Robert Bennett

Mr. BENNETT

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that between the two votes there be a period of 2 minutes for explanation equally divided between the Senator from New Mexico and myself.

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I have a unanimous consent request in which all Senators, I believe, will be interested. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that after the next vote, there be no other rollcall votes until 9:30 tomorrow morning, with the understanding that all amendments will be offered tonight, all debate will take place tonight, and all votes that occur tomorrow will be stacked to be followed by final passage.

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, there is no question but that an education program to try to get our young people to eat better makes sense. There is no question that we should do what we can to deal with the challenge of obesity. Now let us look at a few realities with which we are faced. The President requested $10.25 million for the program. The amendment offered by Senator Bingaman and Senator Lugar would virtually double that amount. There is no other program we are dealing with where the request is to double the funds. We have people who are requesting incremental increases of 5 percent and 10 percent, but quite frankly we have resisted. The total number of earmarks and requests that have come in since the committee acted is over $50 million. We have stood firm against all of them and said we are sorry, the money isn't there. We feel we have to stand firm against it. So this $10 million would double the program as it currently exists and would be 20 percent of the total amount we on the subcommittee have said we cannot fund. The offset is very interesting. It is the common computer environment. It always seems easy to say, well, we can get by, by delaying activity with the computers. Let's cut the computers because education is more important. During the debate we have had today, we have heard complaints from people about interoperability, about inability to communicate in the time of emergency. Katrina has exposed problems with computers. If we were to cut the computer program as drastically as this would cut it, we run the risk of closing county offices. We run the risk of stopping the modernization of services right at a time when complaints are coming in about how antiquated those services are. But interestingly, as the $50 million requests have come in, almost all of them, when we told them you have to have an offset, say let's cut the computers. If indeed we responded to every one of the requests for additional spending, we would have cut the computers $50 million. I don't want to cut the computers at all. I accept the arguments that say we have challenges with communication in the Department; we need to have as modern a communication system as we possibly can. The common computer environment that is trying to create that interoperability should be encouraged and maintained. For that reason, as fond as I am of the Senator from New Mexico and the Senator from Indiana, I have to oppose this amendment. I will ask my colleagues, when the time comes for the rollcall vote, to oppose it. There will be another bill next year. We will see where we are next year with overall spending. We will see where we are with respect to emergencies and how the Department of Agriculture is dealing with those emergencies. I am convinced when we come to that, as we sift through all the damage that is done by Katrina and perhaps by Rita and other challenges, we would like to have as powerful and as modern a computer system to deal with communications as we possibly can. For those reasons, the doubling of a program at a time of budget constraints that we find ourselves in, and taking the offset from a program where we feel we need to be as modern as we possibly can, gives me two reasons to say that I would be opposed to this amendment. I still have an additional 5 minutes and I frankly have said all I need to say. I yield back the remainder of my time. If the Senator from New Mexico wishes to claim it, I am happy to have him use it; otherwise, we can go into a quorum call until such time as the vote starts at 7 o'clock, unless there are other Senators who wish to speak.

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I call for the yeas and nays.

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, we have had previous conversations about the effectiveness of the Agriculture Department. We are talking about our own backgrounds. I have a little bit of background in advertising. I would be anxious before we spend this money to do a little analysis of how effective the advertising has been. You talk about instruction in schools. We all know that there are instructions that work and there are instructions that don't. My own experience is that the Government is not very good at advertising healthy lifestyle changes. We could have been spending--I have no idea. We have not researched this at all. I have no idea where the evidence might be. We could have been spending the 21 cents per pupil and wasting every bit of it in terms of results. I have something of a background in advertising and I know how much advertising budgets get wasted simply because the advertising campaign is not effectively carried out. I recommend to my colleagues we defeat this amendment and if, indeed, the Senator from Oklahoma and the Senator from New Mexico can examine this from their background and demonstrate we are getting a 17-to-1 return from this particular program, that we are getting a 17-to-1 return from the kind of instruction going on in classrooms, then I would be happy to endorse this at some future time. In terms of what has been the result of the $10 million we have been spending, how certain will we be that doubling that is going to, in fact, increase health among our children? It may well be that a GAO study would say the $10 million has been spent on training materials that have been ineffective and produced no result whatever. In effect, we are being asked to buy something of a pig in a poke without understanding exactly how it works. I hope we would stay with the committee allocation here. The issue is a very legitimate issue. I, for one, will be more than willing in the hearings to ask the Department to give us a demonstration of how effective this has been. If it can be demonstrated that it has, in fact, reduced obesity and has had some impact on diabetes, at that point I would be all for doubling it or tripling it because of the 17-to-1 figure the Senator from Oklahoma cites. But lacking that information, in this particular situation I would be loathe to proceed.

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, no one has come forward, so we are prepared to close down with the two amendments still unresolved, Dayton and Jeffords, and then move to final passage after those two are resolved for a voice vote or yeas and nays, I assume which will be determined tomorrow. At the moment, the yeas and nays have not been ordered. I want to respect the rights of both of those Senators. While we get together whatever final activity needs to go forward, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the time between now and 7 o'clock be evenly divided between myself and Senator Bingaman from New Mexico, with the vote on the Coburn amendment No. 1775 to occur at 7 o'clock to be followed by a vote on the Bingaman amendment, with the yeas and nays ordered in both instances with no other amendments being allowed to either amendment prior to the time.

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I call for the regular order on the Coburn amendment No. 1773.

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I call for a vote on this by voice.

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I am unaware of any other Senator who is planning to offer any amendment. I don't want to cut anybody off, but I made it clear during the vote that all amendments have to be offered tonight and all debate take place tonight. We are scheduled for the vote tomorrow morning. My understanding is that the Dayton amendment is still pending, and, therefore, if it can't be disposed of tonight, it would be available for tomorrow morning. The Jeffords amendment is still pending, and if that cannot be resolved tonight, that would be voted on tomorrow morning. Those are the only two I am aware of at the present time. I will suggest the absence of a quorum so we can check the list and see who else might be out there. But I would say to any who are monitoring our procedures on behalf of their respective Senators that the time for offering amendments is getting mighty short. We don't want to deny any Senator his or her rights, but I feel we have given fair warning this is what we will do. With that, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BENNETT

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 3761, which was received from the House.

Mr. BENNETT

Mr. BENNETT. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. BENNETT

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet to meet to conduct a hearing on ``The Kelo Decision: Investigating Takings of Homes and other Private Property'' on Tuesday, September 20, 2005 at 10 a.m. in the Dirksen Senate Office Building Room 226. The tentative witness list is attached. Panel I: The Honorable John Cornyn, United States Senator [R-TX]. Panel II: Ms. Susette Kelo, New London, CT; Fred Jenkins, Pastor, St. Luke's Pentecostal Church, North Hempstead, NY; The Honorable Eddie A. Perez, Mayor, Representing the National League of Cities, Hartford, CT; Hilary O. Shelton, Director, NAACP Washington Bureau, Washington, DC; Thomas Merrill, Charles Keller Beekman Professor of Law, Columbia University, New York City, NY; Steven J. Eagle, Professor of Law, George Mason University, Arlington, VA.

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Disaster Prevention and Prediction be authorized to meet on Tuesday, September 20, 2005, at 3 p.m., on Review of the Prediction of Hurricane Katrina.

Mr. BENNETT

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I have three amendments which I send to the desk and ask for their consideration.

Mr. BENNETT. I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the amendments be dispensed with.

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, as we are approaching the hour of 4:45, which has been set as the time for the vote on the Ensign amendment, I say to my colleagues that Senator Ensign outlined the reasons for his amendment. I have heard others who for one reason or another have already been opposed to it. But so far, none of them have come to the floor to express that opposition. I make it clear to anyone who is following the proceedings that one of the reasons we have delayed the vote as we have and kept the afternoon as open as we have has been to allow those who may be opposed to the Ensign amendment the opportunity to present their proposals. We now are at 4:45. I expect the time is far gone and the vote will proceed. I didn't want anyone thinking we had made any effort to prevent anybody from presenting a different point of view than what Senator Ensign laid out when he proposed his amendment this afternoon.

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I ask for a voice vote.

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I understand the Senator from Hawaii has some amendments to the Agriculture appropriations bill.

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I ask for a voice vote.

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I share the concern and frustration of the Senator from Missouri with the proposal. We have had some of that same concern and frustration in Utah. Charitably, I will say that the efforts to close these offices have been handled a little less wisely than might otherwise have been the case. I hope that between now and the conference we can learn more about this proposal. I think the Senator's comments about getting information and input from those directly affected is very wise. I pledge to work with all the Senators concerned on this issue between now and the time we get to conference. So knowing that this will be the vehicle whereby we can get to conference, I am willing to proceed now to a voice vote and urge Senators to support it. I understand it has been cleared on both sides.

Mr. BENNETT

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday, September 21. I further ask consent that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved, and the Senate proceed to a period of morning business for up to 60 minutes, with the first 30 minutes under the control of the majority leader or his designee and the final 30 minutes under the control of the Democratic leader or his designee; provided that following morning business, the Senate resume consideration of H.R. 2744, the Agriculture appropriations bill.

Mr. BENNETT

Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, I know of no other amendments available to us. Unless someone wishes to speak in morning business between now and the time we routinely break for the policy lunches, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in recess until 2:15 p.m.

Mr. BENNETT

Mr. BENNETT. There is approximately 10 minutes remaining until the vote.