[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 7]
[House]
[Pages 9239-9252]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



  CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 2559, AGRICULTURAL RISK PROTECTION ACT OF 
                                  2000

  Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 512 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 512

       Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be 
     in order to consider the conference report to accompany the 
     bill (H.R. 2559) to amend the Federal Crop Insurance Act to 
     strengthen the safety net for agricultural producers by 
     providing greater access to more affordable risk management 
     tools and improved protection from production and income 
     loss, to improve the efficiency and integrity of the Federal 
     crop insurance program, and for other purposes. All points of 
     order against the conference report and against its 
     consideration are waived. The conference report shall be 
     considered as read.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Reynolds) 
is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield 
the customary 30 minutes to my friend, the gentleman from Massachusetts 
(Mr. Moakley), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, during consideration of this resolution, all time 
yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

[[Page 9240]]


  Mr. Speaker, the legislation before us today provides for 
consideration of the conference report to H.R. 2559, the Agriculture 
Risk Protection Act of 1999.
  Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 512 is a standard conference report 
rule that waives all points of order against the conference report and 
against its consideration.
  Additionally, the rule provides that the conference report shall be 
considered as read.
  Passage of this rule will allow the House to consider the conference 
report to the Agriculture Risk Protection Act.
  The Agriculture Risk Protection Act enjoys broad bipartisan support 
from colleagues representing farmers and ranchers from all regions of 
the country. It is the right legislative response to the current plight 
of our Nation's farmers and ranchers.
  Mr. Speaker, it is no secret that farmers, growers, and ranchers are 
not experiencing the prosperity that many other Americans enjoy today. 
Confronted by adverse weather and low prices, they are facing a second 
year of extreme economic crisis.
  In fact, apple growers alone lost a staggering $760 million 
nationwide over the past 3 years, according to USDA statistics.
  Representing Wayne County, New York, the largest apple producer in 
New York State and one of the largest in the Nation, this type of 
statistic is particularly troubling.
  Growers in my district have been especially hard hit in recent years. 
Floods, storms, drought, and other severe weather have had a crippling 
effect on area specialty crop farmers.
  Just last week, flooding destroyed onion crops that had been planted 
only days earlier in the Elba mucklands in Genesee County in my 
congressional district.
  One local farmer estimated a 75 percent loss on 3,000 acres of onion 
crop, with an estimated value of $15 million annually.
  Despite these and other disasters, crop insurance programs have 
historically been tailored to farmers who grow so-called traditional 
crops, such as wheat, corn, and soybeans.
  It is for that reason that I am especially pleased with the 
conference report which, for the first time, earmarks funds and 
encourages the development of products for underserved commodities, 
including specialty crops.
  This Nation has had a long and proud agricultural history. 
Agriculture has been and remains a vital part of our Nation's economy 
and way of life. America's farmers feed not only our Nation but also 
the world.
  We must give agriculture producers the tools to manage risk 
responsibly, and this legislation does just that.
  This bill provides better insurance coverage at a lower cost for our 
Nation's farmers. It provides affordable coverage at every level, with 
strong incentives to purchase higher levels of protection and new 
flexibility for producers to choose the level of coverage that best 
meets their needs.
  This legislation promotes the development of new products for 
managing risk, empowering universities, co-ops, and individual farmers 
who work to develop successful policies.
  It makes sure that every farmer and rancher has the tools necessary 
for risk preparation. Proactive steps such as these are needed at the 
Federal level.
  Under current conditions, too many farmers are unable to afford crop 
insurance. When natural disasters strike, the Federal Government 
assists victims with taxpayer dollars.
  By increasing Federal contributions to crop insurance, such insurance 
becomes more affordable and there is less need for taxpayer dollars for 
reactive solutions.
  H.R. 2559 makes across-the-board reductions in farmer-paid premiums. 
The bill makes insurance that protects price as well as production more 
affordable to our farmers.
  The bill also helps farmers who are hit hard by multiyear disasters 
to insure more of the yield of what they have proven that they can 
grow. These changes will help farmers from all regions growing all 
crops.
  In short, Mr. Speaker, the Agriculture Risk Protection Act is a 
common sense, fiscally conservative bill. In passing the conference 
report, Congress goes a long way to properly prepare for natural 
disasters that impact agriculture production.
  In conclusion, I would like to commend the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Combest), Chairman of the Committee on Agriculture, and the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) for bringing this measure before the House 
today.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the rule and the 
underlying measure.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank my dear friend, the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Reynolds), for yielding me the time.
  Mr. Speaker, I am in support of this rule. This rule waives all 
points of order against consideration of the conference report, H.R. 
2559, the Agriculture Risk Protection Act of 1999.
  This rule is necessary to allow the House to consider this conference 
report and will provide critically needed funding for rural America.
  In essence, Mr. Speaker, this conference agreement will allow 
producers who participate in Federal crop insurance programs to buy 
better coverage for less money.
  However, the conference report spends the funds set aside in the 
budget for crop insurance reform and for supplemental economic 
assistance. While these funds are badly needed in our ailing farm 
sector, the fact that for 3 years in a row the Congress has provided 
supplemental payments to agriculture points to the simple fact that our 
current farm policy is failing and needs a very thorough review.
  Until there is such a review, Mr. Speaker, this conference agreement 
will help make crop insurance more useful to farmers who need 
protection from natural disasters and it will also provide a badly 
needed supplement to short-term farm income.
  Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I yield back the balance 
of my time.

                              {time}  1015

  Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Washington (Mr. Nethercutt).
  Mr. NETHERCUTT. I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this rule and in support of 
the underlying conference report not only because of what the rule 
provides; I also want to make a comment about what the rule and the 
underlying measure do not provide. What they do not provide, what the 
underlying measure does not provide is the ability for this country and 
the agriculture economy that it serves to have an opportunity to have 
sanctions relief on food and medicine for five countries that we 
currently embargo unilaterally considered in the bill.
  I have been actively engaged with our leadership and members of all 
committees of jurisdiction relative to the issue of lifting sanctions 
on food and medicine to try to accommodate some solution and reach some 
conclusion that would allow this marketing freedom to occur to our 
farmers. Unfortunately, my own leadership said no at the last minute. I 
am on the Committee on Appropriations and its Subcommittee on 
Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration and 
Related Agencies.
  At the subcommittee level, we were able to insert language by an 
overwhelming vote that allowed sanctions on food and medicine to be 
lifted to assist our farmers and for humanitarian reasons as well. We 
went to the full committee a week or so ago and by a vote of 35-24 
rejected a challenge to strip out this language that is going to help 
our farmers.
  Now here we have come to the Committee on Rules and I understand 
later today there will be a rule on the agriculture appropriations 
bill. The language that was fairly and squarely passed through the 
appropriations process for literally the third year we have been 
working on this, but last night it was set up to be stripped out of the 
bill. So I am here to register my

[[Page 9241]]

objection and my active participation in defeating the agriculture 
appropriations rule, not this rule. I am going to vote for this one and 
I am going to vote for the conference report.
  But in reality, the lifting of food and medicine sanctions should be 
in this conference report. It is a vehicle that could have passed, but 
it was thwarted by our leadership. I am going to object to the Rules 
Committee action and hope my colleagues will vote against the rule on 
agriculture appropriations which comes up later today.
  Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Combest), the distinguished chairman of the Committee on 
Agriculture.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time and for his comments and the comments of the gentleman from 
Massachusetts.
  I want to say that I strongly support this rule and urge its passage 
and the accompanying conference report. I appreciate the Committee on 
Rules meeting so late yesterday evening and into the night in order to 
give us this opportunity today. This is a measure that we have been 
working on for about a year and a half. It is something that in fact 
needs as soon as possible to get into law so that the regulations can 
be written, so that the provisions of this program can be implemented 
for the coming crop year.
  It is vitally important that American producers understand the 
assistance package that is coming, and it is very critical that this 
happen at this particular time. I want to again extend my appreciation 
for all of those members on the Committee on Rules who made this 
possible.
  Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Minnesota (Mr. Gutknecht).
  Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
this time. This really is the second great day in a row for American 
farmers. Yesterday we passed PNTR, which will give us, our farmers 
better access to markets in China. Today we have a conference committee 
report that was signed by all 18 conferees. That does not happen very 
often here in Washington. And so in 2 consecutive days, we are seeing a 
tremendous display of bipartisanship on behalf of American farmers. 
Crop insurance reform is a very important issue. For too long it has 
been neglected by this Congress here in Washington, and so I am very 
happy to rise in support not only of the rule but of the bill. This is 
a great day for American agriculture. It follows on another great day 
yesterday. Hopefully, we can get those commodity prices up where they 
belong.
  Mr. REYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, I 
yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on 
the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 512, I call up 
the conference report on the bill (H.R. 2559) to amend the Federal Crop 
Insurance Act to strengthen the safety net for agricultural producers 
by providing greater access to more affordable risk management tools 
and improved protection from production and income loss, to improve the 
efficiency and integrity of the Federal crop insurance program, and for 
other purposes.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pease). Pursuant to House Resolution 
512, the conference report is considered as having been read.
  (For conference report and statement, see proceedings of the House of 
May 24, 2000, at page H3763).
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest) and 
the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest).
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I am extremely proud today to bring this conference 
report to the floor. With this single piece of legislation, we have the 
opportunity to strengthen farmers' ability to manage the risk the 
future may bring and to provide them the financial assistance that they 
badly need to cope with their immediate financial crisis.
  H.R. 2559 began last year when the House provided the budget 
resources to overhaul and reinvigorate our ailing agricultural risk 
management system. The Committee on Agriculture then crafted, on a 
truly bipartisan basis, the most significant improvements in the crop 
insurance program in its history. The result last year was the House 
passage of legislation that makes risk management more affordable and 
more effective for more farmers. While the Senate was unable to pass a 
similar bill until this year, passage of this conference report today 
will ensure that producers will see the benefits of this major 
initiative beginning with the next year's crop.
  In addition to sustaining the drive to secure future farm financial 
stability, this year's budget resolution also provides $7.1 billion in 
emergency economic assistance to farmers facing their third straight 
year of historically low prices. Recovering Asian markets and trade 
openings like yesterday's passage of permanent normal trade relations 
with China are optimistic signs for future prices.
  But this year, farmers face a bleak situation. Providing temporary 
economic assistance now will bring a measure of economic stability to 
farm families as they struggle to regain markets and secure improved 
prices. Altogether, the elements contained in this conference report 
signal Congress' commitment to help America's farmers get through their 
current price crisis and to provide a more stable foundation of risk 
management for their future.
  This has been a massive undertaking that would not have been possible 
without a broad bipartisan effort. I want to thank the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Stenholm), the ranking Democrat on the committee who set 
aside partisan considerations to work for a year and a half to bring us 
to today's vote. His effort typifies the spirit of all 51 members of 
the House Committee on Agriculture to work tirelessly on behalf of 
American farmers. Our committee also owes a debt of gratitude to the 
whole House, who in two successive budget cycles recognized the need to 
focus special attention on one sector of our booming economy that is 
struggling. The work of the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Chambliss) and 
his colleagues on the Committee on the Budget made available the 
resources needed to bring this bill to the floor today.
  Mr. Speaker, it is an honor to be a part of such a broad, sustained, 
and bipartisan effort to provide economic assistance and lay a stronger 
foundation for the future of American farm families. I urge all of my 
colleagues to support the conference report to H.R. 2559.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the conference report and to 
congratulate my colleagues on the Committee on Agriculture. I 
particularly want to thank the chairman for his work that he has put 
into this bill and for the inclusion of the minority and of all the 
members of the committee in the development of its provisions. The 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest), the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. 
Ewing), the subcommittee chairman, and the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Condit), the ranking Democrat on the subcommittee, are all to be 
commended for their efforts. While I support the conference report and 
encourage its adoption, I do have reservations about the manner in 
which the budgeted funds are being spent.
  Mr. Speaker, the conference report's crop insurance provisions 
succeed in spending the funds that were allocated in fiscal year 2000 
and 2001 budgets for risk management and income assistance. The bill's 
supplemental provisions succeed in spending the $7.1 billion reserve 
fund for agriculture as set forth in the fiscal year 2001 budget.
  As someone who represents a rural agricultural area, I know how badly 
these additional resources are needed. Throughout the process of 
developing

[[Page 9242]]

the crop insurance provisions of this bill, I have supported the idea 
that our crop insurance program needs to be strengthened and improved. 
While it was the will of our committee and of the House and Senate 
conferees that these funds should be dedicated to improvements in our 
current crop insurance program, the budget resolution made funds 
available for the broader purposes of income assistance and for risk 
management. In so doing, it provided a level of flexibility that would 
permit nearly any kind of agricultural assistance. I feel that this 
flexibility should have been used to meet a broader set of needs.
  Likewise, Mr. Speaker, the reserve fund for agriculture in this 
year's budget could have been used for any manner of assistance for 
farm producers. Again, the conference report before us today ignores 
that flexibility. By spending the $5.5 billion available for this year 
entirely on additional AMTA payments, the bill fails to recognize other 
unmet needs. For example, payments to producers under last year's 
natural disaster assistance program were pro-rated because sufficient 
funds were not appropriated to make them whole. I would have dedicated 
some of the $5.5 billion to raising these payments, which would have 
provided assistance to producers of all commodities who suffered from 
disaster.
  Without a doubt, the supplemental AMTA payments will provide 
assistance to agricultural producers who are suffering from economic 
disasters because of our failure to live up to our promises to provide 
them with opportunities from the marketplace. The criteria for 
receiving assistance are merely the possession of an AMTA contract, 
however; and this allows producers to receive a payment without 
demonstrating real need. I strongly believe that more fully funding the 
disaster payments would have been a better method for directing these 
funds to agriculture producers most in need. But my view was a minority 
view.
  Mr. Speaker, I also believe that these allotted funds could be better 
utilized to establish an adequate safety net for producers. This year 
marks the third year in a row that Congress has been called upon to 
take extraordinary action to make up for the deficiencies of our 
current farm program. It is getting expensive. The fact that for 3 
years in a row we are compensating producers for low prices seems to me 
to be a stark admission that our basic farm program is not working, 
just as multiple years of yield disaster aid shows that crop insurance 
is not working. Increases in the budget are a clear signal by our 
colleagues that these problems, income reductions as well as yield 
reductions, need to be addressed, and the crop insurance provisions of 
this conference report today do move in that direction.
  In addition, Mr. Speaker, I must express my reservations in regard to 
the timing of this economic disaster assistance. As of right now, all 
we know for certain is that commodity prices are low. We have no hard 
numbers in regard to the extent to which we will need disaster 
assistance this year. Current outlook suggests that drought in the 
Midwest and the South will severely affect production. There is a 
possibility that supply and price relations could result in a situation 
where we have strengthened prices later this year.
  I understand that these funds must be spent in a timely manner in 
order to meet budget requirements. However, I would have been more 
comfortable taking our time in order to fully assess the complete 
picture later this year. I am concerned that we may not be allocating 
the provision of economic loss versus crop loss in a manner that is 
most responsible to the actual conditions facing producers this year.
  Our Nation deserves a long-term reliable farm policy. Taxpayers and 
agricultural producers alike should be able to know up front what kind 
of assistance they can expect and what the rules will be for 
distributing it. In terms of yield insurance, this bill makes some 
progress. Higher subsidy rates, for example, will lead to higher levels 
of participation in crop insurance, better indemnity performance for 
the producers who participate and hopefully less need for Congress to 
respond to weather disasters with emergency spending.
  Absent from the bill, Mr. Speaker, is the other half of the picture. 
In this and the previous 2 years, our programs have left producers 
overexposed to price and weather disasters. The bill makes progress 
towards addressing yield disaster, but what about future price 
disasters? How much more will our government spend on ad hoc 
supplemental AMTA payments before we realize that a more rational, 
predictable policy needs to be in force?
  Mr. Speaker, having pressed my reservations, I once again want to 
commend the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest) and all the members of 
the Committee on Agriculture and the conference committee for their 
work on this bill. Going into this progress, we agreed that short-term 
changes in crop insurance in this cycle would pave the way for a broad 
look at the entire program in the years ahead. I look forward to 
working with my colleagues in developing a crop insurance program that 
works better and a farm revenue program that meets producer and 
taxpayer needs.
  Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge that my colleagues vote to adopt the 
conference report before the House today.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1030

  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, one of the pleasures we have had in the past year and a 
half personally from this Member's standpoint has been the opportunity 
to work with and to have very open and frank discussions with not only 
my colleague on the committee, but my friend and my neighbor, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm), my neighbor not only the 
committee, but neighbor in Texas as well.
  But there are a couple of points that I want to make, Mr. Speaker, in 
regards to the comments of the gentleman from Texas. I agree with the 
gentleman in the fact that we have problems in agriculture and problems 
that the program has its deficiencies. It was that recognition after 
the second year of the amount of money that was required in order to 
keep agriculture afloat in this country that our committee embarked on 
a series of hearings across this country to listen to farmers, to get 
their input on what is good and what is bad about current farm policy.
  We have just concluded in the past 2 weeks 10 of those hearings, and 
I will say my friend and partner, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Stenholm), accompanied me on all 10 of those. We were the only two 
members on the committee able to attend them all. But it was for the 
express purpose of going out and listening to farmers.
  We heard a number of suggestions, but a couple of the things we did 
hear, that I think resonated throughout, was the fact that it has been 
the assistance that Congress has provided over the last couple of years 
that helped tremendously, keeping farmers in business. Another was the 
need for a dramatic reform in crop insurance. I think today's activity 
and legislation addresses both of those in a very significant way.
  I think we need to have a better way to make this delivery, but I 
will say that given the fact that this is paid in this fiscal year, 
given the fact that it has to be deliverable in a timely fashion, there 
have been a lot of discussions with people from the outside and others 
about a need to make a change in the delivery process. I am very open 
to looking at that change. There has been a lot of discussion about it. 
It has not come forward. We will continue to look at it in any possible 
way we can do the job better.
  But I do not want those listening to this conversation to believe 
that this is not something that is strongly supported by commodity 
groups all across this country. There has been virtually unanimous 
request for making the payments from commodity groups in the fashion 
that is provided for in this legislation. It does ensure that farmers 
do know exactly what it is they are going

[[Page 9243]]

to get, they know exactly when they are going to get it, and that helps 
them tremendously in their financial obligations and considerations and 
concerns that they have to deal with today.
  I think that, given the fact that we are dealing in an area that has 
tremendous concerns and problems, agriculture, that this is a very 
healthy and a very positive response to those concerns.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. 
Barrett), the vice chairman of the committee.
  Mr. BARRETT of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding me time.
  Mr. Speaker, after 8 weeks of negotiations and countless hours of 
discussions between the House and the Senate Agriculture Committees, I 
am more than pleased to rise today in support of the conference report 
on the Agriculture Risk Protection Act. The conference report on H.R. 
2559 is really an excellent piece of legislation that accomplishes what 
we set out to accomplish, that is, making crop insurance more 
affordable and easier to use for all of our producers.
  Under the leadership of the gentleman from Texas (Chairman Combest), 
and, yes, the ranking member, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm), 
the House Committee on Agriculture listened to producers' suggestions, 
complaints and stories of fraud. We then developed and passed the bill, 
with the help of the Committee on the Budget, to address those concerns 
and greatly improve the program.
  I am pleased that the conference report will increase premium 
subsidies for producers, address actual production history 
discrepancies, fund research and development for new insurance policies 
and products, and make certain that the program is not fraudulently 
used or abused. Producers have asked for many of these changes for many 
years, and I believe we have something that they will want to use and 
that is in fact helpful to them.
  Also the conference report includes a much-needed economic assistance 
package for agriculture. As has been mentioned, while the economy as a 
whole has been booming, American producers have faced low prices for 
nearly 3 long years. With this conference report, we are responding 
with concrete policies and necessary financial assistance. Congress' 
willingness to provide assistance again this year demonstrates our 
commitment to farmers, ranchers and to rural America.
  Even though many of my colleagues may not have farms or ranches in 
their districts, agriculture is vital to every American and every 
congressional district. So thank the farmer, when you can. They feed us 
all.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this conference report. 
Combined with the economic assistance package, it will provide the help 
producers need to meet the challenges of today's poor agriculture 
economy.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Arkansas (Mr. Berry).
  Mr. BERRY. Mr. Speaker, I want to, first of all, thank the 
distinguished chairman of the Committee on Agriculture, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Combest), and the distinguished ranking member, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm), for the great work they have done 
and the leadership they have provided for all of American agriculture.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Agriculture Risk 
Protection Act and in support of the emergency assistance contained in 
this bill. Food and fiber production in this country is a national 
security interest, second only to national defense. Every citizen of 
this country benefits from the safest, most affordable and most 
abundant food supply in the history of the world.
  Americans spend less of their income on food than almost any other 
country in the world. This is a direct result of the productivity of 
American agriculture. When agriculture is suffering through difficult 
times, such as the times of low commodity prices that we face now, it 
is essential that Congress and the President act to preserve 
agriculture productivity. Farmers need emergency assistance right now 
to stay in business.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this bill, so 
that American agriculture is able to continue to fuel the economic 
development of this country by providing a reliable, reasonably priced 
food supply.
  This bill also makes the Federal Crop Insurance Program a better risk 
management tool for America's farmers. Farmers will pay less for crop 
insurance at every level of coverage as a result of this bill. By 
offering increased premium subsidies, this bill encourages farmers to 
purchase crop insurance and protect themselves against low yields and 
weather disasters.
  This bill also goes a long way towards reducing fraud and abuse in 
the crop insurance system. For years this has been a problem that has 
plagued the system by those who attempt to fraudulently gain payment 
through crop insurance. This bill provides stiffer penalties to attempt 
to root out this abuse. I have always believed that crop insurance was 
not a viable tool because it was ridden by this fraud and abuse, but 
this bill greatly helps this problem.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this bill.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Smith).
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, American farmers and ranchers are 
at risk. Let me briefly try to explain what I see as the problem and 
how this legislation partially provides a solution to part of that 
problem. We are at record low commodity prices, some lower than they 
have been for 30 years. The world is overproducing some of these 
commodities and prices are way down.
  Part of the problem for the survival of our agricultural industry in 
this country is going to be how much other countries subsidize their 
farmers. Right now we are in a situation where Europe, for example, 
subsidizes their farmers five times as much as we subsidize our 
farmers, and much of that encouraged production goes into what 
otherwise might be our markets. So the American consumer, America, this 
Congress, is faced with some decisions of are we going to do what is 
necessary to keep a viable, strong agricultural industry in America.
  This legislation encourages farmers to take out more insurance, 
insurance that covers not only yields, helps to ensure against low-
yield disasters, but also helps to ensure against the prices they might 
receive for that particular commodity. We do that by increasing 
subsidies for some of these farmers so that in the beginning, as we 
start experimenting in this new crop revenue insurance endeavor, we are 
better able to encourage more farmers to move into that arena.
  This kind of legislation, I think, is very important as part of our 
effort to start remodeling, refashioning where we go in future 
agricultural policy.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman and the ranking member for their 
leadership.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Colorado (Mr. Udall), a sponsor of the biomass legislation in the 
House, H.R. 2819, and who also contributed to the biomass provisions 
that are contained in this conference report. I want to thank the 
gentleman for his hard work on this issue.
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, let me just begin by thanking the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Stenholm) for their work on this important measure. I want to remember 
my friend Lou Entz from Colorado, who suggested in the spirit of this 
legislation that if you eat, you are involved in agriculture, and those 
of us that live in suburban districts need to remember that.
  But let me talk about title IV, the Biomass Research and Development 
Act. Last year the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert) and the 
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Minge) joined me in introducing the House 
version of this legislation. We were joined shortly thereafter by the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Ewing), who introduced his own version of 
the legislation.

[[Page 9244]]

  The two bills had much in common. Both recognized the increased 
contribution that biobased industrial products can make to our economy, 
if and only if appropriate research was put into place. Both realized 
the increased need for cooperation among the Departments of Energy and 
Agriculture and the private sector in conducting the research and 
ensuring it leads to new product and new jobs. Both recognized the 
importance of the conversion of cellulosic biomass, which consists of 
any plant or plant product.
  Cellulosic conversion is particularly important to the State of 
Colorado because of the potential threat of wildfires. We have seen the 
effect of wildfires over the recent weeks in New Mexico, and there is 
much more we could do to make these materials available through 
commercial markets.
  In Colorado, the Colorado Forest Service, the U.S. Department of 
Agriculture's Forest Service Laboratory, and the National Renewable 
Energy Lab began to study the possibility of developing ethanol or 
other bioproducts economically from this wood fiber.
  I am especially pleased to see that the version of the legislation 
before us incorporates important concepts from the Udall-Boehlert-Minge 
bill. Peer-reviewed research, sensitivity to the effects of increased 
bioproduction on the environment, and an emphasis on the economics of 
bioenergy and biobased industrial projects are all featured prominently 
in the legislation.
  The definition of biomass is limited to organic matter that is 
available on a renewing or recurring basis, and therefore would not 
include old growth forests or other environmentally sensitive 
ecosystems.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of this important bill.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Oklahoma (Mr. Lucas), a member of the committee who has been very 
involved in this entire process.
  Mr. LUCAS of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the 
chairman and ranking member for all their work and all their efforts on 
this legislation. It includes three initiatives that will greatly 
benefit Oklahoma producers. We reform the crop insurance system, we 
double the AMTA payments, and we include LDP graze-out language. This 
legislation is a big win for Oklahoma producers.
  I would especially like to thank the gentleman from Texas (Chairman 
Combest) for his help in including the LDP graze-out language, which I 
introduced last August. This legislation is the single most important 
issue for Oklahoma producers.
  Currently, producers are eligible for a loan deficiency payment if 
their wheat crop is hayed, put into silage, or cut for grain. However, 
if a producer chooses to graze out his wheat crop, he does not qualify 
for the LDP payment and is left at an extreme disadvantage. Oklahoma 
producers have been calling for Congress to correct this inequity for 
some time. H.R. 2559 includes language that will allow producers to 
collect a payment equivalent to LDP if they opt to graze out instead of 
putting their wheat into hay or through the combine.
  I encourage all my colleagues to support this very important 
legislation. This legislation provides more flexibility and options for 
our producers.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
North Carolina (Mrs. Clayton).
  Mrs. CLAYTON. Mr. Speaker, I also want to congratulate and compliment 
the chairman and the ranking member for their cooperation in working on 
this legislation, but also I want to congratulate all the conferees who 
were involved in this, because this has been an issue that our farmers 
nationwide have suffered through, in not having a way of managing risk. 
We are gathering some information right now from North Carolina to 
compliment what I am saying because I know in North Carolina the 
current structure did not allow for this risk management that we have 
now to speak to the needs.

                              {time}  1045

  We went through endless floods in North Carolina, so our farmers 
indeed not only suffered the risks of droughts they had years before, 
but they also had to manage losing their crops, and many of them lost 
their crops and found no way of having any compensation.
  This bill is not perfect, but it is certainly moving in the right 
direction; it includes a broad base of opportunity for a larger number 
of people; it takes out some of the inequities that are in the current 
law; and it also is a welcome opportunity for the farm service people 
who are administering this program, because they find they are able now 
to respond more appropriately to the farmers.
  Again, I want to congratulate all of the people who were involved in 
making sure that this came to the floor in a timely manner, and I hope 
that it will become law very soon so that our farmers can indeed 
benefit from this.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. Canady).
  Mr. CANADY of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise today 
in support of the conference report on this important legislation. I 
particularly want to focus attention on a provision in this conference 
committee report in title 4, which encompasses legislation I previously 
introduced known as the Plant Protection Act.
  This legislation is designed to address a very real problem facing 
American agriculture. The United States loses thousands of acres and 
billions of dollars in farm production each year due to invasive 
species. Exacerbating this serious problem are the outdated and 
fragmented quarantine statutes that govern interdiction of prohibited 
plants and plant pests. Our agricultural sector needs a modern, 
effective statutory authority that will protect our crops from these 
destructive invasive species.
  It was for this reason that I introduced the Plant Protection Act. 
This legislation, crafted in consultation with the USDA, will help to 
prevent the introduction and dissemination of invasive plants and pests 
by giving the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service greatly 
enhanced investigatory and enforcement tools. The Plant Protection Act 
will streamline and consolidate existing statutes into one 
comprehensive law and eliminate outdated and ambiguous provisions. It 
will also boost deterrents against trafficking of prohibited species by 
increasing monetary penalties for smuggling, and it will provide USDA 
with a comprehensive set of investigatory tools and ensure transparency 
for our trading partners.
  Mr. Speaker, I believe that this provision of the conference 
committee report is an important step forward in protecting American 
agriculture, and I thank the chairman for his support for this.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers on the floor 
at this time, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Chambliss), the vice chairman of the Committee on the 
Budget.
  Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  In 1996, we crafted a new farm bill wherein we told the American 
farmer that the Federal Government is going to change the way that we 
participate in farming operations. At the same time we did that, we 
said we are going to do some other things. We are going to provide the 
farmer with tax relief. We are going to provide the farmer with 
regulatory relief. We are going to provide the farmer with crop 
insurance reform, and we are going to provide the farmer with better 
trade agreements so that farmers can, in fact, sell their products for 
a decent return on the open market.
  Well, unfortunately, it has taken us a while to get there, but 
yesterday, with the vote that we had on the China trade agreement, we 
are now opening markets in China to the American farmer and it will be 
a tremendous benefit for farmers all across America.
  Today, we are taking another giant step in the right direction. The 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) is

[[Page 9245]]

right in a couple of areas when he says we are not doing everything 
from a legislative standpoint to make farming easier and make farming 
more prosperous, because we cannot do that, but these are steps in the 
right direction.
  What we are doing today with crop insurance reform is really 
significant, and every American farmer knows and understands that. This 
has been a team effort. It has been a team effort between leadership 
and the Committee on Budget as well as the Committee on Agriculture, 
and our two captains, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest) and the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) have done a great job of leading 
the team down the field. I commend them for the work they have done on 
this with respect to crop insurance reform.
  The other part of this bill in providing up-front money to our 
farmers for this year is extremely important also, because we know that 
2000 is going to be a tough year for farmers all across America. I do 
not know how much money it is going to take to make sure that they can 
survive this year, but this is going to be another meaningful step in 
the right direction, because it is going to be money in the hands of 
the producer. That is critically important. It is critically important 
now, as we are facing droughts, as we are facing lowest commodity 
prices that we have ever seen.
  So again, this bill provides a double hit for the American farmer 
with respect to crop insurance reform, as well as with respect to money 
in the hands of producers to help improve the year 2000. I commend the 
chairman and the ranking member for their great leadership.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Condit), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Risk 
Management, Research and Specialty Crops, that did yeoman's work on the 
crop insurance portions of this.
  Mr. CONDIT. Mr. Speaker, I would like, if I may, to engage the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest), the chairman of the committee, in a 
colloquy if he would agree to do that.
  Before I do that, I would first like to thank the chairman for the 
hard work he has put in in bringing this conference report to the 
floor. He kept us focused and kept us at the table, and I appreciate 
that. I also would like to congratulate and commend the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Stenholm) for his hard work and the time that he put in 
keeping us focused and at the table, as well as staff on both sides of 
the aisle. They are to be commended for their time and effort in this 
area.
  Mr. Speaker, I know that the chairman is aware of the illegal 
activities undertaken by the Department of Agriculture employees at 
Hunts Point Terminal. These illegal activities have resulted in grave 
economic losses for produce growers throughout the country. I look 
forward to working with the chairman to determine the exact scope of 
the illegal activities so that we may adequately reimburse produce 
growers for their losses.
  It is my hope that the committee can fully examine this matter as 
soon as possible, and I would encourage the chairman and wait for his 
response to indicate that he would be willing to take a look at this.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. CONDIT. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's comments. Not 
only is the chair aware but extremely concerned about what did go on in 
the grading program. While I regret that we were unable to include 
funding in this particular package for the economic damage that these 
growers incurred, I agree that both the House and the Senate committees 
should immediately consider ways that we can help these growers recover 
their economic loss. It is a travesty that this loss occurred as a 
result of illegal action by Federal employees. I assure the gentleman I 
will work with him in every way I possibly can.
  Mr. CONDIT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pease). The gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Combest) has 15\1/2\ minutes remaining, and the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Stenholm) has 16 minutes remaining.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
South Dakota (Mr. Thune), a very important and active member of the 
committee.
  Mr. THUNE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest) 
and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) for their leadership in 
bringing this to the floor.
  Let me make a couple of observations, if I might, about this 
legislation. First of all, crop insurance should be the risk management 
tool that is used by our producers. Unfortunately, it has not been 
because it has not worked. Producers have expressed a lot of 
frustration about the crop insurance program and have asked for 
changes. In response to that, last year I introduced, along with the 
gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Pomeroy), legislation to do just that.
  Many of the changes that are incorporated in the product that we will 
vote on today are consistent with those proposals, one of which deals 
with the premium schedule in providing more incentives for producers to 
buy up the higher level of coverage, and this legislation addresses 
that important point.
  The second point that was a real concern to producers in South Dakota 
and other places in the Midwest was the computation of the actual 
production history. This legislation also makes important changes in 
that area that will make it more usable for producers.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I would say that this is important legislation. The 
reforms that are included in here will be very helpful to our 
producers. It will give them what they need in terms of having a risk 
management tool in place that will allow them to ride out the storms 
that are often the case in agriculture across this country.
  The other thing I would say, Mr. Speaker, is that the disaster 
legislation includes a provision which is very important to me and 
which I have been fighting for. And I appreciate the conferees and the 
chairman for including a piece in this disaster legislation on value-
added agriculture, because I do believe that our producers need to be 
reaching up the marketing chain capturing more of that value by 
processing our raw commodities at the point of production. We need to 
encourage that in this country.
  So this legislation, I think for the first time, lays down a marker 
and provides incentives for our producers to become more involved in 
value-added operations; and, furthermore, I think will help strengthen 
our rural economies by helping to create additional jobs and 
opportunity in rural America.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I would simply say that this is a good piece of 
legislation. I appreciate the leadership by our chairman and ranking 
member, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Minnesota (Mr. Peterson).
  Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding me this time.
  I rise today in support of this, and I appreciate the work of 
everybody that was involved. I want to especially thank the chairman 
and ranking member for all of their leadership in bringing this 
important piece of legislation to my district to the floor.
  This crop insurance reform has been something we have been working 
toward for a long time, and it is going to make some significant 
improvements. It is not as good as our people would like, but it is 
going to move us a long way in the right direction. We are going to be 
able to get at some of the problems that my producers have had where we 
have had losses 6 years out of the last 7; and the current system just, 
frankly, is too expensive and they cannot get enough coverage.
  I particularly appreciate the conference committee yesterday 
including a provision that I have been concerned about that affects a 
lot of producers

[[Page 9246]]

around the country where if one has a change in one's identification 
number, just because maybe one of two brothers were farming together 
and one of them happened to get out of the business and the one 
remaining changed that identification number, the remaining farmer is 
precluded from receiving disaster payments. In the conference report 
yesterday we adopted an amendment that I proposed that will allow those 
people access to the disaster program that they were denied.
  Another provision that is in the bill that is going to be helpful to 
us allows the people that have had problems with scab disease up in our 
part of the world are going to be able to improve the APH so that they 
can get more coverage and be able to better and more adequately insure 
the risk to their crops. We are very appreciative that that language is 
in the bill as well.
  This bill, as I said, does not go as far as I would like, but it is 
going to significantly improve the situation. I hope that we can 
continue to work on crop insurance to try to get a workable revenue 
coverage so that we can get farmers to be able to cover all of their 
crops.
  Lastly, Mr. Speaker, I would like to comment on the assistance part 
of this. Yesterday in the conference committee, we tried to change a 
little bit of the assistance package. We are very appreciative that the 
assistance is in here. But if we were to use the 2000 payment levels, 
we would have had an additional $366 million that we tried to use to 
buy up last year's disasters where people were limited to 69 percent of 
the disaster that they actually had occur and bring that level up to 85 
percent which is what we did in 1998.
  Unfortunately, that was not accepted, and I think this would have 
been a much better bill. Had we made that change, we would have put 
more of this money out to people that really needed it that have had 
multiple-year disasters and are having a very tough time such as up in 
my part of the world, in the Northeast and Southeast and so forth.
  Mr. Speaker, on the whole, this is a very good piece of legislation 
and I want to commend the chairman and ranking member and everybody 
else for their work; and I encourage the adoption of this conference 
report.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Camp), a former member of the Committee on Agriculture 
and a gentleman who still has an extreme interest and is a tremendous 
amount of assistance on agricultural matters.
  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this conference 
report. This legislation will provide needed protection for our farmers 
who have struggled with low commodity prices and weather-related 
disasters. I want to thank the chairman for his continued work to help 
our family farmers.
  There is another part of this legislation that is very important to 
the farmers in my district and throughout the State of Michigan. This 
legislation will provide $6 million in emergency funds to combat bovine 
tuberculosis.

                              {time}  1100

  Bovine tuberculosis has historically been a very rare disease in wild 
deer. However, extensive testing in Michigan found the disease had 
spread throughout the deer population, and these deer have passed on 
the disease to our cattle herds.
  There is no vaccine for bovine TB, and cattle infected with TB are 
destroyed. In addition to the fear of losing their herds, Michigan 
farmers are now facing the news that USDA has taken steps to remove 
Michigan's bovine TB-free status. The loss of that status is expected 
to cost farmers $156 million over the next few years, and that is a 
conservative estimate.
  The State of Michigan, USDA, and Michigan State University have 
worked hard to address this escalating problem. These emergency funds 
being appropriated today will assist in providing the tools necessary 
to continue fighting this disease and provide relief to Michigan 
farmers.
  Again, I want to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest). I 
would like to thank the entire Michigan delegation for their work on 
this issue, and I would especially like to recognize the efforts of the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak) from the first district of 
Michigan. The first outbreaks of this disease began in the first and 
fourth districts, the districts he and I represent; and since that time 
his commitment to this issue has been unwavering and a great help.
  Again, I urge my colleagues to support final passage.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
North Carolina (Mr. Etheridge).
  Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Stenholm) for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice my support for this conference 
report and express my gratitude to those who have included in this the 
$7.1 billion economic relief package for farmers. I do not need to tell 
anyone here how sorely this assistance is needed. For decades, North 
Carolina has been one of the most prosperous and productive 
agricultural States in our country, but then came the Asian economic 
crisis that sent commodity prices crashing down, followed by Hurricane 
Dennis, then Hurricane Floyd. Then came the floods which paralyzed 
eastern North Carolina. Then came Hurricane Irene. Then came steep cuts 
in tobacco programs.
  Now what do we have to look forward to during this summer? The 
forecasters say that it will be another severe drought and another 
active hurricane season. Our farmers have been through a lot, and this 
emergency funding could not come any too soon.
  Farming is more than a way of making a living. It is a way of life. 
It is our responsibility to take these actions that will protect the 
heritage and character of rural America and preserve our farming 
communities.
  I want to thank the bill managers, the chairman from Texas (Mr. 
Combest) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm), the ranking 
member, for their leadership in helping to craft and guide this 
assistance package. The Committee on Agriculture has a long history of 
bipartisan cooperation, and I am proud to be a part of that honorable 
tradition.
  I believe the underlying crop insurance bill will reduce fraud and 
abuse and expand the insurance coverage and make premiums more 
affordable to our farmers. However, it will not solve all the problems 
facing the agricultural community.
  Crop insurance reform and emergency funding is only a bridge leading 
us to the real issue, and that is fundamental reform of the 1996 
Freedom to Farm Act which expires in 2002.
  As Congress continues the debate on Federal farm policy, I remain 
hopeful that Congress can produce legislation that will strengthen our 
Nation's safety net for our farmers so emergency aid packages will no 
longer be necessary except in the most dire of circumstances. I look 
forward to that debate.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Kansas (Mr. Moran), a very active and significant member of this 
committee.
  Mr. MORAN of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Combest) for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest) and the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) for their leadership. The longer I 
serve on the Committee on Agriculture, the greater respect I have for 
the leadership that is provided.
  I particularly appreciate the hearings that have been held across the 
country and the willingness to listen to everyday producers, farmers, 
and ranchers across our Nation, including the hearing we held at the 
Kansas State Fair in September of 1999.
  The provisions included in the crop insurance reform aspect of this 
conference report alone would be something that we could come to the 
House floor very proud of today, and they do move us in the right 
direction. Crop insurance has needed reform for a long time, and this 
committee on the House side has worked long and hard to make that 
happen.
  In addition to that, and I hope it does not get overshadowed, in 
addition to that this conference report will provide

[[Page 9247]]

disaster assistance for farmers desperately in need of that assistance.
  With the failure for us to reach agreements in WTO and reducing 
subsidies by the European communities and others, with the failure of 
our ability to reduce taxes and reduce rules and regulations that 
affect farmers in their everyday lives and their pocketbooks, and with 
continued low commodity prices, on top of increasing costs for fuel and 
the Federal Reserve continually raising the interest rate, there is no 
question but what we would lose another generation of farmers without 
the assistance provided in this package.
  I am particularly delighted that it comes to us early in this 
session. I thank the Committee on the Budget, and I thank the Committee 
on Agriculture and the leadership of the House for making certain that 
our farmers and their bankers know early in this year whether or not 
there is going to be assistance that is provided to them.
  So this is a good day. Crop insurances, disaster assistance and the 
many provisions contained in this legislation will make a difference in 
the everyday lives of farmers and ranchers across the country; and we 
will keep, in place, this generation of farmers now and for the future.
  I look forward to working with this committee because our farmers 
want something more than disaster assistance. That is not what they 
really want. They want a price for their commodity.
  We have a long way to go to help insure that that opportunity is 
there. This is a step in the right direction, and we have our work cut 
out for us. I look forward to working with the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Combest) today, tomorrow, and every year. I thank the gentleman 
for this conference report.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Georgia (Mr. Bishop).
  Mr. BISHOP. Mr. Speaker, I would say to the chairman, the ranking 
member, the conference committee, I cannot express enough gratitude to 
them for finally completing the work in bringing this very, very 
important piece of legislation to the floor for the consideration of 
the full House.
  We need a risk protection tool to repair the safety net that our 
farmers have had torn away from them. We have been working on this bill 
for some time, and I am just delighted that finally we are able to get 
to the point where we can go home and tell our farmers that we have 
accomplished our work.
  This will repair that safety net. It will reward good farming 
experience, much as we reward good drivers for driving safely. It is 
more affordable. There will be more coverage, and it will pay for the 
cost of production losses when there is a disaster.
  The most important thing that I like, and what our farmers in Georgia 
like, is the APH, the adjusted production history, which is a part of 
this bill; and we are very, very, very pleased with that.
  We are pleased with the short-term relief that is being given in the 
emergency payments for the oil seed producers, the cotton seed 
producers, and for the disaster assistance for our peanut farmers.
  I think we have done a very good job here, and I want to commend, 
again, the chairman, the ranking member, and the conference committee 
for a job well done; and I am so glad that we are finally able to get 
it accomplished.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Calvert), another very active member of our committee.
  Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this 
conference report, the Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 2000. This 
legislation goes a long way to assisting our farmers. I want to thank 
both the chairman and the ranking member, the gentlemen from the great 
State of Texas, for moving this conference report forward. I am 
especially pleased that $25 million was included to compensate growers 
for losses resulting from Pierce's Disease, plum pox, and citrus 
canker. My district has been hit hard by Pierce's Disease, which is 
transmitted by the glassy-winged sharpshooter. The disease attacks 
grapevines and is spreading at a rapid rate through Southern 
California, the gateway of one of the premier wine regions in 
California, as well as threatening the wine regions in the northern 
part of the State.
  It is estimated that 25 percent of the 3,000 acres of vineyards in 
Temecula have been destroyed to Pierce's Disease. Pests are not new to 
California and to this country. It is estimated in California alone we 
will lose about $3 billion in losses just because of pests. Pests are 
introduced in California, new pests, every 60 days. This assistance 
will help our growers to fight these pests and to struggle through a 
tough period.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from North Dakota (Mr. Pomeroy).
  Mr. POMEROY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Stenholm) for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by commending the gentleman from Texas 
(Chairman Combest) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm), the 
ranking member, for this legislation and the inclusive process they 
initiated that brought this legislation about.
  This is my fourth term as a Member of this Congress. In my view, the 
crop insurance piece of this package before us reflects the very finest 
dimensions of bipartisan corporation on difficult problems that I have 
ever experienced as a Member of this body. It really took extraordinary 
leadership from the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest) and I appreciate 
it very much.
  Bottom line, this legislation brings farmers higher levels of 
coverage of premiums they can afford. Farmers risk an awful lot of 
capital every year, and they need to protect that risk with crop 
insurance that gets the job done. This higher coverage at affordable 
premiums will take a big part of that.
  Additionally, when farmers lose several years in a row because of 
weather cycles beyond their circumstance, they require the ability to 
continue to have adequate coverage. We fix the APH flaw in the existing 
program with this legislation, and it will mean much better protection 
going forward for farmers in that regard.
  Finally, as has been alluded to by previous speakers, the disaster 
response contained in this legislation responding to the continued low-
price environment our farmers face is also extremely important. 
Imagine, when it costs more to grow the crop than one can get paid for 
at the elevator after harvest time. Nobody can stay in business very 
long under those circumstances.
  We need to build over the long haul countercyclical price protection 
in the farm program so that we do not have to go through this exercise 
of appropriating every year disaster assistance; but in the meantime 
this help is desperately needed, very meaningful.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Ewing), the chairman of the subcommittee where this 
process all started back a year and a half ago.
  Mr. EWING. Mr. Speaker, my thanks to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Combest) and to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) for all the 
work and effort they have put in in coming up with a bill which really 
has a lot in it for American agriculture.
  This is truly a remarkable week for agriculture. With the passage of 
permanent normal trade relations with China yesterday, today the 
passage of this bill, which has more in it than just crop insurance 
reform, and then possibly on to the appropriations process for 
agriculture, this truly is a remarkable week.
  I want to comment just briefly on the bill and its underlying basic 
part, that dealing with crop insurance, because this is what we 
promised our farmers when we passed Freedom to Farm, one of the 
important things.
  We would give them a safety net, and I believe that the provisions of 
the crop insurance bill, as amended in this bill, provide truly a 
magnificent improvement to that safety net.
  We are going to allow our farmers to insure at higher levels. We are 
going to guarantee they can insure what they

[[Page 9248]]

grow or what they should be able to grow on their land, and we are 
going to do it at a cost that is significantly reduced.
  Also in this bill, though, is a very important thing and other 
speakers have talked about how we are going to let our farmers know 
that they are going to have some help in these bad times, again in 
2000. The lost market payments that are in this bill are very important 
to agriculture across the country and certainly in Illinois.
  Finally, in this bill is a provision that was part of the bill that I 
introduced. We called it the biomass bill. Senator Lugar introduced it 
in the other body and it has been incorporated into this bill, and it 
is going to provide research to find uses for what we grow in America, 
alternate products. This bill contains a lot of good parts and I 
certainly encourage everyone to vote for it.
  The Conference Report to the Agricultural Risk Protection Act is of 
immense importance for America's agricultural producers. The $8.2 
billion provided in the bill for crop insurance over the next 5 years 
will lead to increased program participation and help to decrease the 
need for ad hoc disaster bills.
  This legislation will increase by 30 percent the amount of government 
assistance in purchasing crop insurance. Many producers have wanted to 
purchase higher levels of coverage, but because of the high costs of 
premiums they have been unable to afford the high costs of premiums. 
The bill will allow producers to buy levels of crop insurance that 
actually protect them from the unpredictable forces of mother nature.
  The conference agreement also ensures that farmers' actual production 
history will be adjusted so that APH won't drop by more than 60 percent 
of the transitional yield in any particular year.
  Further improvements will allow livestock producers to develop pilot 
insurance programs for the first time. This will be extremely important 
to those producers since livestock revenue accounts for nearly half of 
this nation's producer revenue.
  One of the issues we heard over and over during Subcommittee and full 
Committee hearings throughout the country was that producers wanted 
cost of production policies. This bill provides the ability for the 
development of cost of production policies.
  Additionally, the Conference Report makes revenue insurance such as 
CRC, which is important to producers in Illinois and many other areas 
of the country more affordable, thereby giving them the ability to 
protect their projected revenue flow.
  Everyone involved in the federal crop insurance has stressed the 
importance of preventing fraud and abuse. The Agricultural Risk 
Protection Act deals with concerns voiced over program integrity.
  The Risk Management Agency and the Farm Service Agency will be 
required to work together to ensure that records for crop insurance and 
other programs are accurate.
  The Secretary of Agriculture is required to submit an annual report 
that identifies specific instances of fraud, waste, and abuse and 
outlines the steps taken to correct these problems.
  The Secretary will have the power to use a broad range of sanctions 
against producers, agents, loss adjusters, and insurance providers who 
are committing fraud or abuse.
  The conference agreement reflects the intention of the Committee to 
make the program more efficient and accountable in both its 
administration and development of new policies.
  Rather than having the government develop all new insurance policies, 
this legislation gives producers and their representative organizations 
the ability to work with companies, agents, and universities to 
development crop insurance policies that they believe are more 
attractive and workable. These groups will be reimbursed for their 
costs if the end product is approved by the Federal Crop Insurance 
Corporation's broad and then offered to producers by an approved crop 
insurance provider.
  Many specialty crops have indicated their desire to have policies 
that are better suited to their particular needs and this provision 
will help to accommodate their wishes.
  For those underserved crops with limited resources, the FCIC may 
contract with private groups to help develop new policies.
  These provisions are designed to provide that producers will be able 
to have policies that help them address their business risks.
  The Conference Report to the Agricultural Risk Protection Act also 
contains a number of provisions that reach beyond crop insurance. I 
will briefly outline these provisions that are of considerable 
importance to my producers in Illinois.
  Contained in the agreement is $7.1 billion in economic assistance to 
the agricultural sector. Nearly $5.5 billion dollars in Agricultural 
Market Transition Act (AMTA) payments will help our family farmers 
remain financially solvent as they weather through current low 
commodity prices in our agricultural economy. Many of my farming 
constituents have told me that without these market loss payments they 
have received in the past two years, their family farms would have been 
extremely difficult to hold onto.
  This legislation also provides for a $500 million oilseed payment 
which will benefit farmers in my district as they continue to deal with 
soybean prices that are hovering at a nearly thirty year low.
  The bill invests funds into the research of technology for reducing, 
modifying, recycling, and utilizing waste streams from livestock 
production and eliminating associated air, water, and soil quality 
problems. This research is vital as our suburbs expand into our rural 
areas, and the concerns of odor and sanitation issues take on a new 
importance.
  The Conference Report contains legislative language comparable to a 
bill I introduced last year, H.R. 2827, the National Sustainable Fuels 
and Chemicals Act of 1999. Much of the language is similar and all of 
the goals are identical. The Biomass Research and Development Act of 
2000 is a bicameral, bipartisan effort to authorize research into the 
transformation of biomass into biobased industrial products.
  Biomass is any organic matter that is available on a renewable or 
recurring basis, including agricultural crops and trees, wood and wood 
wastes and residues (including material removed from so-called old 
growth forests), plants, grasses, residues, fibers, animal wastes, 
municipal wastes, and other waste materials. By investing in research 
of biomass, we may be creating an additional market for farmers' 
products in the long term. Research created by this legislation will 
help to add in the expedited development of alternative fuels that are 
environmentally friendly.
  The conference agreement both authorizes and appropriates funds to 
complete the construction of a corn-based ethanol pilot plant in 
Edwardsville, Illinois, at Southern Illinois University. This pilot 
plant will be beneficial to the ethanol industry and corn producers.
  I urge my colleagues to support the Agricultural Risk Protection Act 
to help producers help themselves to better risk management strategies. 
The Conference Report to the Agricultural Risk Protection Act is of 
vital importance to all of agriculture.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Maine (Mr. Baldacci).
  Mr. BALDACCI. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the ranking member 
and the staff for all of their hard work, and also the chairman of the 
subcommittee and the full committee for being able to work together in 
regards to these reforms. They have been a long time coming. The 
Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 2000 has a lot to commend it, but 
more can and should be done in the future.
  We are seeing the failure of our current farm policy. The legislation 
that we have before us does not go far enough in providing risk 
management reforms to strengthen that safety net, but I would like to 
thank all those involved in working together to try to help raise the 
farmers' income, primarily with specialty crops.
  The bill contains improvements to the noninsured disaster assistance 
program. It provides solid investment in research and development for 
new policies while benefiting specialty crops in underserved States. 
Those are reforms that my farmers can appreciate.
  I am disappointed that we did not change the formula for the AMTA 
payments, and I would have rather seen a portion of that money being 
spent on the disaster programs that have occurred and particularly with 
apples and with potatoes.
  Our farmers should not have to live with payments amounting to just 
65 percent of their disaster losses.
  Helping farmers add value to their crops is one sure way to stabilize 
the economies of rural America.

                              {time}  1115

  I would like to thank the conferees. I have submitted legislation and 
amendments dealing with value added, and the component of $15 million 
will go a long way in helping producers to be able to add values, both 
to their harvest and markets, and to help them to

[[Page 9249]]

find those markets all with forest products, with potatoes, with 
blueberries, and cranberries.
  The enactment of this section will go a long way to making sure that 
farmer cooperatives are going to be able to have value added and be 
able to have access to those markets. I think they are vitally 
important.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest), chairman, and 
the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm), ranking member, and the staff 
itself for working together on this; and I seek to work with them also 
as we advance into agriculture appropriations.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hayes), a very valued member of our 
committee.
  Mr. HAYES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Chairman 
Combest) for his tireless and enthusiastic effort for our farmers from 
Lubbock, Texas and the gentleman from Ericksdahl, Texas (Mr. Stenholm), 
the ranking member.
  Mr. Speaker, today I rise in enthusiastic support of the first 
comprehensive crop insurance reform since 1994 as well as much needed 
economic assistance to our farmers, and it could not have come at a 
better time.
  Our Nation's farmers and ranchers are suffering from over 3 years of 
record-low commodity prices, drought, and many other natural disasters 
leading to financial stress. In North Carolina, USDA estimates an 18 
percent drop in farm income this year for 1999 levels. In addition, our 
producers will continue to be greatly affected by increasing interest 
rates that make farm loans more and more expensive. I am happy to see 
that we have addressed these problems with disaster assistance also 
included in this bill.
  The $7.1 billion slated to be paid to producers will help to offset 
the financial difficulties they are going through. The reforms made to 
crop insurance will also aid our farmers.
  More than 2 years ago, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Ewing) joined 
me in Laurinburg in the North Carolina eighth district to work on this 
issue of crop insurance, and here we are today. It is a great day for 
farm community. The chairman and ranking member and all the staff 
worked so hard for years to produce this very, very effective bill.
  The bill increases premium subsidies in such a way to provide 
producers the incentive to buy higher levels of coverage and improve 
participation in the program.
  In addition, the bill provides incentives through the development of 
new and innovative insurance products so that we continue to provide 
our producers with the best tools possible. Fraud, waste, and abuse 
also addressed in the bill go a long way towards restoring integrity to 
the program.
  Mr. Speaker, again, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest), 
chairman, and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm), ranking member, 
and all involved for a wonderful bill. I encourage my colleagues' 
support.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Stupak).
  Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to thank the conferees for 
bringing forth this bill and the $6 million included in this bill for 
Michigan to fight bovine tuberculosis.
  These funds are an important first step in combating an outbreak of 
bovine tuberculosis in Michigan. Bovine TB is spreading in Michigan's 
Lower Peninsula and threatening our beef and dairy cattle.
  USDA has announced that Michigan will lose its bovine TB-free status 
effective June 1. This decision will have dire economic consequences.
  It will require the testing of all 1.25 million Michigan beef and 
dairy cattle. It will place greater restrictions on their travel into 
other States. It is estimated that Michigan's economy will suffer 
losses of $156 million over the next 10 years.
  Michigan's situation is complicated because the virus has been found 
in deer herds, which are more mobile and pose a greater risk to beef 
and dairy cattle. A quarantine zone exists in Michigan; however, 
positive deer have been found outside of the zone.
  In addition, the disease has appeared in badgers, bobcats, coyotes, 
raccoons, and red foxes. When the disease is rampant, immediate action 
is necessary.
  Compounding Michigan's crisis are the restrictions placed on 
Michigan's beef and dairy cattle from entering other States for sale or 
slaughter. In the last 4 years, more than 18,000 Michigan cattle have 
been exported to other States. Now over 43 States have restrictions on 
accepting Michigan cattle. Michigan farmers have lost their markets and 
cannot recoup them until TB is eradicated. Help is needed now, not 
tomorrow, not next month, and definitely not next year.
  So it is essential that we stop bovine tuberculosis before it spreads 
to neighboring States. Prior to being downgraded, Michigan had been 
bovine free since 1979. We cannot, however, afford to wait another 21 
years to regain a TB-free status, and these funds will help in that 
effort.
  I thank all of the conferees for their work.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, when we started off on this endeavor, the idea was to 
listen to what farmers said was a problem in the current crop insurance 
program and to do everything we could to try to make for certain that 
we could correct as much of that as possible within the constraints 
that we had. As always is the case, when there is a pot of money, it 
becomes very tempting to try to divvy that up in a variety of ways.
  The conference that was concluded yesterday was concluded in 2 hours 
and 45 minutes. Nine members of the Senate, nine members of the House 
and all 18 Members of that conference committee signed that report.
  I think it does two things. Number one, I think it shows the 
significance of what this bill is doing. But I also think that it shows 
the significance of the amount of bipartisan effort that went into this 
bill; and as much as anything, it shows how well the staff of the House 
committee, both minority and majority, worked very closely together on 
this throughout the entire process and their work with the Senate staff 
and members of the Senate, and having us to a point that something of 
this magnitude could be concluded in such a short period of time.
  Without the work that has gone on literally for weeks, many, many 
late hours by the staff, both the House and the Senate, majority and 
minority, this would have not been possible. There is no way that I can 
thank them enough for those long hours that they put in in creating 
this product that I think is going to have a significant bearing on the 
future of American agriculture.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Louisiana (Mr. John).
  Mr. JOHN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding 
me 1\1/2\ minutes.
  Being on the Subcommittee of Risk Management, Research, and Specialty 
Crops that began the deliberations on this bill, I am proud to stand up 
here before the House today and support the conference committee 
report.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Texas (Chairman Combest), and the 
subcommittee, and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm), the ranking 
member of the full committee, for their tireless work in putting this 
piece of legislation together. This is a very important piece of 
legislation because I think it heals the promises that were made in the 
1996 farm bill.
  My understanding, I was not here at the time, but my understanding of 
when we passed the Freedom to Farms bills, the Congress' obligation was 
twofold: First to provide a safety net and, second, to open new 
markets.
  I think yesterday we took a major step in opening new markets for our 
rice producers and the other farmers across America; and maybe even 
today we will have another opportunity to continue opening markets in 
the area of Cuba and other areas in other countries.

[[Page 9250]]

  But the second part was creating a safety net, a safety net that is 
so important to our rice producers and also our farmers across the 
country.
  So I stand here to support the conference committee report because it 
makes it accessible and it makes it affordable. But, specifically, I 
want to thank the gentlemen from Texas, Mr. Combest and Mr. Stenholm, 
both of which worked with me to provide a provision to help south 
Louisiana's rice farmers.
  This year, we had a drought of a magnitude that we have not seen in 
many, many years in southwest Louisiana. Under present law, rice 
farmers were not covered under the drought provisions. I just wanted to 
thank them for being able to put the rice provision in there for our 
rice farmers because it is so important to them.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the conference committee 
report.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, how much time is remaining?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pease). The gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Combest) has 2\1/2\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Stenholm) has 3 minutes remaining.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, just let me say in closing, again, I commend the 
gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Ewing) and the ranking members on 
this side for the tremendous hard work that has gone into this package. 
There is no question that our producers all across the Nation will be 
very appreciative of this financial assistance once again this year.
  I thank the actions, as the gentleman from Texas (Chairman Combest) 
has mentioned a moment ago, tremendous work of the staffs on both sides 
of the aisle who have been able to work together in resolving many 
difficult issues in which we do not always agree 100 percent. But this 
committee, under the leadership of the gentleman from Texas (Chairman 
Combest), I think, does as good and perhaps I would say best job of any 
committee in the House of working out differences between both sides 
when we, perhaps, have differences, not partisan differences, but 
honest differences in the manner in which various pieces of the 
legislation should be written.
  This was a difficult task with the additions and all, but it has been 
done in a way in which I feel that can be recommended to our colleagues 
on both sides of the aisle for their support. Again, I thank the 
gentleman from Texas (Chairman Combest) for his work and cooperation.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of the time.
  Again, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm), my friend and 
my neighbor there, for all the good work and the efforts that have gone 
into this, and, again, to the staff on the minority side for the 
efforts and for their work.
  If I might just take a moment, Mr. Speaker, to, not only talk about 
the significance of this bill, but the significance of what happened in 
the House yesterday. One of the glaring concerns that agriculture has 
faced over the last 3 years has been a concern about the ability or 
inability to expand markets.
  While I recognize and appreciate the deep-held feelings of those 
people who were opposed to the granting of permanent normal trade 
relations with China, I think it was one of the most significant votes 
that we could take in this House on, not only what is good for America, 
but what is good for our farmers when we have 1.3 billion people, the 
largest market in the world, that is now opening up to American 
production.
  All of the groups that have come forward and have talked about the 
amount of increase and income for their producers and the amount of 
increase in the price of hogs or cattle, the number of exports that 
will become available to us, it was really, in my opinion, a no choice, 
that we have now made ourselves available to a market that everyone 
else in the world would have taken advantage of.
  The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) in every one of the field 
hearings that we held across the country, not only asked the panel, but 
he asked the members in the audience, and this has been several 
thousand over 10 hearings, their position on providing PNTR. In all of 
those hearings, total combined, well over 90 percent of the people 
indicated that they supported that activity.
  I think that shows the kind of recognition and support that American 
agriculture has, but I think it also shows the understanding that 
people have, number one, about what a great trade agreement that was, 
and number two, about its impact on agriculture.
  It was, I think, a very thoughtful question that my colleague asked 
and carried through that, through the entire hearing process, and I 
think, continued to focus on it in its significance. It also, I think, 
gave us a recognition of the amount of support that was out there that 
otherwise would not have been done.
  So I think, as was stated earlier, the last 2 days have been 
extremely positive days for American agriculture. I was glad to be a 
part of it and glad to be a part of it on a team that works so 
bipartisan.
  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the conference report 
on H.R. 2559, the Agriculture Risk Protection Act. This legislation 
will provide important assistance to our nation's agricultural 
community and it will help our nation's children as well.
  I was reared on a farm and know the hardships faced by our nation's 
farmers. I was also an educator and know the importance of ensuring 
that children eat nutritious meals. It is simple. Hungry children don't 
pay attention to their schoolwork, they pay attention to their growling 
stomachs.
  Currently farmers in my Congressional district are experiencing 
problems with plum pox. I want to thank the conferees for including 
indemnification authorization for fruit growers affected by the plum 
pox virus in Adams County, Pennsylvania, as directed by Secretary 
Glickman in his March 2, 2000 declaration of Extraordinary Emergency.
  Mr. Speaker, this legislation also includes several provisions 
affecting our federal child nutrition programs. I would like to 
highlight several of the key provisions.
  The first provision is based on H.R. 3614, the Emergency Commodity 
Distribution Act of 2000. This legislation was introduced to restore 
recent cuts to the School Lunch Program. Since the 103rd Congress, 12 
percent of the cost of school lunches was to be in the form of 
agricultural products purchased for schools.
  Last session, this law was modified to allow the 12 percent commodity 
requirement to be met through a combination of entitlement and bonus 
commodities. The savings achieved as a result of this revision was used 
to help fund the ``Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act 
of 1999.'' As a consequences, schools will receive fewer commodities 
because bonus commodities will be counted as part of the 12 percent 
commodity requirement rather than in addition to the commodities 
schools would receive under this requirement. At the same time, 
purchases of agriculture commodities will also be reduced.
  The conference agreement restores $110 million for the purchase of 
commodities for school meal programs. Both the children and the 
agriculture community benefit from these purchases and I thank the 
conferees for agreeing to partially restore this important commodity 
funding.
  The conference report also includes key provisions of H.R. 4520, the 
Child and Adult Care Food Program Integrity Act of 2000, legislation to 
combat fraud and abuse in the Child and Adult Care Food Program 
(CACFP). The Child and Adult Care Food Program provides nutritious 
meals and snacks to children in day care facilities and family day care 
homes. It operates in 37,000 day care centers and 175,000 day care 
homes.
  Unfortunately, in recent years both the Inspector General of the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture and the General Accounting Office (GAO) have 
issued reports of widespread fraud and abuse and deficient management 
practices in the program. As a result, the full value of nutrition 
benefits the program delivers has been denied to many of the 2.7 
million participating children nationwide.
  Provisions included in the conference report, based on H.R. 4520, 
would address fraud and abuse in CACFP and improve program management. 
For example, the legislation will require the Agriculture Department to 
develop a plan for ongoing periodic training of state and sponsor staff 
in the prevention of fraud and abuse; require a minimum number of 
unannounced site visits for inspections; and permit

[[Page 9251]]

the Secretary of Agriculture to withhold administrative funds to states 
that have not met their oversight responsibilities. It will also 
require child care provisions to notify parents if they are 
participating in the Child and Adult Care Food Program, so they can 
take action if they suspect fraud and abuse. These are but a few of the 
key provisions directed at eliminating fraud and abuse in the Child and 
Adult Care Food Program.
  Enactment of this legislation will ensure that CACFP funds will be 
used to feed children and not end up in the hands of unscrupulous 
program sponsors and care providers.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2559, the 
Agriculture Risk Protection Act. It provides important assistance to 
our country's farmers and ensures the provision of vital nutrition 
assistance to our nation's children.
  Mr. CONDIT. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to begin by thanking the 
Agriculture Committee members and staff for their hard work on the 
Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 2000. This bill goes far in 
providing much needed assistance to farmers nationally, and for the 
first time effectively addresses the unique conditions of California 
specialty crops.
  A main concern of specialty crop producers is the lack of insurance 
programs that meet their risk management needs. This bill prioritizes 
$25 million for research and development of new and improved insurance 
products for these growers. Additionally, new mandates on RMA to 
contract out and reimburse private sector research and development of 
crop insurance programs will expedite product development and reform. 
The streamlining of RMA's review and development procedures encourages 
new product availability in response to proposals and requests from 
producers and approved insurance providers. A specialty crop 
coordinator will be appointed to expand existing policies and coverage 
for specialty crops.
  To increase specialty crop participation in crop insurance programs, 
cooperatives and non-profit trade associations are permitted to offer 
Catastrophic and additional levels of insurance to their members where 
state law allows licensing fees. Members of these cooperatives who are 
located in adjacent states also benefit from this provision. California 
farmers will benefit tremendously from this provision, since 
cooperatives will now be allowed to encourage farmer participation in 
crop insurance programs and assist in the payment of fees.
  Participation is also increased by the elimination of an area-wide 
loss before disaster payments can be made to producers of currently 
non-insurable crops. In states with less than 50 percent of national 
participation average, the USDA Secretary is also instructed to take 
steps to study and develop other ways to increase participation.
  I am very pleased with the reforms made in this year's crop insurance 
legislation and thank you on behalf of all California farmers for 
responding to their needs.
  Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of Agriculture Risk 
Protection Act Conference Report. This bill provides important support 
for our Nation's farmers an ensures that Americans will have a steady, 
affordable food supply.
  I want to address an issue that is of particular importance to my 
district--the spread of Pierce's Disease. I am pleased that this bill 
includes much-needed funding to combat Pierce's disease and the Glassy-
winged Sharpshooter which spread it. This disease is having a 
devastating effect on California vintners, and needs to be brought 
under control before it does even greater damage.
  Although outbreaks in my district have been limited, recent sightings 
of the Glassy-winged Sharpshooter are very worrisome. Just the other 
day eggs of the Glassy-winged Sharpshooter were found on plants at two 
northern San Luis Obispo County nurseries.
  While we have been experimenting with different ways to combat 
Pierce's Disease, currently there is no known cure. Central Coast wine 
grape growers are banding together and contributing funds to fight this 
disease. We in the federal government need to support these efforts.
  I joined members of the Wine Caucus in urging the Agriculture 
Subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee to increase funding for 
combating Pierce's Disease. I am pleased that the Subcommittee saw the 
importance of this issue and provided appropriate funding in the 
Agriculture Risk Protection Act Conference Report.
  This bill provides the necessary support for our vintners with $7.14 
million in funding for control and containment activities in California 
and $25 million to compensate growers for losses due to three different 
diseases including Pierce's Disease.
  We cannot rest until a cure for this disease is found and the Glassy-
winged Sharpshooter is eradicated. I'm glad that this bill takes a 
major step in that direction.
  Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I am extremely disappointed in H.R. 2559, the 
conference report on the Agriculture Risk Protection Act. While 
originally intended as a simple crop insurance measure, H.R. 2559 
instead is a sad commentary of the state of our nation's current 
dysfunctional farm policy.
  The crop insurance reform bill that this body is set to vote upon 
codifies some of the basic principles that many of us have been 
advocating--affordability, and buy-up coverage. I am happy that the 
measure authorizes an increase in the number of counties that can 
participate in the dairy options pilot program (DOPP), authorizes the 
creation of livestock insurance program, and improved coverage of 
specialty crops--including cranberries, apples, and vegetable crops 
grown in Wisconsin.
  Unfortunately, the conference committee has unnecessarily included 
$7.1 billion in emergency farm payments in the bill. This legislation 
is not the proper vehicle for such outlays. Instead, the House should 
deal with these matters separately, in a more thorough and thoughtful 
manner.
  The emergency farm assistance fails the American farmer and rural 
communities in a number of ways. Specifically, it fails to target the 
assistance to those producers and commodities that need it most. By 
distributing these funds through the inequitable Agriculture Marketing 
Transition Act (AMTA) formula, this legislation places a priority on 
wheat and feed grains grown on large operations in the Great Plains and 
fails to address the needs of family-sized operations.
  According to a recent computer investigation by the Environmental 
Working Group, ``taxpayers have provided $22.9 billion in emergency 
subsidies (payments above normal farm bill receipts) during the first 
three years of the `Freedom to Farm' law, but 10 percent of the 
recipients (144,000 participants) collected 61 percent of the money.'' 
Even President Clinton's Agriculture Secretary opposes this delivery 
mechanism, claiming that AMTA payments treat ``the farm economy as 
monolith, failing to consider the varying degree of market weakness 
across commodities.'' Sadly, this bill fails to correct this economic 
injustice.
  In addition, the AMTA payments do not increase farm conservation 
programs. In a period when a growing segment of the American population 
is calling for improvements in clean water and air, as well as more 
sustainable agriculture practices in general, it is irresponsible not 
to allocate adequate funds to programs that address the growing 
concentrated animal agriculture industry and its related phosphorous 
and nutrient management problems as well as hazards associated with 
crop fertilizer use.
  American farmers deserve more than this short-sighted, inequitable, 
shot-gun approach to farm policy. This nation, and this body, needs to 
have a thoughtful discussion of the commodity price problems facing 
rural America. H.R. 2559 short-circuits the deliberative process that 
is the great hallmark of democracy. Hopefully, rural America will see 
through this half-hearted approach and call on Congress to act in a 
more responsible manner.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member rises in strong support of the 
conference report for H.R. 2559, the Agricultural Risk Protection Act, 
which provides for the reform of our Federal crop insurance program, 
and urges his colleagues to vote for it.
  This Member would like to begin by expressing appreciation to the 
distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest), the Chairman of the 
Agriculture Committee, and the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Stenholm), the Ranking Member of the Committee, for their hard work on 
this important legislation.
  As an original cosponsor of H.R. 2559, this Member is pleased that 
this conference report is being considered today. Agricultural 
producers throughout the country continue to suffer from disastrously 
low commodity prices and in some regions from adverse weather 
conditions. For instance, Nebraska farmers are confronting one of the 
most serious droughts in decades.
  This Member believes that this conference report is an important step 
toward developing a more effective long-term approach to assisting 
agricultural producers. Improving crop insurance is certainly not the 
only solution to the current problems, but it does provide a more 
adequate safety net to farmers who are too often confronted with 
natural disasters and low prices.
  The Agricultural Risk Protection Act will make crop insurance 
coverage more affordable at every level. It will offer producers 
significant incentives to purchase higher levels of protection and 
provide farmers with the flexibility to purchase the coverage that best 
meets their needs.

[[Page 9252]]

  It is important to note that this crop insurance reform bill also 
improves the current risk management structure by providing better 
coverage for both production and revenue. It does so by making possible 
more affordable policies to protect farmers against price and income 
loss. The legislation also initiates a livestock pilot program to test 
the effectiveness of risk management tools to protect livestock 
producers.
  This Member's constituents have made it clear that crop insurance is 
a necessary risk management tool. Unfortunately, it is often too 
expensive or offers too little protection to be of real value. This 
legislation takes these concerns into account and offers agricultural 
producers what they need--meaningful and more affordable crop 
insurance.
  This Member is also pleased that this conference report includes 
funding for emergency payments to farmers. The 1996 Freedom to Farm Act 
was based on the premise of expanding international markets for the 
commodities produced by our nation's farmers. This clearly has not 
happened. Certainly, one of the root causes of the current low 
commodity prices was the drop in exports, especially to Asia as a 
result of the region's economic down-turn. Nobody could have predicted 
the Asian financial crisis or the contagion effect which is still being 
felt.
  Also, because of the strength of our national economy relative to 
most other countries, the value of our currency compared to others now 
makes our exports less price-competitive in Asian markets than our 
competitor exporters like Canada, Australia, Brazil, or the nations of 
the European Union. Thus, there is not only a dramatically reduced 
agricultural export market in Asia, we are also getting a reduced 
portion of the remaining Asian import business.
  Clearly, an emergency agriculture relief package is needed 
immediately. Producers are in desperate need of a quick infusion of 
cash to help them deal with low prices and increasing costs. However, 
as important as that relief is, it is only a temporary fix. A long-term 
approach is clearly needed. This conference report, which includes 
significant improvements in the crop insurance program, is an important 
component of that effort.
  This Member urges his colleagues to vote for the conference report 
for H.R. 2559.
  Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the conference 
report for H.R. 2559, the Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 2000. I 
believe that this legislation is paramount to providing much needed 
assistance to our nations farmers and ranchers.
  In 1996, Congress passed the Freedom to Farm bill, which was designed 
to limit government's role in agriculture. This legislation addresses 
some of the short falls of Freedom to Farm by providing temporary 
economic relief to our farm community, as well as implementing crop 
insurance reform.
  The reforms to the crop insurance program will strengthen the farm 
safety net by providing producers improved risk management tools to 
address the inherit risks associated with farming. I believe that these 
reforms are necessary, and that they will remove need for the type of 
emergency assistance Congress has provided agricultural producers over 
the past two years.
  I am especially appreciative that this conference report contains the 
House crop insurance reform language calling for the implementation of 
livestock pilot programs. These pilot programs would provide livestock 
producers with the necessary risk management tools to cope with 
disasters, weather shifts, and other natural acts beyond their control 
without fear that the cost of doing the right thing will put them out 
of business.
  I am also supportive of the anti-fraud provisions in the crop 
insurance legislation. These provisions direct the Federal Crop 
Insurance Corporation and the Farm Service Agency to work together to 
reconcile producer information on an annual basis, to identify 
producers and insurers who are abusing the program.
  As I stated earlier, I believe that this is sound legislation. I want 
to commend all the conferees and committee staff for their hard work 
and dedication, particularly Chairman Combest and Ranking Member 
Stenholm.
  Mr. CLEMENT. Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to congratulate 
Congressman Combest of Texas for introducing the Agricultural Risk 
Protection Act of 2000. The conference report that we are voting on 
today will provide a badly needed overhaul of our crop insurance 
system.
  All of us who represent and have grown up in rural areas know the 
importance of our nation's farmers. The weather over the past couple of 
years has not been very generous to Tennessee's farmers and now, more 
than ever, they need federal policy to help them these tough times.
  Farming is not only a job that requires endless hours of hard work 
and planning. It also requires a substantial amount of courage to be a 
farmer. Our farmers take risks every year by putting their livelihood 
on the line in order to produce for their communities. They invest the 
money they have worked so hard to save in a crop or a number of crops 
with the hope that the rains will come and that a tornado and the 
insects will not.
  But, as we all know, those conditions are never guaranteed. But my 
fellow Congressmen and I can guarantee them an affordable safety net. 
Providing our dwindling farming population with a cheaper and broader 
insurance program is the least we can do for the men and women who work 
to provide for each one of us in this House.
  The provision in this conference report that makes catastrophic 
coverage available for all farmers for a simple fee is certainly 
appealing to Tennessee's farmers who have been hit by a recent wave of 
tornadoes and droughts over the past several years.
  Tennessee's single crop and lower yield farmers are especially 
excited about the change in their actual production history formula. 
These farmers will now be able to insure more of their investments and 
feel more secure about their ability to support their families. Ladies 
and gentlemen these are only a few examples of the benefits of this 
legislation.
  I call on each one of my fellow members of Congress to join me and 
support this conference report for America's courageous farmers.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the conference report.
  There was no objection.
  The conference report was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________