Michael Bennet

Mr. BENNET

Mr. BENNET. Mr. President, I wish to thank my colleague, the senior Senator from Colorado, for his remarks and for his commitment to this important issue, and I rise today to speak briefly about the disaster bill that is in front of the Senate and to address an issue of enormous importance to the people of Colorado. We have in front of us a disaster bill to respond to the widespread damage caused by Hurricane Sandy along the east coast, and we should obviously pass this bill to help our fellow citizens in their time of need. It is in that exact same spirit that the Senate passed a disaster relief bill at the end of last year that helped victims of natural disasters all across this country--not just the victims of Hurricane Sandy but also the victims of the devastating wildfires in my home State of Colorado and other States across the West. We worked very hard to get that money into the bill the Senate passed in December. With the leadership of Mark Udall, we were able to successfully make the case that Colorado has a significant need for resources to help protect communities affected by the wildfires. We worked closely with the Senate Appropriations Committee, and they answered Colorado's call for help, and I thank those Members--Members from both sides of the aisle--who supported us. That was hard to do. It was hard to do, but in the end the idea that we are all in this together prevailed. The House, however, let that bipartisan bill die at the end of last session, and now Congress has to start anew. Now here we are, asked to consider a House-passed bill that leaves Colorado behind, a bill where the House arbitrarily stripped out the money that would help our struggling communities in Colorado, and we are told this bill is unamendable. We are told the House has drawn a line in the sand and won't take any changes. Like my senior Senator, I am stunned by this and profoundly disappointed. So let me tell my colleagues what this means for the people of Colorado. The Waldo Canyon and High Park fires in the summer of 2012 were the first and second most destructive fires in Colorado's history. They tragically resulted in the loss of life for several Coloradans. The fires destroyed hundreds of homes and caused millions of dollars of damage to critical infrastructure and some of the worst and most lasting damage to our watersheds. As anyone from Colorado or the West knows, our watersheds and the clean water they provide are the lifeblood of our communities. Here is a hilltop that was completely devastated by the fires of 2012 and a road near Fort Collins that was overrun with sediment and debris in a mudslide after the High Park fire. Here is the Poudre River after the fire, running completely black as the sediment, ash, and soot are washed off the singed hillsides into the water. This river provides drinking water for the cities of Fort Collins and Greeley, CO, home to one-quarter of a million people--home to 250,000 people--and home to agriculture and businesses that rely on having clean water to get through the day. I recently met with the water providers at the treatment plant for this area, situated just yards from the charred mountains. They showed me a mason jar of black water, just like this. It could have been pulled directly from the Poudre. That is, unfortunately, because of our inaction and our foolishness, our shortsightedness, and that is what communities can expect if we don't start recovery work in these watersheds. The resources provided under the USDA's emergency watershed protections--the EWP Program--would directly help these communities in Colorado. We fought for those resources, for the EWP Program, in the Senate bill last December, and reason prevailed. Republicans and Democrats came together and said: We understand the people of Colorado need this; they need our help. And I again thank our friends on the Senate Appropriations Committee for helping to make that happen. Yet we stand here today with a bill that doesn't include these funds, the funding stripped out, while an unmet need of $20 million persists in Colorado alone. And it is not just our State, there are 51 other projects across 19 other States that need these resources to recover from their disasters. This is a major national issue, and it is crazy that we are standing here in this position today. Lest anybody think this is a decision that somehow is fiscally disciplined, let me stand on this floor and guarantee you that as these hillsides wash into the river in the spring snowmelt, the cost of restoring these water treatment plants, the cost of making sure we have clean water will dwarf the $20 million we are talking about today. To conclude, it is incredibly unfortunate, given the history we have in this country of coming together after a disaster, that the House would not follow our lead in the Senate and provide us these resources. There are reasons we are the United States of America, and one of those reasons is that we come to each other's aid at moments of natural disasters and help our friends and neighbors in other States. We make sure they get through to the next year. Perhaps adding insult to injury is that funding for Colorado was stripped under the rationale, as I said, that the House was somehow being fiscally responsible, even though the exact opposite is true. The reality of this situation is that it is fiscally irresponsible because we can say with 100 percent certainty that the cost of fixing these problems later will be significantly more than it is now. So an ounce of prevention in this case is clearly worth a pound of cure. Any household or small business understands that making these investments today is the right move, instead of just waiting for the next disaster to happen, instead of waiting for matters to get worse, although that is the habit of this town, as the Acting President pro tempore will come to learn. The House just couldn't put rigid ideology aside and do something for the country as a whole. Mr. President, I am not going to oppose the Sandy bill. We need to help our fellow citizens on the east coast. But this is a real head- scratcher for me and I know for the senior Senator from Colorado, even for this place. We are going to continue to work with our colleagues in the Senate to get these resources signed into law, but the fact is we had it done. We had it done in the Senate, in a bipartisan way, with the help of our friends on the Appropriations Committee and both Republicans and Democrats on this Senate floor. The House of Representatives let Colorado down, and now we are going to have to go back and find a way to make it right. With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BENNET

Mr. BENNET. I thank the Senator.

Mr. BENNET. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the period for morning business for debate be extended until 5 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. BENNET

Mr. BENNET. Let me be the first to congratulate my two colleagues from Delaware on Delaware Day. Have a happy Delaware Day. We have a lot of great things in Colorado, but I am not going to try to outcompete you on beaches this afternoon. We don't have a lot of those. I do think it puts me in mind of something, and that is our constitution. Delaware, as Senator Coons mentioned, was the first State to ratify the Constitution of this great country. My State didn't become a State until nearly a century later. We are the Centennial State as a result of that. That constitution that enabled generation upon generation of Americans had a preamble which said: to secure the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity. It is important in these days of these budget discussions to remind ourselves they didn't stop with themselves. The document doesn't stop with ourselves. It is about ourselves and our posterity. That is what we are talking about here when we are involved in this budget discussion. These aren't decisions that are about ourselves, these are decisions that are about the next generation of Americans and the generation after that. And it is time for us to do our job. It is time for us to walk back from this fiscal cliff and come up with a comprehensive plan. We know what the outlines of that are today, and we need to stop playing political games in this holiday season and get this work done, not for ourselves but for our posterity.

Mr. BENNET

Mr. BENNET. Madam President, as you know, I have been to the floor many times in the last several years to talk about the dysfunction that reigns in this place too often. But today I am here on a happier occasion because I want to celebrate an accomplishment, a bipartisan accomplishment that I think is very important. We were able to work together earlier this week to improve and expand something called Troops to Teachers. Nothing makes a greater difference to student learning than great teaching. Our teachers are critical to our kids' success and, to a greater extent, our country's competitiveness in the economy. America's future depends on our ability to recruit and retain great teachers. And by the way, we are falling down on the job. Fifty percent of the people who go into teaching leave the profession in the first 5 years, which means we don't have the benefit of the experience they have gained over that period of time. And I will save for another day what we need to do about this, but for today's purposes let me observe we have done almost nothing--virtually nothing--as a country to change the way we think about recruiting teachers, retaining teachers, inspiring teachers in this country since we had a labor market that discriminated against women and gave them two professional choices, one being a teacher, or a nurse. Thank goodness, those days are long gone. But we have not modernized our system to make it as attractive to people as it needs to be if we are serious about educating the next generation of Americans. I believe it is our duty in that context to ensure we support new and existing pathways to the teaching profession. We should be making it easier, not harder, for those who want to serve our country in America's classrooms. Troops to Teachers is one of those undertakings. It has been recruiting and placing veterans and service men and women in classrooms around the country since 1994. It brings veterans and servicemembers into some of the hardest-to-serve areas in our country. But in Colorado and across the United States we have school districts near military installations that have not been eligible to participate in Troops to Teachers. These barriers send exactly the wrong message. If veterans want to make a difference in a student's life, they should be able to teach where they are needed most. That is why in 2009 I worked with Senator McCain and his staff to introduce legislation to make it easier for veterans to participate and continue their service in our classrooms. These changes to the program will increase the number of schools eligible to participate by 49 percent. In Colorado alone, that means it will open over 1,000 of our schools to veterans and servicemembers who want to participate. As someone who has spent a lot of time in the classrooms as a former superintendent of the Denver Public Schools, the benefits of Troops to Teachers for our students are crystal clear to me. When he talks about this program, Senator McCain often mentions his English teacher--Mr. William B. Ravenel--an Army veteran who served with General Patton in World War II. Because there is no way I could say it better, I wish to quote my friend from Arizona. Every child should be blessed with a teacher like I had, and to learn at institutions with high academic standards and codes of conduct that reinforce the values their parents try to impart to them. Many students do have that opportunity. But too many do not. And government should be concerned with their fate. I could not agree more with Senator John McCain. Our military is the strongest in the world not because of our weapons or our tanks but because of the men and women who choose to serve. Troops to Teachers enlists their talents, their drive, their commitment to help make America's system of public education once again the driver of the American dream. I am glad to have done this bipartisan work with Senator McCain to pass this amendment, and I wish to thank Senator McCain and his staff who worked so hard to get this over the finish line. Finally, I would like to thank Senator Webb for his leadership on this initiative, as well as Chairman Levin and the staff of the Armed Services Committee. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. BENNET

Mr. BENNET. Earlier this year, I introduced a bill that reforms export controls on satellites and their related items. Under the current law, satellites must be subject to the most restrictive export controls regardless of whether they are sensitive, militarily significant, or widely available outside of the U.S. This has both diminished our Nation's economic competitiveness and our national security. In fact, the State and Defense departments recently concluded that the ``current law forces the U.S. Government to continue to protect commonly available satellites and related items on the USML, thus impeding the U.S. ability to work with partners and putting U.S. manufacturers at a disadvantage, but providing no noticeable benefit to national security.'' My bill reforms our export control laws so that the executive branch has the discretion to determine the appropriate level of export controls for satellites and related items. The executive branch currently has such discretion for all other types of items whether the item serves a military or a dual-use purpose. The bill also prohibits the transfer of such items to China, North Korea, and state sponsors of terrorism. Last week, I filed an amendment to the defense authorization bill that mirrors my legislation. Senators Rubio, Warner, Mark Udall, and Cardin cosponsored the measure. While I had hoped to offer and pass our amendment, it is my understanding that the chairman intends to address these reforms in conference. Is my understanding correct?

Mr. BENNET. I thank the chairman for his support and assurance. amendment no. 3054

Mr. BENNET. Madam President, I rise to engage the chairman of the Armed Services Committee in a colloquy.

Mr. BENNET

Mr. BENNET. Madam President, I see no colleagues have come to the floor, so I want to speak on one additional topic. I will be brief, because I understand we likely won't have an opportunity to address this issue before we leave town. My colleague Senator Mark Udall and I have been working to provide resources for the USDA's Emergency Watershed Protection Program, also known as EWP. The reason we have been doing this is that EWP resources help communities recover from wildfires, specifically watersheds that, after being burned, are unstable and risk harm to critical drinking water infrastructure and sometimes jeopardize human lives. As many in this Chamber know, we had a number of devastating wildfires in Colorado this summer. In the communities of Fort Collins and Colorado Springs in particular, they are having trouble protecting their vital drinking water infrastructure as their watersheds recover. Despite a letter Senator Udall and I authored to the appropriators, the House version of the continuing resolution did not contain this critical funding. That means the Senate won't be able to vote to help these communities recover. And while we are disappointed, we are going to continue to fight for these resources. With that, Madam President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. BENNET

Mr. BENNET. Madam President, I wanted to come to the floor today to speak on a different subject, which is to demonstrate my support for the Sportsmen's package compiled by Senator Tester from Montana. I know the bill was discussed on the floor last night and the request to pass this package of bipartisan bills was objected to, which is horribly unfortunate. I hope we are going to have the opportunity to vote on the measure before we leave town. Sportsmen and women are an essential part of the fabric of our country, the fabric of my home State of Colorado. This community supports millions of jobs and contributes billions of dollars annually to our economy, and they are often the drivers of our most important conservation initiatives across our rich landscape. While serving on the Senate Agriculture Committee, I have enjoyed working with sportsmen to craft a revamped conservation title in the farm bill. Some people forget that the farm bill conservation title is the largest single legislative vehicle for the programs and resources that help us conserve private land all across this country, all across the western United States. It enhances vital wildlife habitat across the country. Sportsmen have always played a vital role in crafting that bipartisan title. That was exactly the way they participated this time as well. While it is not the reason I am here today--I want to talk about Senator Tester's bill--I do want to take the chance to say once again that in my view the House of Representatives ought to pass the 5-year farm bill. We passed a bipartisan bill out of this Senate with well over 70 votes, Democrats and Republicans. On the committee we worked together for over 2 years to create the only bipartisan deficit reduction that has happened in this Congress in either the House or the Senate. We got rid of direct payments for producers, which was an important reform. We strengthened the conservation title, as I was saying earlier. There is absolutely no reason the House should not pass this bill. Over the break, I traveled 2,500 miles around the State of Colorado, rural communities all over my State, and no one wanted to know what was going on in the Presidential election. No one wanted to talk about anything except why can't the farm bill get passed? There has never been a time in modern history that a committee in the House, in this case the House Agriculture Committee, passed out a bill in a bipartisan way and it cannot even get to the floor for a vote. That has never happened before. Something is wrong over there. I can tell you that my farmers and ranchers in Colorado who are going through the worst drought in a generation want people to knock the politics off and pass this bill. Bipartisan, it is real deficit reduction, and it is a good bill. We are doing an incredible disservice, as I said to our farmers and ranchers, and also our sportsmen by failing to act on this bipartisan legislation. There was a time in my life when I had the chance to live in Montana for a brief time, Senator Tester's home State, and I thought of myself as a sportsman then. I used to fish a lot, chopped a lot of wood out there. These days I spend a lot more time on airplanes and chasing my three daughters to soccer games, but some day I will get back there. That brings me to the importance of the package, this package for our Nation's sportswomen and men. The provisions in Senator Tester's bill represent some of the best bipartisan ideas out there to promote hunting, fishing, and recreational access, bills from both sides of the aisle that have been hanging around here for a long time and now need to get passed. The measure would require that 1.5 percent of annual Land and Water Conservation Funds go to provide public access to lands for hunting and for fishing. I am a huge supporter of the Land and Water Conservation Fund. This provision builds on the fine legacy of that program. The bill also contains a provision that is homegrown from our sportsmen in Colorado. Section 103 provides certainty and parity for America's bow hunters, that they can cross National Park Service land with their bows to legally hunt nearby lands outside the park boundaries. This access is provided to hunters with firearms but not to hunters with bows. I started working on this issue over 2 years ago when a Colorado bow hunter encountered a problem. After 14 years of trying, this particular hunter had finally drawn a license to hunt elk in the premium game unit in northwest Colorado. He scouted the unit, found the area he wanted to hunt and he was all set to go until Federal officials told him he could not cross a narrow strip, a very narrow strip, of Park Service land to hunt the BLM land next to it. This is despite the fact that hunters with loaded firearms can cross Park Service land legally and without applying for a permit. The problem with this particular hunter is what brought this issue to my office. But the broader point of the provision is to provide access for our sportsmen and women. We know that we lose thousands of acres of land every day to development, some of it important wildlife habitat. We need to provide all Americans reasonable access to the land that we have set aside for preservation and wildlife habitat, bow hunters included. That is why I was pleased to increase funding for the Voluntary Public Access Program when we marked up the farm bill. That is why I am proud to have worked with Senator Tester to include this provision in his package that I hope we will be voting on soon. The bow hunting provision was carefully tailored to ensure that hunting of wildlife within Park Service boundaries remains illegal. Yet the measure still provides reasonable access, which is so important to the sportsmen in Colorado and across the country. I have received a letter of support for the Bennet-Tester bow hunting from Colorado stakeholder groups across the spectrum, including the Colorado Wildlife Federation, the Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep Society, Pheasants Forever, and the Bull Moose Sportsmen's Alliance, and the list goes on. I ask unanimous consent to have this letter printed in the Record.

Mr. BENNET. The overall sporstmen's package from Senator Tester is also widely supported, ranging from the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership to the Boone and Crocket Club to the National Rifle Association. The Tester bill represent a bipartisan package of commonsense bills that will benefit our Nation's sports men and women. I want to thank Senator Tester for his leadership on behalf of the West and urge a ``yes'' vote. I will simply close by saying it is my fervent hope that once this election is over, some 45 days from now, we will come back to this Chamber, Republicans and Democrats together, and work to avoid surfing over this fiscal cliff that will be so damaging to this economy. People at home know something that people here have not yet figured out, which is even if you believe you are always right on your side or had a monopoly of wisdom on your side--which I do not, but some people seem to--even if you believed it, we cannot accomplish this meaningful deficit reduction without doing it in a bipartisan way. It is impossible to do it without doing it in a bipartisan way. People at home actually want to see it bipartisan, frankly, because they do not believe in either party's go-it-alone strategy when it comes to the debt and deficit. So my hope is this election will clear the air, we will get back to work, and that before January we will have something convincing to say to the American public on this subject.

Mr. BENNET

Mr. BENNET. Madam President, I see we have been joined by the Chair of the Agriculture Committee, Senator Stabenow. She has just arrived, but I wanted to report to her that before she arrived I was talking about the need to pass a farm bill and the fact that, over the break, I had traveled 2,500 miles around the State of Colorado--in rural parts of our State on the west slope and on the eastern plains--and nobody wanted to talk about anything except why we can't get a farm bill passed. It makes no sense to them. They know it was completely bipartisan here in the Senate, and they know it is the only bipartisan piece of legislation with deficit reduction any committee of either Chamber has been able to accomplish. In the case of Colorado farmers and ranchers, we are going through the worst drought we have had in a generation, and they want to know why Washington, DC, has a completely different set of priorities than they have. There is still time for the House to pass this bill. This is the first time in modern history a House Ag Committee has passed out a bill--in this case a bipartisan bill, though not as good, I don't think, as ours, but a step forward--that hasn't come to the floor for a vote. They cannot even get a vote. So while the Senator is here, I wanted to thank her, and I would also say to the ranking member of the committee if he were here, for their extraordinary bipartisan effort over the last 2 years that resulted in a very fine bill. I also think their work sets a model for the way we should be approaching our work in this Chamber. I thank the Chair, and I yield the floor.

Mr. BENNET

Mr. BENNET. Mr. President, I rise today, September 20, to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the Denver, CO chapter of The Links, Incorporated, and to honor dedicated women actively working to build a stronger community in the greater Denver area. As the father of three daughters, these women exemplify role models and are leaders in our community in the areas of business, civic duties, mentorship, activism, and volunteer work. Founded in 1946, The Links is one of the oldest and largest volunteer service organizations committed to enriching, sustaining, and ensuring the culture and economic survival of people of African descent. Their membership consists of over 12,000 professional women of color in 276 chapters located in 42 States, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of the Bahamas. The Links focus on our five major facets: national trends and services, the arts, services to youth, international trends and services, and health and human services. The combined 276 chapters contribute more than 500,000 documented hours of community service. For over 50 years, the Denver chapter has sponsored numerous projects including support to Stovall Care Center nursing home; Cleo Parker Robinson Dance; the George Washington Carver Day Care Center; the East High School Community Forum; and the Marcus Garvey Center at the University of Northern Colorado. Internationally, this chapter has also helped to increase access to basic necessities such as water by building water wells in African countries. This chapter has honored and awarded scholarships to high school and college students. Our current mayor, the Honorable Michael B. Hancock, received one of these scholarships to help him attend Hastings College in Nebraska. Since 2009, the Denver chapter has made a tradition of targeting programs that aim to close the achievement gap of middle school students at Hallett Fundamental Elementary School in Denver. In response to the academic needs of youth at Hallett, they have tutored, mentored, donated computers, and coordinated cultural, career, health, and violence prevention programs. As the former superintendent of Denver Public Schools and a person devoted to enhancing volunteerism and commitment to community service among Americans of all ages, I am proud to honor the Denver chapter of The Links, Incorporated. Mr. President, our Nation is profoundly affected by the service of volunteers. Generations of individuals from different backgrounds have served each other and have focused on making our communities a better place for all. Please join me in celebrating the 60th anniversary of Denver's chapter of The Links, Incorporated, and their commitment to purposeful service and transformational programs to enrich the quality of life for local, national, and global communities everywhere.

Mr. BENNET

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

Mr. BENNET

Mr. BENNET. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate stand in recess subject to the call of the Chair.

Mr. BENNET

Mr. BENNET. They wrote: The message from our constituents and rural America is clear; we need a farm bill now. We ask that you bring a farm bill up before the August District Work Period. They went on to say: We ask that you make this legislation a priority of the House as it is critically important to rural and urban Americans alike. Representative Rick Berg, a Republican from North Dakota, took to the floor last week and said: Now is the time for the House to act, the time for the farm bill now. Jo Ann Emerson, a Republican Congresswoman from Missouri, told reporters that ``there are problems with my farmers who need to make planning decisions.'' We are seeing that exact same uncertainty plaguing our farmers and ranchers in Colorado. Yet here we are again. We have seen this before in Washington. We are pretty good at starting conversations, but we are not very good at finishing them. We are kicking the can down the road once again, but this is the farm bill, which is a bipartisan effort that rarely, if ever, has been used as a political football around this place. Three days ago David Rogers wrote an article, which I think accurately describes our dilemma. It was in Politico. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that this article also be printed in the Record.

Mr. BENNET. Mr. President, I am here tonight on a different topic than the Senator from New Hampshire, but I wish to congratulate her on her fine work here. I know she doesn't need or wouldn't want me to say that, but the people of New Hampshire are so lucky to be represented by her. And this is exactly why--a reminder that our Olympic athletes are about to start, I hope, winning gold medals. I suspect they will win the most in this summer's Olympics. We are looking forward to that. The Senator mentioned marathons, which brought to mind what I want to talk about tonight, which is the farm bill--an elegant segue from one marathon to another. I want to talk about it in the context of the severe drought that is facing Colorado and all of rural America, and I want to acknowledge the administration's ongoing efforts to provide Coloradans with disaster relief during this difficult summer of fires and drought. We need to pass a 5-year farm bill as quickly as possible to address the challenges we are seeing in farm country. We have done the work to get an agreement on the Senate bill. In fact, we passed the 5-year farm bill in this Senate. It was a strong, bipartisan bill. I would like to thank the Senator from Michigan, Debbie Stabenow, and the ranking member of the committee for their incredible leadership in working together, both side of the aisle, never in a partisan way, to produce among other things the only bipartisan deficit reduction that any committee, House or Senate, has produced in this Congress--$24 billion of deficit reduction that has been agreed to by Republicans and Democrats. It ends direct payments to producers, which is one of the most substantial reforms we have seen in agriculture policy in a long time, and it strengthens the conservation title of the farm bill, which is very important to my State and to the West. Colorado has a $40 billion agriculture sector that extends to all corners of our State. Farming and ranching are two things we do extremely well. The Senator from Iowa is here tonight, and his farmers do it extremely well in Iowa as well. Producers in Colorado and nationwide are experiencing the worst drought in 50 years. While Colorado is certainly no stranger to water challenges, this year's growing season has been particularly tough--to put it mildly. According to the U.S. Drought Monitor, nearly our entire State is designated as an extreme drought area. This designation means we are experiencing major damage to crops and pastureland, as well as widespread water shortages. While this designation tells us a lot, we only need to ask the farmers and ranchers about how the dry conditions are threatening their operations. I met recently with a group of corn growers from eastern Colorado. Take a look at what these farmers are up against. This is Steve Scott's cornfield 18 miles southeast of Burlington, CO, a town of 4,200 people near the Kansas border. This crop--and many others in the region--has withered under long stretches of high temperatures with little or no precipitation to help. The Department of Agriculture reports that 50 percent of Colorado's corn production is in either poor or very poor condition. The drought has also taken a significant toll on our cattle producers. Colorado is one of America's top beef producers. Right now 75 percent of pastureland in Colorado, approximately 900,000 acres--and I am not sure how that measures up to the Presiding Officer's State, but it is pretty close to that size--is rated as either poor or very poor in condition. Dry pasture and feed shortages have led ranchers to liquidate their herds early, well before they have realized their full size and value. The Greeley, CO, auction producers' barn is seeing double the sales activity right now as compared to the same time last year because ranchers are selling their cattle below full weight and maturity. They are losing anywhere from $200 to $400 a head. Next week Carl Hansen of Livermore, CO, is selling 160 of his steers and 90 heifers. On average, each animal will be sold 150 pounds underweight due to the drought conditions. If beef is selling at $1.50 a pound, that is $56,000--actually a little more than that--of lost revenue for Carl Hansen and his family. The consequences of this drought extend well beyond farm country. The damage to our farms and ranches affect other sectors of the economy-- from transportation to energy, from banking to retail. We all know there is nothing Congress can do to stop the drought or prevent the next one from coming, but what we can do is give our farmers and ranchers the tools they need to manage this drought and plan for the future by passing a 5-year farm bill. We hear a lot about uncertainty in these two Chambers. I can't imagine a set of circumstances creating more uncertainty in a difficult situation than that. Now we hear that the House leadership is planning a 1-year punt on this whole conversation, one more expression that Washington, DC, has become the land of flickering lights, providing very little opportunity for people to be able to plan and have predictability. What is wrong with the Senate-passed bipartisan farm bill that had the support of 64 Senators? Sixty-four Senators, Democrats and Republicans. Some people voted against it because they didn't think it was adequate to their region, but this was not a partisan vote. Neither the majority nor the minority vote was a partisan vote. This was the Senate operating as the Senate is meant to operate. A 5-year bill provides our agriculture community with much needed certainty and predictability, but now it is being held up in the House by politics. Let's be clear: No one is pretending that the farm bill can correct bad weather. Our producers are not waiting on the farm bill to do what they do best. Colorado will continue innovating and increasing productivity, but the last thing on Earth they need is to have Washington's unfinished business hanging around their necks. A 5-year farm bill will provide producers with a set of tools for managing through this drought and planning for the future. The 1-year bill being discussed over in the House by the leadership doesn't recognize--or is unwilling to recognize--the agriculture community's need to do long-term planning. Among many other important provisions, the Senate farm bill contains revamped risk management programs like crop insurance, which is what I heard was needed by our farmers, and improvements farmers requested to help manage a severe drought exactly like the one we are going through right now. This is the point of that provision. A 1-year bill doesn't have any of those provisions. Corn farmers on Colorado's eastern plains could lose 40 percent or more of their revenue this season. We need these reforms and the predictability of the Senate bill. Our bill also contains permanent disaster programs that provide responsible assistance to producers in need. Some of these programs, such as the livestock disaster program, expired in September 2011, almost a year ago. If Congress takes the easy way out and does a 1-year extension, our livestock producers will get no relief--none. This means no disaster assistance for ranchers whose pasture is too dry to feed their cattle. Who is going to explain to the people selling at the Greeley auction barn why this is not a priority for our Congress in the middle of the worst drought in decades? The House Agriculture Committee passed a 5-year farm bill with a strong bipartisan 35-to-11 vote. Again, this is not the partisan dysfunctionality we talked about for so many months on this floor. We have two bipartisan bills: One was passed out of committee on the House side with broad bipartisan support, and one was passed on the Senate floor with broad bipartisan support. It is not surprising that I am not the only person who is calling for a long-term extension--a 5-year extension. There are 79 House Members, including 41 Republicans, who wrote to the Speaker last week asking him to bring the long-term farm bill to the floor. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the letter signed by 79 House Members be printed in the Record.

Mr. BENNET. To quote Mr. Rogers: Never before in modern times has a farm bill reported from the House Agriculture Committee been so blocked. Never before in modern times. I suspect it is true in ancient times as well, but it has certainly been true in modern times. Rogers tells us that he ``looked back at 50 years of farm bills and found nothing like this.'' He continues: Farmers live by nature's calendar, not continuing resolutions. I could never have said it so eloquently myself. He also said: And by failing to act, Congress can seem even more detached from the real lives of everyday people. I would not have thought it was possible that this place could seem more detached from the everyday lives of the American people than it already appears to be. We found a way of doing that, and that is by failing to pass this bipartisan farm bill through the Congress in a timely way that is essential for people who are suffering through this kind of drought. I think Mr. Rogers' observation is exactly right, and I have been on this floor many times before saying the people at home in Colorado-- Republicans, Democrats, and Independents--don't identify with the cartoon of a conversation that we are having in Washington, DC, right now. I can't think of a clearer example than the failure to act on this bipartisan piece of legislation. This is legislation that would immediately help people all across our country, all across America, who are struggling today. Mr. President, think for just a moment about our farmers in Colorado and rural communities just like our communities all across this wonderful country. Our farmers and ranchers are experiencing the worst drought in over half a century. Who is going to look in the eyes of our farmers in Middle America and tell them our dysfunctional politics will prevent this bill from moving forward? Who is going to tell Steve Scott and Carl Hansen that this bill isn't going to be a priority in the Congress, that we are just going to take our recess and go home for a month not having passed this bipartisan piece of legislation, the only manifestation and example of bipartisan deficit reduction in either the House or the Senate in this entire Congress? I implore the House to figure out how to come to its senses and pass a 5-year bill along the lines of the bill that was passed out of their committee, and then together we can have a conference and decide how we are going to move this bill forward on behalf of farmers and ranchers all across my State and the United States of America. I yield the floor.

Mr. BENNET

Mr. BENNET. Mr. President, I rise to talk briefly about the estate tax and Colorado's agricultural community and small businesses. While I voted in favor of the Middle Class Tax Cut Act, I do not believe that this legislation represents an end to the tax reform debate in Washington. In particular, it is important that we find a bipartisan and responsible path forward on the estate tax that provides the necessary certainty for businesses and families across Colorado. This is vital for Colorado's economy. I am committed to working with my colleagues in Congress to establish an estate tax policy that works for small businesses, family farms and ranches, and all Coloradans.

Mr. BENNET

Mr. BENNET. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. BENNET. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 527 which was submitted earlier today.

Mr. BENNET

Mr. BENNET. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. BENNET

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

Mr. BENNET

Mr. BENNET. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements be printed in the Record.