[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 21]
[Senate]
[Pages 29685-29686]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                               FARM BILL

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, on the farm bill, it is a 5-year bill, 
scored at about $280 billion. It is a bill we need to look at the 
positive aspects of, and I have done that on a number of occasions.
  The nutrition title is one of the bright spots of the bill. Food 
stamp recipients under the bill will be allowed to spend more on 
childcare and remain eligible, as well as save more for education and 
retirement without losing their benefits. Minimum benefits will rise. 
Funding for buying surplus food stuffs for food banks and other relief 
organizations have increased by $100 million each year. That includes 
over $1 billion for the School Lunch Program to provide fresh fruits 
and vegetables to these schools.
  There are many other good things in this bill, and I was disappointed 
the President again talked about a veto. This is a new word in his 
vocabulary, because in the first 6 years of his Presidency, he 
basically never used the word. I should say the first 7 years. One year 
from today, we will have elections for a new President. So in the last 
12 months, in this man's Presidency, he has come up with a new word, 
``veto.'' Everything is veto--CHIP, WRDA, appropriations bills, farm 
bills.
  Yesterday, I came to the floor to express my optimism for the farm 
bill. I said the bill is an example of the good work that can come when 
both sides of the aisle work together. Chairman Harkin and Senators 
Baucus, Chambliss, and Grassley have done that. I also said this bill 
would receive floor time for amendments dealing with the farm bill. 
Apparently, the good work and good faith put toward this bill by 
Democrats and Republicans does not count for much for the President. 
Yesterday afternoon, Acting Secretary of Agriculture Chuck Connors 
announced the President's intent to veto the farm bill--before it has 
been debated, before amendments are offered, and before, of course, it 
is passed.
  Here we go again, I guess is what people are saying. The President 
has now threatened to veto 11 of 12 appropriations bills, including 
Labor-HHS, which provides crucial funding for schools, medical 
research, and police. He said he is going to veto WRDA, which passed 
the Senate with 81 votes.
  I am not alone when I say this latest veto threat of the farm bill 
rings kind of hollow. It rings hollow because Secretary Johanns went 
around the country giving lectures about the current payments system, 
what a bad deal it was. Yet the Bush administration had every 
opportunity to fix the issue of nonfarmers receiving farm payments. 
This is what Johanns loved to go around the country saying. Why don't 
they fix this? He is the Secretary of Agriculture, part of the Bush 
administration. Yet even though he has gone around and given PowerPoint 
presentations to this effect, he should have been giving a PowerPoint 
presentation of why the Bush administration hasn't done anything to fix 
it. It can all be done by changing regulations. You don't need to 
change the law.
  What they now blame Congress for failing to do, they could have 
reformed--the ``actively engaged'' farming payments system--right now. 
That is what they talk about all the time. They talk about people in 
apartment houses drawing benefits. They can change it. The President 
can do that. He has the power to do that. We gave him the power to do 
that. We passed a bill 20 years ago that reformed the

[[Page 29686]]

process. Yet an April 2004 study by the General Accounting Office 
determined the Bush Department of Agriculture's track record in 
implementing this reform was, at best, halfhearted, and that is being 
generous.
  A problem exists in the farming payout structure. We have all heard 
of individuals who live in the city but claim they are farmers and 
receive a subsidy. The Bush administration could change that with a 
regulation. The farm bill begins to tackle that problem--a problem that 
exists, in large part, because the Bush administration has failed to 
address it.
  Now, the President plans to veto a bill that reforms the payment 
process, while maintaining the President's administrative authority to 
act on it. This bill takes reform seriously. If President Bush were 
serious about it as well, rather than just looking at political points, 
he would do something about it. He has the power to do something about 
it.

                          ____________________