Henry Bonilla

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, is it the gentleman's intention to withdraw his amendment?

Mr. BONILLA. I yield to the gentleman from Kansas.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, absolutely. Let me point out that the gentleman from Kansas is not only working hard on this particular issue, but he is a key player on agricultural issues that we deal with on a daily basis here in Washington. I am not only on this issue, but whatever issue the gentleman brings forward, we are ready and willing to discuss, work with and solve problems with him. He comes to the table every day very serious about these issues and truly in his heart wants to solve issues that face agriculture across the country.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the gentleman's amendment. This is an issue that many of us have been working on for many years. The country-of-origin labeling provisions that were part of the last farm bill would present a nightmare to many producers in this country. Good, salt-of-the-earth people in agriculture know that this would impose up to $1 billion in additional costs to their already overworked people and to their budgets, which are already being taxed. This is also an issue for anybody who believes that grocery stores and retailers are part of Americana in this country, and they would rise in strong opposition to this amendment because there is a liability in the country-of-origin labeling that would in essence make your friendly corner grocery store liable for trial lawyers to come in and say you did not put the fact that this calf may have been born in one country, processed in another country, and now on the meat counter in your local grocery store. Now the lawyers can come along and say, we are taking you to court, causing the price of beef to go up for American families. That is not something that would reflect favorably for anyone in this country, whether you are a producer, a retailer or a consumer. This is a marketing issue. I realize there is an intent by this country-of-origin labeling provision to mandate that these labels be put on products. Nothing could be more anti free enterprise than to mandate labeling on a product. If consumers want this, they will ask their retailer to put it on the product so they can favor that product over another. I am not sure what the origin of the country-of-origin labeling provision was in the last farm bill, but there is no doubt it would create additional costs that consumers would have to bear. I would also want to compliment the chairman of the authorizing committee, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte), for introducing a bill to make this country-of-origin labeling provision voluntary. There are dozens of cosponsors on the bill. It is a bipartisan effort. Many of us have been working on that for a long time, and we hope that this provision that I have put in this bill remains by voting no on the Rehberg amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte), the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Agriculture.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Ortiz).

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King).

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Conaway), a distinguished Member from the great City of Midland.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order against the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill and therefore violates clause 2 of rule XXI. The rule states in pertinent part: ``An amendment to a general appropriations bill shall not be in order if changing existing law.'' This amendment directly amends existing law. I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I do rise in opposition to this amendment, and yield myself such time as I may consume. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Sweeney), for whom I have a great deal of respect, has worked on this issue for some time. I know he also has a separate legislating bill that he is trying to move through the process, where this issue and this whole topic could be more appropriately addressed through the authorizing committee. This amendment will shut down an industry without having a hearing, or any due process. The amendment creates a crisis for animal health issues. It prohibits USDA from inspecting horses that may have West Nile virus, or vesicular stomatitis, both of which can affect other animals and humans if those horses are destined for slaughter. The estimated cost to feed and care for 50,000 horses is at least 60 to $100 million per year. Who will pay, or will more horses go to the rendering plant instead? What is the real effect of this measure? There is no way of knowing, because it has not been vetted through the process. Demand for the product will not change. Almost all of the meat from the U.S. is exported, and those countries will simply find another source. I oppose this amendment very strongly. Mr. Chairman, I yield for as much time as he may consume to the chairman of the authorizing committee, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte).

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King).

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I yield for as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte), chairman of the authorizing committee.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Berry).

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Boyd), a distinguished member of our subcommittee.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Pomeroy).

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Foley).

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa).

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Peterson).

Mr. BONILLA. I yield to the gentleman from Iowa.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I would be happy to work with the gentleman and anyone associated with this issue to ensure that the Economic Research Service examine the high energy costs of natural gas prices and their impact on the rural agricultural economy.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.