Henry Bonilla

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I will be brief and to the point. This has been a tough budget year. This is a tough bill, but it is a fair bill, and the gentleman brings up some very good points that need to be addressed. But, again, having done the best we can possibly do under the circumstances, I hope that people understand that we wished we could have done more but we were just not able to. Certainly the accounts that this amendment would increase were not treated unfairly in any way, and this is how they are funded in the bill. For example, the Office of Civil Rights is at last year's level plus increased pay cost. Departmental Administration is at last year's level plus increased pay cost. Hispanic-Serving Institutions is held at last year's level, so there is no cut there, which in this day and age I believe people should be pleased with an outcome like that. The Outreach Program is also at last year's level. The gentleman's amendment would do the following: It would more than double the Office of Civil Rights, giving that office a 104 percent increase; increase the Departmental Administration account by 5 percent; increase Hispanic-Service Institutions programs by 15 percent; and increase the Outreach Program by a whooping 144 percent. Let me emphasize that if we had the money to do this we would be doing cartwheels in supporting these kinds of increases, but we are doing the best we can under the limitations we have in putting this bill together. The money that would be taken from the USDA's Common Computing Environment Account, and while that does not sound like a grand program, let me emphasize that this takes care of the way that a lot of these programs are processed, like the work at the Farm Service Agency, the Natural Resources Conservation Service and the Rural Economic and Community Development Programs. This amendment would take $8.6 million away from USDA's ability to meet those needs, and that would indeed create a lot of hardship out in the heartland. Mr. Chairman, we worked very hard to present a well-considered and fair bill to the House. I ask Members to stick with the committee and defeat this amendment.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, I thank the gentleman from Ohio. Again, I just want to reiterate my gratitude to the chairman of the subcommittee for advocating this program and for his help not only on this issue, but so many others in the bill. Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute Offered by Mr. Obey

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding. I would like to take this opportunity to engage in a colloquy with my good friend from Ohio, but first I would like to compliment the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Regula) for the incredible work that he has done, once again, to put this bill together. He is again, as many have heard comments from both sides of the aisle today, one of the most respected and admired leaders in this House, and I am just proud to serve with him on the Committee on Appropriations. The chairman has been a leader and a champion of funding for community health centers for many years now, and I appreciate the time he has given me on a regular basis to talk about the funding levels that are necessary to keep this wonderful program running. The chairman knows that the $122 million that is currently included in the bill is greatly appreciated. That would bring the fiscal year 2004 total to $1.627 billion. However, there is great concern that this would not be enough to sustain the services at some health care centers, and that, in some cases, they could be forced to reduce services to existing patients as costs increase around the country. My purpose is simply to engage the chairman to ask for his consideration to continue working with us to try to increase this number to the level of $225 million. It is my understanding that Members of the other body are trying to work toward that goal; and if they are successful, we were hoping that we could also work in conference down the road to match that level. This would enable the program to serve 1.7 million additional patients, many of whom are uninsured. We all have examples from around the country from our congressional districts. In my case, health centers serve more than 28,000 people who would otherwise go without this care. We all have seen firsthand the good work that these great health centers are doing; and around the country, hundreds of thousands of Americans who would have no place else to turn are being served by these great people that work in these health centers. I would just simply ask the chairman of the subcommittee that he would continue to work with us throughout this process to ensure that this program is provided an additional $225 million if at all possible in the final bill.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, what a privilege to stand in the United States Capitol to honor the World Champion San Antonio Spurs. In life, it is not just how you win, but it is how you play the game. America has seen that the Spurs are a team of character. There are no ball hogs, no billboard tattoos, no nose rings or show boats. It is a team that works like a well-oiled machine. No longer can anyone in the NBA say that nice guys finish last. David Robinson is not just a basketball icon; he is known internationally as a great community servant. It is appropriate that the NBA renamed its community service award after David. Tim Duncan, the Tower of Power. Those blocked shots in the final game will always be remembered as part of an all-time great performance, and the list goes on and on. Tony Parker's trademark clutch tear-drop shots and the interviews he would do with the French media speaking French gave a new twist to the finals. Bruce Bowen's defense and the 3-point bonanza in a critical game against the Lakers is something we are still talking about. Steve Jackson's three pointers, and Malik Rose's intensity and willingness to bang hard under the basket at crucial times in the game, Manu Ginobili's ability to defy gravity and make those clutch shots and steal the ball at critical times. He became Charles Barkley's favorite player, and Charles loved yelling his name out, Manu Ginobili, during the beginning of the game and afterwards. Then there is Steve Kerr. Boy, did he give the Spurs a boost with those heart-stopping three-point shots in the fourth quarter just when we needed them. This is Steve Kerr's sixth championship ring, and we congratulate him. The rest of the guys all played vital roles just when they were needed, Speedy Claxton, Danny Ferry, Steve Smith, and Kevin Willis. And Coach Gregg Popovich now has two NBA titles with the Spurs. A lot of political bigshots could, frankly, take a lesson from Popovich. He always believes in doing what is right, the media be damned. Congratulations to the owners, Peter and Juliana Holt, two friends and wonderful people who are so deserving. They also set an example for patience and doing what is right for the Spurs, and they continue to serve the community every day of their lives. From all of us in the congressional delegation of San Antonio, thank you for making us proud. And the best news is next year the Spurs are expected to be even better.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I would like to express the deep admiration I share with each member of the Texas Delegation for Representative Larry Combest. It is with a heavy heart that I stand here today to send off my friend from West Texas. Larry and his lovely wife Sharon have truly made a difference to his constituents, the state of Texas and the nation. While serving as Chairman of the Committee on Agriculture, Larry proved his true leadership during the deliberation of the 2002 Farm Bill. Through long, hard days and nights working tirelessly on the measure, Larry never lost sight of the true reason for the bill. The farmers and ranchers of this nation owe Larry a great debt of gratitude for his distinguished service. That being said, the true measure of Larry Combest may not be his astute knowledge of agriculture and politics, but the balance he has kept between his public life and his private life. It is apparent to anyone who knows Larry that his family has always been his top priority. I commend Larry for his great service, and wish him the best as he and Sharon embark together on their next adventure in life.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, Larry Combest is a good friend. I will miss him and his wife Sharon very much. All of his friends who remain in the House of Representatives wish him happiness in his new endeavors.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the legacy of NBC's David Bloom. All across America as people mourn the loss of life among our men and women in uniform, we also mourn the loss of David. Over the years he touched so many lives with his dramatic, cutting-edge reporting. Prior to my time in the U.S. Congress I spent 15 years in the broadcast news business. Today my wife continues in that field. The two of us watch television news reporters with a special eye. David was in a league of his own. He always brought a flair, an insight, an extra dimension to his stories that made you feel the impact. There were times it felt like you had been on a roller coaster after watching his reports. And you always felt better informed. David always set the standard for covering breaking news whether it was the Clinton scandal or the current war. Just when you thought it was impossible to break new ground in broadcast news, David would do it. His Bloommobile rides through Iraq put Americans on the edge of their seats each night. No other reports on television compared to his. Viewers were better served because they got to feel the peril of our troops and the ruggedness they experienced. I remember discussing his reports at the dinner table with family and friends. All agreed his work was the best and couldn't wait to see his next report. David was a rare talent. David's now in a different place. I'm sure he's trying to figure out a way to get a satellite signal set up so he can send us another report. We wish he had a way to reach us. It would be the most incredible moment ever on television. Appropriately, it would carry his name.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I am very worried about one of the greatest assaults that is currently underway against America's telecommunications industry. We have seen some remarkable changes in the past 5 years with the growth of wireless technology and the Internet, but what about the future? Today we are not seeing America's telecom companies making investments in their products and services. We are not seeing companies hire new people and training them. We are not seeing healthy competition between companies. What we are seeing day after day in the telecom industry are attack ads from AT&T trying to stifle competition for their own benefit. These are very difficult times for American business. One would think that in this current environment, every major corporation would be focused on their people, their products and their future; but sadly you cannot open a newspaper, turn on a radio or watch television without being bombarded by these negative ads that are being run under disguise and being run by a bogus group called Voices for Choices. Why in the world would AT&T be running these millions of dollars in ads in Washington, D.C.? They do not promote any products, service, or any kind of private sector growth. My conclusion is that after seeing these ads that AT&T believes that their future relies on Washington and regulation. I hope the Chamber recognizes that these ads are just bogus and they are an attempt to play the D.C. regulatory game. This game is ruining the telecommunications industry. We must not be fooled by the tactics of those companies that feel that playing games is more important than focusing on legitimate business.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 254. This legislation will reauthorize the North American Development Bank (NADBank) and allow NADBank to make grants and loans to improve water supplies and the environment along the border at more flexible rates. As I travel my district, which includes approximately 800 miles of the U.S-Mexico border, I am repeatedly reminded of the tremendous need for potable water, wastewater treatment, and municipal solid waste management. Many towns in my district have directly benefitted from the investment brought by NADBank over the years. In Del Rio, the construction of a potable water treatment plant, the replacement of water pumping facilities and a potable water ground storage tank was recently completed with the help of NADBank financing. In Eagle Pass, NADBank is currently financing the replacement of two water treatment plants and the construction of a new wastewater treatment plant. Thanks to NADBank investment, water distribution lines and wastewater collection lines will be installed and water storage facilities built to serve 15 colonias surrounding Laredo in the near future. Uvalde recently benefitted from NADBank financing of landfill expansion and equipment purchases for efficient operation. Many of these important projects would not have been possible were it not for NADBank investment. Thanks to this investment, environmental conditions and living standards along the border have been dramatically improved. I urge the House to pass this legislation so that these communities and other like them may continue to reap the benefits of NADBank investment.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I offer a resolution (H. Res. 63), and I ask unanimous consent for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, today, we are debating the most fundamental issues we face as a Congress and as a country. Today we are debating whether to send America's sons and daughters into harm's way, whether a threat exists to America's security and whether we need to act now or wait. We have no more grave responsibility as legislators than defending our Nation and democratic way of life. American foreign policy has had a single objective since the foundation of our republic. That objective has been to defend our independence and freedoms. Over the years the policies America has followed have changed to meet the changing threat. During America's first century we followed a policy of staying out of foreign conflicts, comfortable in the security offered by two oceans. The Monroe Doctrine represented the first expansion of American policy in its vigorous assertion of America's right to ensure that no foreign power intervenes in our hemisphere. The last century saw a further expansion of American power as we acted to prevent any hostile power or ideology from dominating the eastern hemisphere and threatening our continued independence. Today, we face a new challenge, a homicidal dictator striving to acquire the means to threaten our civilization and kill millions of our fellow Americans. Saddam Hussein already has the means; he only lacks the material needed to build an atomic bomb. It has been widely reported that he could build a bomb within a year were he to acquire certain materials. A nuclear armed Saddam Hussein would represent a clear and present danger to our nation. No one who has objectively looked at the facts, no one who has seen the Kurdish villagers gassed on Saddam Hussein's order, no one who remembers the invasion and looting of Kuwait, no one looking at the facts can doubt that a nuclear Saddam Hussein would be a threat to our Nation and civilization. Given these facts I think it is important we understand what we are debating today. We are not debating whether a nuclear Saddam Hussein is a threat. No honest analysis can deny that. We are not debating how to confront Saddam Hussein. No one wants war and it is my earnest hope that our actions today will convince Saddam Hussein that he must disarm and give up his goal of acquiring nuclear weapons. However, we can only succeed in avoiding war if Saddam Hussein is convinced that he risks war and the destruction of his regime if he continues to defy us. What we are debating today is timing. Do we confront Saddam Hussein today or wait. Do we act now when he does not possess nuclear weapons or wait until he does. Common sense tells us that the risky course is to wait. Our responsibility as legislators dictates we act against any threat to our independence. Opponents of this resolution say the risks are too great and that there is too much that is unknown, but the risks of not acting are far greater and the unknown far more terrifying. Let us remain true to previous generations of Americans who have been vigilant in protecting our freedom and vote for this resolution. Let us live up to the expectations set by the Founding Fathers and support this resolution.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of An Extravaganza in Old Uvalde (AEIOU), which was held in Uvalde, Texas on September 6th and 7th. This annual event is a fundraiser for the West Main Library Museum Archives Project. The West Main Project will provide the people of Uvalde and the surrounding area access to a myriad of printed information. In addition, through its archives and museum, the project will play a critical role in preserving the culture of this beautiful region. This facility will provide the room and the resources to meet the needs of the community. South Texas is home to a unique crossroads of cultures. This facility will remind area children of our heritage and provide a forum through which to share this heritage with neighbors and visitors alike. The library will chronicle the unique experiences of residents of the area, preserving their experiences on videotape for generations to come. It will showcase area geological, cultural, social and other historical artifacts. With archaeological and written documentation, the museum will tell the story of what Uvalde is and what it has been. El Progreso will provide a place for local children to conduct research and be tutored, for migrant families to learn English, and for seniors to learn to use the Internet. It will provide a place for partnerships between educational, governmental, civic and social service organizations to flourish. It will allow residents to give back to the community through volunteering in a variety of capacities. Education, history and culture are important parts of our past. I commend Uvalde for it's leadership in preserving the past while building towards the future. It is my sincere hope that thanks to the West Main Project, Uvalde will soon be home to the best library and archives in all of West Texas.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, while I support this bill because it provides meaningful prescription drug coverage for America's seniors and implements measures needed to modernize the Medicare system, I rise out of concern for the effects of this bill on pharmacy services. Pharmacists are on the front lines of health care for millions of Americans. Seniors count on their pharmacist for quality medications and medication therapy services. Coverage of prescription drugs should go hand-in-hand with access to quality pharmacy services. This bill would inhibit the ability of America's seniors to select the pharmacy that best meets their needs. In many of the smaller towns in my district, seniors have established long-standing relationships of trust with their community pharmacists. This bill would force many of these seniors to turn elsewhere for prescription drug services. Furthermore, this bill allows Pharmacy Benefit Managers to establish restrictive pharmacy networks, preferred formularies, mail order services and inadequate reimbursement rates, severely undermining the future viability of community pharmacies. Prescription drug plan sponsors, not pharmacists or doctors, would determine the selection of medications to be included on formularies. Cost would supercede the medication that is in the best interest of the patient, and community pharmacies would be left struggling to stay in business. This bill also compromises seniors' access to medication-therapy services. Pharmacists play an important role in reducing medication- related problems. They routinely resolve complex drug interaction problems for seniors who take multiple medications. These problems cost billions of dollars annually and kill hundreds-of-thousands of persons. Medication-therapy services decrease long-term health care costs while increasing safety. As a conservative, I recognize the need to be fiscally responsible, however we should not allow our efforts to rein in the high cost of prescription drugs to jeopardize the health of our seniors. Taken together, the provisions of this legislation would impose economic hardships that would severely damage pharmacy infrastructure and compromise the health of America's precious seniors. Thousands of pharmacists have diligently served America's seniors with dedication and excellence. We should not inhibit their ability to continue providing the drugs and services our seniors desperately need.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this bill today. I must commend, first of all, the chairman of the Committee on Agriculture along with the ranking member, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm). The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) have done an incredible job of standing up for the rights of producers in this country under a great challenge, especially considering what some people in this town and elsewhere were proposing from a different part of the capital. It is a good bill overall. There are some problems that we have to work through as we support this and move forward. The labeling provision is something that we know the chairman tried to work hard to not include in the bill but, unfortunately, it is in there along with the dairy provisions that are in there that are not good for some of our producers in our part of the country. We also have some concerns with numerous new mandatory spending programs, programs that historically and rightfully fall under the discretion and funding jurisdiction of the Committee on Appropriations. I hope that Members do not forget the money associated with these new entitlement programs as my subcommittee attempts to respond to their funding requests in the FY 2003 agriculture appropriations bill. However, as Members of the Congress, we must base our votes on the positive areas of this bill. This is again a good bill overall for farmers and ranchers in this country and all associated with the bill. We are very pleased as well especially with the wool and mohair marketing loan provision that was put in the bill by our conferees. It is a good bill. I stand in strong support of this today.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin) for yielding me this time, and I rise in strong support of the Upton amendment and the Tauzin-Dingell bill, which is long overdue. Imagine for a moment running a company, a good company, a high-tech telecom company in this country that has been operating with handcuffs on for a long time, watching employees walk out the door to the tune of about 250,000 employees over the last year because we have been in an economic downturn. Now we are on the upturn again, and this will give it a tremendous boost. But imagine running a company with handcuffs on, where you cannot open the doors to more business, to have more people take advantage of the high-tech opportunities that many of us have had an opportunity to take advantage of so far. That is what we are talking about. This bill takes off the handcuffs; and instead of having between 8 and 10 percent of the American people and businesses having access to broadband accounts, this will open up the floodgates and allow these great companies, and again let me read a couple of them to see who could be against Disney, who could be against Yahoo and Cisco and Packard and Compaq and Texas Instruments and AOL and Dell and Motorola and Microsoft and Intel and Hewlett Packard, and all of these good companies that have been a large part of our economic boom over the last 10 to 15 years who are suddenly finding themselves with the handcuffs on. We need to take them off so that we can get these people back to work. And again not only do this for this country but to show the world the tremendous economic power that we have within our own borders to create more jobs for good Americans out there that are just waiting for opportunity. Those who oppose us are simply saying, no, status quo, let us keep the handcuffs on and try to make it work under the current circumstances. That is absurd. Let us get these handcuffs off American businesses and strongly support this broadband bill. It is long overdue. We should have voted on this a year ago. I am glad this day has finally come, and I look forward to great success here this day at the end of this debate, and I look for others in this great city here in Washington to follow this lead that we are involved in here today.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding me time. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is well intentioned. Hats off to the gentleman from Wisconsin for offering the amendment, because I know his intention is similar to what we all want to accomplish here today and have been working on for many months, and that is to provide the administration enough money to deal with any terrorist threat that currently exists. Whether it is money for the Justice Department, the Defense Department, the Agriculture Department, you name it, we have worked in a bipartisan way for months now to try to provide enough funds for every aspect of the war on terrorism. Specifically, I chair the Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, and we put $61 million additional money, more money, for increased inspections of imported food products. The amendment the gentleman offers would increase the amount available for inspection of food imports by $239 million, and the statement by the gentleman says the amount would increase the level of effort to cover 10 percent of all food imports. But why is this a good number, and why is it the right number, and why is it any better than the amount we provide now, or should we provide more? Mr. Chairman, what we have tried to do is work in a practical way with the experts involved in this every day at USDA and provide the right funding level. Again, we did this in the agriculture appropriations bill that was supported overwhelmingly in a bipartisan way, working hand in hand with the administration. The President's budget also included over $34 million to accelerate the availability of drugs, vaccines and devices. This amendment does not propose to increase the level of effort for this activity. Why not? The question would be, is it more urgent to check the last can of imported olives than it is to review pharmaceutical products for safety and efficiency? Mr. Chairman, what we have before us is an attempt to strike a balance. We have worked hard to find a balance in recommending the resources for FDA's many regulatory activities and protecting public health. Could we do more? Perhaps, and all of us want to do that when the time is right and the appropriate budget requests come in. Would more resources guarantee a higher level of security at this point? That is not clear at all, and that is why we are trying to use every reasoned measure to put the spending bills together as a group this year. I ask Members to think hard about this. Our subcommittee just completed its work on our fiscal year 2002 appropriations conference agreement which was just signed into law this afternoon. That agreement included $1.3 billion, billion with a B, for the FDA; and it was by far the largest appropriation ever for this agency. It is my view that that amount, together with the additional $104 million included in this bill, will provide sufficient resources for FDA to continue its good work in protecting the public health, as it has for 100 years. So, again, we all want to do the right thing here; and, again, the gentleman's amendment is well intentioned, but at this time it is not the right thing to do. We are trying to act responsibly. I urge rejection of the amendment and support for the committee's recommendation for funding levels this year.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the previous order of the House, I call up the conference report on the bill (H.R. 2330) making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002, and for other purposes.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to bring before the House today the conference report on H.R. 2330, providing appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, the Food and Drug Administration and Related Agencies for fiscal year 2002. Mr. Speaker, I want to acknowledge the good work of my friend, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), my ranking member who has contributed greatly to this process. It has been a real pleasure working with her and all the members of the subcommittee in getting to this point today. It has really been a pleasure, and I want to acknowledge that as we present this conference report. Mr. Speaker, I believe we have produced a good, bipartisan conference agreement that does a lot to advance important nutrition, research and rural development programs and still meet our conference allocations on discretionary and mandatory spending. My goal this year has been to produce a bipartisan bill, and I believe we have done a good job in reaching that goal. This conference agreement does have significant increases over fiscal year 2001 for programs that have always enjoyed strong bipartisan support, and they include: Agriculture Research Service, $83 million for salaries and expenses and $45 million for buildings and facilities; Cooperative State Research Education and Extension Service, $45 million; Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, $83 million; Food Safety and Inspection Service, $20 million; Farm Service Agency, $240 million; Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Fund $232 million; Natural Resources Conservation Service, $55 million; Rural Economic and Community Development Programs, $101 million; Domestic Food Programs, $3.7 billion, including the Food Stamp Program, $1.9 billion in reserve to respond to economic conditions; and WIC, $305 million to respond to economic conditions that may worsen; the Foreign Assistance and Related Programs including Public Law 480, $34 million; and the Food and Drug Administration, $120 million. Mr. Speaker, we all refer to this bill as an ``agriculture bill,'' but it does far more than assist basic agriculture. It also supports human nutrition, the environment, and food and drug and medical safety. This is a bill that will deliver benefits to every one of our citizens every day. I would say to all Members, if they can support this conference agreement, they can tell all of their constituents that they voted to improve their lives while maintaining fiscal responsibility. The conference agreement is a bipartisan product with a lot of hard work and input from both sides of the aisle. I would like to thank my friend, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), chairman of the full Committee on Appropriations, as well as the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), the distinguished ranking member of the Committee on Appropriations, who put in a lot of hard work and contributed to this effort. Mr. Speaker, I would also like to thank all of my subcommittee colleagues, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh), the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston), the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Nethercutt), the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Latham), the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. Emerson), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goode), the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood), the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey), the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr), and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Boyd). Mr. Speaker, I would again like to single out in particular the ranking member, who has put so much effort into this bill, and my friend, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), for all her hard work. Mr. Speaker, we have tried our best to put together a good, solid bill that works for all of America. Much of it is compromise, to be sure, but I believe it is a good compromise and good policy. In closing, I would also like to thank the subcommittee staff for all of their hard work. None of this could get done without the strong, good commitment, the hard work that the staff puts in day in and day out: Hank Moore, the subcommittee clerk; Martin Delgado; Maureen Holohan; Joanne Orndorff; Leslie Barrack; Martha Foley of the staff of the gentleman for Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), and Jim Richards, a great American, who is in my personal Congressional office. Without their good work we would not have a bill here today. Mr. Speaker, I would urge all of my colleagues to support this conference agreement. Mr. Speaker, I include at this point in the Record tabular material related to this bill. [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13NO01.001 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13NO01.002 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13NO01.003 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13NO01.004 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13NO01.005 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13NO01.006 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH13NO01.007 Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I would agree with the gentlewoman that our intent with respect to the accepted language is the ``food supply chain.''

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on the conference report to accompany H.R. 2330, and that I may include tabular and extraneous material.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that managers on the part of the House have until midnight Friday night, November 9, 2001, to file a conference report to accompany H.R. 2330; that it be in order at any time on the legislative day of Tuesday, November 13, 2001, to consider such conference report; that all points of order against such conference report and against its consideration be waived; and that such conference report be considered as read when called up.

Mr. BONILLA

Mr. BONILLA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 2330) making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002, and for other purposes, with a Senate amendment thereto, disagree to the Senate amendment, and agree to the conference asked by the Senate.