[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 9]
[Senate]
[Pages 12712-12714]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




            FOOD, CONSERVATION, AND ENERGY ACT OF 2008--VETO

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the veto message is 
considered read and spread in full upon the Journal and will be printed 
in the Record. The clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       Veto message to accompany H.R. 6124, to provide for the 
     continuation of agricultural and other programs of the 
     Department of Agriculture through fiscal year 2012, and for 
     other purposes.

  The veto message ordered to be printed in the Record is as follows:

To the House of Representatives:
  I am returning herewith without my approval H.R. 6124, the ``Food, 
Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008.''
  The bill that I vetoed on May 21, 2008, H.R. 2419, which became 
Public Law 110-234, did not include the title III provisions that are 
in this bill. In passing H.R. 6124, the Congress had an opportunity to 
improve on H.R. 2419 by modifying certain objectionable, onerous, and 
fiscally imprudent provisions. Unfortunately, the Congress chose to 
send me the same unacceptable farm bill provisions in H.R. 6124, merely 
adding title III, I am returning this bill for the same reasons as 
stated in my veto message of May 21, 2008, on H.R. 2419.
  For a year and a half, I have consistently asked that the Congress 
pass a good farm bill that I can sign. Regrettably, the Congress has 
failed to do so. At a time of high food prices and record farm income, 
this bill lacks program reform and fiscal discipline. It continues 
subsidies for the wealthy and increases farm bill spending by more than 
$20 billion, while using budget gimmicks to hide much of the increase. 
It is inconsistent with our objectives in international trade 
negotiations, which include securing greater market access for American 
farmers and ranchers. It would needlessly expand the size and scope of 
government. Americans sent us to Washington to achieve results and be 
good stewards of their hard-earned taxpayer dollars. This bill violates 
that fundamental commitment.
  In January 2007, my Administration put forward a fiscally responsible 
farm bill proposal that would improve the safety net for farmers and 
move current programs toward more market-oriented policies. The bill 
before me today fails to achieve these important goals.
  At a time when net farm income is projected to increase by more than 
$28 billion in 1 year, the American taxpayer should not be forced to 
subsidize that group of farmers who have adjusted gross incomes of up 
to $1.5 million. When commodity prices are at record highs, it is 
irresponsible to increase government subsidy rates for 15 crops, 
subsidize additional crops, and provide payments that further distort 
markets. Instead of better targeting farm programs, this bill 
eliminates the existing payment limit on marketing loan subsidies.
  Now is also not the time to create a new uncapped revenue guarantee 
that could cost billions of dollars more than advertised. This is on 
top of a farm bill that is anticipated to cost more than $600 billion, 
over 10 years. In addition, this bill would force many businesses to 
prepay their taxes in order to finance the additional spending.
  This legislation is also filled with earmarks and other ill-
considered provisions. Most notably, H.R. 6124 provides; $175 million 
to address water issues for desert lakes; $250 million for a 400,000-
acre land purchase from a private owner; funding and authority for the 
noncompetitive sale of National Forest land to a ski resort; and $382 
million earmarked for a specific watershed. These earmarks, and the 
expansion of Davis-Bacon Act prevailing wage requirements, have no 
place in the farm bill. Rural and urban Americans alike are frustrated 
with excessive government spending and the funneling of taxpayer funds 
for pet projects. This bill will only add to that frustration.
  The bill also contains a wide range of other objectionable 
provisions, including one that restricts our ability to redirect food 
aid dollars for emergency use at a time of great need globally. The 
bill does not include the requested authority to buy food in the 
developing world to save lives. Additionally, provisions in the bill 
raise serious constitutional concerns. For all the reasons outlined 
above, I must veto H.R. 6124.
  I veto this bill fully aware that it is rare for a stand-alone farm 
bill not to receive the President's signature, but my action today is 
not without precedent. In 1956, President Eisenhower stood firmly on 
principle, citing high

[[Page 12713]]

crop subsidies and too much government control of farm programs among 
the reasons for his veto. President Eisenhower wrote in his veto 
message, ``Bad as some provisions of this bill are, I would have signed 
it if in total it could be interpreted as sound and good for farmers 
and the nation.'' For similar reasons, I am vetoing the bill before me 
today.
                                                      George W. Bush.  
                                        The White House, June 18, 2008.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the time until 5:30 
p.m. is equally divided.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I will not take much time. We are here 
again for another vote on whether to override the President's veto of 
the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008, which we otherwise know 
as the farm bill. The veto message before the Senate is to accompany 
H.R. 6124, which is the bill passed by both the Senate and the House of 
Representatives to enact the full conference report on the new farm 
bill in the exact form it was agreed to and intended by the conferees 
and approved by both bodies overwhelmingly last month.
  That conference report, on the bill H.R. 2419, was approved by the 
House on May 14 by a vote of 318 to 106, and by the Senate on May 15 by 
a vote of 81 to 15. That measure was vetoed by the President, but after 
the veto it was discovered that one title of the bill--Title III, 
covering food aid and agricultural trade--had been inadvertently 
omitted during the enrollment process. At the time of that discovery 
the Memorial Day recess was imminent, as was the expiration of the 
extension of the previous farm bill enacted in 2002. Both bodies then 
voted to enact H.R. 2419, as it was enrolled, notwithstanding the 
President's veto. The House vote was 316 to 108 and the Senate vote was 
82 to 13. Thus, 14 of the 15 titles of the farm bill, H.R. 2419, were 
fully enacted into law as agreed to and included in the conference 
report.
  On May 22, the House with a vote of 306 to 110 passed the measure now 
before the Senate, H.R. 6124, which includes the entire farm bill 
conference report, in order to enact the Title III and, in effect, 
reenact the other titles that were enacted when the Senate overrode the 
President's veto of H.R. 2419. The Senate passed H.R. 6124 on June 5 by 
a vote of 77 to 15. The President vetoed the bill today, and earlier 
this afternoon the House voted 317 to 109 to enact the legislation 
notwithstanding the veto.
  Since this legislation has been thoroughly debated previously, I 
don't need to take much time now. I will just sum it up by saying this 
is a very good bill. It continues, reforms and strengthens income 
protection for the benefit of farm and ranch families and the rural 
economy. The bill will move our Nation ahead in maintaining our 
preeminent position in the world in agriculture production. The 
nutrition title very significantly improves and strengthens food 
assistance. As we have pointed out, nearly 70 percent of the funding 
provided in this bill goes for nutrition and food assistance for 
Americans. The energy provisions will help unleash the potential of 
agriculture and rural communities to supply energy to our nation. And 
farmers and ranchers will receive significantly more help through funds 
and technical assistance to conserve and protect soil, improve water 
quality, and boost wildlife on their land.
  Regarding Title III of this legislation, the majority of it involves 
the operation of our international food aid programs, in particular, 
the Title II Food for Peace program run by the Agency for International 
Development; the Food for Progress and McGovern-Dole Food for Education 
programs, both run by the Department of Agriculture; and the program 
for holding food stocks for emergency purposes under the Bill Emerson 
Humanitarian Trust.
  These authorities are vital to our Nation's efforts to alleviate 
hunger and poverty, and to foster development around the globe. So it 
is essential that we reinstate these authorities by enacting the 
legislation before us. We have included in this bill important reforms 
of the food aid programs, aimed at improving their operations and 
making them more responsive to humanitarian needs. All in all, the 
provisions of Title III of this bill are non-controversial and are 
definitely needed to ensure the continuity of U.S. food aid, as well as 
our very important agricultural trade promotion programs at the 
Department of Agriculture.
  Mr. President, I thank my friend, the ranking member, who started 
this farm bill process when he was chairman of the Agriculture 
Committee, Senator Chambliss of Georgia, and so many others who helped.
  I see my good friend, Senator Kent Conrad, chairman of the Budget 
Committee, who kept us on track through all these many days and nights 
of getting this bill put together. I want to thank them both for all 
their help in finally getting us to this point.
  Let me also thank my colleagues for their patience and understanding 
in dealing with the unusual procedural history we have experienced in 
the course of enacting this bill. I am grateful for the overwhelming 
support for the legislation and for our work in completing it.
  Because of the unusual procedural history of the Food, Conservation, 
and Energy Act of 2008, I want to note that the full legislative 
history for H.R. 2419, including the conference report statement of 
managers, committee reports, and statements in the Congressional Record 
are to be considered as legislative history for the provisions of H.R. 
6124.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia.
  Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I think Senator Harkin has said it all. 
It seems like we vote on the farm bill once a week as of late, and this 
is our weekly vote on the farm bill again. I do hope this is our last 
vote because this is such a serious piece of legislation.
  I did a talk radio show a little earlier today, and we were talking 
about gas prices, and I talked about what we did in the farm bill 
relative to energy. The talk show host said: Wait a minute. All you are 
doing is getting criticized in the press over this farm bill. He said: 
This has some good stuff in it relative to gas prices.
  I said: Yes, it really does.
  So we did an awful lot in this bill relative to energy. We did an 
awful lot relative to nutrition, as the chairman said. And, finally, I 
think, hopefully, that message is going to get out across America.
  The Chairman did a magnificent job leading us down this road, and I 
commend him and thank him for his great work. And to my good friend, 
Senator Conrad, without him this would not have gotten done. I 
appreciate his great leadership and great support.
  I want to tell particularly the chairman, as we had our meeting today 
with the Secretary, we were talking about implementing, Mr. President, 
this farm bill, and we were reminded in that meeting about what is 
going on in Iowa today, as we speak. The banks of the Mississippi and a 
couple of other rivers out there are overflowing onto farmland and 
destroying crops and creating havoc. In this farm bill we have a 
disaster package that is not going to require emergency spending for 
the 2008 crop. And it was criticized very much as we went through the 
process, yet folks in Iowa are going to be hurting, and folks in 
Missouri, as that water comes downstream, are going to be hurting, and 
I think this farm bill is going to turn out to be the best product we 
have put out, from a farm bill perspective.
  It will continue to be criticized, and it is not perfect by any 
means, but under the leadership of the chairman, I think it has been a 
great product, and I thank him and I thank Senator Conrad for his great 
leadership and friendship that we have as a result of this farm bill.
  To our staffs, thanks for great work. I look forward to this 5:30 
vote, and I certainly hope this is the last one on the farm bill.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, perhaps I could say the farm bill is so 
good we would like to have senators put their stamp of approval on it 
repeatedly.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?

[[Page 12714]]


  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I yield to the Senator from North Dakota 
whatever time he requires.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I thank the chairman and the ranking 
member. I thank them for their leadership and their partnership and 
their vision. This is a bill that is good for consumers, good for 
taxpayers, and good for farmers. This is the same song, second verse. 
We have been through this whole rotation once already, but we have to 
do it again.
  I think it is very important to remind people this is much more than 
a farm bill. This is a food bill with important nutritional components. 
In fact, 66 percent of the spending in this bill goes for nutrition. It 
is an important conservation bill to conserve our national resources. 
It is an important energy bill, as was referenced by the chairman and 
the ranking member. This bill is going to turn the page on developing 
our long-range renewable energy potential, and it contains very 
significant farm program reform.
  In addition, it provides a disaster title so the people who are being 
so devastated in Iowa, in other States, are not going to have to come 
to the Federal Government and ask for disaster aid. It will be there 
for them.
  The bottom line is this bill does not add to the deficit or debt 
because this bill is paid for. That is not my claim; that is the 
finding of the Congressional Budget Office, which says over the first 5 
years this bill has a modest surplus of $67 million. And over the life 
of the bill, the 10-year projections that we are required to comply 
with, this bill saves $110 million.
  I conclude by again thanking the chairman for his vision, thanking 
his staff for their incredible dedication, and thanking the ranking 
member, Senator Chambliss, whom I call Cool Hand Luke. You couldn't 
have a better guy in the pit, and it is a pit at times when you are 
writing a bill of this magnitude and this complexity and this 
importance. But he always kept his calm, and that helped enormously in 
these negotiations. And to his outstanding staff, we thank you. Thank 
you for being willing to serve in public life. We know you could make 
much more money some other place, but you have made an enormous 
contribution to this country.
  Finally, to Jim Miller, who is my lead negotiator, my very special, 
personal thanks for extraordinary dedication, for doing something good 
for the country and my State.
  I hope my colleagues will vote to override the President's ill-
considered veto.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I see the hour is just about upon us to 
start our vote. Again, I also want to thank our staffs, our great 
staffs who have worked so hard on this legislation for so many months: 
Martha Scott Poindexter and Vernie Hubert, I see over here, and Mark 
Halverson, and all the rest of the staff who are here in the chamber. I 
mentioned them by name before, and I can't thank them enough for all 
their hard work. It has been a long endeavor, and they have worked so 
hard, I hope they will be able to take a vacation.
  Again, to Senator Chambliss, I cannot thank him enough for a great 
working relationship and helping to pull this bill through. Now we look 
ahead to next year and the child nutrition bill, as well as to other 
matters before us. I also thank Senator Chambliss for his care and his 
concern, discussing with me--not only today but other times--the 
serious situation in the State of Iowa.
  We are hurting bad. It is hard to describe it, what is happening in 
Iowa. This farm bill will put some new policies in place, including the 
new permanent disaster program we have included, and others in 
agriculture, such as for conservation of our soil and water, so we will 
be able to get through this terrible crisis we are facing in the State 
of Iowa right now, to recover, to rebuild, and to come back even 
stronger and prepared for the future.
  I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a 
sufficient second.
  The question is, Shall the bill pass, the objections of the President 
of the United States to the contrary notwithstanding? The clerk will 
call the roll.
  The assistant journal clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. 
Byrd), the Senator from New York (Mrs. Clinton), the Senator from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Kennedy), and the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Obama) 
are necessarily absent.
  Mr. KYL. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator 
from New Mexico (Mr. Domenici) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. 
McCain).
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Stabenow). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 80, nays 14, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 151 Leg.]

                                YEAS--80

     Akaka
     Alexander
     Allard
     Barrasso
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boxer
     Brown
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burr
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Chambliss
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Conrad
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     Dodd
     Dole
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Enzi
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Graham
     Grassley
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Isakson
     Johnson
     Kerry
     Klobuchar
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Martinez
     McCaskill
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Pryor
     Reid
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Salazar
     Sanders
     Schumer
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Stevens
     Tester
     Thune
     Vitter
     Warner
     Webb
     Wicker
     Wyden

                                NAYS--14

     Bennett
     Coburn
     Collins
     DeMint
     Ensign
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Kyl
     Lugar
     Murkowski
     Reed
     Sununu
     Voinovich
     Whitehouse

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Byrd
     Clinton
     Domenici
     Kennedy
     McCain
     Obama
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 80 and the nays are 
14. Two-thirds of the Senators present and voting having voted in the 
affirmative, the bill, on reconsideration, is passed, the objections of 
the President of the United States to the contrary notwithstanding.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.

                          ____________________