
Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 1901
note; Public Law 104-127); or
(3) to implement or enforce section 352.19 of title 9, Code
of Federal Regulations (or a successor regulation).
Sec. 761. (a) The modifications made by the Food and Drug
Administration on January 3, 2023 to the risk evaluation and
mitigation strategy under section 505-1 of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355-1) for mifepristone are
hereby nullified.
(b) None of the funds made available by this Act may be
used to establish, implement, or enforce--
(1) any provision of a risk evaluation and mitigation
strategy under section 505-1 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355-1) for mifepristone that is
substantially similar to any of the modifications nullified
by subsection (a); or
(2) any non-enforcement or enforcement discretion policy
for any provision of a risk evaluation and mitigation
strategy under such section for mifepristone.
Sec. 762. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act may be used by FDA to develop, issue,
promote, or advance any new guidelines or regulations
applicable to food manufacturers for population-wide sodium
reduction actions until the issuance of the 2025-2026
National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES)
survey that will show consumer sodium consumption after the
completion of the short-term sodium reduction targets.
Sec. 763. Within 60 days of enactment of this Act the
Secretary shall provide to the Committees a plan for
expenditure that accelerates the continued implementation and
expansion of the Farmers.gov application and the Enterprise
Data Analytics Platform and Toolset (EDAPT) to enable USDA
users to: (1) view their information, complete transactions,
quickly review the status, and update tabular customer
information; (2) submit applications for Farm Production and
Conservation programs and receive program payments for all
USDA farm programs; (3) to complete their own applications,
including electronic signatures and submission, for all farm
programs that require direct application; (4) enable
electronic income reporting between USDA and IRS; and (5)
transition acreage reporting, farm records mapping, and farm
records information to Farmers.gov: Provided, That the Farm
Production and Conservation Business Center shall provide a
roadmap for systems to be decommissioned and consolidated
with Farmers.gov and EDAPT including, but not limited to, the
Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC) and Price Loss Coverage (PLC)
programs, the Dairy Margin Coverage program, and the Farm
Service Agency Emergency Relief Program.
Sec. 764. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this or any other Act may be used to implement,
administer, apply, enforce, or carry out Executive Order
13985 of January 20, 2021 (86 Fed. Reg. 7009, relating to
advancing racial equity and support for underserved
communities through the Federal Government), or the U.S.
Department of Agriculture's Equity Action Plan in Support of
Executive Order 13985, or any Equity Action Plan created by
the Food and Drug Administration, the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission, or the Farm Credit Administration, or
Executive Order 14035 of June 25, 2021 (86 Fed. Reg. 34593,
relating to diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility
in the Federal workforce), or Executive Order 14091 of
February 16, 2023 (88 Fed. Reg. 10825, relating to further
advancing racial equity and support for underserved
communities through the Federal Government), or to create or
establish an Office of the Chief Diversity and Inclusion
Officer.
Sec. 765. The Secretary of Agriculture shall take such
actions as may be necessary to prohibit the purchase of
agricultural land located in the United States by non-
resident aliens, foreign businesses, of any agent, trustee,
or fiduciary associated with Russia, North Korea, Iran, or
the Communist Party of China.
Sec. 766. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
during the period beginning on the date of enactment of this
Act and ending on the last day of school year 2024-2025, the
Secretary of Agriculture shall --
(1) allow flavored, low-fat fluid milk to be served --
(A) under the school lunch program established under the
Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1751
et seq.);
(B) under the school breakfast program established under
the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.);
[[Page H4524]]
(C) as a competitive food available on campus during the
school day; and
(D) to children ages 5 years and older under the child and
adult care food program established under section 17 of the
Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C.
1766); and
(2) with respect to weekly sodium limitations to meals and
supplements served during such period under the school lunch
program established under the Richard B. Russell National
School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1751 et seq.) --
(A) exclude sodium used for food safety and functional
purposes in cheese-making, as determined by the Secretary in
consultation with the Commissioner of the Food and Drug
Administration; and
(B) if a determination has not been made under subparagraph
(A), apply the Target 1 sodium levels included in the final
rule entitled ``Nutrition Standards in the National School
Lunch and School Breakfast Programs'' published by the
Department of Agriculture in the Federal Register on January
26, 2012 (77 Fed. Reg. 4087).
Sec. 767. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to finalize, implement, administer, or enforce any
rule that would reduce the maximum monthly allowance with
respect to milk under section 246.10 of title 7, Code of
Federal Regulations (as in effect on April 1, 2023),
including the rule entitled ``Special Supplemental Nutrition
Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC): Revisions to
the WIC Food Packages'' published by the Department of
Agriculture in the Federal Register on November 21, 2022 (87
Fed. Reg. 71090).
Sec. 768. None of the funds provided by this Act or
provided from any accounts in the Treasury of the United
States derived by the collection of fees available to the
agencies funded by this Act, may be used by the Secretary of
Health and Human Services to finalize, issue, implement,
administer, or enforce any rule, regulation, or order setting
a tobacco product standard that mandates a maximum nicotine
level for cigarettes.
Sec. 769. None of the funds provided by this Act, or
provided from any accounts in the Treasury of the United
States derived by the collection of fees available to the
agencies funded by this Act, may be used by the Secretary of
Health and Human Services to finalize, issue, or implement
any rule, regulation, notice of proposed rulemaking, or order
setting any tobacco product standard that would prohibit
menthol as a characterizing flavor in cigarettes or prohibit
characterizing flavors in all cigars and their components and
parts.
Sec. 770. In this fiscal year and each fiscal year
thereafter, and notwithstanding any other provision of law,
none of the funds made available by this or any other Act may
be used to implement section 3.7(f) of the Farm Credit Act of
1971 in a manner inconsistent with section 343(a)(13) of the
Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act.
Sec. 771. (a) For an additional amount for the Office of
the Secretary, $2,000,000, to remain available until
expended, for the Secretary of Agriculture to carry out no
more than 10 pilot projects, under the terms and conditions
determined by the Secretary for a period not to exceed 2
years, that award grants to an Indian tribe; a tribal
organization approved by an Indian tribe; a tribal
educational agency; a consortium of Indian tribes; or a
partnership between an Indian tribe and either a State
educational agency, a local educational agency, a tribal
educational agency, or the Bureau of Indian Education to
operate and implement the school lunch program as authorized
by the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42
U.S.C. 1769), the summer food service program as established
under section 13 of the Richard B. Russell National School
Lunch Act, the child and adult care food program as
established by section 17 of the Richard B. Russell National
School Lunch Act, or the school breakfast program established
by the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773) in either
a Bureau-funded school (as defined in section 1141 of the
Education Amendments of 1978 (25 U.S.C. 2021)); a school (as
defined in section 12(d) of the Richard B. Russell National
School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1760 (d)) on or near an Indian
reservation; or an early child care and education facility:
Provided, That to carry out this pilot program each grant
awarded shall be no less than $10,000 and no more than
$100,000 for each school year and shall not increase state
administrative costs or the amount of benefits provided in
any program: Provided further, That the term ``Indian tribe''
has the meaning given the term in section 4 of the Indian
Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C.
5304).
(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a pilot
project grant recipient shall be reimbursed for meals served
under the school lunch program, the summer food service
program, and the child and adult care food program as if the
recipient were a State under the Richard B. Russell National
School Lunch Act; and under the school breakfast program as
if the recipient were a State educational agency.
(c) Not later than 1 year after the conclusion of the pilot
program, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on
the outcomes of the pilot program.
Sec. 772. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used by the Secretary of Agriculture, the Commissioner of
Food and Drugs, the Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission, or the Chairman of the Farm Credit Administration
to fly or display a flag over a facility of the Department of
Agriculture, the Food and Drug Administration, the Commodity
Futures Trading Commission, or the Farm Credit Administration
other than the flag of the United States; the flag of a
State, territory, or the District of Columbia; the flag of an
Indian Tribal Government; the official flag of a U.S.
Department or agency; or the POW/MIA flag.
Sec. 773. (a) In general.--Notwithstanding section 7 of
title 1, United States Code, section 1738C of title 28,
United States Code, or any other provision of law, none of
the funds provided by this Act, or previous appropriations
Acts, shall be used in whole or in part to take any
discriminatory action against a person, wholly or partially,
on the basis that such person speaks, or acts, in accordance
with a sincerely held religious belief, or moral conviction,
that marriage is, or should be recognized as, a union of one
man and one woman.
(b) Discriminatory action defined.--As used in subsection
(a), a discriminatory action means any action taken by the
Federal Government to--
(1) alter in any way the Federal tax treatment of, or cause
any tax, penalty, or payment to be assessed against, or deny,
delay, or revoke an exemption from taxation under section
501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 of, any person
referred to in subsection (a);
(2) disallow a deduction for Federal tax purposes of any
charitable contribution made to or by such person;
(3) withhold, reduce the amount or funding for, exclude,
terminate, or otherwise make unavailable or deny, any Federal
grant, contract, subcontract, cooperative agreement,
guarantee, loan, scholarship, license, certification,
accreditation, employment, or other similar position or
status from or to such person;
(4) withhold, reduce, exclude, terminate, or otherwise make
unavailable or deny, any entitlement or benefit under a
Federal benefit program, including admission to, equal
treatment in, or eligibility for a degree from an educational
program, from or to such person; or
(5) withhold, reduce, exclude, terminate, or otherwise make
unavailable or deny access or an entitlement to Federal
property, facilities, educational institutions, speech fora
(including traditional, limited, and nonpublic fora), or
charitable fundraising campaigns from or to such person.
(c) Accreditation; Licensure; Certification.--The Federal
Government shall consider accredited, licensed, or certified
for purposes of Federal law any person that would be
accredited, licensed, or certified, respectively, for such
purposes but for a determination against such person wholly
or partially on the basis that the person speaks, or acts, in
accordance with a sincerely held religious belief or moral
conviction described in subsection (a).
Sec. 774. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used by the Food and Drug Administration to issue,
promote, or advance any new guideline or regulation
applicable to food manufacturers for Listeria monocytogenes
(Lm) until the Food and Drug Administration, based on the
available new science, incorporates into the Compliance
Policy Guide (CPG), Guidance for FDA Staff, Sec. 555.320, a
tolerance for Listeria monocytogenes in low-risk foods,
meaning foods that do not support the growth of Listeria
monocytogenes.
Sec. 775. The Secretary of Agriculture may not use
unobligated balances available under section 22002(a)(1) of
Public Law 117-169, after the application of the rescission
under section 722 of this Act, to award grants under section
9007 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (7
U.S.C. 8107).
Sec. __. Each discretionary amount made available by this
Act is hereby reduced by 14.15 percent. Such reduction shall
not apply to the following amounts:
(1) ``Domestic Food Programs--Food and Nutrition Service--
Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants,
and Children (WIC)''.
(2) ``Foreign Assistance and Related Programs--Foreign
Agricultural Service--Food for Peace Title II Grants''.
spending reduction account
Sec. 776. $0.
This division may be cited as the ``Agriculture, Rural
Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2024''.
The CHAIR. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as
amended, are waived.
No further amendment to the bill, as amended, shall be in order
except those printed in part F of House Report 118-216, amendments en
bloc described in section 12 of House Resolution 723, and pro forma
amendments described in section 13 of that resolution.
Each further amendment printed in part F of the report shall be
considered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only
by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read,
shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided
and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, may be withdrawn by
the proponent at any time before action thereon, shall not be subject
to amendment except as provided by section 13 of House Resolution 723,
and
[[Page H4525]]
shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question.
It shall be in order at any time for the chair of the Committee on
Appropriations or her designee to offer amendments en bloc consisting
of further amendments printed in part F of the report not earlier
disposed of. Amendments en bloc shall be considered as read, shall be
debatable for 20 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair
and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or the
designees, shall not be subject to amendment, except as provided by
section 13 of House Resolution 723, and shall not be subject to a
demand for division of the question.
During consideration of the bill for amendment, the chair and ranking
minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their respective
designees may offer up to 10 pro forma amendments each at any point for
the purpose of debate.
Amendments En Bloc Offered by Mr. Harris
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chair, pursuant to House Resolution 723, I offer
amendments en bloc.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendments en bloc.
Amendments en bloc consisting of amendment Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,
8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 27,
28, 30, 31, 34, 35, 37, 39, 40, 44, 46, 47, 49, 50, 58, 59, 60, and 63,
printed in part F of House Report 118-216, offered by Mr. Harris of
Maryland:
AMENDMENT NO. 1 OFFERED BY MS. BALINT OF VERMONT
Page 3, line 14, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $1,000,000) (reduced by $1,000,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 2 OFFERED BY MR. VALADAO OF CALIFORNIA
Page 3, line 14, after the second dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $1,000,000) (increased by $1,000,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 3 OFFERED BY MR. STEIL OF WISCONSIN
Page 3, line 14, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $500,000)''.
Page 9, line 12, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $500,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 4 OFFERED BY MS. LEGER FERNANDEZ OF NEW MEXICO
Page 3, line 14, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $2,975,000)''.
Page 3, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $2,975,000)''.
Page 7, line 3, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $2,975,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 5 OFFERED BY MS. PORTER OF CALIFORNIA
Page 3, line 14, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $1,000,000)''.
Page 3, line 14, after the second dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $1,000,000)''.
Page 13, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $1,000,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 6 OFFERED BY MS. SEWELL OF ALABAMA
Page 3, line 14, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $1,000,000)''.
Page 3, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $1,000,000)''.
Page 3, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $1,000,000)''.
Page 46, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $1,000,000)''.
Page 46, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $1,000,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 7 OFFERED BY MS. PETTERSEN OF COLORADO
Page 3, line 14, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $3,249,000)''.
Page 29, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $3,249,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 8 OFFERED BY MS. PETTERSEN OF COLORADO
Page 3, line 14, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $4,002,000)''.
Page 34, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $4,002,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 9 OFFERED BY MRS. BOEBERT OF COLORADO
Page 3, line 14, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $2,000,000)''.
Page 7, line 8, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 10 OFFERED BY MR. EDWARDS OF NORTH CAROLINA
Page 3, line 14, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $1,000,000)''
Page 58, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $1,000,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 11 OFFERED BY MR. EDWARDS OF NORTH CAROLINA
Page 3, line 14, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $1,000,000)''.
Page 9, line 12, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $1,000,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 12 OFFERED BY MRS. BOEBERT OF COLORADO
Page 3, line 14, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $3,000,000)''.
Page 15, line 8, after first dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $3,000,000)''.
Page 15, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $3,000,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 13 OFFERED BY MR. MOLINARO OF NEW YORK
Page 5, line 18, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $2,500,000)''.
Page 6, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $2,500,000)''.
Page 6, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $2,500,000)''.
Page 13, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $5,000,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 14 OFFERED BY MR. MILLER OF OHIO
Page 5, line 18, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(decreased by $2,000,000)''.
Page 42, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 16 OFFERED BY MRS. BOEBERT OF COLORADO
Page 6, line 3, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $2,000,000)''.
Page 53, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
Page 54, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 17 OFFERED BY MRS. BOEBERT OF COLORADO
Page 6, line 3, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $3,000,000)''.
Page 53, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $3,000,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 18 OFFERED BY MS. JACKSON LEE OF TEXAS
Page 6, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $3,000,000)''.
Page 6, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $3,000,000)''.
Page 11, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 19 OFFERED BY MS. ESCOBAR OF TEXAS
Page 6, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $5,000,000)''.
Page 6, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $5,000,000)''.
Page 40, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $5,000,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 20 OFFERED BY MRS. BOEBERT OF COLORADO
Page 6, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $2,500,000)''.
Page 6, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $2,500,000)''
Page 11, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 21 OFFERED BY MR. MOLINARO OF NEW YORK
Page 6, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $3,000,000)''.
Page 50, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $3,000,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 22 OFFERED BY MS. CARAVEO OF COLORADO
Page 6, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $2,000,000)''.
Page 44, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 23 OFFERED BY MS. CARAVEO OF COLORADO
Page 6, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $1,000,000)''.
Page 13, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $1,000,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 25 OFFERED BY MS. LEGER FERNANDEZ OF NEW MEXICO
Page 7, line 3, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $7,000,000)''.
Page 32, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $7,000,000)''.
Amendment No. 26 Offered by Mr. Neguse of Colorado
Page 7, line 8, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $1,000,000) (increased by $1,000,000)''.
amendment no. 27 offered by mr. johnson of south dakota
Page 7, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $3,500,000)''.
Page 11, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $3,500,000)''.
amendment no. 28 offered by mrs. boebert of colorado
Page 7, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $2,000,000)''.
Page 46, line 11, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
Page 47, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $2,000,000)''.
amendment no. 30 offered by ms. perez of washington
Page 9, line 12, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $1,000,000) (increased by $1,000,000)''.
amendment no. 31 offered by ms. perez of washington
Page 9, line 12, after the dollar amount, insert the
following: ``(reduced by $1,000,000) (increased by
$1,000,000)''.
amendment no. 34 offered by ms. slotkin of michigan
Page 13, line 13, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $10,000,000) (increased by $10,000,000)''.
amendment no. 35 offered by mr. molinaro of new york
Page 13, line 13, after the dollar amount insert
``(increased by $5,000,000) (reduced by $5,000,000)''.
amendment no. 37 offered by mrs. fischbach of minnesota
Page 15, line 8, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $2,500,000)''.
Page 16, line 3, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $2,500,000)''.
[[Page H4526]]
Page 63, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $2,500,000)''.
Page 66, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $2,500,000)''.
amendment no. 39 offered by mr. molinaro of new york
Page 28, line 13, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $10,000,000) (increased by $10,000,000)''.
amendment no. 40 offered by mr. raskin of maryland
Page 29, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $8,500,000) (increased by $8,500,000)''.
amendment no. 44 offered by ms. houlahan of pennsylvania
Page 42, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $1,000,000) (reduced by $1,000,000)''.
amendment no. 46 offered by ms. escobar of texas
Page 44, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $75,000,000) (increased by $75,000,000)''.
amendment no. 47 offered by ms. caraveo of colorado
Page 50, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $10,000,000) (increased by $10,000,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 49 OFFERED BY MS. ESCOBAR OF TEXAS
Page 52, line 19, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $30,000,000) (increased by $30,000,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 50 OFFERED BY MR. MOLINARO OF NEW YORK
Page 60, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $10,000,000) (increased by $10,000,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 58 OFFERED BY MRS. KIGGANS OF VIRGINIA
Page 63, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $1,000,000) (reduced by $1,000,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 59 OFFERED BY MRS. KIGGANS OF VIRGINIA
Page 63, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $1,000,000) (reduced by $1,000,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 60 OFFERED BY MR. MOLINARO OF NEW YORK
Page 65, line 24, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $2,800,000) (increased by $2,800,000)''.
AMENDMENT NO. 63 OFFERED BY MR. GOTTHEIMER OF NEW JERSEY
Page 81, line 6, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $3,000,000)''.
Page 81, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $3,000,000)''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman from
Maryland (Mr. Harris) and the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Bishop) each
will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Maryland.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chair, I rise in favor of this amendment. This is the
bipartisan amendment, which includes priorities for Members on both
sides of the aisle. I appreciate Ranking Member Bishop working with us
on this amendment and ask for your support.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of this
amendment. This amendment includes 42 amendments--5 bipartisan, 17
Republican, 20 Democratic.
The agriculture funding bill has historically been a bipartisan bill,
and we will need to channel that same cooperation if my colleagues want
to pass appropriations bills into law.
Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for offering the amendments and his
cooperation in having this bipartisan en bloc amendment, and I reserve
the balance of my time.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman
from Vermont (Ms. Balint).
Ms. BALINT. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the en bloc amendment,
which includes my amendment to support Vermont's recovery from this
summer's catastrophic flooding.
Vermont farmers are hurting. With government funding running out on
Saturday, the Republicans' Agriculture appropriations bill is too
little too late. Vermont's recovery needs are urgent.
My amendment urges USDA to ensure disaster assistance is deployed as
quickly as possible.
It has been a rough year in Vermont. Vermont producers have sustained
millions and millions of dollars in damages, impacting nearly 30,000
acres of land.
Vermont's farmers are essentially the heart of our communities, the
fabric of our State, and I will do everything in my power to make sure
they have the resources they need to make sure that they are able to
recover and build back better from this horrible flooding.
A government shutdown would be devastating for Vermont and other
States like mine that are recovering from disasters this summer.
Vermonters need Federal recovery dollars to continue to flow so that
towns and households can get back on their feet. We must turn our
attention to serious matters.
Mr. Chair, I urge adoption of this amendment.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman from Georgia (Mr.
Bishop) and Mr. Harris for working together.
Every time I come to the floor, Mr. Chair, I am going to say that I
do not want a government shutdown, having been through them and seen
the desperation that comes upon the American people, and I will do
everything I can that is within reason to make sure we do not have it.
As I present this amendment and thank the committee for allowing this
amendment to be included, I have to take note of the cuts in SNAP
benefits, the funding cuts in rural electric cooperatives, and the
shocking cuts in WIC. That is what I think has to be fixed, so the
American people are aware.
I am grateful that my amendment, the Jackson Lee amendment No. 18,
increases funding that provides grant research and financial support
for the 1890s land grant universities, which are 28 historically Black
colleges and universities. This amendment would decrease funding in
another account.
The Association of Public and Land-grant Universities Council of
1890s includes all the historically Black colleges under the Morrill
Act of 1890. At least 19 universities have been designated.
The importance of this is how crucial it is to engage our
universities in research and, in particular, the National Science
Foundation. It strengthens the training of our young people. It
provides them with the doors to opportunity. Research is the economy of
the 21st century. Increasing funding for the United States Department
of Agriculture that provides grant research would help to stimulate
sustainable improvement in research and development.
Mr. Chair, I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment
that supports education and research in historically Black colleges.
Mr. Chair, I rise to speak in support of the Jackson Lee Amendment,
listed as No. 18 in Harris (MD)--EN BLOC No. 1 to H.R. 4368, the
Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and
Related Agencies Act of 2024.
I want to thank my colleagues on the Rules Committee for making this
amendment in order.
The Jackson Lee Amendment [No. 18 in Harris (MD)--EN BLOC No. 1]
increases funding that provides grant research financial support for
``1890s Land Grant Universities,'' which are 28 Historically Black
Colleges and Universities.
This amendment also proposes decreasing funding for Office of the
Chief Information Officer.
The Association of Public and Land-grant Universities' (APLU) Council
of 1890s includes all Historically Black Colleges and Universities
(HBCUs) that are land-grant universities.
Under the Morrill Act of 1890, at least 19 universities have been
designated with land-grant status.
The Historically Black Colleges and Universities--Excellence in
Research HBCU-EiR program was established in response to direction
provided in the Senate Commerce and Justice, Science and Related
Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee Report (Senate Report 115-139).
That initiative was built on prior and continuing efforts by the
National Science Foundation (NSF) to strengthen research capacity at
Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs).
The Jackson Lee Amendment [No. 18 in Harris (MD)--EN BLOC No. 1]
would provide sufficient funding and guidance to enable the NSF to be
successful with the HBCU Excellence in Research program.
This amendment would further provide opportunities for both public
and private HBCUs, particularly for those who have not been successful
in competing with larger NSF Research & Related Activities.
[[Page H4527]]
Increasing Funding for the United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA) agency that provides grant research would help to stimulate
sustainable improvement in research and development capacities of
HBCUs.
By increasing funding for relevant agencies that provide appropriate
financial support for these historically underserved institutions, we
can ensure that federal funds are redirected toward more critical
funding needs of the American people.
For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote in support of the
Jackson Lee Amendment [No. 18 in Harris (MD)--EN BLOC No. 1].
{time} 2130
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman
from Washington (Ms. Perez).
Ms. PEREZ. Mr. Chair, I rise today to urge the support of two of my
amendments in this bipartisan en bloc.
My first amendment supports farmers and healthy soils by asking the
USDA to conduct research on the amount of microplastics in farmland.
Microplastics are showing up everywhere: in our bodies, in our
waters, and our soils. My amendment would support efforts to understand
microplastics and support healthy soil, which is essential for our
farming communities and our agricultural sector.
My second amendment is the idea that the USDA should be able to fix
its own stuff. We shouldn't waste taxpayer dollars on tractors and
other farm equipment that cannot be repaired easily--and by USDA
technicians--when it breaks.
My amendment allows the USDA to be better stewards of taxpayer
dollars and supports the longevity of the equipment they use to perform
groundbreaking research.
Mr. Chairman, I encourage my colleagues to support my amendment.
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the
gentlewoman from New Mexico (Ms. Leger Fernandez).
Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this en bloc
amendment which includes two of my amendments.
The USDA Office of Tribal Relations serves as the vital, single point
of contact for our rural communities as they work through what is
available for them. As we know, our Tribal communities are rural, and
they must have access to the USDA Office of Tribal Relations.
My amendment No. 4 would restore funding levels for the USDA Office
of Tribal Relations. Separately, my amendment No. 25 would increase
funding to USDA Rural Development by $7 million to use these funds to
improve its oversight of the Section 515 loan program for Rural Rental
Housing.
Outrageously, in my district, three of these properties have
experienced serious management and maintenance issues. The city of
Espanola even condemned a property recently. This has left residents in
unsafe conditions. USDA needs the necessary research to make sure its
properties are livable.
Mr. Chair, while I am in favor of this en bloc, I must state again my
opposition to the appropriations bill itself. I previously stood on
this floor in opposition to the severe cuts to our rural communities.
We must prioritize our rural communities, not cut them to 2007 levels.
Mr. Chair, I urge adoption of this amendment, but I am opposed to the
bill itself.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendments en bloc offered by the
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Harris).
The en bloc amendments were agreed to.
Amendment No. 15 Offered by Mr. Biggs
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 15 printed in
part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 5, line 18, after the first dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $11,404,000)''.
Page 5, line 24, strike the period at the end and insert
the following: ``: Provided further, That no reduction in
such amount shall be made from funds appropriated to the
Office of Pest Management Policy within the Office of the
Chief Economist.''
Page 119, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $11,404,000)''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman from
Arizona (Mr. Biggs) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment to restore
funding for the USDA Office of Chief Economist to fiscal year 2016
levels, which will save us more than $11 million in 2024.
Now, what is interesting, I have been listening to my colleagues
across the aisle saying that it is going to 2001 levels. They don't
want 2000 levels. This goes to 2016 levels, so I am hoping that they
will support this because our annual discretionary spending has
exploded over the course of the COVID-19 response.
No one thought our government was too small before COVID. We are
currently spending $400 billion more in fiscal 2023 for the same
government we had before, and deficits for this year are expected to
exceed $2 trillion.
That is why we have a $33 trillion national debt, and that does not
even include the $600-$700 billion in interest that we pay.
Revenue in fiscal year 2022 levels far exceeded our Federal spending
in fiscal year 2016, meaning that if we were to shrink the Federal
behemoth back to those pre-COVID levels, we might be able to avoid
adding to our national debt for the next 12 months.
This is the first of many amendments that I will be offering to
appropriations bills this week intended to reduce spending. My staff
and I spent countless hours earlier this year reviewing the prior
year's appropriations bills and making recommendations to the Committee
on Appropriations. I even filed 521 separate bills to cut spending
across the discretionary budget totaling $100 billion in spending
reductions for fiscal year 2024.
I am not singling any one office or department out here. We need to
tighten our belts across the Federal Government in order to get
spending under control.
I will just ask you: How bad is the national debt crisis? The 12
regional Federal Reserve Banks that compose the largest central bank in
the world have a monopoly on printing paper dollars. It is the world's
reserve currency. Yet, its ability to print money and invest it in
bonds, the Federal Reserve is now on pace to lose over $100 billion
this year.
They lost $53 billion in the last two quarters. They are going to
lose over $100 billion.
Why is that? Because Federal spending is out of control. If we are
not going to fix it, who is going to fix it? Who is going to start
fixing it? It is our job.
Mr. Chair, I urge the adoption of my amendment, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to
the amendment.
The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this
amendment. The amendment would cut funding for the Office of the Chief
Economist by an additional 46 percent. That is almost half.
The Office of the Chief Economist provides advice and counsel to the
Secretary on matters affecting the economy with respect to the
Agriculture Department. This bill already guts funding for USDA. Any
further cuts just make a bad bill worse.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to defeat this amendment, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Maryland (Mr. Harris).
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chair, I congratulate the gentleman, because the
gentleman brings an amendment to the floor that does something with the
$2 trillion budget deficit. He is right, we have a $33 trillion debt.
Our interest payments in a few years are going to be over $1 trillion--
more than Social Security, more than Medicare, more than Medicaid, more
than food stamps, more than all of them.
One fact check before I sit down. Now we heard it was FY 2007, so I
guess the
[[Page H4528]]
speechwriters can't make up their minds. Is it FY 2000, 2001, 2003? Now
it is 2007.
I would remind the Chair, the spending level in the 2007 bill was
$17.8 billion, and that is almost $5 billion less than what we
appropriate in this bill.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, this is a bad amendment. It is
bad for the country. It is bad for the USDA.
Mr. Chair, I urge defeat of this amendment, and I reserve the balance
of my time.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chairman, for the last while I have heard my
colleagues across the aisle, they were talking about costs, that
Republicans want to cut costs, and that we always talk about costs.
Here is my question: What could they do? They are the ones who
fostered this massive inflation on us that is imposing terrible,
terrible costs on the American people.
The first thing they could do is they could unleash American energy.
When you unleash American energy, you reduce the price of the fuels
that are necessary for the farmers to produce our food. You reduce the
cost of the transports to bring that food to market, and you make our
cost structure go down.
That is not necessarily inflation, because the other thing you have
to do to bring inflation under control is to bring Federal spending
under control.
Mr. Chairman, I urge the adoption of my amendment, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, when you cut the energy
assistance programs for our farmers and our rural communities, you
raise the cost of their production. When you raise the cost of their
production, you raise the cost of the products they produce to put on
the shelves of the grocery stores. This is not a good thing, so I urge
the defeat of this amendment, and I urge the defeat of this bill.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Arizona (Mr. Biggs).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 24 Offered by Mr. Good of Virginia
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 24 printed in
part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 6, line 25, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $3,789,000)''.
Page 119, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $3,789,000)''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Good) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chairman, here we are trying to fund our government for the year
at a time when we have $33 trillion in national debt and we are on
track for a $2 trillion deficit this year, and so we are literally
borrowing some $2 trillion to fund the government this year. It is
incumbent upon us to be careful with how we spend hard-earned taxpayer
dollars.
Mr. Speaker, within that context, the Biden administration continues
to weaponize every level of the Federal Government, abusing their power
to push their harmful leftist agenda on Federal employees and the
American people.
Exhibit A would be the Department of Defense abortion travel policy
which violates current law, but this harm that is being done to the
American people by this administration manifests itself in other ways,
as well. The Biden administration continues pushing diversity, equity,
and inclusion policies through all Federal agencies largely enforced by
the Office of Civil Rights.
My amendment would reduce funding for the Office of Civil Rights
within the USDA by 50 percent, permitting necessary functions to
continue but sending a much-needed message on behalf of the American
people that they cannot use their taxpayer dollars to implement their
radical leftist agenda.
DEI initiatives promote hiring quotas rather than merit-based
policies for selection and promotion. The Federal Government should be
hiring and firing--now there is a concept for the Federal Government.
The Federal Government should be hiring and firing employees based on
the quality of their performance or lack thereof, not based on the
color of their skin or the gender they claim to be identifying as on
whatever particular day.
My amendment cuts a little over $8 million. When we have $33 trillion
in national debt and we are on track for a $2 trillion deficit, my
amendment would cut a little over $8 million from the Department so
that taxpayer dollars can be appropriately used rather than promoting
the leftist radical agenda of the Biden administration.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this
amendment.
The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, this amendment would cut funding
for the Office of Civil Rights at USDA by an additional 19 percent. The
bill already guts funding for USDA. Any further cuts would just make a
bad bill worse.
The Office of Civil Rights at USDA is there for one purpose, and that
is to make sure that every American has an equal opportunity to access
the programs of USDA regardless of race, regardless of gender,
regardless of national origin.
USDA over the past decades has been required to pay billions of
dollars to folks who were stakeholders who were denied equal
opportunities to access these programs. If we cut this, we will be
hamstringing the ability of USDA to do the right thing. We want to stop
this before it spreads. It has already done too much damage to access
for minorities, for women, and for various ethnic minorities, so we
must fund this office.
I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment. It is another
amendment that does nothing to serve farmers, nothing to serve rural
America, and it has no place in this bill. We should fund the USDA in a
way that makes its programs accessible and available to every single
American.
Mr. Chair, I urge that this amendment be rejected, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
{time} 2145
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, the justification of the gentleman
from Georgia just enumerated there is already protected by law. It is
already illegal to discriminate on the basis that he is talking about
there. Thanks to the Supreme Court, we are moving to a post-
discrimination society. We are going to no longer discriminate based on
race. The Supreme Court is moving us that way in education. We ought to
be doing it with the Office of Civil Rights in the USDA, as well.
We should be using taxpayer dollars for those farmers and programs
that actually benefit the American people and have the highest return
or at least a return and one that is not harmful for the American
people.
If the Office of Civil Rights were simply ensuring that people were
protected as required by law, again, there wouldn't be a problem, but
the Biden administration has subverted these types of offices to
promote their divisive radical leftist agenda.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia has the only time remaining.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, the Biden administration has
completely lost touch with the idea of hiring and firing people
according to their performance and the work that they do, and instead
wants to base those decisions on a person's immutable characteristics
and achieving quotas in the name of equity.
My amendment will hold these individuals accountable to simply do
their jobs instead of promoting a radical agenda and wasting taxpayer
dollars--again, dollars that are borrowed from our kids and grandkids.
I urge my colleagues to vote in support of my amendment, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Good).
[[Page H4529]]
The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia will be postponed.
Amendment No. 29 Offered by Mr. Biggs
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 29 printed in
part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 8, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $12,996,000)''.
Page 119, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $12,996,000)''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman from
Arizona (Mr. Biggs) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment, which
restores funding for the National Agricultural Statistics Service to
the fiscal year 2019 level. That would result in nearly $13 million to
deficit reduction in fiscal year 2024.
Annual discretionary spending, I won't go through that again, what I
said last time.
Revenue in fiscal year 2022 levels actually exceeded our Federal
spending in fiscal year 2019, meaning that if we were to shrink the
Federal behemoth back to those pre-COVID levels, we might be able to
avoid adding to our national debt for the next 12 months.
Now, I want to continue on why this is so doggone important that we
take care of this. The proposed funding level for the National
Agricultural Statistics Service is a 7.6 percent increase over the
fiscal year 2019 level. So we are actually bumping it slightly above
the 2019 level, but we are getting right back to the pre-COVID levels.
Now, let's talk about this for a second. My colleagues across the
aisle--I actually heard one of them say in talking about the underlying
bill, the main bill, that the Federal Government needed to ``meet the
needs of every American.'' I want you to think about what that says.
The Federal Government meets the needs of every American.
Who determines what that need is and who pays for that need? Well,
our grandchildren must be the ones that they think are going to pay for
the current needs because we are borrowing $2 trillion this year; and
it will be more than that next year. We are paying interest about $700
billion in 2023. It will be more than that next year.
Let's talk about the Fed again. I mention the Fed just so people can
understand that the Fed has now put itself in a precarious position. We
always used the Fed. We counted on it--those who wanted to grow
government did. They believed in modern monetary theory, that the Fed
could just keep printing money, no inflation would result, just money
grows on trees, and that we could supply every American with every need
that they might have.
So you use the central bank to keep interest rates really low. That
made private borrowers really happy because they could service
government debt inexpensively.
But what happened? COVID happened, right? And trillions of dollars
flooded our economy, and when those trillions of dollars flooded our
economy, it devalued our currency and caused inflation to go up because
those were nonproductive dollars.
What did the Democrats do last year--because they didn't get their
act together on budgeting--they passed a couple of CRs, which led
ultimately to the omnibus bill, and that flooded money in there--after
COVID was long gone. They added to the inflationary pressures.
I am going to continue this, but for now, Mr. Chair, I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to
this amendment.
The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to
this amendment. It will cut funding for the Natural Agricultural
Statistics Service and the Census of Agriculture by an additional 8
percent.
This bill already cuts too much funding from USDA, and any further
cuts, again, will make a bad bill worse.
The Office of National Agricultural Statistics Service and the Census
of Agriculture serve very important functions.
The American people need to know--we need to know what we grow; we
need to know who is producing what we grow; we need to know where it is
grown; we need to know what the country will need.
This office provides very important data that informs us; it informs
governmental entities; it informs our private sector; it informs the
consumers. We don't need any more cuts here.
I urge Members to defeat this amendment, and I yield back the balance
of my time.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, let's talk some more about the Fed and why we
are in a world of hurt and why we have to start reducing spending and
funding.
We can't fund every project, everything around the world and even in
our own country. We send hundreds of billions of dollars out of this
country.
Guess what, when the Fed bought $4.7 trillion in additional assets,
$2.5 trillion of that was in mortgage-backed securities, and they
invested in long-term loans. Then, as inflation pressures up, they kept
increasing the prime rate. They are now expecting another increase in
the interest rate within the next 2 months. We will have to pay that
debt service. That will contribute to the inflationary pressure that we
have.
When you screw up your energy policy and you screw up your Federal
funding policy, the American people suffer, and they suffer through
higher costs due to inflation. That is a hidden tax.
That is why I keep trying to find ways, line items where we can
actually provide services but we can reduce the Federal spending to at
least make some rational nod toward bringing us back to some sound
funding policy, something we haven't seen here in ages.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Arizona (Mr. Biggs).
The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will be postponed.
The Chair understands that amendment No. 32 will not be offered.
Amendment No. 33 Offered by Mr. Biggs
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 33 printed in
part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 11, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $157,572,000)''.
Page 119, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $157,572,000)''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman from
Arizona (Mr. Biggs) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment to restore
funding to the National Institute of Food and Agriculture to fiscal
year 2019 levels.
This amendment would direct $157 million to deficit reduction in
fiscal year 2024.
Let's talk about this. I have been talking all night about the
precarious position our economy is in. I am often baffled by this. I
view it as an existential threat, and you know what, bipartisan we have
seen national security leaders of this country say our biggest threat
is our national debt.
Every year we have a structural deficit. This year we thought it was
going to be about $1.7 trillion. CBO revised it to north of $2
trillion, and that is what it is going to be next year.
The National Institute of Food and Agriculture has made a habit of
disseminating grant funding to organizations intent on perpetuating
societal
[[Page H4530]]
division in the United States. These include things like a $350,000
funding grant to a Soros-funded nonprofit promoting ``equity'' in
community food development projects, another $1.4 million in funds for
organizations to advance ``food justice'' in California, and funding to
colleges seeking to ``enhance diversity'' in food economics.
The proposed funding level that is made for the National Institute of
Food and Agriculture is a 17 percent increase over the fiscal year 2019
level.
This reduction I propose in my amendment would ensure that taxpayer
dollars are properly focused on activities related to food and crop
development. That is what this agency is supposed to be doing, not
wokeifying the money that we give to it.
Well, I want everyone to support this amendment, and I am going
continue my talk about our precarious position, which is an existential
crisis to the United States.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I rise in very strong opposition to
this amendment.
Cutting funding for the National Institute of Food and Agriculture by
an additional 17 percent is penny-wise and pound-foolish.
The bill already guts funding for USDA, but the NIFA, the National
Institute for Food and Agriculture provides grants for research to our
colleges and universities, and particularly the 1890s institutions that
were created under the Second Morrill Act.
This is a very useful agency. It provides essential research, the
tool that keeps American agriculture on the cutting edge. In America,
we produce the safest, the highest quality of food and fiber anywhere
in the industrialized world, and we do it because we fund research.
Our research is cutting edge. Why would we cut it by 17 percent? We
need research like we never needed it before because of the climate
challenges that we are facing. We have got challenges that we must
overcome in order to continue to produce the food to feed the people in
this country and around the world.
This research is essential, and we need to continue to fund it. We
don't need this 17 percent cut.
I urge the defeat of this amendment. Let's defeat this amendment, and
let's pass a useful bill that is responsible that meets the needs of
the American people and the American producers.
Mr. Chair, I urge that this amendment be defeated, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chairman, over the course of this evening during the
debate of the underlying bill it was referred to as being heartless and
disrespectful. This amendment was referred to as being disrespectful,
as a matter of fact.
This is what I would tell you: You know what is heartless? Heartless
is putting our Nation and wrapping it up with flax and cords that we
will not soon be able to get out of with constant perpetual debt.
You see inflation, inflation is going to keep going. Inflation is
going to keep going because we don't have a great energy policy and we
have a terrible Federal spending problem.
We heard on the underlying bill, hey, you know what, we should just
raise more taxes. That is what we should be doing. But you know what,
we had record revenue, record revenue, and guess what, we continued to
increase our structural deficit, which leads to a greater national debt
problem.
{time} 2200
It isn't that Americans aren't paying enough in taxes. It is a
fundamental spending problem. It gets back to what I have been talking
about, this modern monetary theory. You heard it just a minute ago. We
need to take care of the needs of everybody. Who pays for that? It is
obviously not going to be the American people who are living right now.
Maybe it is going to be some who are living right now.
We can't fundamentally afford the government my leftist colleagues
across the aisle continue to promote. That is what they want. They want
massive government. They want government that controls every aspect of
everybody's life. Then, they say, that will meet the needs of
everybody.
That is not enough. They have to open the southern border, as well.
By the time the Biden administration leaves, you will have 10 million
encounters at the border. That won't include the got-aways, both known
and unknown, which already, under the Biden administration, exceed 2\1/
2\ million people.
How are you going to pay for that? They never want to tell you how
they are going to pay for it because they have no concept of what is
facing this country.
Mr. Chair, I urge the adoption of my amendment, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Arizona (Mr. Biggs).
The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will be postponed.
The Chair understands that amendment No. 36 will not be offered.
Amendment No. 38 Offered by Mr. Biggs
The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 38 printed in
part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 22, line 18, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $14,952,000)''.
Page 119, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $14,952,000)''.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman from
Arizona (Mr. Biggs) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment to restore
funding to the Farm Production Conservation Business Center to fiscal
2019 levels. That is right: Take it back to pre-COVID levels.
This amendment would direct nearly $15 million to deficit reduction
in fiscal year 2024. My staff and I, earlier in the year, introduced
many bills trying to take a line-item approach to the budget to try to
reduce spending, to try to bring us back into some rationality, and
this is one of the places we found.
The proposed funding level for the Farm Production Conservation
Business Center is a nearly 7 percent increase over fiscal year 2019
levels.
The Farm Production Conservation Business Center is a fairly new
office within the Department of Agriculture and is intended to support
the agency's farmer-facing components. Under the Biden administration,
the agency is pushing out taxpayer-funded climate alarmism and
messaging to outline how USDA is advancing equity by providing
increased financial assistance to historically underserved groups.
The spending reduction in this amendment would ensure that the
business center is not abusing its farmer-facing role to promote
divisive ideology, as the Biden regime is trying to do, but instead
focuses its resources on serving agriculture producers.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to
the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Issa). The gentleman is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, these amendments just go to
undermine the ability of USDA to do what it is supposed to do for the
American people.
This is another amendment that cuts funding, and if you keep cutting
funding, you will totally make this agency unable to deliver on its
promises to the American people.
Mr. Chair, it is a bad amendment. It is a cut that doesn't need to
happen. I urge opposition, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I have to say, I am actually baffled a little
bit because it is like we are on the other side of an ocean, an ocean
separates us. I never hear my colleagues say that they want to reduce
spending on any program. I never hear it. Instead, they
[[Page H4531]]
want to continually propose big spending programs that we simply don't
have money for, and then they want to do something that is actually
self-defeating by increasing taxes.
We have significant revenue. We just outspend the revenue. We
outspend it every time.
What happened after COVID? Well, I am proposing we go back to pre-
COVID levels. What happened during COVID is that the Federal Reserve
had to auction so many treasuries it really had to begin offering
higher rates. What did that do? That fueled higher rates.
Now, with rates so much higher, the bank is now forced to borrow
against all its prior lending, all its prior investments, which they
did at like 1 percent. Now, we are sitting at 5.3 percent.
When you are doing bonds, Mr. Chair, and you know this as well as
anybody, your value of your asset has decreased. That is what has
happened, and it puts us in massive economic jeopardy. We have to
acknowledge that.
That is the reason that the Fed has incurred a net loss of $53.5
billion on interest expense, a trend that is going to continue in this
quarter.
Mr. Chair, I include in the Record an article by Daniel Horowitz from
September 26, 2023.
[From Blaze Media/Opinion & Analysis/Opinion, Sept. 26, 2023]
Horowitz: When Money Printers Can No Longer Print Money
(By Daniel Horowitz)
Just how bad is the national debt crisis? The 12 regional
Federal Reserve Banks that compose the largest central bank
in the world have a monopoly on printing paper dollars, the
world's reserve currency. Yet despite its ability to print
paper and then invest it in bonds, the Federal Reserve is now
on pace to lose money on its own scheme to the tune of over
$100 billion this year.
Thus, the great bailout institution of last resort has now
itself become a further drain on the federal treasury.
Until recently, the Federal Reserve was the ace in the hole
for the governing elites who wanted to grow weaponized
government on the cheap. The central bank was able to keep
interest rates extremely low, which made private borrowers
happy but also serviced government debt inexpensively. And by
using maturity transformation to borrow short and lend long,
the central bank could turn a profit by lending at higher
rates of interest than it borrowed. The net profit was always
deposited into the rapacious accounts of the Treasury
Department to offset a portion of its ballooning debt.
Then came COVID.
COVID ended the Ponzi scheme. In its attempt to permanently
control our lives, the Federal Reserve was forced to pay for
the lockdowns and ultimately lost control of the money
laundering operation. In order to service the debt, the Fed
in less than a year purchased $4.7 trillion in additional
assets, including $2.5 trillion in mortgage-backed
securities. Central bankers invested this money in the form
of long-term loans locked in at very low rates.
Then came the inevitable inflation driven by this very
COVID spending.
The Federal Reserve was forced to auction so many
Treasuries on the market that it had to begin offering higher
rates. Many would also argue that Federal Reserve Chairman
Jerome Powell raised the federal funds rate too quickly under
the false premise that it would stem the tide of the
inflation it created.
Well, now with interest rates so much higher, the bank is
forced to borrow high against all of its prior lending
(investments), which was at a much lower rate. We now have
the ultimate inversion, which is causing severe deficits. In
just the first two quarters of 2023, the Fed has incurred a
net loss of $53.5 billion on interest expense, a trend that
will only be exacerbated with higher rates, a slowing
economy, and a tightening credit market.
The $53 billion loss for the first half of 2023 is on top
of the $15.8 billion net loss in the final quarter of 2022.
This is a big deal. For the first time in its more than 100
years of existence, the money god itself can't print its way
out of insolvency.
To print even more money now will take an already tapped-
out consumer and small business and crush them further with
even higher inflation, tightening of credit, and crushing an
already insolvent housing market.
On top of the Fed's capital deficit is more than $1
trillion in unrealized losses on its $7.6 trillion balance
sheet of Treasuries and mortgage-backed securities it
purchased in its System Open Market Account. All those assets
the bank purchased at 1 percent interest are now worth much
less if the bank were to sell them off at 5.3 percent.
Ironically, this is the same insolvency other banks that come
to the Fed for bailouts are facing today.
Yet the Fed simply writes off the loss as it unloads a
small portion of its balance sheet (about 9 percent from its
high in 2022) without using mark-to-market accounting, as
other banks are required to do under the Dodd-Frank law.
Mark-to-market uses the actual market price of the bonds, not
the irrelevant face value. The Fed ignores the market price
of bonds and assumes they are face value.
If the Fed is incurring this much of a deficit, which will
engender more bailouts from the Treasury--rather than the Fed
bailing out the debt-ridden Treasury--imagine how the economy
will look in the coming years. The majority of FOMC members
announced at a Wednesday meeting that they expect another
interest rate hike before the end of the year. Then they
envision the elevated rates to remain at least for a few
years. The capital deficit and unrealized losses on the
balance sheet are going to explode exponentially because of
the yield inversions, which will further exacerbate the debt
tsunami.
Also, even if the Fed itself doesn't raise the funds rate,
the yields on Treasuries must continue to climb just from the
sheer volume of issuance the Fed will offload on the market
to service biblical levels of interest on the debt, now
slated to top $1 trillion every year. There is already a
problem attracting enough buyers--with many foreign
countries, including China and Japan, dumping U.S.
Treasuries. Just wait until these other countries continue
with their plan to move away from the U.S. dollar as the
reserve currency. Yields will need to increase, further
perpetuating and exacerbating the cost of servicing the debt
and the Fed's own fiscal deficit in doing so.
Yields on the two-year Treasury are at the highest level
since 2006. However, 17 years ago, the gross debt was $8.5
trillion, not $33 trillion. Also, we were running $200-$400
billion annual deficits, not $2 trillion deficits. Not to
mention the fact that we didn't have nearly this much debt
and credit crush in the private sector and among households
that are straining banks and individuals to the point of
insolvency. Oh, and we are officially not in a recession and
have relatively low unemployment. Wait until the fun begins
in 2024 and the cost of social programs skyrockets. Even
without any new debt, $7.6 trillion of existing debt will
mature within the next year at much higher interest rates.
In other words, the Fed, which has been the government's
lifeguard for several generations, is now drowning in the
very pool it, along with corrupt politicians in Congress and
the Treasury Department, has created. Who will bail out the
money printer then?
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, let's talk some more about what should be done.
We have a structural deficit of $2 trillion. We are spending $700
billion in interest. The Fed is losing money. Our economy is slowing
down to boot.
The question is: What could we do? How about we rein in our Federal
spending so that the value of our currency doesn't keep dropping like a
stone? How about we unleash American energy so that we have pressure to
reduce costs on the energy side and have traditional currency
protection on the inflation side? That would do it. That would help,
but we don't see anything from the Hill from which my colleagues across
the way speak. We don't hear from the White House, either.
Mr. Chair, I am urging adoption of this amendment. It is a small
measure to reduce a small program in a small way, but it moves us in
that direction.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 41 Offered by Mr. Brecheen
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 41
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. BRECHEEN. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 29, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $60,543,000)''.
Page 119, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $60,543,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Oklahoma (Mr. Brecheen) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oklahoma.
Mr. BRECHEEN. Mr. Chair, since this administration took office, the
average family of four is spending $1,200 more per month to buy the
exact same goods and services as compared to January 2021. That is an
almost $15,000 increase per year to the average family of four because
of excessive government spending that is driving devaluation of our
currency, thus inflation.
I grew up ranching. I still ranch. When you talk to farmers and
ranchers, they will tell you their biggest issue is the increase in the
input costs. Whether it is 4-point barbed-wire, T-posts, a feed truck,
a cake box, used tractors, everything is costing almost
[[Page H4532]]
twice what it did just a few years ago. The price of agriculture in
general is up 23 percent, the stats tell us, just in 2 years under this
administration.
To help America's farmers and ranchers, we need to get serious about
cutting government spending that is the root cause of inflation and
devaluation of our currency.
Right now, for every dollar that we are spending, about $6 trillion,
only 70 percent of it is paid for. We are charging 30 percent to our
kids and our grandkids, who want to inherit those farms and ranches.
My conservative colleagues and I are urging Congress to reduce
overall spending back to pre-COVID spending levels. The cut I am
proposing with this amendment is a modest 6.5 percent cut from the
underlying bill and funds the NRCS at a higher level even than they
were in fiscal year 2019.
I know NRCS programs. In my heavy equipment excavation business, I
built ponds. I have friends who work for the NRCS. I have gotten good
advice from the NRCS.
My question to my friends at the NRCS and my question to my friends
in the agricultural community: Can we not return to the pre-COVID
spending levels to give our kids and our grandkids a chance at the
blessing of liberty?
There is money within the NRCS that can be cut that is not even
conservation related. Like many agencies, the Biden administration is
using even the NRCS to carry out a leftist agenda, so absorption of
these cuts should start here.
The NRCS has an Equity Division whose mission is to advocate and
better align institutional equity into the work and practices of NRCS
programs and services.
The NRCS aims to meet or exceed President Biden's Justice40 goals.
Under the guise of environmental justice, the Justice40 Initiative goal
is to pick winners and losers. It aims to have 40 percent of benefits
flow to disadvantaged communities that are marginalized, underserved,
and overburdened by pollution.
The NRCS State offices, like Vermont, have created a lesbian, gay,
bisexual, and transgender special emphasis program manager position.
The NRCS also provides resources such as Pride calendars, pronouns in
the workplace guidance, and LGBTQ spotlights.
This is not the original mission of the NRCS. It demonstrates there
is excess within the agency.
I know this agency. I have benefited from it. Friends have benefited
from it. If we are going to be serious about giving our kids a chance,
we can't protect every program that we like from what has to be a
nation that starts living within its means. We have to begin somewhere.
Mr. Chair, this 6.5 percent cut is more than reasonable, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this
amendment.
Cutting funding for the Natural Resources Conservation Service by an
additional 8 percent will just, again, make it worse.
This is a very important agency. It provides very valuable services
to our communities as well as to our farmers. You have a number of
programs that are so vitally important.
They have the conservation innovation programs.
They have the Environmental Quality Incentives Program, which helps
farmers, ranchers, and forest landowners to integrate conservation into
their working lands.
They have the grants that support the development of new tools and
new approaches, practices and technologies to further our natural
resources conservation on private lands.
They have the Conservation Stewardship Program, which builds on
conservation efforts to strengthen the farmers' operations.
They have the Emergency Watershed Protection Program, which is a
Federal emergency recovery program that helps local communities recover
after natural disasters strike. Look at what we have endured over the
past year, the past 2 years. Communities have been struck by floods,
wildfires, and hurricanes.
We have problems, and the Watershed Rehabilitation Program is there.
It needs to be fully funded, particularly this year with what we have
experienced with climate change.
They have watershed and flood prevention programs, the wetland
reserve easements. We have to help with this. We have to protect our
forests and, of course, the forest programs and the grazing funds for
our livestock.
This is just penny-wise and pound-foolish. We must protect the
conservation programs because they protect our environment and our
farmers and help them to be sustainable.
Mr. Chair, this is a bad amendment. I urge its rejection, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
{time} 2215
Mr. BRECHEEN. Mr. Chair, I had someone say to me one time that
governing should be pretty easy. However much government you want ought
to be the amount of government you are willing to pay for.
The problem is, on the Federal Government level, we are not paying
for it. We are asking our kids and our grandkids to pay for all of
this.
For every dollar we are spending right now, we are asking our
children to pick up 30 percent of the tab.
The question is: When will we start being responsible, looking out
for the blessing of liberty for our children and our grandkids?
This is a 6.5 percent reduction. The underlying bill, if adopted,
leaves $850 million in NRCS.
We are addicted to overspending in this Nation. Fiscal sanity is
crying out. Future generations are crying out to start somewhere. I am
asking my colleagues to start here with me.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Brecheen).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oklahoma
will be postponed.
The Acting CHAIR. The Chair understands that amendment No. 42 will
not be offered.
Amendment No. 43 Offered by Mr. Brecheen
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 43
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. BRECHEEN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 37, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $1,606,926,000)''.
Page 119, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $1,606,926,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Oklahoma (Mr. Brecheen) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oklahoma.
Mr. BRECHEEN. Mr. Chairman, to reiterate what has often been said
this evening, we hit $33 trillion. It is the first time in our Nation's
history.
That means, as of today, every baby that is born in any hospital
around this country who opens their eyes and takes in their first
breath of air owes $98,000.
They are only going to pay it off through a lower standard of living
because of the selfishness of the generations before them.
If we continue at this rate of overspending, we are sacrificing their
future--make no mistake about that.
It is why my conservative colleagues and I are trying to rein in our
Federal spending and return to the pre-COVID spending levels. We have
to start cutting spending.
My amendment would eliminate the USDA rental assistance program,
which is 1 of 25 duplicative housing programs. I want to reiterate the
word ``duplicative''--duplicative housing programs, 25.
This amendment, if adopted, would save $1.6 billion. That is a real
number.
Today, the Federal Government subsidizes low-income families through
more than 25 duplicative housing programs consisting of projects,
vouchers, rental construction, financing, and
[[Page H4533]]
grants to State and local governments. It includes 20 different
entities administering 160 different programs, tax expenditures, and
other tools supporting homeownership and rental housing.
In 2021, the Federal Government spent over $57 billion on low-income
housing programs benefiting 9.3 million Americans. We have 333 million
Americans total in this Nation.
This particular program represents only about 2.8 percent of Federal
housing assistance programs. This duplicative program should be rolled
into the Department of Housing and Urban Development to improve
efficiency.
In 2012 and 2016 reports, the Government Accountability Office
recommended consolidating many of these duplicative programs. That is
why, in 2018, OMB under President Trump proposed removing USDA rental
housing programs to HUD to improve operational efficiency, service
delivery, and produce savings by reducing agency bureaucracy costs.
According to the OMB under the Trump administration, ``USDA's housing
programs, which serve eligible rural areas, were initially established
in the 1940s in response to an underrepresentation of national housing
programs in rural areas. . . . Since then, the rationale for separate,
rural-focused housing programs at USDA has become outdated given HUD's
role in serving communities throughout the Nation, including in many
rural areas. In fact, due in large part to the sheer size of its
programs, HUD serves more households in USDA-eligible areas than USDA
does.''
The consolidation of agencies or administrative functions could yield
a more efficient oversight and administrative structure for cost
savings in central housing programs.
The Government Accountability Office recommended that HUD and USDA
review and consolidate duplicative housing programs, including the
Rural Housing Service.
The duplication of program services provides headaches and confusion
to the neediest of Americans wanting to know where to go. It is time to
streamline programs and get our fiscal house in order.
What is causing so many young adults outside of this program
administration not to be able to afford their homes? High interest
rates driven by overspending.
This $1.6 billion that this amendment proposes represents a return to
fiscal sanity. For every dollar we are spending, we are only paying for
70 percent of it.
When are we going to get serious about spending restraint for the
next generation?
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to
the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, this bill, our funding bill, funds
rural America. We, as Members of Congress, ought to be committed to
ensuring that people who live in rural communities are not
disadvantaged simply because of their rural ZIP Code.
I urge us to defeat this amendment because affordable, decent housing
is something that every American ought to have access to regardless of
where he or she lives.
Of course, this funding for rural America is comparable to the same
programs that urban Americans have access to. It provides support for
families so that they can afford to have decent housing.
To cut this is to punish people who need help for decent housing and
who happen to live in rural America. This is something we should not
do.
Rural Americans should have the same opportunities to realize the
American Dream as any other American anyplace they live.
Mr. Chair, I urge the defeat of this amendment. It is a bitter, nasty
amendment that hurts people who need a hand up.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BRECHEEN. Mr. Chairman, I reiterate: duplication of programming.
There are 25 duplicative programs in this same area.
This cut represents 2.8 percent of all Federal housing assistance. We
can help the neediest Americans by streamlining housing programs and
getting our own fiscal house in order.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense reduction
in duplication, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Brecheen).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oklahoma
will be postponed.
Amendment No. 45 Offered by Mr. Perry
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 45
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 42, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced
by $25,715,000)''.
Page 119, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $25,715,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, this amendment cuts the Rural Business
Program Account in half from last year's enacted budget amount of
$43,125,000.
The Rural Business-Cooperative Service, like a lot of Washington,
D.C., programs, has a good name. It doesn't always do good things.
Unfortunately, it continues the age-old government sin of picking
winners and losers instead of just letting the market work.
I ran a small business, and people would tell me that the government
wants to be a good partner. I wasn't looking for a partner in my
business. I was looking to run my business. If there was a partner,
surely it wasn't the government, which had no idea about what I did in
my business.
What businesses need is for the government to get out of the way and
stop making it difficult if they don't bend the knee to whatever the
government demands of them.
Let me just tell you what we are funding with this money. This comes
right from the code cited in this appropriations bill: Loans for the
purposes of reducing the reliance on nonrenewable energy sources by
encouraging the development and construction of solar energy systems
and other renewable energy systems.
If you want to do that, you can get some of this money. If you don't
want to do that, you can forget it.
Mr. Chair, we have seen the government-mandated shift to green and
oftentimes unreliable energy sources, and we have seen what it has done
to the country. The Secretary of Energy tried to take a drive a little
while ago in her battery-operated vehicle and didn't make it too far.
We are not against these things, but the market should decide, not
the government. The government is not the market, and it doesn't make
the most efficient decisions.
Even in places where the shift hasn't directly caused tragedy, every
single one of our constituents is facing higher prices because of these
policies.
Because of these policies, we are literally building a grid on top of
the grid that we already have, and the grid that we have, we are
actually diminishing it at the very same time we are demanding more
from that grid.
Remember your healthcare costs, how they were going to go down when
we socialized medicine with the Affordable Care Act, and now you can't
afford medicine? Get ready because you are not going to be able to
afford your electricity, either. This program supports that
unaffordability, which is why it should end.
This is only the tip of the iceberg. This very spending fight has
highlighted the true amount of waste and duplication in the Federal
Government the gentleman before me just spoke about.
I offer a list of agencies that offer direct or indirect funding for
this very
[[Page H4534]]
thing: Department of Agriculture, Department of Commerce, Department of
Defense, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of the
Interior, Department of the Treasury, and Small Business
Administration.
My goodness. If every household and every business duplicated all the
things the Federal Government did, they would be broke, too, because we
sure are now.
Again, I am more than supportive of small businesses and towns. That
is where I got my start, picking fruit, baling hay, working in small
businesses. The first business outside of agriculture was Ray's Exxon
on Route 15. That is a small business.
These businesses, like every other one and our consumers, have faced
the record-high cost of living due to government-mandated shutdowns and
harmful Biden policies.
Every single one of these businesses and all individual taxpayers
ought to keep more of their money that they earn instead of having it
redistributed to whomever the government chooses to be the winner.
Mr. Chairman, I urge support of this amendment, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to
the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, this amendment should be
defeated. It will cut funding for the Rural Business-Cooperative
Service by an additional 44 percent.
Agricultural cooperatives provide effective marketing and local
supplies and services to their member-owners. Cooperatives bring
electricity, eConnectivity, affordable housing, capital, financial
services, telecommunications, healthcare, food, hardware, building
supplies, and countless other goods and services for people who live in
rural communities.
An example for electricity: There are 900 co-ops, electric membership
cooperatives, that serve 42 million people in this country in 48 of the
50 States, and they cover 51 percent of the land area in the United
States of America.
{time} 2230
We need the Rural Business-Cooperative Service to help support these
rural co-ops that help bring business and help marketing in our rural
communities.
Agriculture is a very, very lucrative business, it happens in our
rural communities for the most part, and we need this cooperative
service and we need the support for it.
Mr. Chair, this is a bad amendment. It is penny-wise and pound-
foolish, and I urge its defeat.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlemen from
Maryland (Mr. Harris).
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for
coming to the floor with a specific idea of how we stop the out-of-
control Federal spending leading to a $2 trillion deficit and runaway
inflation. That is the bottom line.
There are plenty of ideas on how to spend more money, believe you me.
There are plenty of ideas circulating around Washington. What we need
are ideas on how to cut spending.
Mr. Chair, I suggest that going after parts of the Federal Government
that encourage high-cost energy, because that is what renewable energy
is, it is all high cost. That is the fact of the matter.
If we want to create low-cost energy, Mr. Chair, you know what we
have to do, we have to extract our natural gas and burn our natural gas
and then we can compete with China for the cost of energy.
All that we are doing with programs like this that fund renewable
energy is yielding unilateral disarmament to China on energy, and it
doesn't belong in the agriculture department.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Issa). The gentleman from Pennsylvania's time
has expired.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania
will be postponed.
Amendment No. 48 Offered by Mr. Nunn of Iowa
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 48
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. NUNN of Iowa. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 51, line 19, strike ``twenty-five'' and insert ``one-
hundred''.
Page 51, line 20, strike ``three'' and insert ``twenty''.
Page 51, line 24, strike ``twenty'' and insert ``100''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Iowa (Mr. Nunn) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Iowa.
Mr. NUNN of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to discuss the critical
need to expand broadband connectivity across the United States. In my
home State of Iowa, nearly a third of our State is considered a
broadband desert.
Hundreds of thousands of Iowans are left out from the critical access
that they need, such as for a young mother to get telemedicine
provided, for a growing farmer to be able to have the artificial
intelligence necessary for their farm to be successful, or for a fellow
veteran to get the type of access they need for their medicine over
broadband.
As parents, we know all too well the challenges of rural communities
to be able to get the same access that some of our other States have
received. It is not enough to simply have internet, but to have high-
quality access to broadband that truly grows the types of communities
that we have seen be successful.
Not just in my home State of Iowa, but across the country, these
small investments allow young entrepreneurs to work remotely. It allows
farmers to work and cultivate to both feed and fuel the world.
Importantly, they help connect through the USDA ReConnect Program
grants which allow access to grow in my home State to over 400,000
households, and not just in Iowa but nationwide.
Clearly, there is more work that needs to be done. I offered this
amendment in the Agriculture appropriations legislation to raise the
awareness and the need that is happening in rural communities across
our country, and to improve this program to ensure that we are
investing in our rural communities' success in the same way we have in
some of our large cities' success.
Strategically speaking, I want to make sure that this is something
that is enduring and not just in one appropriations bill, but that
there is a roll-out plan--a plan like the farm bill that looks at a 5-
year venture here.
With Chairman G.T. Thompson's commitment on the Agriculture
Committee, I believe we can incorporate this into the farm bill. I will
be withdrawing my amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair, I rise to claim the time in
opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair, during this Congress, the
House Committee on Agriculture has had one overarching goal: to empower
our farm families and invigorate our rural economies.
A central focus of our efforts has been to ensure that rural
economies gain access to affordable, high-speed internet.
Mr. Chair, I thank Mr. Nunn for his tireless work on behalf of his
constituents to develop smart policy ideas to bring broadband internet
to every corner of America.
Over the past several years, the House Committee on Agriculture has
worked hard on a bipartisan basis to close the connectivity gap. The
gentleman from Iowa has been a welcome addition to those conversations.
[[Page H4535]]
Every Member of this House is committed to using taxpayer funds
wisely, and the House Agriculture Committee will report a farm bill
that does just that.
We will ensure that broadband networks financed through USDA's
broadband programs will offer fast, reliable service far into the
future.
Now, I firmly believe that the best policies emerge through
discussions and collaboration. That is what we are doing as we craft
the next farm bill.
With the leadership of Members like Mr. Nunn, we will ensure USDA's
broadband programs can meet both the current and the future
connectivity needs of rural America.
Mr. Chair, I appreciate Mr. Nunn taking the time tonight to raise
these important issues. I am equally appreciative of his willingness to
withdraw his amendment and continue this conversation through the farm
bill process.
Mr. Chair, I look forward to working with the gentleman on our shared
priorities as we advance the 2023 farm bill through the House and
ultimately to the President's desk.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Iowa is recognized.
Mr. NUNN of Iowa. Mr. Chair, I specifically thank Chairman Thompson
for his leadership on this, and from the many of us from rural
communities, including agriculture communities like Iowa, for this
continued commitment to improve our broadband. We have seen time and
time again; this type of infrastructure truly can grow our economy in a
productive way.
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment from
consideration.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from Iowa?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The amendment is withdrawn.
Amendment No. 51 Offered by Mr. Donalds
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 51
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 60, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $23,440,000)''.
Page 119, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $23,440,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Florida (Mr. Donalds) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Chairman, I will be brief. My amendment does one
simple thing, it actually restores the funding for the Foreign
Agriculture Service to fiscal year 2019 levels.
In short, Mr. Chairman, our government spends a lot of money, and we
are not even sure if it is effective. One of the things that is
critical to get our overall fiscal house in order is to start looking
at line items in the Federal budget pre-COVID.
We have plussed up a lot of these agencies and a lot of these
departments, and the COVID pandemic was used as a reason to do so.
My amendment is simple. The COVID pandemic is over and it is now time
to start focusing on getting our fiscal house in order while still
being focused on the programs that are important to the agriculture
community and other communities. My amendment does that.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I certainly rise in opposition to
this amendment. The amendment would reduce funding for the Foreign
Agriculture Service, which reduces the services promoting United States
agricultural exports, developing overseas markets, and increasing
global food security.
This cut would directly harm American farmers because they would have
less opportunities to market their commodities abroad. There is already
a 14.15 percent cut from the House levels imposed by the majority in
this bill, and these cuts would only further harm our American farmers.
Mr. Chair, I urge opposition to this amendment, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Chairman, let's be very clear. What we are talking
about is moving the requested number for this appropriation down $23.4
million.
In 2019, we spent $213,000,890 on the Foreign Agriculture Service.
All we are saying is move it back to that line. The Federal Government
will still be able to accomplish its mission, but we don't have the
additional resources. We have to be prudent with the people's money so
we can actually cut that back to 2019 levels and still accomplish the
mission.
Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr.
Harris).
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chair, I congratulate the Member from Florida for
bringing a concrete idea to the floor on how to cut our $2 trillion
Federal deficit.
Once again, it is very easy to spend money. We could make a list of a
thousand programs that are deserving programs, but the fact of the
matter is we have to borrow every single cent to fund the programs in
this agriculture bill, and our grandchildren have to pay it back. That
is immoral.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I think it is interesting to
hear the discussion about a $2 trillion deficit when that was created
by the tax cut that they passed in the last administration--$2 trillion
because they cut the taxes and reduced the amount of revenue. Come on.
You balance the budget with revenues as well as with spending
reductions. Let's be real here. This is just a subterfuge. We need to
defeat this amendment and we need to move forward and try to produce an
agriculture bill that really addresses the needs of the American people
in 2023.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Chairman, I did not hear an argument as to why $250
million needs to be spent for the Foreign Agriculture Service. What I
heard, Mr. Chairman, was talk about the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act which, by
the way, has yielded more tax revenue to the Federal Government than at
any other time in American history.
The minority party refuses to acknowledge the fact that actual tax
policy changes in a positive way which reduces rates on producers in
our country actually yields more tax revenue to the Federal Government.
They refuse to acknowledge that to this day.
If you are going to ask for a recipe for fiscal sanity in this
Nation, it is to actually lower marginal tax rates over a consistent
period of time--consistent, controlled spending restraint at the
Federal level over a period of time. Those two things will actually
lead us to spending less in this government and provide more prosperity
to all of the people that we serve, regardless of where they fall on
the economic ladder.
Mr. Chairman, I ask my colleagues to support this amendment. This is
what we should be doing. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Donalds).
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIR. The Chair understands that amendment No. 52 will
not be offered.
The Chair understands that amendment No. 53 will not be offered.
Amendment No. 54 Offered by Mr. Biggs
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 54
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 61, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $1,740,000,000)''.
Page 119, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $1,740,000,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Arizona (Mr. Biggs) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
[[Page H4536]]
{time} 2245
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment to strike
funding for the Food for Peace Title II grant program, which would
direct $1.74 billion to deficit reduction.
I will repeat again what has been said so often here: Annual
discretionary spending exploded over the course of the COVID-19
response. No one thought our government was too small before COVID, and
we are currently spending $400 billion more in fiscal year 2023 for the
same government we had before. Deficits exceed $2 trillion.
Let me just make this clear: In 2019, we spent about $4.9 trillion,
$4.7- to $4.9 trillion, depends on who is telling you, and our revenue
is going to be about $5.2 trillion. Wouldn't it be great to get back to
those 2019 levels? Wouldn't it be great to get to the 2019 spending
levels with our current revenue levels? Then you would not be
increasing your deficit, your structural deficit.
The spending deficits that we have are out of control. They are
leading to this massive national debt, which is fueling inflation and
is going to be generational theft.
Let's talk about the Food for Peace Title II grant programs. Since
the program was established in the 1950s, funding for the program has
exploded. The Trump administration's fiscal year 2020 budget request
recommended eliminating this program, which is duplicative of other
foreign aid programs.
What is interesting, I say ``Trump,'' and you know that is going to
set off, oh, no, the Trump derangement syndrome folks, the far left of
this body are going to say: Oh, that is crazy.
However, Trump wasn't the first to do it. The Obama administration's
2014 budget request recommended shifting all Food for Peace Title II
funds into accounts funded through the State and Foreign Operations
appropriations bill. They cited potential improvements to flexibility,
timeliness, and efficiency.
I am urging us to wipe out $1.74 billion in wasteful, duplicative
spending and put it into deficit reduction.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this
amendment.
As a reminder, the bill already cuts the Food for Peace program by 69
percent from the level passed in the full committee. During a time of
increased need and difficult decisions ahead for prioritizing funding
from this program, this amendment would further cut Food for Peace.
Additionally, today, we have already considered three other stand-alone
amendments to cut the program.
I not only oppose this amendment due to its effects on people without
food security across the globe, I also oppose it due to its effect on
our farmers here at home. U.S. commodities are a key pillar of this
program, and cutting funding would directly harm those farmers who
produce these commodities that go to this program. There is an
international aid shortfall of commodities, including millions of
commodities that American farmers proudly produce, such as wheat, rice,
corn, sorghum, lentils, beans, and peas.
This amendment shortchanges America's farmers as well as America's
values, our Judeo-Christian values. I urge opposition to this
amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chairman, previously, some of my counterparts in
debate have said we should supply every need, the Federal Government
should supply every need to every American, and now they want to
persist in trying to satisfy the needs and wants of people offshore, as
well.
We can't afford to take care of every need of every American today.
That is why we have a $2 trillion structural deficit. That does not
include the $700 billion that we are spending in interest. We simply
cannot afford to keep giving our future away, and that is what we are
doing here.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chairman, I am encouraging everyone to support this
important amendment. I think it is important, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will
be postponed.
The Chair understands that amendment No. 55 will not be offered.
Amendment No. 56 Offered by Mr. Ogles
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 56
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. OGLES. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 61, line 25, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $120,000,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Tennessee (Mr. Ogles) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Tennessee.
Mr. OGLES. Mr. Chairman, our Nation's international food assistance
programs are broken. They drive our deficits higher while providing
little to no value to taxpayers and even harming the recipient
countries.
I am grateful for Mr. Harris' manager's amendment that reduced
funding for the destructive so-called Food for Peace program, and I
urge extending the cost cuts to its sister program, McGovern-Dole,
sometimes known as Food for Education.
When we dump free food on developing markets, their domestic farmers
can't compete. I mean, who can compete with free? Their domestic
farmers are forced out of business, and investment in their domestic
agricultural sector dwindles. In fact, we hurt those we seek to assist.
We have known that this problem has existed for years. In 2010,
watching international food aid destroy his country's agricultural
sector, the President of Haiti begged us to stop, to stop sending it.
Further, reflecting on his administration's role in testimony before
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, President Bill Clinton said:
``I had to live every day with the consequences of the loss of capacity
to produce a rice crop in Haiti to feed those people.''
Bill Clinton even recognized the mistake. However, we keep making it.
We need to stop impoverishing farmers in countries with developing
agricultural sectors and stop discouraging private investment in those
sectors.
While supporters of the McGovern-Dole program have touted its alleged
role supporting democracy and good governance, a look at the recipient
countries proves that that isn't true. USDA determines a list of
priority countries for McGovern-Dole each year. Let's take a look at
this year's recipients, seven countries.
Nicaragua, which is ruled by Daniel Ortega's thugocracy, throws its
opposition in prison, and that is on a good day. It stands accused of
politically motivated extrajudicial executions and torture and other
human rights abuses.
Then there is Togo, whose President first took power in a military
coup in 2005.
Cameroon's President, coincidentally, won reelection uninterrupted
since coming into power in 1982.
At the time the USDA put Nepal on the priority list, it had a
Communist Party leader.
These are not beacons of democracy or good governance.
Haiti still remains on the priority list; and look at Haiti today.
Decades of aid have failed to produce a reliable government there.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to
this amendment. As I said in my opening statement, this bill already
cuts the Agriculture funding bill back to a level last seen in 2001.
[[Page H4537]]
Apparently, those cuts are not enough because this amendment would
cut 50 percent from the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education
and Child Nutrition Program. That is a 50 percent cut from funding
supporting schoolchildren abroad.
This is a proven, successful program, a bipartisan program which
takes concrete steps to ensure that the program activities continue
after U.S. support is no longer provided. This money is not wasted. It
is not indefinite for any one location. It is a sound investment to
promote the health and education of schoolchildren, especially girls,
in need around the globe.
We are 4 days away from a government shutdown, and instead of
debating a bipartisan path forward, we are debating further cuts to
programs that have broad, bipartisan support. I urge all of my
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote against this amendment.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. OGLES. Mr. Chairman, success? Haiti is a wreck. Nicaragua has
sided with the CCP. They led the charge to expel Taiwan as a permanent
observer, replacing with the butchers of Beijing. Of the seven priority
countries, six of them--including Cameroon, Mozambique, Nepal,
Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, and Togo--voted to support China's imposition of
the oppressive national security law on Hong Kong. The recipient
countries have proven to be anti-American.
Their countries have failed to produce agricultural sectors because
local farmers can't compete with free. This isn't saving people from
hunger. It is destroying the very people we are trying to assist. I
urge Congress to continue to reform its food aid program. Mr. Chairman,
if you want to sow the seeds of freedom, harvest the yield of
democracy, pursuing failed policies is not the answer. I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. OGLES. Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of my amendment. These
policies are failed. They are not successful. We are hurting the very
countries that we are aiming to support. Let's help these nations, but
this is not the answer.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Ogles).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 57 Offered by Mr. Biggs
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 57
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 61, line 25, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $240,000,000)''.
Page 119, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $240,000,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Arizona (Mr. Biggs) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment to strike
funding for the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and
Child Nutrition Program.
I appreciate that the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Ogles) offered an
amendment reducing it, and I appreciate that that is now going to be
part of the underlying bill since it just passed on voice vote.
My amendment would direct the entire $240 million supporting that
program would be used to reduce our deficit in 2024.
When you think about it, Mr. Ogles certainly made a strong case as to
why that should be so, but I am going to add just a couple points to
it. I am not going to belabor the fact that we continue to spend
ourselves into oblivion at the Federal level. That is causing
tremendous inflationary pressures, bringing stress to every American
family.
What I am going to talk about instead is what happens in any Federal
bureaucracy, what we see government do constantly. Mr. Ogles talked
about the negative policy aspects of it, but I will just cover briefly
what happens in the Federal bureaucracy on the spending side of it.
This particular program, the McGovern-Dole International Food for
Education and Child Nutrition Program first received appropriations in
fiscal year 2004, just 20 years ago, 20 short years ago. The bill set
aside $50 million to carry out the program. That was the program, $50
million. Help around the world ostensibly, right?
However, what happens to Federal bureaucracies? They grow like Topsy.
This one has grown to $240 million annually.
The Trump administration's 2018 budget, pre-COVID budget, request
recommended that the program be eliminated as it ``lacks evidence that
the program is being effectively implemented to reduce food
insecurity.''
{time} 2300
Additionally, the program primarily works by donating food produced
in the United States to communities in need around the world, but we
have already heard the seven nations identified. It is a great deal for
U.S. agricultural producers whose surplus is purchased by the Federal
Government for use in the program, but the provision of free food, as
Mr. Ogles so eloquently pointed out, is required to be delivered, and
that causes native, local production to decline in those States.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I claim time in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I oppose this amendment. It is
unnecessary and harmful.
While there is a global commodity shortage and conflict that fuels
hunger around the world, this bill has already been cut by 14.15
percent. Further cuts will only cause further impacts to efforts to
improve the food security and education of children around the world.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, why else might we want to eliminate this
program? The provision of free food to these seven nations on this
list, which is required to be delivered in a not-so-timely manner on
U.S.-flagged ships, distorts food production markets in those nations
receiving aid, and it actually increases the cost.
It is a classic ``give a man a fish, feed him for a day'' problem.
The program isn't eliminating food insecurity. It is slow. It is
costly. It is growing. It pushes out local production. Quite frankly,
we simply can't afford it anymore.
At some point, we are going to have to say we are having trouble
funding everything in our own country, and now we are going to send it
abroad. That is something I don't think the American people stand for.
Mr. Chair, I urge the adoption of this amendment, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Gooden of Texas). The question is on the
amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will
be postponed.
Amendment No. 61 Offered by Mr. Biggs
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 61
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 69, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $77,000,000)''.
Page 119, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $77,000,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Arizona (Mr. Biggs) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
[[Page H4538]]
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment to restore
funding for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to fiscal year
2019 pre-COVID levels.
This amendment would direct $77 million to deficit reduction in
fiscal year 2024. Annual discretionary spending exploded over the
course of the COVID-19 response. No one thought our government was too
small before COVID. We are currently spending hundreds of billions of
dollars more in fiscal year 2023 for the same government functions that
we had before.
Deficits are now projected to exceed $2 trillion for this fiscal
year. Recently, the U.S. eclipsed $33 trillion in debt, accounting for
nearly $100,000 per U.S. citizen.
Earlier in the debates today, we were told that if we go down this
road, we are going to see a threatened credit rating reduction. We have
already seen that. Fitch already did it. Moody's is threatening to do
it again, and why are they doing it again? It is because, as they said
the last time they downgraded us, we don't have an effective plan to
handle and reduce our Federal deficit.
We just don't have a plan anymore. The plan is to actually increase
our deficit, and my bill attempts to take one small bite at trying to
shrink that deficit, that structural deficit, that leads to the gross
national debt problem we have every year.
Revenue in fiscal year 2022 levels actually exceeded our Federal
spending in fiscal year 2019. What that means is if we were to shrink
the Federal spending behemoth back to those pre-COVID levels, we might
just be able to avoid adding to our national debt for the next 12
months. That is all I am asking.
I am begging us, can we do it for a month, 2 months, 3 months? You
will see that this country will not fall apart. Instead, it will
prosper and grow, and we would be better off.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the
offered amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this
amendment. I appreciate the gentleman taking a bite at fiscal
responsibility, but this bite actually will create fiscal
irresponsibility and create harm.
The CFTC is one of our two financial market regulators acting as a
cop on the beat for commodity derivatives markets. The Commission's
work is essential to ensure that commodity markets are fair for all
participants, from the largest financial institutions to the smallest
businesses.
Robust, fair, well-policed derivative markets allow for the accurate
risk control and price discovery for essential economic inputs, like
agricultural and energy products. Domestic derivatives markets enable
U.S. producers and consumers of commodities to effectively manage their
risk, making American businesses more competitive around the world.
The Commission's work is also essential to protecting the public from
financial frauds and scams, including those targeting the elderly,
immigrants, and Americans seeking to participate in the digital assets
market.
CFTC is already one of the most cost-effective financial regulators
we have, its markets as complex and important as securities markets
with a budget that is just a slice, a sixth, of the SEC's $2 billion
budget.
Now, this bill, the underlying bill, already reduces the CFTC's
funding $296 million, which is less than FY 2021. Enacting this
amendment on top of the current reductions in the bill would reduce the
CFTC's funding to $219 million, which is a cut $49 million greater than
the sponsor's intent.
Instead of bringing the CFTC back to 2019 funding levels, this
amendment would bring the CFTC back to its 2014 funding levels. If
enacted into law, this amendment would result in a 40 percent reduction
in funding for the Commission and would jeopardize the critical work
the agency does to support the economy and protect Americans from
financial fraud.
Mr. Chair, I strongly oppose this amendment, and I urge my colleagues
to do the same. I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chair, I appreciate my friend, the Agriculture
Committee chairman, and his opposition, but I must respectfully
disagree. The proposed funding level for the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission is a nearly 30 percent increase over the fiscal year 2019
levels.
The CFTC is following in the footsteps of the SEC under the Biden
administration with efforts to mandate, without statutory authority, an
onerous climate disclosure regime on the private sector.
Last year, the CFTC solicited comments on climate-related financial
risk. Conservative attorneys general, led by West Virginia Attorney
General Patrick Morrisey, forcefully pushed back, stating that attempts
to mandate disclosure through rulemaking or through another regulatory
framework would clearly implicate the major questions doctrine, raised
First Amendment concerns related to compelled speech, and stated that
courts would find climate-related action to be arbitrary and
capricious.
{time} 2310
Other reporting suggests that the CFTC is aggressively pursuing
enforcement action and hefty fines over minor technical reporting
requirements. That is typical of the bureaucratic regime established
under the Biden administration.
Adoption of my amendment would ensure that the CFTC is properly
utilizing its resources to fulfill its mission of fostering open,
competitive, and financially sound futures and option markets, not
becoming the Biden administration's ESG enforcer.
Mr. Chair, I urge adoption of my amendment, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona will
be postponed.
Amendment No. 62 Offered by Mr. Donalds
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 62
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 69, line 14, after the dollar amount, insert
``(reduced by $96,000,000)''.
Page 119, line 20, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $96,000,000)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Florida (Mr. Donalds) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Chairman, my amendment in short does something very
simple. It actually reduces the funding requirement for the Commodity
Futures Trading Commission back to FY 2018 levels.
In short, Mr. Chairman, the job of the CFTC has been operating for a
very long time. The additional $96 million in money, it is not clear
why they need that to be able to regulate the Commodity Futures Trading
platform.
Nothing miraculously has changed in commodity trading from 2018 to
2024, so in my view, Mr. Chairman, we need to restore those levels back
to the FY18 levels in part because the CFTC will still be able to
accomplish their mission, number one.
Number two, we are running a $2 trillion deficit this fiscal year. We
have to actually begin to pull some of these agencies back two levels
so the American taxpayer can actually begin to afford, and not the
wishful thinking of Federal agencies.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to
this amendment
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
[[Page H4539]]
Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, it is a good thing I
represent Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania, because it feels like Groundhog
Day all over again.
I don't see the point of defunding the police further than what the
underlying bill has done to police. It really provides safeguards for
those who are involved in the derivative market, those small
businesses, those farmers, those Americans.
As I have mentioned before, the CFTC is one of our two financial
market regulators. They are the police within this area, acting as a
cop on the beat for the commodity derivatives market.
The Commission's work is essential to ensure that commodity markets
are fair for all participants, from the largest financial institutions
to the smallest businesses. Robust, fair, well-policed derivative
markets allow for accurate risk control and price discovery for
essential economic inputs like agricultural and energy products.
Domestic derivative markets enable the United States producers and
consumers of commodities to effectively manage their risk, making
American businesses more competitive around the world.
Now, this Commission's work is also essential to protecting the
public from financial frauds and scams, including those targeting the
elderly, immigrants, and Americans seeking to participate in the
digital asset markets, which, quite frankly, is an increasing number
given the state of digital assets in the derivatives market.
The CFTC is already one of the most cost-effective financial
regulators we have. It polices markets as complex and important as
securities markets, with a budget that--once again I have to state--is
less than a fifth of the SEC's $2 billion budget.
The bill already reduces CFTC's funding to $296 million, which is
less than FY 2021.
Enacting this amendment on top of the current reductions in the bill
would reduce, quite frankly, this police force from protecting those
investing through the derivatives market, their funding to $200
million, which is a cut $49 million greater than the sponsor's intent.
Instead of bringing the CFTC back to 2018 funding levels, this
amendment would bring the CFTC back to 2011 funding levels.
If enacted into law, this amendment would result in a 45-percent
reduction in funding for the Commission and jeopardize the critical
work that the agency does to support the economy and protect Americans
from financial fraud.
I strongly oppose this amendment, and I urge my colleagues to do the
same.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Chairman, a couple of things. Number one, the
regulatory mission and the enforcement mission for the CFTC has not
been encumbered in any way over the last several years, so cutting
their spending back at a time when the American taxpayer does not have
more money, first, to give to the Federal Government and its leviathan
of overspending but, number two, borrowing more money from its future
is just not the prudent measure to do. That is one and two.
Number three, Congress has not outlined any regulatory framework
around the digital assets framework. It does not exist because Congress
has not spoken about digital assets. For the CFTC to take
appropriations to regulate a space it has no legal authority to
regulate, in my view, is outside the purview of the CFTC.
There might be a time in the future where Congress would regulate
legislative responsibilities around the digital assets marketplace, but
that has not occurred at this time.
Number four, I would agree with the gentleman from Pennsylvania, the
CFTC, with respect to all the other regulators, is one of the most
cost-effective.
Obviously, I believe the SEC is bloated and, frankly, out of control
in a myriad of areas, but that does not mean that we just turn a blind
eye to the budgets of every aspect of the Federal Government. We have
to bring some semblance of fiscal sanity to this government and
starting even with the good ``cops on the beat'' is a responsible thing
to do.
The CFTC can still accomplish its mission if their budget is
restrained to a degree. There has not been any really significant
issues in the derivative markets since, frankly, 2008, where the CFTC
has not been able to accomplish its mission. This lower funding level
will allow them to do the same.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Donalds).
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIR. The Chair understands that amendment No. 64 will
not be offered.
Amendment No. 65 Offered by Mr. Graves of Louisiana
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 65
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 119, after line 18, insert the following:
Sec. 775A. None of the funds made available by this Act
may be used to carry out clause (ii) of section 6(o)(4)(A) of
the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2015(o)(4)(A)).
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Louisiana (Mr. Graves) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Louisiana.
Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Chairman, in 1996 this Congress came
together to work on a bipartisan basis and enact work requirements for
welfare programs.
Mr. Chairman, let me be very clear. The United States needs a social
safety net. We need a social welfare program--let me say it again--as a
safety net, as a program that is there to help those on a temporary
basis at a time of need to offer a handout.
Under President Clinton, under Republicans and Democrats working
together in 1996, and I make note, Mr. Chairman, then-Senator Joe Biden
voted in support of installing work requirements for welfare programs
such as for the SNAP program, and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program, commonly known as food stamps.
{time} 2320
Under the program or under the law change, the work requirements
simply meant that you needed to go to a job assistance center, a job
training center, somewhere to gain the skills to connect you with
available jobs.
More recently, Mr. Chair, just months ago, Republicans and
Democrats--and I want to make note the majority of Democrats in this
Chamber, the majority of Republicans in this Chamber and our President
Joe Biden signed into law strengthening those work requirements; for
example, raising the requirement up to age 55 that work capable
individuals without dependents would be responsible for 20 hours of
work in order to be eligible after an extended period for programs like
food stamps.
This body came together and established a hard cap on the percentage
of individuals that a State may be able to exempt.
What has happened is we have watched as the States have abused a
loophole, a loophole that simply says if there are insufficient jobs,
you don't have to comply with the work requirement. Eighteen States
today--18 States--have said that they have insufficient jobs. Mr.
Chair, that is ridiculous.
We have one of the lowest workforce participation rates in modern
history. We have 8.8 million jobs available according to the Bureau of
Labor Statistics. Jobs are available. Let's be clear. For those who are
going to come out and say that this is mean, this is mean-spirited,
this is cruel--let's be clear, Mr. Chair, the objective of work
requirements--I am certain that Bill Clinton had as President, that
then-Senator Joe Biden supported, that more recently President Joe
Biden signed into law--the objective here is following models that have
shown getting people to job assistance centers, job training centers,
volunteering in
[[Page H4540]]
their community, volunteering in their church, going to school helps
improve employability. It helps get people back in the workforce,
taking them off of government dependence and becoming members of our
society that determine their own future.
Mr. Chair, I urge adoption of this amendment, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this
amendment.
The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I have extremely strong opposition
to this amendment.
If there are not sufficient jobs for people in the State, who are we
to take that State's judgment away?
The other side is always talking about States' rights. Well, these
are not people that are living high on the hog. They are not people
that have excess money.
I cannot and I will not support this amendment, nor will any of my
Democratic colleagues. It is mean and it is cruel to ask people to do
something that is not possible. If there aren't jobs, they can't be
employed and they can't comply with this. The States should know better
than we in Washington. If the State requests a waiver, which is a
request, it is not a mandate, certainly the Department can examine it
and determine whether or not there is sufficient cause to justify the
waiver.
We shouldn't just sua sponte on our own decide that a State doesn't
have sense enough to know what is going on within its borders.
We should not support this, and if it is included in the final
conference agreement, I doubt my Democratic colleagues would provide
the necessary votes for final passage, nor that the President would
sign the bill.
I urge us to defeat this amendment. It really makes no sense, and it
is mean, and it is cruel.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry).
Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman from Louisiana for
yielding. He has a great amendment. Now, he doesn't have great hair
right now--there is a little too much of it--but he has a great
amendment.
He is talking about the abuse of States. I come from Pennsylvania
where these waivers are continually abused.
Let's face it, Mr. Chair, they wouldn't have to be abused, they don't
have to be abused at all. If my friends on the left would quit
destroying the economies and the fabric of the household that makes a
living and makes everything more expensive for them, none of this would
be required. First, they destroy the house's income, and then they
subsidize it and force them to do this.
These waivers are indicative of this policy, Mr. Chair, and the
gentleman from Louisiana makes a great point. This is a great
amendment, and it should be adopted because these programs exist to
help people but not to be abused by States that use them to push people
further into poverty, which is what happens. They can never get out,
and they are ever dependent. These waivers support that, and that is
why they should end.
Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Chair, I will respond to my friend's
comments. I actually agree with what he said, and, fortunately, he is
not making any reference to my amendment.
Let's be clear on what happens here. These are Federal funds; so,
yes, absolutely, the Federal Government should be determining it. This
has nothing to do with State's rights. We don't let the States cut the
check for the Federal Government. That is inappropriate.
Number two, no one is taking these benefits away. Let's keep in mind,
taxpayers are funding these programs, and all we are doing is we are
simply asking for 20 hours a week of volunteer time in return for
receiving these very generous taxpayer-funded benefits.
Lastly, Mr. Chair, the outcomes show, study after study shows this
results in getting people back in the workforce. This should be our
objective. Why in the world would we want to force people to stay on
social welfare programs? That is cruel. We shouldn't be doing that to
anyone. It is entirely inappropriate.
Mr. Chair, I urge adoption of this amendment, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Graves).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 66 Offered by Mr. Tiffany
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 66
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. TIFFANY. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to finalize, implement, administer, or enforce
section 3 (relating to milk) of the rule entitled ``Child
Nutrition Programs: Revisions to Meal Patterns Consistent
with the 2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans'' published by
the Department of Agriculture in the Federal Register on
February 7, 2023 (88 Fed. Reg. 8050).
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 66, the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Tiffany) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. TIFFANY. Mr. Chair, my bipartisan amendment ensures that none of
the funds made available by this bill will go toward funding a rule
that will ban flavored milk, like chocolate milk, in schools.
This would ensure that all types and flavors of milk are available to
schoolchildren.
This summer it was reported that the USDA is considering banning
chocolate milk from elementary and middle schools.
USDA issued a proposed rule in February that would set new nutrition
standards for school meals. If implemented, the new standards proposed
could limit the amount of flavored milk, like chocolate and strawberry,
in high schools while children in elementary and middle schools would
be restricted to a variety of unflavored milk. This rule would affect
roughly 30 million students who participate in the school meal
programs.
According to the Journal of the American Dietetic Association,
removing flavored milk from schools resulted in a 62 to 63 percent
reduction in milk consumption by kids in kindergarten through fifth
grade, as well as a 50 percent reduction in sixth through eighth
grades.
Milk is full of rich nutrients that support bone growth and
development, and millions of children enjoy drinking it.
We should not be funding rules that would limit our children's access
to delicious and nutritious products like milk.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this bipartisan amendment,
and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chair, this amendment, as the gentleman
from Wisconsin has said, prohibits funds from being used to finalize,
implement, administer, or enforce the milk section of USDA's proposed
rule that aligns nutrition standards to the 2020 dietary guidelines for
Americans. This appropriations rider is preemptive as the final rule
hadn't even been released by the Department, and it is out of place
because this issue should be taken up within the context of a child
nutrition reauthorization, not an appropriations rider.
{time} 2330
This amendment disregards the normal scientific process currently
being undertaken to establish the nutrition guidelines.
School meals and beverages are required to be consistent with the
dietary guidelines for Americans, which are evidence-based
recommendations set to provide nutritional guidance.
This amendment would effectively undermine the unbiased, evidence-
based process that ensures that children receive the most nutritious
meals and replace that scientifically based process with a political
process.
[[Page H4541]]
It is critical that science continue to guide the process in
determining options in schools and that the regulations are updated to
align with the newest dietary guidelines using a process that
intentionally allows for adaptations in line with the latest scientific
and expert recommendations.
Importantly, the Department of Agriculture has specifically requested
public feedback on the proposed milk options for consideration when
crafting the final rule.
The bottom line is that scientific experts, not politicians, should
be the ones to determine the nutrition standards and ensure that our
children get the healthiest meals possible.
A dozen organizations, including the Academy of Nutrition and
Dietetics, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Heart
Association, have all urged Congress to continue to respect the
scientific-based process and not interfere with the normal procedure.
Mr. Chair, I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
Mr. TIFFANY. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Van Orden), my friend and neighbor in the Third
Congressional District.
Mr. VAN ORDEN. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of this amendment,
which will continue the allowance of flavored milk in school nutrition
programs.
Dairy products deliver nutrients critical to children's health and
development. Milk is the top source of protein, calcium, potassium,
phosphorus, and vitamin D for children ages 2 to 11. Dairy also
provides nutrients vital for immune health.
Unfortunately, children are not consuming enough dairy to benefit
from these essential nutrients. Removing flavored milk from schools
only deters school-aged children from drinking milk.
Mr. Chair, I ask my colleagues to support this amendment to continue
to fully allow nonfat and low-fat flavored milk in grades K-12 to
ensure our children have access to nutrients that they need.
I will say to my Democratic colleagues on the other side of the aisle
that we must be cautious when we are speaking about conflating politics
with science. We have learned that over the last 3 years.
Mr. TIFFANY. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry).
Mr. PERRY. Mr. Chair, I thank Mr. Tiffany for the amendment. I want,
with him, to speak on behalf of parents and children, not on behalf of
politicians and so-called scientists.
This is what we know. We shouldn't even be having this conversation
because we didn't enact this Federal Government to ban things from us.
We want to make the decisions. Children want to make the decisions.
Parents want to make the decisions. We know what is best for us. We
don't need them to tell us. We will figure it out ourselves. Over the
course of a couple hundred years, we have done pretty well here without
scientists and politicians telling us and our children what is good or
what is bad.
Let me tell you what is good and what is bad. What is bad is school
lunches today. Do you know how I know? Because kids don't want to eat
them. All the nutrition they are getting? They are not getting it
because they don't want them. The only time they are going to eat them
is if it is the only thing they have to eat, and you are limiting that
now. It is absurd.
Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin for offering the
amendment. I hope that we win this amendment, and kids and parents can
finally make choices for themselves.
Mr. TIFFANY. Mr. Chair, in many ways, this may be the least of the
amendments that you will hear tonight, but it is actually, I would say,
the most of the amendments.
Here is the reason why: When you have a Federal Government that
believes that they need to regulate the milk that is served in our
kids' schools across America, you have a Federal Government that is out
of control.
We have become a borderless country. When our Federal Government has
become perhaps the largest human trafficking operation in the history
of the world, when you have a Federal Government that will not take us
back to energy independence, where gasoline is now back up to $4 a
gallon where I live in northern Wisconsin, where you have a Federal
Government that has fueled inflation like we haven't seen for 40 years,
what in the world are they doing? What in the world are they doing
trying to regulate what milk is served in our kids' schools?
That is why we are here tonight and trying to pass these amendments.
They get America back to a place of fiscal responsibility but also
sanity from what we have seen over the last couple of years with this
profligate spending that is going on.
Finally, I will say that I come from America's Dairyland, and you are
damn right that I am going to fight for milk in our kids' schools.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Tiffany).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 67 Offered by Mr. Bost
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 67
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. BOST. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert
the following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act
may be used by the Secretary of Agriculture to purchase
electric vehicles.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Illinois (Mr. Bost) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois.
Mr. BOST. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment to restrict the
Secretary of Agriculture from using taxpayer dollars to purchase
electric vehicles.
The American people have had enough of the Green New Deal mandates.
Families and farmers in my district, who fear the steady march of Big
Government, know that it is just the beginning before Big Government
makes it harder to purchase the vehicles you want to drive and that you
have to drive to operate your farms and businesses.
I have talked to car dealers in my district that are having a hard
time even moving electric vehicles off the lot. No one wants to buy
them. Not only do electric vehicles cost more than gas-powered
vehicles, but they also make us more dependent on global adversaries
for the lithium batteries it takes to run them.
Americans should not be forced to heel under the Biden
administration's push for this radical agenda.
There are better solutions. For instance, biofuels offer a tremendous
energy opportunity for our country that supports our farmers in the
fields and the consumers at the pump with cleaner and cheaper fuel.
The USDA should be supporting and uplifting American farmers, not
selling them out to please environmental activists. My amendment shows
that the people's House will hold the Biden administration accountable
to the people.
Mr. Chair, I urge support of my amendment, and I reserve the balance
of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to
this amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, electric vehicles produce no carbon
dioxide or other harmful emissions when driving, and they create a
healthy environment for all Americans by reducing air pollution.
Electric vehicles require less fluids and lubricants, which keeps our
drinking water cleaner.
Why would anyone object to having cleaner air or cleaner water for
our children and our grandchildren?
This amendment doesn't save the American taxpayer any money because
it prohibits the Secretary of Agriculture from purchasing electric
vehicles that will reduce fuel costs for the Department of Agriculture.
It is estimated that by 2035, most of the world's automakers will
offer nothing but electric vehicles. While that is
[[Page H4542]]
12 years away, there is no reason to prohibit the Department of
Agriculture from replacing retiring vehicles with electric vehicles to
build our fleet for the future.
We are all witnessing the impacts of climate change through drought
and extreme weather events. Let's not prevent any steps that would help
us address climate change.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 2340
Mr. BOST. Mr. Chairman, first off, I have actually met with members
of the Auto Dealers Association who have tremendous amounts of EVs
sitting on their lots that they can't sell. Yet, we continue to push
from the Federal Government and from the Biden administration to try to
push that.
I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Harris).
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman from Illinois for
yielding time.
This is a commonsense amendment. The bottom line is it is a myth to
say that electric vehicles produce no CO2. Where do you
think the electricity comes from when you plug it into the outlet? Most
electricity in the United States is producing CO2.
Secondly, why would we want the Federal Government to buy a vehicle,
an expensive vehicle, that people don't even buy for themselves?
We should run the Federal Government much more efficiently. These are
not the most efficient purchases to make. We have a $2 trillion
deficit.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. BOST. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Minnesota
(Mr. Stauber).
Mr. STAUBER. Mr. Chair, my colleague from the other side of the aisle
just talked about electric vehicles and how clean they are.
Well, let me ask you something. Why would you mine those critical
minerals, Mr. Chair, in a foreign adversarial land under zero
environmental standards and zero labor standards, when we can do it
better here in this country?
In the district that I have the privilege of representing, we have
the biggest copper-nickel find in the world to help mine these critical
minerals safely.
My colleagues on the other side of the aisle and this administration,
Mr. Chair, won't even let us mine those minerals here in the United
States of America. They would rather have the polluting Chinese
Communist Party mine these minerals and then say we want to get to this
green energy and turn a blind eye to the atrocities and the child slave
labor coming from the communist country of China and the Congo where 15
of those 19 industrial mines are owned by the Chinese communist country
who employ child slave labor.
Don't tell me that electric vehicles are cleaner.
Mr. BOST. Mr. Chairman, let me explain this. As I said, auto dealers
themselves, since we put this in place, cannot sell these vehicles. No
one wants them even if the government is trying to force us to take
them.
They are offering tax incentives. They are offering everything that
you think would drive somebody to purchase a vehicle they don't want.
We, as United States citizens, and my constituents and your
constituents, Mr. Chair, know and understand that we are consumers. We
kind of like this freedom thing we have in this Nation. We want to make
sure that that freedom works for us.
I am going to tell you, it is vitally important that our farmers have
vehicles that are affordable, that are reliable, and that they can do
the job of providing the food, fiber, and all of the things that we
require from our farmers to make sure that we can feed the world.
Mr. Chairman, if we continue down this path, it doesn't allow them to
do that. I encourage all the Members to support this amendment. I yield
back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Bost).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 68 Offered by Mr. McCormick
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 68
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. McCORMICK. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the spending reduction
account) insert the following:
Sec. ___. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to implement the revised guidance entitled ``Marketed
Unapproved Drugs--Compliance Policy Guide Sec. 440.100,
Marketed New Drugs Without Approved NDAs or ANDAs'',
published by the Food and Drug Administration in the Federal
Register on September 21, 2011 (76 Fed. Reg. 58398) (or any
guidance of the same substance).
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Georgia (Mr. McCormick) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. McCORMICK. Mr. Chair, I rise to offer my amendment No. 68 to H.R.
4368, the Agricultural, Rural Development, Food and Drug
Administration, and Related Agencies appropriations bill.
Amendment No. 68 prohibits funding for the implementation of the
Unapproved Drug Initiative. This initiative causes generic drugs that
have historically low prices to have their prices skyrocket, which
ultimately hurts families across the Nation.
Because of the Unapproved Drug Initiative, many generic drugs that
have been used for centuries were removed from the market and awarded
to large pharmaceutical companies to seek new drug applications, which
has led to monopolistic practices.
On top of this, the new drug manufacturer was granted a period of
market exclusivity and aggressively used the courts to block other drug
companies from marketing cheaper generic alternatives for years.
The best example of this issue is in the pricing of the therapeutic
drug colchicine. When I was a resident at Grady Hospital through the
Emory ER residency program, I treated patients with colchicine for
gout.
The drug had been around for centuries. It was a cheap drug. The
average American could afford it. It cost about $11.
After this initiative, colchicine increased nearly 16-fold from about
$11 in 2009 to $190 in 2011. The average family cannot afford that.
As of 2020, price increases of drugs through the Unapproved Drug
Initiative have increased U.S. health spending by $3.2 billion.
High drug costs do not only interfere with appropriate use of
medications, but they force families to make impossible choices between
their healthcare and other basic needs.
If reinstated, the Unapproved Drug Initiative would target an
estimated 1,500 drugs. Even one increase would punish all of us,
whether destitute or well-insured.
The only one who wins is Big Pharma. We all lose. That is why I urge
my colleagues to support amendment No. 68, which serves as a safeguard
to ensure that the FDA does not continue to implement the Unapproved
Drug Initiative, which is hurting Americans and placing an undue burden
on the healthcare system.
To be clear, there will never be a good use for this. It can only be
used to profit and cannot benefit people we serve, especially the most
vulnerable.
I appeal to my fellow Georgian, my fellow servant, my fellow
Christian, join me in a nonpartisan effort to protect the American
people.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. McCormick).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 69 Offered by Mrs. Miller of Illinois
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 69
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mrs. MILLER of Illinois. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the spending reduction
account), insert the following:
Sec. ___. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to implement
[[Page H4543]]
any recommendation specified in the Interim Report 2023
issued by the USDA Equity Commission established pursuant to
section 1006(b)(3) of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021
(135 Stat. 13).
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentlewoman
from Illinois (Mrs. Miller) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Illinois.
Mrs. MILLER of Illinois. Mr. Chair, under the Biden administration,
the Department of Agriculture is being forced to pander to the left's
extreme ideology instead of helping farmers in rural communities.
While farmers struggle with the increasing cost of inputs caused by
the Biden administration, the Biden Department of Agriculture is
focusing on equity and climate change.
The Department of Agriculture's job is to support farmers and rural
communities, not political equity reports.
I urge my colleagues to stand with me and support this amendment to
ensure that no funds go toward the Biden administration's woke agenda
policies.
Let us refocus the USDA on its core mission of supporting farmers in
rural communities.
I urge the adoption of my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I claim time in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I oppose this amendment. This
amendment would prohibit funding for carrying out the recommendations
of the interim report of the USDA Equity Commission.
The Equity Commission has made 32 initial recommendations on a range
of topics such as environmental justice, increasing financial support
for minority-serving institutions, and ensuring farmworkers have access
to nutrition programs, among other topics.
{time} 2350
These recommendations are a great first step toward addressing
historic inequities and we should all support them.
Therefore, I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. MILLER of Illinois. Mr. Chair, it is time to refocus the USDA on
its core mission of supporting our farmers and rural communities.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Miller).
The amendment was agreed to.
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings
will now resume on those amendments printed in part F of House Report
118-216 on which further proceedings were postponed, in the following
order:
Amendment No. 24 by Mr. Good of Virginia.
Amendment No. 29 by Mr. Biggs of Arizona.
Amendment No. 33 by Mr. Biggs of Arizona.
Amendment No. 41 by Mr. Brecheen of Oklahoma.
Amendment No. 43 by Mr. Brecheen of Oklahoma.
Amendment No. 45 by Mr. Perry of Pennsylvania.
Amendment No. 54 by Mr. Biggs of Arizona.
Amendment No. 57 by Mr. Biggs of Arizona.
Amendment No. 61 by Mr. Biggs of Arizona.
The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the minimum time for any
electronic vote after the first vote in this series.
Amendment No. 24 Offered by Mr. Good of Virginia
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 24, printed in part F of House Report
118-216 offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Good), on which
further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by
voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 175,
noes 254, not voting 10, as follows:
[Roll No. 408]
AYES--175
Aderholt
Alford
Allen
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bean (FL)
Bentz
Bergman
Bice
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brecheen
Buchanan
Buck
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Calvert
Cammack
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Cole
Collins
Comer
Crane
Crawford
Crenshaw
Curtis
Davidson
De La Cruz
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Donalds
Duncan
Edwards
Ellzey
Emmer
Estes
Ezell
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fleischmann
Foxx
Franklin, C. Scott
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Garcia, Mike
Gimenez
Gonzales, Tony
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Houchin
Hudson
Huizenga
Hunt
Jackson (TX)
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (PA)
Kelly (MS)
Kustoff
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Latta
Lesko
Loudermilk
Luetkemeyer
Luttrell
Malliotakis
Massie
Mast
McCarthy
McClain
McClintock
McCormick
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (OH)
Miller (WV)
Mills
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Moran
Moylan
Nehls
Newhouse
Norman
Obernolte
Ogles
Owens
Palmer
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Rutherford
Santos
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Self
Sessions
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Strong
Tenney
Tiffany
Timmons
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Walberg
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Yakym
Zinke
NOES--254
Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Auchincloss
Bacon
Baird
Balint
Barragan
Beatty
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Bucshon
Budzinski
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Ciscomani
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
D'Esposito
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
Dingell
Doggett
Duarte
Dunn (FL)
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Fletcher
Flood
Foster
Foushee
Frankel, Lois
Frost
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Robert
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gonzalez-Colon
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Huffman
Issa
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson Lee
Jacobs
James
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Joyce (OH)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kean (NJ)
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Khanna
Kiggans (VA)
Kildee
Kiley
Kilmer
Kim (CA)
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
LaLota
Landsman
Langworthy
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTurner
Lawler
Lee (CA)
Lee (FL)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Letlow
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Lynch
Mace
Magaziner
Mann
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McCaul
McClellan
McCollum
McGarvey
McGovern
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Mfume
Miller-Meeks
Molinaro
Moolenaar
Moore (WI)
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Mrvan
Mullin
Murphy
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Nickel
Norcross
Norton
Nunn (IA)
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Ross
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Ryan
Salazar
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Slotkin
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
[[Page H4544]]
Stevens
Strickland
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Valadao
Van Orden
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wagner
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Williams (NY)
Wilson (FL)
NOT VOTING--10
Bush
Carter (TX)
Lucas
Luna
McHenry
Peltola
Pence
Radewagen
Sablan
Scholten
{time} 1319
Mr. COHEN changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Messrs. JOHNSON of Ohio, MILLER of Ohio, CRAWFORD, and ADERHOLT
changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 29 Offered by Mr. Biggs
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Murphy). The unfinished business is the demand
for a recorded vote on amendment No. 29, printed in part F of House
Report 118-216 offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs), on
which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes
prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 119,
noes 307, not voting 13, as follows:
[Roll No. 409]
AYES--119
Amodei
Arrington
Babin
Banks
Bean (FL)
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Brecheen
Buchanan
Buck
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Cammack
Carter (GA)
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Collins
Comer
Crane
Crenshaw
Curtis
Davidson
Donalds
Edwards
Ellzey
Emmer
Estes
Fallon
Ferguson
Finstad
Fitzgerald
Fleischmann
Foxx
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Garcia, Mike
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Houchin
Hudson
Huizenga
Hunt
Jackson (TX)
Johnson (LA)
Jordan
Joyce (PA)
Kustoff
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lesko
Loudermilk
Luttrell
Mace
Malliotakis
Massie
Mast
McCarthy
McClintock
McCormick
Miller (WV)
Mills
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Moran
Nehls
Norman
Ogles
Owens
Palmer
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rosendale
Roy
Salazar
Santos
Scalise
Schweikert
Self
Sessions
Smith (MO)
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Spartz
Steel
Steube
Tiffany
Timmons
Van Drew
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Westerman
Williams (NY)
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Zinke
NOES--307
Adams
Aderholt
Aguilar
Alford
Allen
Allred
Armstrong
Auchincloss
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Balint
Barragan
Beatty
Bentz
Bera
Bergman
Beyer
Bice
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bost
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Bucshon
Budzinski
Calvert
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carey
Carl
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Ciscomani
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crawford
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
D'Esposito
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
De La Cruz
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Duarte
Duncan
Dunn (FL)
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Ezell
Feenstra
Fischbach
Fitzpatrick
Fletcher
Foster
Foushee
Frankel, Lois
Franklin, C. Scott
Frost
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Robert
Gimenez
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzales, Tony
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gonzalez-Colon
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Guest
Guthrie
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Hill
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Huffman
Issa
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson Lee
Jacobs
James
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Joyce (OH)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kean (NJ)
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Khanna
Kiggans (VA)
Kildee
Kiley
Kilmer
Kim (CA)
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
LaHood
LaLota
Landsman
Langworthy
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latta
LaTurner
Lawler
Lee (CA)
Lee (FL)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Letlow
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Luetkemeyer
Lynch
Magaziner
Mann
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McCaul
McClain
McClellan
McCollum
McGarvey
McHenry
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Meuser
Mfume
Miller (IL)
Miller (OH)
Miller-Meeks
Molinaro
Moolenaar
Moore (WI)
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Moylan
Mrvan
Mullin
Murphy
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newhouse
Nickel
Norcross
Norton
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Ross
Rouzer
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rutherford
Ryan
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Simpson
Slotkin
Smith (NE)
Smith (WA)
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Stauber
Stefanik
Steil
Stevens
Strickland
Strong
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Tenney
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Valadao
Van Duyne
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wagner
Walberg
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Wenstrup
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Womack
Yakym
NOT VOTING--13
Barr
Bush
Carter (TX)
Flood
Lucas
Luna
McGovern
Peltola
Pence
Radewagen
Sablan
Scholten
Van Orden
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 1734
Ms. FOXX and Mr. JACKSON of Texas changed their vote from ``no'' to
``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 33 Offered by Mr. Biggs
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 33, printed in part F of House Report
118-216 offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs), on which
further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by
voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 106,
noes 323, not voting 10, as follows:
[Roll No. 410]
AYES--106
Arrington
Banks
Bean (FL)
Biggs
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Brecheen
Buck
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Carey
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Collins
Comer
Crane
Curtis
Davidson
Donalds
Duncan
Edwards
Emmer
Estes
Fallon
Fitzgerald
Foxx
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Garcia, Mike
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Graves (LA)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Hageman
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Houchin
Hudson
Hunt
Jackson (TX)
Johnson (LA)
Jordan
Joyce (PA)
Kelly (MS)
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Latta
Lesko
Loudermilk
Luttrell
Mace
Massie
Mast
McCarthy
McClintock
McCormick
McHenry
Miller (WV)
Mills
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Moran
Nehls
Norman
Ogles
Owens
Palmer
Perry
Pfluger
Reschenthaler
Rosendale
Roy
Salazar
Scalise
Schweikert
Self
Sessions
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Spartz
Steel
Steube
Tiffany
Timmons
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Wagner
Walberg
Waltz
[[Page H4545]]
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (NY)
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
NOES--323
Adams
Aderholt
Aguilar
Alford
Allen
Allred
Amodei
Armstrong
Auchincloss
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Balint
Barragan
Beatty
Bentz
Bera
Bergman
Beyer
Bice
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bost
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Buchanan
Bucshon
Budzinski
Calvert
Cammack
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carl
Carson
Carter (GA)
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Ciscomani
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
D'Esposito
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
De La Cruz
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Duarte
Dunn (FL)
Ellzey
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Ezell
Feenstra
Ferguson
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fletcher
Flood
Foster
Foushee
Frankel, Lois
Franklin, C. Scott
Frost
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Robert
Gimenez
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzales, Tony
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gonzalez-Colon
Gottheimer
Granger
Graves (MO)
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Harder (CA)
Harris
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Huffman
Huizenga
Issa
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson Lee
Jacobs
James
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Joyce (OH)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kean (NJ)
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Khanna
Kiggans (VA)
Kildee
Kiley
Kilmer
Kim (CA)
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Kustoff
LaLota
Landsman
Langworthy
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTurner
Lawler
Lee (CA)
Lee (FL)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Letlow
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Luetkemeyer
Lynch
Magaziner
Malliotakis
Mann
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McCaul
McClain
McClellan
McCollum
McGarvey
McGovern
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Meuser
Mfume
Miller (IL)
Miller (OH)
Miller-Meeks
Molinaro
Moolenaar
Moore (WI)
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Moylan
Mrvan
Mullin
Murphy
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newhouse
Nickel
Norcross
Norton
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Posey
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Ross
Rouzer
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rutherford
Ryan
Salinas
Sanchez
Santos
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Simpson
Slotkin
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (WA)
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Stauber
Stefanik
Steil
Stevens
Strickland
Strong
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Tenney
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Valadao
Van Orden
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Weber (TX)
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Womack
Yakym
Zinke
NOT VOTING--10
Barr
Bush
Carter (TX)
Lucas
Luna
Peltola
Pence
Radewagen
Sablan
Velazquez
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 2048
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 41 Offered by Mr. Breechen
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 41, printed in part F of House Report
118-216 offered by the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Breechen), on which
further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by
voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 86,
noes 343, not voting 10, as follows:
[Roll No. 411]
AYES--86
Arrington
Babin
Banks
Barr
Bean (FL)
Biggs
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Brecheen
Buck
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Carey
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Collins
Comer
Crane
Curtis
Davidson
Donalds
Edwards
Ellzey
Estes
Fallon
Foxx
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Garcia, Mike
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Hudson
Jackson (TX)
Johnson (LA)
Jordan
Kustoff
Lamborn
Lesko
Loudermilk
Luttrell
Massie
McClintock
McCormick
Miller (WV)
Mills
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Murphy
Nehls
Norman
Ogles
Owens
Palmer
Perry
Posey
Rosendale
Roy
Salazar
Santos
Scalise
Schweikert
Self
Smith (MO)
Spartz
Steel
Tiffany
Timmons
Van Duyne
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
NOES--343
Adams
Aderholt
Aguilar
Alford
Allen
Allred
Amodei
Armstrong
Auchincloss
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Balint
Barragan
Beatty
Bentz
Bera
Bergman
Beyer
Bice
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bost
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Buchanan
Bucshon
Budzinski
Calvert
Cammack
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carl
Carson
Carter (GA)
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Ciscomani
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
D'Esposito
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
De La Cruz
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Duarte
Duncan
Dunn (FL)
Emmer
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Ezell
Feenstra
Ferguson
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fletcher
Flood
Foster
Foushee
Frankel, Lois
Franklin, C. Scott
Frost
Gallagher
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Robert
Gimenez
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzales, Tony
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gonzalez-Colon
Gottheimer
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Guest
Guthrie
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Hill
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houchin
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Huffman
Huizenga
Hunt
Issa
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson Lee
Jacobs
James
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kean (NJ)
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Khanna
Kiggans (VA)
Kildee
Kiley
Kilmer
Kim (CA)
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
LaHood
LaLota
LaMalfa
Landsman
Langworthy
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latta
LaTurner
Lawler
Lee (CA)
Lee (FL)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Letlow
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Luetkemeyer
Lynch
Mace
Magaziner
Malliotakis
Mann
Manning
Mast
Matsui
McBath
McCarthy
McCaul
McClain
McClellan
McCollum
McGarvey
McGovern
McHenry
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Meuser
Mfume
Miller (IL)
Miller (OH)
Miller-Meeks
Molinaro
Moolenaar
Moore (WI)
Moran
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Moylan
Mrvan
Mullin
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newhouse
Nickel
Norcross
Norton
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Pfluger
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Ross
Rouzer
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rutherford
Ryan
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sessions
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Simpson
Slotkin
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Smucker
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Stauber
Stefanik
Steil
Stevens
Strickland
Strong
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Tenney
[[Page H4546]]
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Valadao
Van Drew
Van Orden
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wagner
Walberg
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Wenstrup
Westerman
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Williams (NY)
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Womack
Yakym
Zinke
NOT VOTING--10
Bush
Carter (TX)
Lucas
Luna
Peltola
Pence
Radewagen
Sablan
Steube
Waltz
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 2435
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 43 Offered by Mr. BrechEen
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 43, printed in part F of House Report
118-216 offered by the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. BrechEen), on which
further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by
voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 89,
noes 341, not voting 9, as follows:
[Roll No. 412]
AYES--89
Allen
Arrington
Babin
Banks
Bean (FL)
Biggs
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Brecheen
Buck
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Cammack
Carter (GA)
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Collins
Comer
Crane
Davidson
DesJarlais
Donalds
Duncan
Ellzey
Estes
Fallon
Foxx
Franklin, C. Scott
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Garcia, Mike
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Graves (LA)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Grothman
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Houchin
Hudson
Jackson (TX)
Jordan
Kelly (MS)
Lamborn
Lesko
Loudermilk
Luttrell
Massie
Mast
McClintock
McCormick
Miller (WV)
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Nehls
Norman
Ogles
Owens
Palmer
Perry
Posey
Rosendale
Roy
Santos
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Self
Smith (MO)
Spartz
Steube
Tiffany
Timmons
Van Duyne
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Yakym
NOES--341
Adams
Aderholt
Aguilar
Alford
Allred
Amodei
Armstrong
Auchincloss
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Balint
Barr
Barragan
Beatty
Bentz
Bera
Bergman
Beyer
Bice
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bost
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Buchanan
Bucshon
Budzinski
Calvert
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carey
Carl
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Ciscomani
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
Curtis
D'Esposito
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
De La Cruz
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Duarte
Dunn (FL)
Edwards
Emmer
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Ezell
Feenstra
Ferguson
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fletcher
Flood
Foster
Foushee
Frankel, Lois
Frost
Gallagher
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Robert
Gimenez
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzales, Tony
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gonzalez-Colon
Gottheimer
Graves (MO)
Green, Al (TX)
Griffith
Grijalva
Guest
Guthrie
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (LA)
Higgins (NY)
Hill
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Huffman
Huizenga
Hunt
Issa
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson Lee
Jacobs
James
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kean (NJ)
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Khanna
Kiggans (VA)
Kildee
Kiley
Kilmer
Kim (CA)
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Kustoff
LaHood
LaLota
LaMalfa
Landsman
Langworthy
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latta
LaTurner
Lawler
Lee (CA)
Lee (FL)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Letlow
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Luetkemeyer
Lynch
Mace
Magaziner
Malliotakis
Mann
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McCarthy
McCaul
McClain
McClellan
McCollum
McGarvey
McGovern
McHenry
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Meuser
Mfume
Miller (IL)
Miller (OH)
Miller-Meeks
Mills
Molinaro
Moolenaar
Moore (UT)
Moore (WI)
Moran
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Moylan
Mrvan
Mullin
Murphy
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newhouse
Nickel
Norcross
Norton
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Pfluger
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Ross
Rouzer
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rutherford
Ryan
Salazar
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sessions
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Simpson
Slotkin
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Smucker
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Stevens
Strickland
Strong
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Tenney
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Valadao
Van Drew
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wagner
Walberg
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Webster (FL)
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Williams (NY)
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Womack
Zinke
NOT VOTING--9
Bush
Carter (TX)
Lucas
Luna
Peltola
Pence
Radewagen
Sablan
Van Orden
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 2736
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 45 Offered by Mr. Perry
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 45, printed in part F of House Report
118-216 offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry), on
which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes
prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 68,
noes 362, not voting 9, as follows:
[Roll No. 413]
AYES--68
Arrington
Barr
Bean (FL)
Biggs
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Brecheen
Burchett
Burlison
Carl
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Collins
Comer
Davidson
Donalds
Ellzey
Estes
Gaetz
Garcia, Mike
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Graves (LA)
Green (TN)
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Higgins (LA)
Hudson
Johnson (LA)
Jordan
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Mace
Malliotakis
Massie
Mast
McCarthy
McClintock
McCormick
Miller (WV)
Mills
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Nehls
Norman
Ogles
Palmer
Perry
Posey
Rogers (AL)
Roy
Salazar
Santos
Scalise
Schweikert
Self
Smith (MO)
Smucker
Spartz
Steube
Tiffany
Timmons
Waltz
Webster (FL)
Wilson (SC)
NOES--362
Adams
Aderholt
Aguilar
Alford
Allen
Allred
Amodei
Armstrong
Auchincloss
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Balint
Banks
Barragan
Beatty
Bentz
Bera
Bergman
Beyer
Bice
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bost
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Budzinski
Burgess
Calvert
Cammack
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
[[Page H4547]]
Carey
Carson
Carter (GA)
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Ciscomani
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crane
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
Curtis
D'Esposito
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
De La Cruz
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Duarte
Duncan
Dunn (FL)
Edwards
Emmer
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Ezell
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fletcher
Flood
Foster
Foushee
Foxx
Frankel, Lois
Franklin, C. Scott
Frost
Fry
Fulcher
Gallagher
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Robert
Gimenez
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzales, Tony
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gonzalez-Colon
Gottheimer
Granger
Graves (MO)
Green, Al (TX)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grijalva
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Hern
Higgins (NY)
Hill
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houchin
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Huffman
Huizenga
Hunt
Issa
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson (TX)
Jackson Lee
Jacobs
James
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kean (NJ)
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Khanna
Kiggans (VA)
Kildee
Kiley
Kilmer
Kim (CA)
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Kustoff
LaHood
LaLota
Landsman
Langworthy
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latta
LaTurner
Lawler
Lee (CA)
Lee (FL)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Lesko
Letlow
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Loudermilk
Luetkemeyer
Luttrell
Lynch
Magaziner
Mann
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McCaul
McClain
McClellan
McCollum
McGarvey
McGovern
McHenry
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Meuser
Mfume
Miller (IL)
Miller (OH)
Miller-Meeks
Molinaro
Moolenaar
Moore (UT)
Moore (WI)
Moran
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Moylan
Mrvan
Mullin
Murphy
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newhouse
Nickel
Norton
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Owens
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Pfluger
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Rosendale
Ross
Rouzer
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rutherford
Ryan
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sessions
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Simpson
Slotkin
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Stevens
Strickland
Strong
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Tenney
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Valadao
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Van Orden
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wagner
Walberg
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Weber (TX)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Williams (NY)
Williams (TX)
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Womack
Yakym
Zinke
NOT VOTING--9
Bush
Carter (TX)
Lucas
Luna
Norcross
Peltola
Pence
Radewagen
Sablan
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 3041
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 54 Offered by Mr. Biggs
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 54, printed in part F of House Report
118-216 offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs), on which
further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by
voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 83,
noes 348, not voting 8, as follows:
[Roll No. 414]
AYES--83
Arrington
Babin
Bean (FL)
Biggs
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Brecheen
Buck
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Cammack
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Collins
Comer
Crane
Davidson
Donalds
Duncan
Ellzey
Estes
Fallon
Ferguson
Franklin, C. Scott
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Garcia, Mike
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Hunt
Jackson (TX)
Johnson (LA)
Jordan
Joyce (PA)
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lesko
Loudermilk
Luttrell
Mace
Massie
Mast
McClintock
Miller (IL)
Miller (WV)
Mills
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Nehls
Norman
Ogles
Perry
Posey
Rosendale
Roy
Rutherford
Scalise
Schweikert
Self
Spartz
Steube
Tiffany
Timmons
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Walberg
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Zinke
NOES--348
Adams
Aderholt
Aguilar
Alford
Allen
Allred
Amodei
Armstrong
Auchincloss
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Balint
Banks
Barr
Barragan
Beatty
Bentz
Bera
Bergman
Beyer
Bice
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bost
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Buchanan
Bucshon
Budzinski
Calvert
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carey
Carl
Carson
Carter (GA)
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Ciscomani
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
Curtis
D'Esposito
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
De La Cruz
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Duarte
Dunn (FL)
Edwards
Emmer
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Ezell
Feenstra
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fletcher
Flood
Foster
Foushee
Foxx
Frankel, Lois
Frost
Gallagher
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Robert
Gimenez
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzales, Tony
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gonzalez-Colon
Gottheimer
Granger
Green, Al (TX)
Griffith
Grijalva
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (LA)
Higgins (NY)
Hill
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houchin
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Hudson
Huffman
Huizenga
Issa
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson Lee
Jacobs
James
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Joyce (OH)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kean (NJ)
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Khanna
Kiggans (VA)
Kildee
Kiley
Kilmer
Kim (CA)
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Kustoff
LaHood
LaLota
Landsman
Langworthy
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latta
LaTurner
Lawler
Lee (CA)
Lee (FL)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Letlow
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Luetkemeyer
Lynch
Magaziner
Malliotakis
Mann
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McCarthy
McCaul
McClain
McClellan
McCollum
McCormick
McGarvey
McGovern
McHenry
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Meuser
Mfume
Miller (OH)
Miller-Meeks
Molinaro
Moolenaar
Moore (UT)
Moore (WI)
Moran
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Moylan
Mrvan
Mullin
Murphy
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newhouse
Nickel
Norcross
Norton
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Owens
Pallone
Palmer
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Pfluger
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Ross
Rouzer
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Ryan
Salazar
Salinas
Sanchez
Santos
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sessions
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Simpson
Slotkin
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Smucker
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Stevens
Strickland
Strong
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Tenney
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Valadao
Van Orden
Vargas
Vasquez
[[Page H4548]]
Veasey
Velazquez
Wagner
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Williams (NY)
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Womack
Yakym
NOT VOTING--8
Bush
Carter (TX)
Lucas
Luna
Peltola
Pence
Radewagen
Sablan
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 3404
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 57 Offered by Mr. Biggs
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 57, printed in part F of House Report
118-216 offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs), on which
further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by
voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 81,
noes 350, not voting 8, as follows:
[Roll No. 415]
AYES--81
Arrington
Babin
Barr
Bean (FL)
Biggs
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Brecheen
Buck
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Collins
Comer
Crane
Davidson
Donalds
Duncan
Ellzey
Fallon
Fitzgerald
Fulcher
Gaetz
Garcia, Mike
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Grothman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Hunt
Jackson (TX)
Johnson (LA)
Jordan
Joyce (PA)
Kelly (PA)
Lamborn
Latta
Lesko
Loudermilk
Luttrell
Mace
Massie
Mast
McClintock
Miller (WV)
Mills
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Nehls
Norman
Ogles
Owens
Perry
Posey
Rosendale
Roy
Santos
Scalise
Schweikert
Self
Spartz
Steube
Tiffany
Timmons
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Walberg
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Zinke
NOES--350
Adams
Aderholt
Aguilar
Alford
Allen
Allred
Amodei
Armstrong
Auchincloss
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Balint
Banks
Barragan
Beatty
Bentz
Bera
Bergman
Beyer
Bice
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bost
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Buchanan
Bucshon
Budzinski
Calvert
Cammack
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carey
Carl
Carson
Carter (GA)
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Ciscomani
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
Curtis
D'Esposito
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
De La Cruz
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Duarte
Dunn (FL)
Edwards
Emmer
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Estes
Evans
Ezell
Feenstra
Ferguson
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fletcher
Flood
Foster
Foushee
Foxx
Frankel, Lois
Franklin, C. Scott
Frost
Fry
Gallagher
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Robert
Gimenez
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzales, Tony
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gonzalez-Colon
Gottheimer
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Al (TX)
Griffith
Grijalva
Guest
Guthrie
Hageman
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (LA)
Higgins (NY)
Hill
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houchin
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Hudson
Huffman
Huizenga
Issa
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson Lee
Jacobs
James
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Joyce (OH)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kean (NJ)
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (MS)
Khanna
Kiggans (VA)
Kildee
Kiley
Kilmer
Kim (CA)
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Kustoff
LaHood
LaLota
LaMalfa
Landsman
Langworthy
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTurner
Lawler
Lee (CA)
Lee (FL)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Letlow
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Luetkemeyer
Lynch
Magaziner
Malliotakis
Mann
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McCarthy
McCaul
McClain
McClellan
McCollum
McCormick
McGarvey
McGovern
McHenry
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Meuser
Mfume
Miller (IL)
Miller (OH)
Miller-Meeks
Molinaro
Moolenaar
Moore (UT)
Moore (WI)
Moran
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Moylan
Mrvan
Mullin
Murphy
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newhouse
Nickel
Norcross
Norton
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Palmer
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Pfluger
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Ross
Rouzer
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rutherford
Ryan
Salazar
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sessions
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Simpson
Slotkin
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Smucker
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Stevens
Strickland
Strong
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Tenney
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Valadao
Van Orden
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wagner
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Wenstrup
Westerman
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Williams (NY)
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Womack
Yakym
NOT VOTING--8
Bush
Carter (TX)
Lucas
Luna
Peltola
Pence
Radewagen
Sablan
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 3712
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 61 Offered by Mr. Biggs
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 61, printed in part F of House Report
118-216 offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs), on which
further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by
voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 105,
noes 325, not voting 9, as follows:
[Roll No. 416]
AYES--105
Allen
Arrington
Babin
Banks
Bean (FL)
Biggs
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Brecheen
Buck
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Carey
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Collins
Comer
Crane
Curtis
Davidson
DesJarlais
Donalds
Duncan
Edwards
Emmer
Estes
Fallon
Ferguson
Finstad
Fitzgerald
Foxx
Franklin, C. Scott
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Garcia, Mike
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Grothman
Guest
Hageman
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Houchin
Hudson
Hunt
Jackson (TX)
Jordan
Joyce (PA)
Kelly (MS)
Kustoff
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lee (FL)
Lesko
Loudermilk
Luttrell
Mace
Malliotakis
Massie
Mast
McCarthy
McClintock
Meuser
Miller (WV)
Mills
Mooney
Moore (UT)
Moran
Nehls
Norman
Ogles
Palmer
Perry
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rosendale
Roy
Salazar
Santos
Scalise
Schweikert
Self
Sessions
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Steube
Tiffany
Timmons
Van Drew
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Westerman
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Zinke
NOES--325
Adams
Aderholt
Aguilar
Alford
Allred
Amodei
Armstrong
Auchincloss
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Balint
Barr
Barragan
Beatty
Bentz
Bera
Bergman
Beyer
Bice
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bost
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
[[Page H4549]]
Buchanan
Bucshon
Budzinski
Calvert
Cammack
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carl
Carson
Carter (GA)
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Ciscomani
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
D'Esposito
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
De La Cruz
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Duarte
Dunn (FL)
Ellzey
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Ezell
Feenstra
Fischbach
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fletcher
Flood
Foster
Foushee
Frankel, Lois
Frost
Gallagher
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Robert
Gimenez
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzales, Tony
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gonzalez-Colon
Gottheimer
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Al (TX)
Griffith
Grijalva
Guthrie
Harder (CA)
Harris
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Hill
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Huffman
Huizenga
Issa
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jackson Lee
Jacobs
James
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Joyce (OH)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kean (NJ)
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Khanna
Kiggans (VA)
Kildee
Kiley
Kilmer
Kim (CA)
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
LaLota
Landsman
Langworthy
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latta
LaTurner
Lawler
Lee (CA)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Letlow
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Luetkemeyer
Lynch
Magaziner
Mann
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McCaul
McClain
McClellan
McCollum
McCormick
McGarvey
McGovern
McHenry
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Mfume
Miller (IL)
Miller (OH)
Miller-Meeks
Molinaro
Moolenaar
Moore (AL)
Moore (WI)
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Moylan
Mrvan
Mullin
Murphy
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newhouse
Nickel
Norcross
Norton
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Owens
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Pfluger
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Ross
Rouzer
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rutherford
Ryan
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Simpson
Slotkin
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Stevens
Strickland
Strong
Swalwell
Sykes
Tenney
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Valadao
Van Duyne
Van Orden
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wagner
Walberg
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Williams (NY)
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Womack
Yakym
NOT VOTING--9
Bush
Carter (TX)
Lucas
Luna
Peltola
Pence
Radewagen
Sablan
Takano
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 4105
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
Ms. BUSH. Mr. Chair, I was not able to be present during today's full
first vote series or the second series. Had I been present, I would
have voted NAY on rollcall No. 404, NAY on rollcall No. 405, YEA on
rollcall No. 407, NAY on rollcall No. 408, NAY on rollcall No. 409, NAY
on rollcall No. 410, NAY on rollcall No. 411, NAY on rollcall No. 412,
NAY on rollcall No. 413, NAY on rollcall No. 414, NAY on rollcall No.
415, and NAY on rollcall No. 416.
The Acting CHAIR. The Chair understands that amendment No. 70 will
not be offered.
Amendment No. 71 Offered by Ms. Hageman
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 71
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the spending reduction
account), insert the following:
Sec. ___. No funds made available by this Act may be
provided to the World Health Organization.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentlewoman
from Wyoming (Ms. Hageman) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Wyoming.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chair, I rise in favor of my amendment No. 71 to
H.R. 4368, which prevents American tax dollars from being used to fund
the World Health Organization.
In the bill currently before us, the FDA is seeking to provide
funding to the WHO to advance and expand tobacco product regulation
under the Building Research Capacity in Global Tobacco Product
Regulation grant program.
The United States has consistently been the largest contributor in
the world to the WHO, topping the charts in 2020 at over $116 million,
nearly twice as much as China, which contributed about 12 percent of
the organization's total that same year.
This is the same WHO that refused to act on or publicize warnings
from Taiwan that the new respiratory infection now known as COVID-19
was a threat to humans.
{time} 0050
Ms. HAGEMAN. They instead chose to echo the lies coming out of China,
that there was no evidence of human-to-human transmission.
Mr. Chairman, my constituents sent me to Washington, D.C., with the
mandate to stop sending taxpayer dollars to the WHO, an entity which
covers for the CCP, helped cover up the COVID outbreak, and routinely
attempts to infringe of the sovereignty of Americans in furtherance of
its globalist agenda.
I say all this to repeat what the American people rightly know. That
the WHO is a corrupt organization which bends to the Chinese Communist
Party and does not deserve a cent of American tax dollars, no matter
through which account this money is distributed.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I rise to claim the time in
opposition to this amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, setting aside whether this
amendment is misplaced in the Agriculture appropriations bill, this
amendment is simply bad policy.
We are still fighting the lingering effects of a once-in-a-lifetime
pandemic and attempts to cut funding for the World Health Organization
would hamper work to monitor any new variants of COVID-19.
Moreover, the World Health Organization's work extends far beyond
just responding to COVID. Cutting funds for the World Health
Organization will affect efforts on other diseases and illnesses,
including polio or the flu.
Efforts to disengage with the WHO through our bill are misguided and
do nothing to address any concerns about accountability, transparency,
or cost efficiency.
This is not a good amendment. I urge its defeat, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Indiana (Mrs. Houchin).
Mrs. HOUCHIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment. I
thank the gentlewoman from Wyoming for yielding and for her leadership
on this issue.
I share the concern of many of my constituents with respect to the
World Health Organization or the WHO, particularly with respect to the
recent track record related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
In fact, I supported President Trump's efforts to remove the United
States from the WHO. Our tax dollars are precious. Tax dollars should
only be spent on necessary programs and necessary programs only.
We should be prioritizing our limited resources within organizations
that have a track record of delivering for the American people.
Frankly, based on the WHO's own record, I struggle to say the WHO
fits into that category. We have had to
[[Page H4550]]
make a lot of tough decisions about what to spend taxpayer dollars on,
about what to cut and what not to cut.
An international organization with a dangerous record of protecting
the world from the spread of diseases just does not meet the simple
threshold. Are American taxpayers getting what they are paying for?
Again, I thank the gentlewoman from Wyoming for her efforts to bring
this to the floor. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Chair, it is simply not in the interest of Americans
to have their tax dollars going toward a program that studies the
health burden of tobacco in other countries.
This is simply an attempt to export the Federal nanny State into
other countries through one of the most corrupt international
organizations ever known.
What we should be focusing on is domestic deregulation, not global
governance. After everything we have been through over the last few
years, after witnessing the WHO's complete and utter incompetence
during the spread of COVID-19, after witnessing them turn a blind eye
time and time again to the CCP's culpability, you would think that we
would have learned that American tax dollars should go to American
priorities and not the priorities of our adversaries.
Having any funding for the WHO in any appropriations bill is
inconsistent with the stated goal of the 118th Congress to defund the
WHO completely.
They are a failed puppet organization of Communist China. I urge my
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support my amendment. I yield
back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Wyoming (Ms. Hageman).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 72 Offered by Mr. Crawford
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 72
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the spending reduction
account), insert the following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to close or continue closing offices of the Farm
Service Agency, including any such offices still on a closed
or hybrid schedule related to COVID-19.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Arkansas (Mr. Crawford) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arkansas.
Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Chair, we need to have a nationwide conversation
about USDA's Farm Service Agency's staffing levels that have suffered
as a result of COVID-19.
USDA operates over 2,000 FSA county offices around the country. Its
mission is to serve all farmers, ranchers, and ag partners through the
delivery of effective and efficient agricultural programs such as
commodity support programs, farm ownership, operating, and emergency
loans, disaster assistance, and other ad hoc disaster assistance
programs.
One of the FSA's greatest strengths is its grassroots delivery system
of farm programs to the agency's customers, meaning FSA's programs are
delivered through an extensive network of county offices and local FSA
employees.
Producer-elected county committees comprised of farmers in the local
area are responsible for overseeing FSA programs and services delivered
to the farming community.
This local oversight of farm programs enables FSA to maintain close
relationships with farmers and ranchers, address their needs in a
timely manner, preserve and improve the integrity of Federal farm
programs, and provide production agriculture with the tools they need
to produce the world's best ag products.
Unfortunately, the FSA county office footprint has been impacted by
employee retirements and USDA's inability to attract high-level talent
and onboard new employees.
Producers in my district continue to raise the lack of FSA staff as
one of the main reasons for program delivery delays.
Sadly, the COVID-19 pandemic made a bad situation worse at FSA, but
the pandemic is over, and we must continue bringing our Federal, State,
and local workforces back into the office and refill positions that
were lost during the pandemic.
This also means putting an effective end to any offices that may
still be operating on a closed or hybrid schedule related to COVID-19.
We cannot afford to have the FSA understaffed or teleworking, and
thus unable to provide the expected level of customer service needed on
the farm.
This is a disservice to farmers and producers everywhere. It is long
past time we had a conversation about why we can't get farmers and
ranchers the basic help they need.
I hear from farmers and ranchers all the time about how they still
have problems contacting their local FSA offices and how they never
receive a response, even after multiple inquiries.
That is not farm service. This amendment finally ends the COVID-19
pandemic in FSA offices, but it also highlights the need for the
Department of Agriculture to focus on maintaining FSA's county office
footprint and delivering farm programs.
I call on my colleagues to support my amendment in returning our FSA
county agents to work and urge the Secretary of Agriculture to take
action by adequately staffing FSA county offices.
I thank the chairman, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I rise to claim the time in
opposition to this amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, this amendment would prevent the
closing of offices of the Farm Service Agency for any reason.
Although it mentions COVID-19, the prohibition amendment would not be
limited to closures related to COVID.
The Crawford amendment is duplicative of the stronger, clearer
proviso on page 25, lines 8 through 10 of the bill that is being
considered where it says: Provided further that none of the funds
available to the farm service agencies shall be used to close Farm
Service Agency county offices.
Therefore, this amendment is unnecessary because it would create a
restriction that the legislation already contains.
{time} 0100
We don't know what the future of COVID or any future pandemic or
disaster may hold, so we shouldn't impose such a broad restriction.
This is duplicative.
Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CRAWFORD. Madam Chair, I am glad to hear the ranking member
actually agrees with me. We can say that this is actually a good
amendment because it contains language that sounds like he actually
supports.
Madam Chair, I urge adoption of the amendment and I yield back the
balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The Acting CHAIR (Ms. Van Duyne). The question is on the amendment
offered by the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Crawford).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 73 Offered by Mrs. Cammack
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 73
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mrs. CAMMACK. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act may be made available to finalize any
rule or regulation that meets the definition of section
804(2)(A) of title 5, United States Code.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentlewoman
from Florida (Mrs. Cammack) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
[[Page H4551]]
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Florida.
Mrs. CAMMACK. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment
which would restrict taxpayer funds from being used to finalize any
rule or regulation that has resulted in or is likely to result in an
annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more at the Department
of Agriculture.
During his first 2 years in office, the President added more than
$300 billion in new regulatory costs to the economy. The American
Action Forum found that the new rules in his first 2 years required 193
million hours of compliance paperwork. That is 193 million hours to
comply with new regulations from nameless, faceless bureaucrats.
This commonsense proposal would restrict any major regulatory actions
by USDA from going into effect without the approval of Congress
beforehand. Our farmers and ranchers across the country have enough to
deal with, including natural disasters, market conditions, increasing
input costs, trade issues, and the list goes on.
Our Nation's farmers, ranchers, and producers should not have to
worry about the ever-changing environment in Washington with regard to
regulations. Moreover, these costly regulations ultimately harm
consumers who end up paying a higher price for their food, fiber, and
fuel.
These days, these major rules and regulations are simply a way for
agencies to circumvent Congress on major policy decisions to implement
the political will of whatever party is in office at the time.
As the Nation's legislative body, we must reassert our constitutional
role and prevent regulatory overreach. It doesn't matter if there is a
Republican or Democrat in the White House, the American people should
not be burdened by and forced to pay for the overreaching regulations
that are rooted in nothing more than a political agenda.
Madam Chair, I encourage all of my colleagues to support this
amendment to protect our Nation's farmers and ranchers and to prevent
overreach. We certainly can cut spending, Lord knows we need to. Until
we change the way we do business here in Washington, and this amendment
does that, we will not change a thing.
Madam Chair, I urge passage of this amendment, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to this
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, the amendment prohibits the
administration from finalizing any rules with significant economic
impacts. The amendment adds to the pile of bad policy riders aimed at
tying the administration's hands when it comes to carrying out the laws
passed by Congress.
It will stop USDA, FDA, and CFTC from finalizing regulations that are
designed to keep the food and drug supply safe, the environment
healthy, and markets stable.
This amendment has little to do with an appropriations bill, and even
less to do with supporting farmers or rural America.
While I can understand the gentlewoman's intentions, I must
respectfully oppose the amendment and urge my colleagues to do the
same.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. CAMMACK. Madam Chair, respectfully, I disagree with my
colleague. However, I can't think of a single Member in this Chamber
who would willfully give up their constitutional oversight
responsibilities that their constituents have sent them up here to
Washington to engage in.
I think it is time that we reassert Article I authority, but more
importantly, make sure that we are being mindful of the inflationary
costs that are burdening our consumers as well as our producers in this
country.
Madam Chair, I urge adoption of the amendment, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Cammack).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 74 Offered by Mr. Van Orden
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 74
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. VAN ORDEN. Madam Chair, I rise to offer amendment No. 74 as the
designee of Mr. Steil from the great State of Wisconsin.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert the
following:
Sec. __. For the Agricultural Marketing Service for dairy
business innovation initiatives as authorized by section
12513 of the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (7 U.S.C.
1632d), there is hereby appropriated $10,000,000, and the
amount made available by this Act for the Agricultural
Marketing Service is hereby reduced by, $10,000,000.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Wisconsin (Mr. Van Orden) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. VAN ORDEN. Madam Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment.
This amendment funds the Dairy Business Innovation Initiatives, which
supports our dairy farmers in the development, production, marketing,
and distribution of their products.
Wisconsin is America's dairyland and this important program is why I
also introduced, along with my great colleague, Bryan Steil, the Dairy
Business Innovation Act, that looks to increase the authorization from
$20 million to $36 million, a 55 percent increase.
Wisconsin is home to nearly 6,000 dairy herds that produce over 2.7
billion pounds of milk a month. In fact, in our district, there are
many counties where our cows outnumber people by a ratio of 4-to-1.
Since President Biden took office, costs have risen by over 15
percent for Wisconsin families. Our agriculture industry is paying the
price as Bidenflation makes it more expensive for farmers to fuel
equipment, feed their livestock, and run their businesses.
This amendment would help ease the burden of Bidenflation for our
farmers and ensure that they are able to continue the innovations in
today's uncertain economic times. We must ensure that Wisconsin dairy
farmers continue to be able to feed the world.
The time for fearmongering with our farmers is over. I came to this
body to legislate, not bloviate. I encourage my colleague from the
great State of Wisconsin, who spoke so passionately earlier on this
initiative, to spend more time reading legislation versus X--formerly
known as Twitter--because if he had he would realize that this
amendment was proposed in July.
Madam Chair, I encourage my colleagues, especially those in the
Wisconsin delegation, to cosponsor my bill and support this amendment;
to not do so is clearly putting politics over our farmers. Actions
speak louder than words.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I am a strong supporter of our
Nation's dairy farmers in the southeast and in Georgia, but I must
regretfully decline to support this amendment.
The Agricultural Marketing Service, from which the funds will be
taken, is equally as important, and it supports farmers in all segments
of agriculture.
The Initiative, which goes to entities only in four States got $80
million from the American Rescue Plan just 15 months ago. The offset
from the Agricultural Marketing Service is one that many, many Members,
certainly on my side, deeply value.
It does great work, particularly for our specialty crop producers,
and it is already underfunded due to the manager's amendment.
Madam Chair, I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment, and I ask my
colleagues to vote ``no'' also.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
{time} 0110
Unfortunately, my great colleague is not conflating or confusing
apples and
[[Page H4552]]
oranges, it is almonds and cheese curds. These moneys are designated to
make sure that our dairy industry is intact. We either support small
family farms or we do not. Money talks, and I will not finish the rest
of that colloquialism.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Van Orden).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 75 Offered by Mrs. Miller of Illinois
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 75
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mrs. MILLER of Illinois. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the
desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used for Climate Hubs.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentlewoman
from Illinois (Mrs. Miller) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Illinois.
Mrs. MILLER of Illinois. Madam Chair, the FDA is no place for the
left to push their radical climate agenda. While farmers face real
problems, like rising input costs, the left wants to make sure that the
green bad deal infiltrates every aspect of our lives.
Under the Biden administration, the USDA came out with an Action Plan
for Climate Adaptation and Resilience. Instead of promoting the left's
climate priorities, USDA should be focused on promoting policies that
actually help farmers. That is why my amendment makes sure no Federal
funds go toward the USDA's climate hubs. I urge my colleagues to vote
``yes'' on the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition to
the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, USDA's climate hubs were created
to promote robust and healthy agricultural production and natural
resources under increasing climate variability and climate change.
Climate hubs develop and deliver science-based, region-specific
information and technologies to USDA agencies and its partners,
including Federal and State agencies, extensions, and Tribes to make
our communities and our Nation more resilient to climate change.
They provide outreach and education to farmers, ranchers, and forest
landowners on the effects of climate change on their working lands.
We are all witnessing drought, extreme weather events, and changing
growing seasons, so why would we want to prohibit aiding farmers,
ranchers, and forest landowners understand and respond to climate
change on their working lands? Why would we want to prohibit these 10
regional climate hubs from providing usable regional data and forecasts
to underserved and vulnerable communities, Tribes, and individuals that
can help their land be more productive?
This amendment does not save the American taxpayer money. In fact, it
jeopardizes our food security, our economy, and the lives and
livelihoods of many across the Nation. I urge my colleagues to reject
this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. MILLER of Illinois. Madam Chair, with due respect to the
gentleman from Georgia, the farmers in my district recognize climate
change as summer, winter, spring, and fall, and we would like the USDA
to focus on policies that actually help producers and rural
communities.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Miller).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 76 Offered by Mrs. Spartz
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 76
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mrs. SPARTZ. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to carry out any program established under a
commodity promotion law (as such term is defined in section
501 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of
1996 (7 U.S.C. 7401)).
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentlewoman
from Indiana (Mrs. Spartz) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Indiana.
Mrs. SPARTZ. Madam Chair, I know that accountability is a foreign
concept in Washington, D.C., and there is no lobby for the people, but
I would like to lobby for real farmers and consumers as a farmer
myself. And, also, I have a cosponsor of my amendment, an actual real
farmer, too. I would like to stand with the farmers.
My amendment is very simple. Farmers used to pay a voluntary checkoff
fee when they do a checkoff to promote their commodities to boards,
nonprofit boards. Well, Congress decided to make this fee mandatory and
no transparency. If you are going to force farmers to pay some money, I
think farmers need to know where the money goes. Do they promote
commodities or promote jobs for very wealthy people in fancy suits?
Farmers are working hard for this money.
My amendment has two parts, to help promote transparency with trying
to do the farm bill, but also no taxpayer money should be used unless
we know what is happening with these checkoff dollars to be used to
promote them. I believe no one argues that these moneys are not used
for checkoff fees.
This does not say that they cannot be used for checkoff fees. I
thought this would be an easy amendment. Unfortunately, a lot of
special interest groups that aren't supposed to even lobby with this
money decided to go and attack: How can Congress ask accountability?
How can Congress ask us what we are doing with the money? I believe now
it has become imperative since they are lobbying with this money
against this amendment, against transparency, I think it is becoming
imperative that taxpayer dollars are not used or given to these boards
until we figure out what is going on with the money.
This is a very simple amendment. They say they are not using this
money, so just clarify the intent of the Congress that no taxpayer
dollars are going to be used or given to these boards who knows where
they spend the money. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to
the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, I rise today in strong
opposition to this amendment. Research and promotion programs, commonly
referred to as checkoffs, are time-tested programs that expand markets,
increase consumer demand, develop new uses for those covered
commodities, and, quite frankly, helps to fund the research that is
needed to be able to deal with issues related to those crops or those
commodities.
These programs are voluntarily created by producers for producers,
and they receive no taxpayer dollars for any of their activities or for
USDA oversight of their activities.
I am a strong supporter of research and promotion programs and will
wholeheartedly advocate for their continued existence. I believe any
debate surrounding the integrity of these programs should be reserved
for farm bill deliberations due to the fact that no dollars from the
bill that is up for consideration that we are talking about funds these
programs.
I look forward to engaging with my colleagues to explain the merits
and the mechanics of checkoffs and encourage anyone who has questions
about these programs to engage with their producers to hear firsthand
about the
[[Page H4553]]
benefits of these programs. I specifically look forward to continuing
conversations about these programs with the gentlewoman from Indiana.
I urge my colleagues to stand with producers and join me in voting
against this amendment. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. SPARTZ. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Massie).
Mr. MASSIE. Madam Chair, I rise in support of this amendment,
sponsored by my colleague and fellow farmer, Mrs. Spartz. The amendment
states that none of the funds made available by this bill may be used
to carry out commodity checkoff programs.
These may have started out as well-intentioned, but it is pretty well
known in Washington, D.C. that this program has gone rotten, and it no
longer serves farmers. In fact, we have just sent a bipartisan letter
from Senators and Members of this House to Secretary Vilsack reminding
him that the USDA is required to report annually to Congress,
describing activities conducted accounting for the receipt and
disbursement of all funds and including an independent analysis of the
effectiveness of the program. Yet the USDA hasn't submitted this report
since 2019.
{time} 0120
Yet, the USDA hasn't submitted this report since 2019. Since that
time, American dairy farmers have paid nearly a billion dollars into
this promotional program. At the same time, we have witnessed the loss
of more than 6,000 dairy operations across our communities.
Let me talk about the Beef Checkoff program. In 2010, an independent
audit examining the equivalent of just 9 days of Beef Checkoff program
spending found that the primary Beef Checkoff contractor, the National
Cattlemen's Beef Association--that is right; I am calling out names--
had improperly spent more than $200,000 in checkoff dollars on lobbying
and overseas vacations.
Despite a Freedom of Information Act request and complaint, a full
audit has not been released to the public. Additionally, this
organization, NCBA, gets 70 percent of its revenue from the checkoff
program. They are prohibited from lobbying, but they are one of the
biggest lobbyers up here in Washington, D.C. They lobby against things
that are antithetical to cattlemen. For instance, they were up here
lobbying with the money paid to them by the cattlemen against country
of origin labeling.
They represent less than 5 percent of the industry. It is time to put
them back to work for farmers. It is time to adopt Mrs. Spartz'
amendment.
Mrs. SPARTZ. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, I yield such time as he
may consume to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Baird), the Agriculture
Committee's Conservation, Research, and Biotechnology Subcommittee
chairman.
Mr. BAIRD. Madam Chair, today, I rise in opposition to the Spartz
amendment No. 76. This amendment states that none of the funds made
available by this appropriations bill may be used to carry out
commodity checkoff programs.
Checkoff programs function as research and promotion boards that help
different commodities achieve industry success through market
development, heightened demand, and expanded consumer awareness.
This amendment proves factually unnecessary and inaccurate since no
tax dollars are used to implement the checkoffs and no appropriated
dollars are used to oversee them, pursuant to the statute. These
programs benefit our Nation's agriculture industry and bolster the work
that is being done by our farmers and ranchers who put food on the
tables across the country.
The continued success of these programs must not be interrupted and
misguided by the lack of understanding and nongermane amendments.
Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.
Mrs. SPARTZ. Madam Chair, if my colleagues are saying that no
taxpayer funds are used for these programs, I don't think that should
be a debate, just to clarify that no taxpayer funds are used for these
programs.
If they are so beneficial, I am looking forward to bringing
transparency. They shouldn't be afraid to say that they are doing these
great things for farmers, but so far, I have seen them serving large
special interest groups and large monopolies, and farmers are becoming
more and more consolidated because the little guy cannot survive.
This is ultimately the decision of Congress to stand up for the
little guy, for consumers, for farmers, or we will continue to cater to
large special interest groups making big salaries. Secretary Vilsack
was making over a million dollars on checkoff boards while farmers were
going bankrupt.
Congress needs to stop this insanity and not be afraid to challenge
them and say that we do stand for the people, we lobby for the people,
and we shouldn't be afraid.
Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I
look forward to bring more transparency, but this is the clarity, and I
don't see any opposition to something that everyone believes exists.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. THOMPSON from Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, once again, these
checkoff programs are commodity group driven. There are no taxpayer
dollars for any of the activities or for USDA oversight of these
activities. I look forward to the farm bill process where we can
continue discussions I have had with the gentlewoman from Indiana and
with her staff to be able to look at how we improve transparency, how
we refine these programs to provide her and others confidence in them.
The attack on the checkoff programs really was rooted in animal
rights organizations that have one goal, and that is to eliminate the
livestock agriculture industry. Obviously, that is unacceptable, but
increasing transparency is not unacceptable. I see the farm bill
process as the appropriate path forward for that.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Indiana (Mrs. Spartz).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Indiana
will be postponed.
Amendment No. 77 Offered by Mrs. Boebert
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 77
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mrs. BOEBERT. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. The amount of appropriations provided by this Act
for the annual salary of the position of the Deputy Under
Secretary of the Food and Nutrition Service of the Department
of Agriculture, occupied by Stacy Dean, is hereby reduced to
$1.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentlewoman
from Colorado (Mrs. Boebert) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Colorado.
Mrs. BOEBERT. Madam Chair, this amendment decreases the salary of the
Deputy Under Secretary of the Food and Nutrition Service.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I claim time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I rise in strong opposition to
this amendment.
The amendment targets a dedicated leader in nutrition for apparently
doing her job as the law required. With all the challenges that we face
in feeding our Nation, we should not obstruct the agency charged with
carrying out our nutrition policies.
This House should hold its actions to the highest standards and not
engage in attacks on individual officials in the executive branch.
[[Page H4554]]
Madam Chair, I urge the defeat of this amendment, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mrs. BOEBERT. Madam Chair, one moment. My apologies. I do not have
amendment No. 77 in front of me, but, Madam Chair, I urge adoption of
amendment No. 77 to be considered to decrease the salary of the Deputy
Under Secretary.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mrs. BOEBERT. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Maryland (Mr. Harris).
{time} 0130
Mr. HARRIS. Madam Chair, the Thrifty Food Plan, this is the official
political appointee who decided that the SNAP benefits weren't high
enough, so they devised a new food plan that was used as a vehicle to
just increase the SNAP benefits.
The bottom line is we are spending over $100 billion a year. We have
a $2 trillion deficit. We should reevaluate that increase in the
Thrifty Food Plan that has resulted in a double-digit increase in SNAP
benefits.
What this amendment does is sends a clear signal to the
administration that this probably wasn't a well-thought-out idea.
Mrs. BOEBERT. Madam Chair, I rise today to offer my amendment that
utilizes the Holman rule to reduce the salary of Deputy Under Secretary
of the Food and Nutrition Services of the Department of Agriculture,
Stacy Dean, to $1.
As the Deputy Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer
Services at USDA, Ms. Dean has spent her career helping bureaucrats use
loopholes and gimmicks to gut requirements for able-bodied adults and
bypass Federal eligibility requirements, even going as far as to help
States make millionaires qualify for the program.
The last thing Americans need are higher prices, fewer jobs, and the
largest expansion of our welfare State in a lifetime. The Biden-Harris
administration expansion of the welfare State abolishes work ethic and
promotes a new generation of government dependency.
I have lived under government dependency, and I am thankful that I
have broken free of that cycle given my life experiences and developing
work ethic. I am one of the few who was able to break free of that
cycle of dependency.
Stacy Dean, without Congressional approval, unilaterally increased
Title IV of future farm bills by no less than $256 billion. Stacy Dean
has spent her life's work concocting ways to expand the welfare State
and was given latitude to do so under the Biden administration with no
consequence, no oversight, and no boundaries. No amount of endless
government checks can address the underlying challenges families face.
The best way to help American families is with good-paying jobs, not
endless government checks.
Madam Chair, 25 years ago in the face of rising welfare caseloads,
long durations in poverty, and no work for millions, Republicans and
Democrats came together to reform the Nation's welfare system.
These reforms were based on one simple idea: The best way out of
poverty is a job. Even the Bible says if you don't work, you don't eat.
Ms. Dean has also allowed a 25 percent increase to food stamp
benefits, which was not only unprecedented, but abandoned the cost-
neutral policy the Department had followed for 45 years.
Madam Chair, 25 years ago, in the face of rising welfare caseloads,
long durations in poverty, and no work for millions, we said this was
enough. That cannot be reiterated enough.
This move displayed Dean's blatant disregard for program transparency
by failing to even consult USDA's own chief economist. Worse yet, this
move went far beyond Congressional authority granted under the 2018
farm bill, all thanks to Ms. Dean.
Ms. Dean even went as far as to expand woke LGBTQ+ free school lunch
policies absent Congressional approval and direction.
Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to support my amendment and hold
Ms. Dean accountable for going rogue in an administration that has
ignored the direction of Congress.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Colorado (Mrs. Boebert).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 78 Offered by Mrs. Miller of Illinois
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 78
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mrs. MILLER of Illinois. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the
desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the spending reduction
account), insert the following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to implement the COVID-19 Workplace Safety Plan
issued by the Department of Agriculture on February 7, 2023.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentlewoman
from Illinois (Mrs. Miller) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Illinois.
Mrs. MILLER of Illinois. Madam Chair, President Biden's COVID mandate
was illegal and unconstitutional, but his radical administration tried
to force it through anyway. We will never forget that President Biden
tried to use the Federal Government to fire 84 million struggling
Americans from their jobs.
Congress must pass this amendment to ensure that the Federal
Government cannot implement its radical COVID agenda on Americans ever
again.
Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this amendment,
and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition to
the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, this Workplace Safety Plan was
developed according to the guidance of the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention. Decisions regarding the safety of Federal workers and
returning to work should be driven by science and the methodical
recommendation of experts not by broad Congressional mandates.
Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. MILLER of Illinois. Madam Chair, we need to pass this amendment
so that this can never happen again.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Miller).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 79 Offered by Mrs. Boebert
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 79
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mrs. BOEBERT. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used for the Equity Commission of the Department of
Agriculture established pursuant to section 1006 of the
American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (7 U.S.C. 2279 note).
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentlewoman
from Colorado (Mrs. Boebert) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Colorado.
Mrs. BOEBERT. Madam Chair, I rise today to offer my amendment to
prohibit funding for the USDA's Equity Commission.
Our farmers and ranchers are fed up with a government that is
weaponized against them and are fed up paying for commissions that
simply should not exist.
The USDA Equity Commission was born out of a Biden executive order
[[Page H4555]]
calling for Federal departments to address, ``racial equity,'' because
they believe even agriculture is racist.
This Commission made over 30 recommendations to make the USDA more
woke. This includes diversity training for farmers and ranchers,
expanding language access, and even supporting legislation that removes
restrictions on food stamp eligibility based on immigration status, or
even criminal records.
This commission also opened up the door for Joe Biden's racist $4
billion plan for minority farmers and ranchers to pay their loans
because the USDA is racist.
Joe Biden's USDA is even holding school lunch money hostage to force
a curriculum that sexualizes our children. This administration is
acting like a schoolyard bully, saying, if you are not going to do what
I want, I am going to take your lunch money. Quite literally.
They are holding school districts hostage in order to shove their
radical agenda down our throats to ensure biological men are allowed to
use the same restroom as five-year-old girls. This is madness.
This administration is so distracted by pandering to their own
leftist agenda to prioritize diversity, equity, and inclusion that they
simply cannot manage their policies that have driven the price of milk
and eggs up over 50 percent for the average American family for those
items.
{time} 0140
Let's return our focus to our USDA to what it should be--providing
leadership on food, agriculture, natural resources, rural development,
nutrition, and related issues based on public policy, the best
available science--real science, please--and effective management, not
pandering to the woke mob.
I urge passage of my amendment and, Madam Chair, I reserve the
balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in
personalities toward the President.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. I claim the time in opposition to the
gentlewoman's amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. The USDA Equity Commission was set up in 2022
to address the historic inequities in implementation of the programs by
the Department of Agriculture.
The Department has a long and storied history of discrimination, as
evidenced by the billions of dollars that it has had to pay out as a
result of discriminatory policies over the years.
To quote directly from the USDA website regarding the commission:
``At USDA, we acknowledge we have not done enough to provide all
farmers and ranchers an equal chance of success and prosperity. We are
committed to changing that, actively working to build a USDA that
ensures none of our customers are ignored or left behind.''
What is so threatening about that?
The bill already came out of committee bearing harmful policy riders
restricting the administration's efforts related to diversity, equity,
and inclusion.
The continued assault on equity initiatives at USDA is not helping
our farmers. This amendment is a distraction from the real issues that
are facing our farmers, and it does nothing to move us closer to a
bipartisan conference agreement, an agreement we know we must reach to
pass these appropriations bills.
I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mrs. BOEBERT. Madam Chair, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from
Maryland (Mr. Harris).
Mr. HARRIS. Madam Chair, I thank the gentlewoman from Colorado for
offering this amendment.
There is one thing the Federal Government should not do when it has a
$2 trillion deficit, and that is do duplicative things in one
department.
There already is an Office of Civil Rights in the U.S. Department of
Agriculture. There is no need for an Equity Commission. Oh, but that is
right, we have got to get the word ``equity'' in there somewhere.
I suggest maybe we should go back and just rename the Office of Civil
Rights. It is cheaper, and with a $2 trillion deficit, that is probably
what we ought to do.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mrs. BOEBERT. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Colorado (Mrs. Boebert).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado
will be postponed.
Amendment No. 80 Offered by Mr. Self
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 80
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. SELF. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert
the following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act
may be used for the Civilian Climate Corps.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Self) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas for 5 minutes.
Mr. SELF. Madam Chair, I rise to support my very simple amendment,
which would prohibit any funds from this bill from being used toward
the Civilian Climate Corps.
The Biden administration continues to prioritize programs like the
Civilian Climate Corps, which pushes Green New Deal policies that have
proved to be costly and ineffective.
Instead of pushing their Green New Deal agenda, this administration
should instead focus on cutting wasteful spending and securing our
southern border, rather than wasting taxpayer dollars on indoctrination
on a leftist ideology that provides nothing of value to the economy.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition to
the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I am perplexed that anyone would
not want to provide good-paying jobs that will help our Nation tackle
the climate crisis and build a stronger country.
The goal of the Civilian Climate Corps is to put more than 20,000
young people on career pathways in the growing fields of clean energy,
conservation, and climate resilience.
In launching this effort, President Biden is calling on Tribal,
State, and local governments, labor unions, nonprofit service allies,
the private sector, and philanthropy to collaborate with the Federal
Government to build on current relationships and expand skills-based
training partnerships to ensure that our workforce is ready to meet the
climate crisis.
We have seen the devastation to coastal communities impacted by
hurricanes and tropical storms. Why would we not want to train our
youth to restore coastal wetlands that can protect communities from
storm surges?
We know the damage and the loss that accompanies wildfires across our
Nation, so why would we not want to train youth to manage forests, to
improve health, and prevent catastrophic wildfires?
We know the power of skills-based training as a tool to expand
pathways into good-paying jobs. Let's not deny our youth this
opportunity, and let's not deny our country the resources for our
future.
Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SELF. Madam Chair, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from
Maryland.
Mr. HARRIS. Madam Chair, I thank the gentleman from Texas for
offering the amendment.
It turns out in the wisdom of the committee we have already defunded
the Civilian Climate Corps, but belts and suspenders is fine, I have no
problem with that, because good-paying
[[Page H4556]]
jobs shouldn't come from the government, they should come in the
private sector. That is why we don't need the Civilian Climate Corps.
Oh, that is right, it has the word ``climate'' in it, so you have to
create something in the Department with the word ``climate'' and with
the word ``equity'' and with the words ``diversity'' and
``inclusion''--the whole thing. We don't need it.
Mr. SELF. Madam Chair, we borrow $6 billion a day. We throw the $2
trillion number around all the time but, frankly, most of us don't
understand a trillion.
We borrow $6 billion a day toward that $2 trillion. We discuss a lot
of inputs on the floor of the House, which means government spending,
Federal spending. We rarely discuss outputs, and in this case there is
very little output. We are talking about some inputs, Federal spending,
but no outputs.
This is simply an indoctrination program to the Green New Deal.
Now, we also have a lot of noble sounding ideas coming across this
floor, but in this case there is nothing positive. There is only
spending.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Self).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 81 Offered by Mr. Burlison
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 81
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. BURLISON. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to carry out section 6(o)(4) of the Food and
Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2015(o)(4)).
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 81, the gentleman from
Missouri (Mr. Burlison) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri.
{time} 0150
Mr. BURLISON. Madam Chair, everyone understands that if you add
recipients to a program that has limited resources, the benefits of
that program get diluted amongst those who are still receiving it. In
essence, the safety net becomes stretched and sometimes may even break,
which is why I rise in support of my amendment to eliminate a loophole
in the SNAP program that is called the geographic work requirement
waivers.
These waivers have been abused for years by State bureaucracies to
waive work requirements in areas with record-low unemployment and
particularly waive them for able-bodied individuals, the very people
who should be working.
Current law allows for States to waive work requirements for those
individuals in certain limited circumstances, but States have used this
loophole to waive work requirements completely. In fact, 18 States have
completely waived these work requirements. My amendment prevents this
from happening.
Having work requirements for food stamps or for SNAP is not a new or
radical idea. It has been around since the 1990s. It was a bipartisan
agreement that occurred, and it is a commonsense approach to ensure
that those who can work should be working, thereby promoting self-
sufficiency while reducing the burden on taxpayers.
Congress intended for these to be limited, but obviously, just like
anything else the Federal Government touches, its intent has been
distorted to ensure as many people as possible are dependent on the
government.
The USDA, in the late days of the Clinton administration, issued
these loopholes, but now they have exploded to the point where 70
percent of able-bodied adults do not have to be required to do any work
requirements.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I rise in extremely strong
opposition to this amendment.
This amendment would take away all State waivers for able-bodied
adults without dependents, the so-called ABAWDs. If employment is over
10 percent or there are not sufficient jobs for people in the State,
again, who are we to take that State's judgment away?
If you think we will never experience these conditions again, think
again. Neither you nor I can foresee the future. If these conditions do
occur, what are the chances that these folks will find jobs?
I cannot and will not support this amendment, nor will any of my
Democratic colleagues. If it is included in a final conference report,
I doubt my Democratic colleagues will provide the necessary votes for
final passage, nor will President Biden sign it into law.
It is a bad amendment. Let's vote it down.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BURLISON. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Maryland (Mr. Harris).
Mr. HARRIS. Madam Chair, I thank the gentleman from Missouri for
putting forth this amendment. It is common sense. Able-bodied people
ought to work. That is the bottom line.
There are two things about this program. One is that my colleague on
the other side of the aisle says you never know, the economy could get
bad. Now, this is only a 1-year amendment. We are only discussing the
next fiscal year.
The President has said this is a great economy. I don't know what we
are worried about. The President has said this economy is great. So
don't worry about this amendment. It shouldn't be a problem.
The other thing is that this is one of the greatest State scams in
the country right now. States vie with each other as to who can get
this waiver. Do you know what, Madam Chair? This is no cost to the
State. We could solve this problem by just asking States to have a 20
percent copay.
Do you think food stamps are a great deal or SNAP is a great deal?
Great. The Federal Government pays 80, you pay 20, just like Medicaid.
That means States will have skin in the game, and they won't go for
these scams.
Mr. BURLISON. Madam Chair, this program has blown up and expanded--
nearly a 60 percent increase since 2020 alone. This addition of
individuals who are able-bodied is jeopardizing the program that we
should make sure is available for individuals who truly need it, those
individuals who are disabled, parents with children, and anyone who is
a student. Those are the individuals who we all see and want to provide
a safety net to.
Let's not let these programs, which are so valuable to them, be
diluted by individuals who should be working.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Burlison).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 82 Offered by Mrs. Cammack
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 82
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mrs. CAMMACK. Madam Chair, I rise to offer amendment No. 82 as the
designee of Mr. Roy of Texas.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
SEC. __. NONE OF THE FUNDS APPROPRIATED BY THIS ACT MAY BE
USED TO IMPLEMENT ANY OF THE FOLLOWING
EXECUTIVE ORDERS:
(1) Executive Order 13990, relating to Protecting Public
Health and the Environment and Restoring Science To Tackle
the Climate Crisis.
(2) Executive Order 14008, relating to Tackling the Climate
Crisis at Home and Abroad.
(3) Section 6 of Executive Order 14013, relating to
Rebuilding and Enhancing Programs To Resettle Refugees and
Planning for the Impact of Climate Change on Migration.
(4) Executive Order 14030, relating to Climate-Related
Financial Risk.
(5) Executive Order 14057, relating to Catalyzing Clean
Energy Industries and Jobs Through Federal Sustainability.
(6) Executive Order 14082, relating to Implementation of
the Energy and Infrastructure Provisions of the Inflation
Reduction Act of 2022.
[[Page H4557]]
(7) Executive Order 14096, relating to Revitalizing Our
Nation's Commitment to Environmental Justice for All.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentlewoman
from Florida (Mrs. Cammack) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Florida.
Mrs. CAMMACK. Madam Chair, I rise in support of an amendment authored
by Representative Roy and myself. This amendment would restrict funds
from being used to implement President Biden's radical climate agenda.
Since taking office, the Biden administration has spent billions of
dollars implementing leftist climate initiatives at the expense of the
American taxpayer.
In May 2023, the USDA announced $11 billion in grants and loans for
``zero emission energy,'' otherwise known as unreliable energy.
In addition, a recent report found that Biden's USDA Secretary, Tom
Vilsack, coordinated with Arabella Advisors, a George Soros-funded
group, on transforming the U.S. food system.
We simply cannot produce and process the food necessary to satisfy
the massive demand in this country and abroad if we cannot depend on
energy and food systems that are being hijacked into an extremist
climate agenda.
Furthermore, Biden's climate policies have detrimental effects on our
economy and threaten the very livelihood of Americans in our
agricultural sector. In many cases, these radical Biden initiatives
actually do more harm than good to our environment.
Our farmers already face enormous challenges, including market
fluctuations and rising input costs. The list goes on and on.
By squeezing out clean and economical fuel sources and demanding a
hasty shift to so-called clean energy, green energy, as they call it,
our farmers and ranchers are struggling with the rising cost of fuel
that they need to keep their operations going.
Agriculture is the backbone of our Nation, and we must ensure that
that sector, the agricultural sector, has the resources that it needs
to keep providing for American families.
Our farmers and ranchers are some of the best conservationists in the
world. Our amendment would prevent President Biden's extreme anti-
climate initiatives that would undoubtedly raise costs on our Nation's
agricultural businesses.
A threat to our Nation's ag producers is a threat to our national
security. I encourage my colleagues to support this commonsense
amendment and safeguard our farmers and ranchers from the Biden
administration's misguided climate policies.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I claim time in opposition to the
gentlewoman's amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, this amendment prohibits funds
from being used to carry out President Biden's climate change executive
orders, specifically:
Executive Order No. 13990 relating to Protecting Public Health and
the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis;
Executive Order No. 14008, relating to Tackling the Climate Crisis at
Home and Abroad;
Section 6 of Executive Order No. 14013, relating to Rebuilding and
Enhancing Programs to Resettle Refugees and Planning for the Impact of
Climate Change on Migration;
Executive Order No. 14030, relating to Climate-Related Financial
Risks;
Executive Order No. 14057, relating to Catalyzing Clean Energy
Industries and Jobs Through Federal Sustainability;
Executive Order No. 14082, relating to Implementation of the Energy
and Infrastructure Provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022;
and
Executive Order No. 14096, relating to Revitalizing Our Nation's
Commitment to Environmental Justice for All.
Who could be against that? Oh, well.
{time} 0200
The scientific consensus is clear, however, that we need to take
significant steps to reduce carbon emissions moving forward while also
working to mitigate the damage from climate change that we are already
experiencing.
Extreme weather events and changing temperatures and weather patterns
are extremely relevant to America's farmland. The Department of
Agriculture should be at the forefront of ensuring that our farmers
remain productive and successful on the global market in the years to
come.
Tackling the climate crisis is an essential part of that work. Our
farmers are on both the front line of dealing with the effects of
climate change as well as taking steps to reduce carbon output and to
promote sustainability.
This amendment being offered on both appropriations bills brought to
the floor this week would hamstring our government's response to
climate change.
This amendment is shortsighted and does nothing to help our farmers.
In fact, it hurts our farmers.
Madam Chair, I urge the defeat of this amendment, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mrs. CAMMACK. Madam Chair, I am so glad that my colleague mentioned
carbon emissions and the need to reduce them because our farmers and
ranchers are a carbon sink.
Like I said, they are the best conservationists in the world, and the
harmful policies of the Biden administration continue to make their job
much more difficult.
Madam Chair, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr.
Harris).
Mr. HARRIS. Madam Chair, I thank the gentlewoman from Florida for
offering this amendment.
My colleague across the aisle read verbatim from an executive order
to analyze the effect of climate on migration. What we need is an
executive order to examine the effect of an open border on migration
into the United States, the effect in the large cities--New York,
Chicago--and bankrupting this country. That is the executive order we
need from the President, not these.
Mrs. CAMMACK. Madam Chair, we are closing in on 2 a.m., and while I
definitely encourage my colleagues to support this commonsense
amendment, I give thanks to the floor staff, the Clerks, the
Parliamentarians, my colleagues on the committee staff who are here at
2 a.m. doing the very important work of the American people.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Cammack).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 83 Offered by Ms. Hageman
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 83
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to finalize, implement, administer, or enforce the
proposed rule entitled ``Use of Electronic Identification
Eartags as Official Identification in Cattle and Bison''
published by the Department of Agriculture in the Federal
Register on January 19, 2023 (88 Fed. Reg. 3320).
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentlewoman
from Wyoming (Ms. Hageman) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Wyoming.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Madam Chair, I rise today in favor of my amendment No.
83 to H.R. 4368. This amendment would prevent the Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service from implementing its proposed rule mandating
electronic identification ear tags, known as EID, for cattle and bison
transported in interstate commerce.
Let me start by saying this: The United States has the highest
quality and safest meat in the world. We currently have a robust,
effective, and affordable animal identification and traceability system
in place that works. Our high standards of disease prevention and
detection make us the leader in world food quality.
[[Page H4558]]
This rule is problematic for many reasons, including the fact that it
sets a dangerous precedent by allowing a Federal agency to dictate how
our ranchers run their operations. Our ranchers do not need the D.C.
bureaucracy to tell them how to manage and identify their livestock.
Yet, that is exactly what this rule allows.
This rule will create a paperwork nightmare, forcing our producers to
hire a slew of compliance officers just to meet the new requirements.
The creation of this federally mandated system will require extensive
data collection and countless reporting obligations.
Last year, Ireland mandated EID ear tags. Today, just 1 year later,
there are an untold number of reports that they must file with the
government.
Ireland is now considering killing off 1.3 million head of cattle to
reach their ``climate targets.'' Their EID mandate will help them carry
out this slaughter.
This rule will increase the cost of food and food production, thereby
hurting the consumer.
This rule will ultimately cost our ranchers millions of dollars in
compliance costs, forcing many of our smaller independent operations to
sell out. It will thus result in further vertical integration of the
food supply chain, making our independent livestock producers nothing
but serfs to the big ranches and meatpackers.
The primary supporters of this rule are the four big packers, two of
which are owned by Brazil and one of which is owned by China, and the
ear tag manufacturing companies.
This rule raises serious privacy concerns for our independent
ranchers. APHIS' estimated cost of this rule is indefensible, and the
minimal amount included in the rule for implementation is entirely
inadequate. The real cost of mandating EID ear tags is exponentially
higher than what APHIS claims, and this is an unfunded mandate.
In short, we simply cannot afford or allow a bunch of unelected
bureaucrats, who have never handled livestock or made an honest living
raising animals, to tell our ranchers how to operate.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, I claim time in opposition
to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, American agriculture
really can be defined very simply by three words: science, technology,
and innovation.
We should utilize that to our advantage, obviously, going forward. It
really has been a defining nature of American agriculture.
Quite frankly, traceability resources are paramount when dealing with
an animal disease outbreak. We have seen that this year with poultry.
We had threats on swine.
We obviously invested, as of the last farm bill, a significant amount
of money to have a vaccine for foot and mouth. Should that ever impact
our livestock industry here, it would be devastating.
APHIS' proposed rule on electronic identification would reduce the
overall quarantine times, limit the number of animals that get sick,
and allow farmers and ranchers to resume normal operations in a timely
manner.
Producers recognize that animal disease traceability is an essential
component of protecting livestock during an animal disease outbreak,
and that is whether they are the size of herds in Wyoming or, quite
frankly, in Kentucky or Pennsylvania, where they are much smaller.
Animal health is incredibly important, and the ability to recognize
animal disease traceability is, as well.
We should not allow ourselves to be in a position where efforts to
improve animal disease traceability are hampered, and for this reason,
I will oppose Ms. Hageman's amendment.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Kentucky (Mr. Massie).
Mr. MASSIE. Madam Chair, as a cattleman myself who interacts with and
supports thousands of cattlemen in Kentucky, I rise in support of Ms.
Hageman's very important amendment, which prevents funds from being
used to mandate electronic identification ear tags for cattle and
bison.
The cattlemen in Kentucky know this isn't just another extra expense
for them. It is the beginning of the end of the American rancher, of
the American cattleman. It is the beginning of the end of
multigenerational farms in Kentucky because this is an on-and-off
switch that will prevent farmers from marketing their cattle if they
are not in compliance with thousands of rules, a never-ending list of
rules. This is why we should oppose it.
We should quit listening. I implore my colleagues who have been
lobbied on this issue--we have all been lobbied on this one. I implore
my colleagues to quit listening to the lobbyists who pretend to
represent farmers and start listening to their farmers back home and
support Ms. Hageman's amendment.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, once again, traceability
resources really are incredibly important when dealing with an animal
disease outbreak.
{time} 0210
We need to do our best to be prepared to deal with these. Otherwise,
it compromises our ability to export overseas. Our trade partners could
shut off markets in the United States, and it would have a decimating
impact on the livestock industry in the United States.
There are moneys in the underlying bill in order to do this. Quite
frankly, a more appropriate amendment might have been to make sure the
money lines up with the need. I would agree that what is in the bill is
not adequate for the full implementation of this, but that is another
issue.
Madam Chair, I remain in opposition to the amendment, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Madam Chair, I reiterate that we already have an
identification and traceability system in place that is effective,
robust, and affordable. Some larger operations have voluntarily
implemented EID because they have the resources and the manpower to do
so.
If small and medium operations are forced into this same system,
however, and without the proper capital, they will be locked out of the
markets.
My colleague just admitted that the funding in the rule doesn't
provide adequate funding to implement the rule, and so it is going to
cost our ranchers literally millions upon millions of dollars to
comply. It is an unfunded mandate.
This proposed rule is based on dubious assumptions. It raises more
questions than answers. It is a solution in search of a problem. It is
dangerous, and it should be stopped.
I will finish with this: My amendment does not touch the cost offset
in the bill. It merely addresses the flawed policy advanced by USDA. It
does not prevent any American rancher, cattle producer, or bison
producer to use EID technology, but it does not allow the USDA to
mandate it.
Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of my amendment,
and I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Wyoming (Ms. Hageman).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Wyoming
will be postponed.
It is now in order to consider amendment No. 84, printed in part F of
House Report 118-216.
Amendment No. 85 Offered by Mr. Good of Virginia
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Stauber). It is now in order to consider
amendment No. 85 printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
[[Page H4559]]
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. The amount of appropriations provided by this Act
for the annual salary of the position of the Director of the
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research of the Food and Drug
Administration, occupied by Patrizia Cavazzoni, is hereby
reduced to $1.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Good) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman for 5 minutes.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment to reduce to $1
the salary of the director of the Center for Drug Evaluation and
Research within the FDA.
As part of the Republican House majority, conservatives were able to
secure important reforms to the House rules, including reinstating the
Holman rule. The Holman rule dates back to the 1800s and was created to
reduce spending, but it has also been used as a measure of
accountability to exercise oversight over unelected bureaucrats by
reducing the salaries of Federal employees.
I have concerns that the position of director for the Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research has been politicized because of decisions it
has been involved in related to abortion.
In January, the Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy for the main
chemical abortion drug, mifepristone, was updated. A multidisciplinary
team within the FDA approved changes that eliminated the in-person
distribution requirement of mifepristone and allowed for retail
pharmacies to dispense the abortifacient.
A Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, or REMS, is required by
the FDA for certain drugs with ``serious safety concerns to help ensure
the benefits outweigh its risks.'' It is baffling to me that these
bureaucrats would acknowledge that mifepristone is inherently dangerous
yet advance policies that discourage a woman from even having to show
up at a doctor's office.
This office was complicit in these dangerous updates that impact
women's health. My amendment provides needed scrutiny over the
bureaucrats who issue documents, not laws, that literally carry the
power of life or death.
Whatever value these offices provide to drug safety has been clouded
by political judgment. Congress should take a serious look at these
offices, and we can start by holding pro-abortion officials accountable
for such a destructive decision.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to stand for life and support this
amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I claim time in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this
amendment. It targets a career civil servant for apparently doing their
job as the law requires. This House should hold its actions to the
highest standards, and attacks on the civil service have no place in
this House.
This is a bad amendment. It sets a bad precedent. It is beyond our
duties. It is ultra vires.
Mr. Chair, I urge the defeat of this amendment, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman
from Maryland (Mr. Harris).
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman from Virginia for
bringing this forth.
Mr. Chair, look, I urge everyone just to read the Fifth Circuit Court
opinion. The fact of the matter is, the Fifth Circuit Court said the
FDA way overstepped their congressional fencing in on how they have to
approve drugs. The bottom line is, it is not us saying this. It is the
Fifth Circuit.
Maybe this is one way to send a message that you actually ought to
listen to the way Congress set up the safety and efficacy approval
process. Maybe we need something like this so the FDA actually pays
attention to how Congress told them they have to operate.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, FDA administrators who originally
approved mifepristone knew it had risks attached to it. In the
following years, those risks have been confirmed and proven time and
again to the mother and, obviously, ultimately to the child.
Between 2002 and 2015, the rate of chemical abortion-related
emergency room visits increased by more than 500 percent.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, at least seven offices within the
FDA are responsible for administering the decision that made the
chemical abortion drug easier to access. My amendment reduces to $1 the
salary of the director of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.
Congress has a responsibility to not just appropriate money but to
also conduct oversight for the use of taxpayer dollars. My amendment
does both.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to stand up for life and support my
amendment.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Good).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia
will be postponed.
{time} 0220
Amendment No. 86 Offered by Mr. Massie
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 86
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the spending reduction
account) insert the following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to fund any grant related to any transgenic edible
vaccine.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Kentucky (Mr. Massie) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Kentucky.
Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment, which
states, ``None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to
fund any grant related to any transgenic edible vaccine.''
Does the term transgenic edible vaccine sound farfetched? Well, it is
not. We are funding it.
In fact, scientists from the University of California, Riverside,
funded with your taxpayer dollars, have been studying whether they can
turn edible plants such as lettuce and spinach into mRNA vaccine
factories, thereby creating a transgenic edible vaccine.
One associate professor at UCR explained that ``Ideally, a single
plant would produce enough mRNA to vaccinate a single person. We are
testing this approach with spinach and lettuce and have long-term goals
of people growing it in their own gardens. Farmers could also
eventually grow entire fields of it.''
I don't think this is a good idea.
I don't think the American people should be funding this, and I would
hope that we have learned something from the COVID experience with
SARS-CoV-2 that some of our science projects aren't the best ideas.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition
to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I do rise in opposition to this
misguided amendment.
The amendment would eliminate research funding into novel approaches
to keeping livestock healthy.
Livestock disease costs hundreds of millions of dollars per year.
Producers
[[Page H4560]]
lose revenue and consumers pay higher prices as a result.
An ongoing avian influenza outbreak has devastated poultry producers
across the country, devastating that industry in many areas.
Innovative research on methods to cost effectively protect livestock
benefits both producers and consumers.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to defeat this misguided amendment
and let USDA work to keep livestock healthy for producers and prices
low for consumers.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Chair, my colleague on the other side of the aisle
talks about keeping prices low. I think there is more to it than that
for the American people. He also speaks as if these vaccines, these
transgenic edible plant vaccines, are only used for livestock.
Well, in fact, they have been used for livestock--I will get to that
in a second--but they are also being used for people. That is the
intended outcome of many of these programs that we are funding with
money from the USDA.
What could possibly go wrong with this research?
Well, we found out a few years ago when a biotech company was
experimenting, growing, in corn, a vaccine to keep pigs from getting
diarrhea.
What happened? Well, the next year where the corn was grown the prior
year, the corn came up and it got commingled with soybeans that were
being grown there.
It contaminated 500 bushels of soybeans, which were then commingled
with 500,000 bushels of soybeans. Those all had to be recalled and
destroyed.
Luckily, they caught it.
Do we want humans eating vaccines that were grown in corn meant to
stop pigs from getting diarrhea? I don't think we want that to happen.
Yet, that almost happened, and it could happen.
There is another case where the pollen cross-contaminated another
crop of corn, and 155 acres of corn had to be burned. What are the
cases where we are not discovering this?
I think it is dangerous to play God with our food. I think we need a
safe food supply.
Mr. Chair, this is about food safety. Ultimately, the people in this
country need to know what is in their food, and if we start
contaminating the DNA of our food with DNA from other animals or
viruses, the pollen could spread, and we don't know what could happen.
I would hope we have learned a lesson from the Wuhan lab that
sometimes things escape, sometimes things don't go as you plan. That is
why I think it is a bad idea to fund transgenic edible plant vaccine
research from the USDA.
Mr. Chair, I urge adoption of my amendment, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Massie).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 87 Offered by Mr. Massie
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 87
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to issue any new rule under section 23(a) of the
Federal Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 623(a)), section
15(c)(1)(B) of the Poultry Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C.
464(c)(1)(B)), to implement or enforce sections 303.1(a)(2)
and 381.10(a)(4) of title 9, Code of Federal Regulations (or
regulations of the same substance), or sections 303.1(b)(1)
or 320 of such title 9--
(1) regarding the number of owners of an animal for
purposes of the custom slaughter exemption of the Food Safety
and Inspection Service;
(2) limiting the persons that may own an animal; or
(3) requiring custom operators to keep records.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Kentucky (Mr. Massie) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Kentucky.
Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment, which
states in part that, ``None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to issue any new rule related to (1) regarding the number of
owners of an animal for purposes of the custom slaughter exemption of
the Food Safety and Inspection Service; (2) limiting the persons that
may own an animal; or (3) requiring custom operators to keep records.''
My amendment simply states that no funds in this bill can be used to
create new rules and regulations related to the custom slaughter
exemption, limiting the number of people who may own an animal, or
placing additional recordkeeping burdens on custom slaughter exemption.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition
to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I appreciate and share the
gentleman's support for our meat and poultry producers. However, this
is an amendment to permanent law that, with very rare exceptions,
should not be in an appropriations bill. This issue should be
considered in the context of the next farm bill.
Mr. Chair, I urge a ``no'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully disagree with my colleague's
characterization of this amendment that it changes permanent law. In
fact, all it does is limits the spending that can be used to promulgate
any new rules. Its only period is for the extent of a year. The next
year, the next fiscal year.
In fact, were it changing permanent law, we would not have allowed it
as an amendment to this bill.
Mr. Chair, I serve on the Rules Committee, and we vet hundreds of
amendments for this very constraint. This is not one of the amendments
that changes permanent law.
If I could change permanent law, would I change permanent law? You
are sure right that I would, and we will try that in the farm bill, but
we can't change permanent law on an appropriations bill.
The reason I have introduced this amendment is I have found on the
USDA website, they haven't done the rule yet, but they are thinking
about doing a rule to limit how many families could share an animal.
Listen, there are four meat-packers that control over 80 percent of
the meat that is processed in the United States. Our President himself
said it from that very podium during a state of the Union speech. It is
a problem. We all know it.
There is one exemption that allows people to get out from under the
thumb of the multinational corporations that process most of the meat
in this country, and that is the custom slaughter exemption that allows
somebody who owns an animal to have it processed for themselves.
It seems somewhat ridiculous that the USDA thinks they have the power
to say two families can't share that animal. Yet, that is what they are
proposing in a PowerPoint slide on their website.
My amendment is simple. It says we are not going to allow the USDA to
promulgate a rule that keeps families from getting healthy meat from
their local farmer.
Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of my amendment, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Massie).
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 88,
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Amendment No. 89 Offered by Mrs. Boebert
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 89
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mrs. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used for courses, books, or study guides relating to--
(1) approaching LGBT issues in the workplace;
[[Page H4561]]
(2) succeeding as an LGBT professional ;
(3) understanding and supporting LGBTQ+ employees;
(4) connecting with LGBTQ+ customers year round;
(5) becoming an ally to all;
(6) inclusive mindset for committed allies external link;
(7) mindfulness, diversity, and the quest for inclusion;
(8) driving inclusion with empathy;
(9) communicating about culturally sensitive issues;
(10) skills for inclusive conversations;
(11) strategies to foster inclusive language at work;
(12) pride leadership: strategies for LGBTQ+ leaders to be
the king or queen of their jungle;
(13) building effective corporate engagement on LGBTQ
rights;
(14) how the LGBT+ community and their allies are changing
the global economy;
(15) conversations with LGBTQ+ leaders on the power of
identity;
(16) gender ambiguity in the workplace: transgender and
gender-diverse discrimination; and
(17) transgender employees: creating an inclusive work
community.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentlewoman
from Colorado (Mrs. Boebert) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Colorado.
{time} 0230
Mrs. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, I rise today to offer my amendment that
prevents USDA from using funds for woke extreme leftist courses, books,
and study guides as part of this administration's woke LGBTQI+--
whatever other letter you would like to add for the flavor of the day--
Pride Month agenda.
Biden's woke bureaucrats implemented woke courses, books, and study
guides for Department employees' training that defy congressional
intent and mandate leftist indoctrination.
Mandated Department courses and curriculum for the Federal employees
included topics like Pride Leadership: Strategies for LGBTQ+ Leader to
be the King Or Queen of Their Jungle; the Queer Advantage:
Conversations with LGBTQ+ Leaders on the Power of Identity; Out and
Proud: Approaching LGBT Issues in the Workplace; Gender Ambiguity in
the Workplace: Transgender and Gender-Diverse Discrimination; Lesbian,
Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer (LGBTQ+) Program.
In total, there were more than 20 different LGBTQI+--add your
letter--training sessions and courses required by USDA that cower to
the left's woke indoctrination policies, defy congressional intent, and
contradict the agency's mission.
Federal employees devoted to public service shouldn't be forced to
participate in extreme training sessions that contradict their own
values.
I urge my colleagues to support my amendment and prevent Federal
employees from being forced to participate in extreme training sessions
for the purpose of pandering to a woke agenda.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to
the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Who in the world knows what ``woke'' means? I
think all of us should be awake to the dangers of overreach in this
appropriations bill.
This amendment would prohibit funds for courses, books, or study
guides on 17 topics related to inclusion, diversity, and supporting
LGBT employees.
These topics include issues such as empathy, fostering an inclusive
workplace, or becoming an ally to all.
I do not believe we should be spending our time here on the floor
today debating ways that we can cut back on teaching empathy. Instead,
what I think would serve our constituents the most would be a
discussion on how we can better help American farmers remain
competitive globally, help put food on the tables of those in need,
and, yes, help foster an inclusive and welcoming workplace for all at
the Department of Agriculture.
Mr. Chair, I urge opposition to this amendment, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mrs. BOEBERT. Mr. Chair, maybe the USDA should spend their time
educating those on how to tell the difference between a heifer and a
bull. Maybe then we can actually bring some common sense to this topic.
Also, I would like to note that my colleague on the other side of the
aisle, the gentleman, failed to mention some letters when referencing
the LGBTQI+ community, which is not very inclusive for their party's
agenda. I just wanted the record to reflect that there definitely were
some letters missing from that description, which is extremely
offensive.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Colorado (Mrs. Boebert).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Colorado
will be postponed.
Amendment No. 90 Offered by Mr. Good
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 90
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. The amount of appropriations provided by this Act
for the annual salary of the position of the Director of the
Office of Surveillance and Epidemiology of the Food and Drug
Administration, occupied by Gerald Dal Pan, is hereby reduced
to $1.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 90, the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Good) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my
amendment to reduce to $1 the salary of the director of the Office of
Surveillance and Epidemiology within the FDA.
As part of the Republican House majority, conservatives were able to
secure important reforms to the House rules, including reinstating the
Holman rule, which dates back to the 1800s and was created to reduce
spending, but it has also been used as a measure of accountability to
exercise oversight over unelected bureaucrats by reducing salaries of
Federal employees.
I invite my colleagues to consider this amendment as a form of
oversight, transparency, and accountability--what value does this
office provide, and is the person who occupies it using their position
for political purposes?
Earlier this year, the FDA updated the risk evaluation and mitigation
strategy for the main chemical abortion drug, mifepristone. This
document changed the policy surrounding the distribution of the drug,
making it easier to access, and, therefore, more dangerous for women.
Many peer-reviewed studies show that women who take chemical abortion
pills are at risk of severe side effects, including hemorrhaging, the
need for follow-up surgery, and even death. Yet, this FDA guidance
would formally eliminate the in-person distribution requirement.
My amendment provides scrutiny over the bureaucrats who issue
documents--not laws--that literally carry the power of life or death.
Whatever values these offices provide to drug safety has been clouded
by political judgment, and Congress should take a serious look at those
offices, and we can start by holding pro-abortion officials accountable
for such a destructive decision.
I urge my colleagues to stand for life in support of this amendment,
and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to
the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Good).
[[Page H4562]]
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia
will be postponed.
Amendment No. 91 Offered by Mr. Good
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 91
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. The amount of appropriations provided by this Act
for the annual salary of the position of the Director of the
Division of Risk Management of the Food and Drug
Administration, occupied by Cynthia LaCivita, is hereby
reduced to $1.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Good) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may
consume. I rise today in support of my amendment to reduce to $1 the
salary of the director of the Office of Risk Management within the FDA.
This amendment asks the question: Is this person who oversees the
Office of the Director of Risk Management actually protecting women and
children from risk?
The office is one of at least seven within the FDA that helped
develop a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy, or REMS, for the
chemical abortion drug mifepristone. These REMS documents are required
by the FDA for certain drugs with serious safety concerns to help
ensure the benefits outweigh its risks.
It is baffling to me that these bureaucrats would acknowledge that
mifepristone is inherently dangerous, yet advance policies that
discourage a woman from even having to show up at a doctor's office.
Earlier this year, the FDA updated the risk evaluation mitigation
strategy for the main chemical abortion drug mifepristone, and this
document changed the policy surrounding the distribution of the drug.
{time} 0240
Chemical abortion has four times the complication rate of surgical
abortion. These risks would only increase with advanced pregnancy and
lack of medical supervision.
Of course, mifepristone REMS doesn't factor into the risk evaluation
process, and the drug ends the life of the precious, innocent child in
the womb.
Mifepristone deprives the developing child of the hormones that he or
she needs to grow and then is paired with another drug to violently
expel the child from the womb.
My amendment provides needed scrutiny over bureaucrats who issue
documents that literally carry the power of life or death.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to stand for life and support this
amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I claim time in opposition to this
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Good).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia
will be postponed.
Amendment No. 92 Offered by Mr. Good of Virginia
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 92
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. The amount of appropriations provided by this Act
for the annual salary of the position of the Director of the
Office of New Drugs of the Food and Drug Administration,
occupied by Peter P. Stein, is hereby reduced to $1.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Good) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment to reduce to $1
the salary of the director of the Office of New Drugs within the FDA.
This amendment provides accountability on behalf of the 63 million
children lost to abortion since 1972. If our Federal agencies are not
protecting the most vulnerable among us, we should not give them more
of our hard-earned taxpayer dollars.
This year, the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine brought a lawsuit
against the FDA with evidence that the original approval process for
mifepristone was incomplete. This case argues that the FDA wrongfully
fast-tracked approval and neglected the pediatric study requirement.
The case is still ongoing, but the details show a pattern of the FDA
systematically removing any meaningful safeguard from the drug to make
it as widely used as possible.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to stand for life and support this
amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to
the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support the
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Good).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia
will be postponed.
Amendment No. 93 Offered by Mr. Good of Virginia
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 93
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. The amount of appropriations provided by this Act
for the annual salary of the position of the Director of the
Office of Compliance of the Food and Drug Administration,
occupied by Jill Furman, is hereby reduced to $1.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Good) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment to reduce to $1
the salary of the director of the Office of Compliance within the FDA.
Americans don't want their taxpayer money funding bureaucrats who
make decisions contrary to their values. In this case, this director
was complicit in harming women and their unborn children by loosening
restrictions on
[[Page H4563]]
mifepristone, the chemical abortion drug.
The FDA has even looked the other way to permit chemical abortion
drugs to be distributed via mail, which clearly violates the Federal
law outlined in the Comstock Act.
Americans expect Federal regulators to value women's safety and
children's lives more than profits for the abortion industry.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to stand for life and support this
amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to
the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support the
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Good).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia
will be postponed.
Amendment No. 94 Offered by Mr. Good of Virginia
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 94
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. The amount of appropriations provided by this Act
for the annual salary of the position of the Director of the
Office of Medical Policy of the Food and Drug Administration,
occupied by M. Khair ElZarrad, is hereby reduced to $1.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Good) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment to reduce to $1
the salary of the director of the Office of Medical Policy within the
FDA.
In 2020, chemical abortions became the number one abortion method for
ending an unborn child's life. In that year, we lost 492,210 children.
Instead of making it easier for women to get access to the abortion
pill, the FDA should be banning it. We should work to make every
pregnancy a happy one and support the fantastic pregnancy resource
centers, churches, and families that help women in difficult situations
choose life for their children.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to
the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support the
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Good).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia
will be postponed.
Amendment No. 95 Offered by Mr. Good of Virginia
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 95
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. The amount of appropriations provided by this Act
for the annual salary of the position of the Director of the
Office of Regulatory Policy of the Food and Drug
Administration, occupied by Elizabeth Jungman, is hereby
reduced to $1.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Good) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment to reduce to $1
the salary of the director of the Office of Regulatory Policy within
the FDA.
Mr. Chair, between 2007 and 2019, total FDA employment increased 79
percent. Today, there are over 18,000 employees. The FDA actually makes
it very difficult to discern the exact number among the thousands of
employees who were responsible for the updates to the abortion pill
Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy.
We can glean from FDA documents that multidisciplinary teams,
including at least these seven offices I have mentioned across my
debate time, played a role in approving the changes that eliminated the
in-person distribution requirement of mifepristone and allowed for
retail pharmacies to dispense the abortifacient.
The names of specific individuals responsible are shrouded in
mystery. The names are redacted from public documents related to this
massive policy change, but we can reasonably conclude that the
directors were indirectly or directly responsible.
Whatever value these offices provide to drug safety has been clouded
by these political judgments, and Congress should take a serious look
at these offices. We can start by holding these pro-abortion officials
accountable for such a destructive decision.
Mr. Chair, I ask my colleagues to support this amendment, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to
the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support the
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Good).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia
will be postponed.
{time} 0250
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Rosendale). The Chair understands that
amendment Nos. 96 through 98 will not be offered.
Amendment No. 99 Offered by Mr. Stauber
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 99
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. STAUBER. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used for the Farm to School Network Racial Equity Learning
Lab.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Minnesota (Mr. Stauber) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Minnesota.
Mr. STAUBER. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment. I believe
in promoting equal opportunities for all, irrespective of race, color,
or creed.
[[Page H4564]]
However, the National Farm to School Network's Racial Equity Learning
Lab takes an approach that contradicts the core values of our Nation.
The Farm To School movement was started to help give schools and
students access to locally produced farm fresh foods and provide a new
market for our local farmers.
It is unfortunate that the National Farm to School Network has
decided to force radical ideology into these programs.
The proposed Racial Equity Learning Lab's stated goal is to teach
participants to apply a ``racial equity lens'' to their work within the
farm to school program.
It seeks to inject critical race theory and identity politics into
our educational institutions, perpetuating an agenda that emphasizes
differences rather than uniting us as Americans. This follows a
dangerous and growing trend in America to view everything through the
lens of race.
While the National Farm to School Network itself has laudable goals
of encouraging healthier eating habits among students and supporting
local agriculture, it should do so without embracing divisive
ideologies.
We should be fostering an environment where children from all
backgrounds come together to learn and grow, understand the value of
hard work, personal responsibility, and the importance of community.
Mr. Chair, my amendment will ensure that no taxpayer money is used to
further steer the National Farm to School Network in the wrong
direction.
I ask that my colleagues join me in keeping critical race theory out
of our food systems and out of our schools. I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to
the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this
amendment. The National Farm to School Network supports the work of
farmers, teachers, and community leaders.
The Racial Equity Learning Lab is a learning program regarding racial
inequities in our food system. USDA's support from the program seeks to
address racial equity in our farm to school system.
I would think that making sure that all schoolchildren have access to
adequate meals would be an easy, bipartisan priority. I am disappointed
by this amendment. I urge all Members to oppose it. I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. STAUBER. Mr. Chair, I rise again in support of my amendment and
ask my colleagues to do the same, and I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Stauber).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Minnesota
will be postponed.
Amendment No. 100 Offered by Mr. Good of Virginia
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 100
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. Chairman.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the spending reduction
account) insert the following:
Sec. ___. None of the funds appropriated by this Act may
be used to implement any of the following executive orders:
(1) Executive Order 14075, relating to Advancing Equality
for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, and Intersex
Individuals.
(2) Executive Order 14021, relating to Guaranteeing an
Educational Environment Free from Discrimination on the Basis
of Sex, Including Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity.
(3) Executive Order 13988, relating to Preventing and
Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or
Sexual Orientation.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Good) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
My amendment will defund three radical executive orders issued by
President Biden. These executive orders are intended to combat so-
called discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual
orientation.
The weaponized bureaucratic regime wants to promote everything
regular Americans stand for: freedom of speech, marriage as being
between one man and one woman for life, and other values that so many
people outside of Washington hold dear.
The Biden administration wants to instill fear in the hearts of
regular Americans. My amendment would block any taxpayer dollars that
would be used for the implementation of these woke executive orders in
any agency. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I rise to claim the time in
opposition to this amendment.
I oppose this amendment. Members of the LGBT community have
historically faced higher rates of food insecurity.
USDA has taken steps to clarify that discrimination on the basis of
sexual orientation and gender identity are prohibited in programs
administered by USDA such as SNAP.
It is concerning to me that the Democratic amendment striking harmful
policy riders was not put forward by the Rules Committee for the
debate, while a large number of Republican amendments adding further
policy riders were allowed to be considered.
These amendments have no chance of becoming law and only move us
further from bipartisan conference agreement which can pass both
chambers of Congress.
I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, the Civil Rights Act of 1964
which, by the way, saw significant Democrat opposition, clearly
outlines who is protected from discrimination.
Now, the left wants to impose extra requirements on businessowners
and the American people and force them into either having to walk on
eggshells or face being sued for a supposed incorrect statement.
This amendment will defund President Biden's directives to promulgate
woke ideology throughout the entire government instead of serving the
American people. This culture of fear is not what made America the
Nation that it is.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I urge strong support for my
amendment for the values that have made America the country we love
today.
Democrats are opposed to the very idea of America so much that they
oppose the values that Americans know and love.
My amendment will preserve that America and fight back against the
left's woke agenda. I urge my colleagues to support this effort and
vote in favor of this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my
time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Good).
The amendment was agreed to.
amendment no. 101 offered by mrs. miller of illinois
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 101
printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mrs. MILLER of Illinois. I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. ___. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to implement or enforce the Executive Order 14008 of
January 27, 2021, titled ``Tackling the Climate Crisis at
Home and Abroad'' (86 Fed. Reg. 7619).
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 101, the gentlewoman
from Illinois (Mrs. Miller) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
[[Page H4565]]
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Illinois.
{time} 0300
Mrs. MILLER of Illinois. Mr. Chair, the American people do not want
their tax dollars going to the creation of the Obama communist climate
corps, which is a leftwing indoctrination program for young people that
advances Communist China's attack on American energy and promotes
China's solar panels, lithium batteries, and windmills.
Congress must prohibit funding for this green bad deal army and
reverse the America last agenda. Barack Obama's communist revolution to
fundamentally transform America kills our domestic energy production.
Obama flies on private jets and has beachfront mansions. He doesn't
care about climate, and he doesn't think the oceans are rising.
Taxpayers do not want to fund the foot soldiers of Obama's communist
revolution.
Mr. Chair, I urge the adoption of my amendment, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I claim time in opposition to this
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, this amendment would prohibit USDA
from implementing an executive order on tackling the climate crisis.
This year, our country has experienced more billion-dollar climate
disasters than ever before in our history. In only the first 8 months
of the year, 23 weather disasters devastated regions across the
country, and in every case, the agricultural sector was harmed.
This summer, we witnessed catastrophic floods in the Northeast
decimate farmers' crops. Extreme drought in the West continues to
impact ranchers' ability to sustain their livestock. Tragically, we
watched helplessly as the Maui wildfires ravaged thousands of acres of
farmland and took nearly 100 human lives.
This amendment would block Federal efforts to help farmers develop
climate-smart agricultural and forestry practices that are critical to
combating the climate crisis. If we are to address the climate crisis,
help farmers, and strengthen our economy, we cannot be hamstrung by
funding limitations that deny that climate change is real.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Miller).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Illinois
will be postponed.
Amendment No. 102 Offered by Mr. Rosendale
The Acting CHAIR (Mrs. Miller of Illinois). It is now in order to
consider amendment No. 102 printed in part F of House Report 118-216.
Mr. ROSENDALE. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. The total amount of appropriations made available
by this Act is hereby reduced by $717,000,000.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 723, the gentleman
from Montana (Mr. Rosendale) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Montana.
Mr. ROSENDALE. Madam Chair, I rise to support my amendment.
My amendment No. 102 would reduce the Agriculture, Rural Development,
Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act
by $717 million in order to get the total spending of all bills back to
the fiscal 2022 levels.
In fiscal year 2022, the Agriculture-FDA appropriations were about
$24 billion. I believe that the agencies and programs included in this
bill were able to operate effectively enough at those levels.
In order to get spending under control, Federal agencies must begin
operating at the same levels or, at the very least, receive only modest
increases, which this would include.
On April 26, 2023, House Republicans passed the Limit, Save, Grow Act
to reduce spending and take the first step forward to financial
stability and recovery for our country. However, Speaker McCarthy
deserted this plan and instead turned to the Democrats to pass a debt
ceiling bill eliminating the work done and passed under the Limit,
Save, Grow Act.
The American people are sick and tired of the D.C. cartel. It is
running up our tab for the American people while our constituents are
struggling to make ends meet.
From 1981 until 2008, Congress added $10 trillion to the national
debt. In the past 4 years, we have added as much as they did during
that 27-year period.
This is not sustainable, and we need to find an off-ramp. Limiting
spending will help our farmers in the long run as they are currently
struggling with high input costs as a result of Joe Biden's reckless
spending, which has led to historically high inflation rates.
We can no longer continue to fund the Democrats' and the Biden
administration's radical agenda. It is an insult to the American people
to continue the exorbitant spending spree that has been spread by the
previous Speaker of the House.
Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I claim time in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to this
amendment.
The amendment would attempt to cut overall funding of the bill by an
additional $717 million. Not only that but it would do so without
specifying where the cuts would come from. This would effectively turn
the decision from where the cuts would come from over to the executive
branch, to the administration that the other side is so critical of,
robbing Congress of its constitutionally mandated power of the purse, a
violation of the separation of powers.
This is something that we should not include in any appropriations
bill. The bill already guts funding for USDA, and any further cuts
would just make a bad bill worse.
We should kill this amendment. We should enact a reasonable,
responsible appropriations bill so that we can take care of the needs
of the American people and make sure that the Department of Agriculture
is adequately funded to serve the needs of the American people.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. ROSENDALE. Madam Chair, there is a proposed $1.3 billion increase
in this appropriation. With this reduction, there would still be a $600
million increase in the appropriation. That is a reasonable increase
based upon the inflation rates that have been caused by all the
reckless spending by the Biden administration.
The farmers across the State of Montana understand that everyone has
to conserve. A $600 million increase in the appropriation for the
agriculture bill is certainly doing their part. That is a tremendous
increase, and they are willing to take that $700 million reduction.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Montana (Mr. Rosendale).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Montana will
be postponed.
Mr. HARRIS. Madam Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Rosendale) having assumed the chair, Mrs. Miller of Illinois, Acting
Chair of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union,
reported that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill
(H.R. 4368) making
[[Page H4566]]
appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug
Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 2024, and for other purposes, had come to no
resolution thereon.
____________________