[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 12]
[House]
[Pages 17705-17708]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




    PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 2112, 
      CONSOLIDATED AND FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2012

  Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call 
up House Resolution 467 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 467

       Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be 
     in order to consider the conference report to accompany the 
     bill (H.R. 2112) making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural 
     Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related 
     Agencies programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
     2012, 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 
     previous question shall be considered as ordered on the 
     conference report to its adoption without intervening motion 
     except: (1) one hour of debate; and (2) one motion to 
     recommit if applicable.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from North Carolina is 
recognized for 1 hour.
  Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), 
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During 
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose 
of debate only.


                             General Leave

  Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 
5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from North Carolina?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. FOXX. House Resolution 467 is a closed rule providing for 
consideration of H.R. 2112, the Consolidated and Further Continuing 
Appropriations Act, also known as the mini-bus.
  Mr. Speaker, this conference report was approved by the conference 
committee on a wide bipartisan basis with all but one of 38 House and 
Senate conferees signing off on the report. The bill contains a 
continuing resolution to avoid a government shutdown and continue 
Federal operations until December 16, 2011, or until Congress completes 
the remaining nine FY 2012 appropriations bills. It is important to 
highlight that this CR is a clean extension and includes no new funding 
provisions.
  In accordance with the Budget Control Act, this conference report 
upholds the overall discretionary spending level of $1.043 trillion and 
includes $2.3 billion in disaster relief funding, which falls under the 
disaster designation cap set by the act.
  The Agriculture agencies and programs in this bill will receive a 
total of $136.6 billion in both discretionary and mandatory funding, a 
reduction of $4.6 billion from the President's request based on the 
administration's midsession review. Discretionary funding in the 
legislation totals $19.8 billion, a reduction of $350 billion below 
last year's level and a cut of $2.5 billion from the President's 
request.
  It is important to note that mandatory food and nutrition programs 
within the Department of Agriculture--including SNAP, also known as 
food stamps, as well as child nutrition--are funded at $98.6 billion. 
This funding will allow all individuals and families who meet the 
programs' criteria for aid to receive all the benefits available to 
them, and includes $3 billion in reserve funds in case of unanticipated 
increases in participation or food price increases.
  Additionally, school lunch and school breakfast programs will receive 
$18.2 billion in mandatory funding in the agreement. This funding will 
help low-income students with free or reduced-price meals at schools in 
every community in the Nation.
  The conference agreement includes provisions to prevent overly 
burdensome and costly regulations and provide greater flexibility for 
local school districts to improve the nutritional quality of meals in 
the national school lunch and school breakfast programs. Without these 
provisions, the cost of these important programs would balloon by an 
additional $7 billion over the next 5 years, leaving States and local 
school districts in the lurch.
  The WIC program is funded at $6.6 billion. This funding will provide 
supplemental foods, as well as nutritional and other preventative 
health services, to low-income participants.
  I am pleased to report that the bill places restrictions on the 
implementation of a Grain Inspection and Packers and Stockyards 
Administration, GIPSA, proposed rule that would have allowed harmful 
government interference in the private market for livestock and 
poultry.
  The Commerce, Justice, and Science section of the conference report 
includes a base total of $52.7 billion, a decrease of $583 million 
below last year's level, and a decrease of almost $5 billion below the 
President's request.
  The conference agreement includes numerous provisions that protect 
the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. Three of these 
protections are made permanent law beginning in fiscal year 2012. These 
three provisions prohibit the Department of Justice from consolidating 
firearms sales records, electronically retrieving the records of former 
firearms dealers, and maintaining information on persons who have 
passed firearms background checks. The conference agreement also 
contains numerous 1-year firearms protections and new language 
prohibiting DOJ from requiring imported shotguns to meet a sporting 
purposes test.
  The bill extends important provisions related to Guantanamo Bay, 
including a prohibition on the transfer or release of any detainee into 
the U.S. and a prohibition on the acquisition or construction of any 
new prison to house detainees. Under no circumstances should we 
endanger our communities by allowing some of the most dangerous people 
in the world to set foot on American soil.
  The conference agreement includes important provisions to protect 
unborn human life, including a ban on abortion funding for Federal 
prisoners and a conscience protection for prison employees, and a 
prohibition on the Legal Services Corporation funds for organizations 
that engage in abortion-related litigation.
  The Transportation, Housing and Urban Development section of the 
conference report includes a base total of $55.6 billion, representing 
a decrease of $19.4 billion below the President's request.

                              {time}  1240

  The conference agreement provides $500 million for National 
Infrastructure Investments, commonly referred to as

[[Page 17706]]

the TIGER program, and includes language prioritizing rail, highway, 
and transit projects that improve or expand existing systems.
  The conference agreement provides $39.9 billion for the Federal 
highway program, which is the annual spending level set by the latest 
Surface Transportation Extension Act.
  The agreement provides $1.66 billion for the Federal Highway 
Administration's Emergency Relief program, which assists States in 
rebuilding Federal highways that were damaged by major natural 
disasters such as Hurricane Irene and the flooding of the Missouri 
River.
  Included in the conference agreement is $12.5 billion for the FAA. 
The agreement provides $3.35 billion for airports and $2.7 billion for 
facilities and equipment. Language is included to restore the Block 
Aircraft Registry Request program, or BARR, and to prohibit future 
changes to the program. Also included is $878 million for FAA Next 
Generation funding to ease congestion and reduce air traffic delays.
  The legislation includes a total of $37.3 billion for the Department 
of Housing and Urban Development, a decrease of $3.8 billion below last 
year's level and $4.7 billion below the President's request.
  The bill does not extend the increased maximum loan limits for Fannie 
Mae and Freddie Mac. These entities have been under public scrutiny for 
their questionable business practices and use of billions in Federal 
bailout funds, some of which have been used for extravagant management 
bonuses. The bill does allow an increase in the conforming loan limits 
to the Federal Housing Authority, FHA, which is subject to greater 
congressional scrutiny and oversight.
  Mr. Speaker, I am appreciative of the members of the conference 
committee and cognizant of the tough jobs they had to get to this 
bipartisan agreement coming to the floor for consideration. It is for 
this reason that I urge my colleagues to support the rule, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. I thank my colleague for yielding me the customary 30 
minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a sad day for the House of Representatives--
another demonstration that the House has failed to meet its basic 
responsibility to the American people. The new budget year began over 6 
weeks ago, but not a single routine appropriations bill, not a single 
one, has been enacted. Instead, we are considering a massive $100 
billion hodgepodge of unrelated programs and agencies all crammed into 
a single bill that no Member of the House saw before this week.
  In fact, most of the provisions in this bill have never been 
considered by the House at any time in any form. Let me repeat that. A 
massive $100 billion bill, most of which has never been considered by 
the House, brought up for a single, all-or-nothing vote under a 
completely closed process. And what's worse, we will be back here in a 
few weeks with another massive omnibus bill to keep the rest of the 
government open. As I said, Mr. Speaker, this is a sad day for the 
House.
  Fortunately, there is one hint of good news in this mess. The bill 
does reject some of the absurd cuts proposed on the other side of the 
aisle. For example, the bill does not contain proposed cuts that would 
have denied 700,000 women, infants and children valuable nutritional 
supplements or defunded the COPS program.
  But those welcome steps are not enough to make this a good bill. I am 
especially disturbed by the unwise and shortsighted cuts to programs 
important to America's role as a competitive global power. High-speed 
and intercity passenger rail, for example, gets no funding under this 
agreement. The bill allows the country to maintain Amtrak at its 
current state, but does nothing to help us keep pace with countries 
like China and Germany, who have already built a rail infrastructure 
that will expand their economies well into the 21st century. If our 
country hopes to remain a global superpower in the 21st century, we 
have to do more to invest in our country than the meager steps that we 
are taking today.
  Especially in tough economic times like these, we need to rebuild our 
infrastructure, to be educating our children, and creating jobs for the 
millions of unemployed. Instead of the Band-Aid measure we are 
considering today, we have to truly begin to invest in our future and 
ensure that we not only survive, but that we thrive, in the century to 
come.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I just want to say to my colleague from New 
York that I think the American people are beginning to realize that 
government spends money; it doesn't invest money.
  With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Massachusetts, a member of the Committee on Rules, Mr. 
McGovern.
  Mr. McGOVERN. I thank my ranking member for yielding to me.
  Mr. Speaker, there are some good things in this minibus. I'm 
especially pleased with the funding levels for the SNAP and the WIC 
programs, which will ensure that hungry people have access to 
nutritious food during these tough economic times. And I regret very 
much that those programs were under attack by the Republican majority 
in this House, but in this minibus, those levels are adequate. And I'll 
likely support the final passage of this bill.
  But, Mr. Speaker, for the life of me, I can't understand why policy 
riders were allowed to be included in the final bill. Some were even 
airdropped in the dark of night without being considered by either the 
House or the Senate. Most troubling, the underlying bill includes a 
special carve-out for Maine and Vermont to allow 100,000-pound trucks 
on their interstate highways for the next 20 years.
  Mr. Speaker, current law allows only trucks up to 80,000 pounds to 
travel on interstates--and for good reason. Bigger, heavier trucks are 
an enormous safety threat. Oversized rigs are more likely to be 
involved in crashes, not to mention that it's unnerving to see one in 
your rearview mirror bearing down on you on the highway. And if the 
safety risks are not convincing enough as to why heavier trucks are a 
bad idea, consider the economic arguments. We're here talking about 
deficit reduction, and already bigger trucks don't pay their fair share 
for the damage they incur on our roads and our bridges. An 80,000-pound 
truck only pays 80 percent of its damage costs, and a 97,000-pound 
truck would pay only half of the damage it causes.
  Our Nation's infrastructure is crumbling, and the highway trust fund 
is woefully underfunded. Where are we going to get this money to repair 
our infrastructure? And the Maine and the Vermont exemptions will only 
make this problem worse.
  And it also starts us down a slippery slope of allowing other States 
to ask for special weight-limit exemptions. We'll end up with a 
patchwork of truck-size and truck-weight laws that will make the 
business of transporting goods by truck across State lines a confusing 
mess.
  Mr. Speaker, there were no hearings--none, zero--no hearings held in 
the House on the Maine and Vermont exemption. The House didn't even 
consider a Transportation Appropriations bill. So to be making such a 
major policy change without thoughtful consideration and vigorous 
debate is absurd.
  I would remind my colleagues that there's bipartisan opposition to 
increasing truck size and truck weight. I have a bill to freeze truck 
size and truck weight at 80,000 pounds across the entire national 
highway system, and it has 60 bipartisan cosponsors. The issue of 
increasing truck size and weight needs to be fully understood and 
debated before making any long-term policy changes. I strongly oppose 
the Maine and Vermont policy rider in this appropriations bill; and I 
regret very, very much that this was included without the appropriate 
hearings, without the appropriate oversight, and without doing it out 
in the open so people could understand what the policy implications are 
by making this exemption.
  Ms. FOXX. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page 17707]]


  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Colorado, a member of the Committee on Rules, Mr. Polis.
  Mr. POLIS. I thank the gentlelady from New York.
  Mr. Speaker, I have to voice my opposition to an insidious provision 
that has been added to this bill at the last minute by agribusiness and 
the frozen food industry, and that is a change that allows pizza to be 
counted as a vegetable. They started with French fries; now they've 
moved on to pizza. This language equates pizza with vegetables and 
weakens otherwise good school nutrition standards.
  This false equivalency harkens back to the ludicrous labeling of 
ketchup as a vegetable made infamous 30 years ago by President Ronald 
Reagan. Again, this bill's actual language requires crediting of tomato 
paste--again, crediting of tomato paste from page 90 of this bill--as a 
vegetable under the school lunch program to be subsidized by taxpayers 
as a vegetable.

                              {time}  1250

  I had a family from my district, from Eagle County, Colorado, in my 
office earlier this morning and I asked the mom, I said, When your kid 
is eating, do you count pizza as his vegetable? And she said, No. And 
parents across the Nation agree.
  Pizza can be incorporated into a healthy diet. I eat pizza. Most of 
my constituents eat pizza. But when we're talking about taxpayer 
subsidies for healthy vegetables, to make sure that they're available 
for kids on the side of pizza, making sure there's some broccoli, 
making sure there's some spinach, making sure there's something healthy 
for them to eat at the school lunch counter, pizza alone--particularly 
pizza with no vegetables on it, just tomato paste--it's common sense 
that it's not a vegetable. What's next? Are Twinkies going to be 
considered a vegetable?
  Rather than having a deliberative effort, we have special interests 
inserting these provisions into these bills, contrary to the public 
health. And we wonder why Congress is so unpopular nationally. No one 
can help but to look at us and scratch their heads when we say that 
french fries count as a healthy, nutritious vegetable, that pizza 
counts as a healthy, nutritional element.
  You know, poor children's health is something we all have a stake in. 
Not only are the kids and the families affected, but we're all 
affected. The costs of Medicaid and Medicare, government spending, 
rising obesity rates. The empty calories in french fries are not equal 
to truly nutritious vegetables like carrots, spinach, lettuce, 
broccoli, cucumbers.
  I know it's hard to get kids to eat vegetables. I have a 9-week-old. 
He hasn't been weaned yet, so we haven't had to deal with that yet. But 
you know what? You don't define vegetables down. You don't call a 
Twinkie a vegetable. You don't call pizza a vegetable. What you do is 
you have to make sure that kids know how to incorporate healthy food 
into their diet so they can grow up strong and keep all of our costs 
down and make sure to keep America healthy.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill has many important provisions, but I feel it's 
critical to highlight the ludicrous definition that Congress is giving 
by redefining nutrition down and providing taxpayer subsidies for 
unhealthy food in our schools.
  Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Our colleagues across the aisle often try to distract from what are 
the real issues facing our country and get into the weeds, and bills 
like this give them a perfect opportunity to do that. But when I'm home 
every weekend and talk to my constituents, what they're concerned about 
is they have incredible outrage with the inaction of the liberal 
Democrat-controlled Senate.
  My constituents are aware of the many bills that the House has passed 
but which are stalled in the Senate, and many of these bills deal 
directly with promoting jobs, which remains the prevailing issue of so 
many Americans.
  Our colleagues are upset about the quality of the free lunches that 
we provide. Well, we have more people in poverty and getting free 
lunches because the Democrat-controlled Senate refuses to work with the 
Republicans in the House to set an environment where more jobs can be 
created and fewer people would be dependent on food stamps and be 
dependent on getting free breakfast and free lunches in the schools.
  My constituents understand the colossal failure of the Obama stimulus 
bill and the general policies that existed when the Democrats were in 
control of the House for 4 years. My constituents understand that 
government can create jobs only for more government bureaucrats. And 
those bureaucrats must justify their existence by creating more 
regulations that wind up killing more private sector jobs.
  The liberal Democrat elites in Washington keep asking for one 
Republican jobs bill. Well, Mr. Speaker, we've passed at least 20 jobs 
bills that help the private sector--the only sector of our economy that 
can actually create real jobs through growth in their businesses.
  The liberals keep buying into the false theory that government will 
create millions of jobs. The reality is that, unless we provide the 
private sector with an environment that is conducive to job creation, 
jobs will be very hard to come by.
  Mr. Speaker, Republicans have been listening to our constituents, and 
we're acting to provide private business owners and entrepreneurs with 
the tools that they need to create jobs. However, the bills we pass and 
send over to the Senate just sit there and nothing is done with them.
  Mr. Speaker, we could reduce the number of children, again, on free 
and reduced lunches by creating jobs and getting people out of poverty 
in this country. That's what we should be focused on right now. We 
could solve a lot of the problems in this country by doing that.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Ohio, a member of the Committee on Appropriations, Ms. 
Kaptur.
  Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the ranking member, Congresswoman Slaughter, for 
her incredible work and rise today, Mr. Speaker, to support the rule 
for fiscal year 2012 appropriations for agriculture, transportation, 
training and justice. Technically--or maybe untechnically--this bill is 
called the ``mini-bus.'' I completely commend the conferees for 
including language based on legislation we introduced directing 
additional resources for the Federal Bureau of Investigation's White-
Collar Crime Division for Wall Street financial crime prosecution.
  Moreover, with the Federal deficit requiring our rigor, this mini 
bill makes difficult cuts, but also provides support for those most 
hurt by the current recession. Let me state for the record that the 
trillions of dollars of deficit being racked up in this country come 
from some pretty clear sources: first of all, two wars--the longest 
wars in American history, lasting over a decade now; also, the cost of 
unemployment to this economy caused by Wall Street malfeasance; and, 
finally, looking back, the tax cuts for the rich enacted during the 
last Bush administration that continue to rack up mounting deficits 
every year. It's very clear what's happening to cause the deficits. And 
then with the rising deficit, the cost of added interest is included in 
the debt total.
  This bill meets the spending caps set in the Budget Control Act 
compromise and includes a clean continuing resolution to prevent a 
government shutdown, which would only further hurt our economy.
  With over 15 percent of Americans living in poverty now, our moral 
responsibility as a Congress must be to help our fellow citizens 
weather this storm--which they didn't create. Thus this bill maintains 
funding for key programs, such as for food for needy children and poor 
women who are pregnant, for food commodities for food banks across this 
country that are strapped with rising need, and for food sustainment 
for the unemployed.
  In particular, this bill includes language, based on legislation I 
authored,

[[Page 17708]]

to allow the FBI to hire hundreds of new agents to fully investigate 
white-collar crime in the financial services sector. People across 
Ohio, from Toledo to Cleveland, are hurting because of the recklessness 
of Wall Street. Those who broke the law in order to get rich at the 
expense of everybody else should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of 
the law. I commend the conferees for including my language to help 
provide the FBI with the necessary resources to investigate those who 
are responsible.
  I urge my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying bill, 
which is quite balanced despite the very difficult choices that they 
had to make.
  Ms. FOXX. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlelady from 
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I thank the gentlelady from New York for 
her kindness in yielding. I thank the hard work of the Appropriations 
Committee. I thank the gentlelady from Virginia for managing. And I 
thank Mr. Dicks as well for accepting the challenge in these very 
difficult times.
  It's not a happy time to come to the floor and indicate that this is 
what we have to do, but it's important to acknowledge some challenges 
that we still have. And those challenges are: the many food programs 
that have to be capped in spite of the numbers of people who are hungry 
in this country; the dumbing down of food resources, in particular, as 
my colleague from Colorado mentioned, listing tomato paste and french 
fries as vegetables; and then an issue that I hope that I will be able 
to continue to work on with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and 
that is food deserts, where there are pockets in rural and urban 
centers where we have no food access, good healthy food, vegetables.
  But I am glad that the New Starts, under the transportation bill, 
includes the north and southeast lines for the city of Houston, 
creating jobs, putting people to work, and improving mobility, some 
$94,616,000.

                              {time}  1300

  I am also delighted that TIGER grants are in at $500 million, but 
disappointed in the community planning, that we have lost some $830 
million for community block grants, $1.6 billion below the President. 
That's where we help rebuild communities and jobs.
  The Legal Services Corporation that I've been a supporter of and 
actively was on our local board, board of directors, now has been 
reduced by $348 million; but it has been reduced, which creates what we 
call the justice gap.
  I also am concerned about providing more developmental training for 
our law enforcement that covers our Federal sectors. In particular, I 
am concerned about the police in the Supreme Court and the Chief of 
Police there, and the concern for the lack of professionalism and the 
need for training.
  I believe that in the Capitol Police scenario, there is an orderly 
process of the Chief, the Sergeant-at-Arms, and we work wonderfully 
together with these outstanding men and women. It's a shame for those 
who have to protect the other body of government, the Supreme Court, to 
have individuals who do not recognize IDs, are not professional in 
their handling of their business. And I will be raising this issue with 
the Department of Justice and relating it to the funding which I think 
is necessary to either provide them with more funding or to put more 
stringent guidelines in their hiring policies and the way they train 
people.
  So I rise today to say that I am glad that we will have the 
government open, and that we have funded agriculture programs, not at 
the best; we've funded infrastructure. But we can do more. And I 
believe we should not adhere to any cuts going forward, and I hope the 
supercommittee will not do that. I ask for support of the underlying 
bill.
  Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I would advise my colleague from New York that 
I have no requests for time. I do have some more comments that I will 
make that I am reserving until a little bit later in the time.
  I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. I am prepared to close.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from 
New York.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, although I'm encouraged that we were able 
to reverse some of the most severe cuts proposed, I am disappointed 
that our budget process has come to this, $100 billion packed with 
provisions that the House has never considered. Therefore, on process, 
I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, the rule before us today allows us to proceed 
to the general debate of a bill that encompasses three major 
appropriation measures. I want to thank the conferees for their work on 
this agreement.
  As we move forward with the debate, we must keep in mind the dire 
fiscal situation that our country is in, and we must continue to work 
in a fiscally responsible manner.
  With that, I urge my colleagues to vote for this rule. I yield back 
the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the 
resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________