Saxby Chambliss

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the FY03 National Defense Appropriations Act, which provides critical resources for our military to ensure that they have the adequate training, modern equipment, and sufficient resources to do their job in protection our nation. I am proud of the work this Congress has done in crafting a bill that will support our troops and their families. This bill is important for our nation. Our troops deserve a pay raise-and we provide that to them. We provide our troops and their families quality health care and benefits, which they are entitled to in return for their service and sacrifice for our nation. We provide significant funds for the development of technologies that are needed for our missile defense systems so that we are better prepared to meet the future threats this country faces. We increase the resources available to combat terrorism, which now is an immediate threat to the people of the United States. We increase key readiness accounts so that we continue to increase our capabilities to support our warfighters who are actively engaged in protecting American interests around the globe. Let me say that this bill is also important to Georgia. We fully funded the president's budget requests for vital modern aircraft for our Air Force, include the F-22 advanced tactical fighter, the C-17, the C-130 and JSTARS and I oppose attempts to decrease funding for these critical weapons systems that our troops need to successfully fight and win a war. Mr. Chairman, terrorism and our national security are not temporary problems, but perpetual reminders of the uncertainty of the days ahead and the need for our continued support for a strong national defense. I encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting our military and our President by voting for this bill and ensuring that the men and women in uniform who serve our nation valiantly everyday to protect and defend our freedom have the resources which they need to do their job and win the war on terrorism.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. As we conclude our general debate on this bill, I too would like to, first of all, recognize and thank the great leadership that we have had from the Committee on the Judiciary, from the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), the chairman of the committee, to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), the ranking member, to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith), the chairman of the subcommittee, and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott), the ranking member of that subcommittee. We have had an open dialogue on this issue, an issue that all of us, irrespective of what party or what side of that party one comes from, recognize that this is a bill about what it takes to make America safer and what it takes to assist our law enforcement officials and ensuring that we do, as the President says, eradicate this war on terrorism. I also want to thank again the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss), our chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), our ranking member, for their strong leadership. Their cooperation helped us move this forward. I particularly want to say thanks to my ranking member, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman). She has already stated a number of times in what a bipartisan way we have worked, and we truly have. She provides good, strong leadership, advice and council; and she has been a great asset to the committee, and she has been an even greater asset to the subcommittee. It is unfortunate that the bipartisan attitude that we have on our subcommittee does not translate over to all of the work that we do in this committee; we would probably get a lot more done. But I do thank her for the great work she has done and the great cooperation she has given us here. Mr. Chairman, this is a major piece of legislation. I do not think we can say that enough. As the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Rogers) mentioned a little bit earlier, if he had had this piece of legislation in place 8 years ago, it would have gone a long ways toward helping him solve a particular crime against the United States of America when he, as a special agent of the FBI, was handicapped. The laws are in place today regarding the ability to share information with our State and local officials. This is the first step in moving to establish and restructure the Government of the United States and to create the Department of Homeland Security. We cannot guarantee the prevention of another attack of terrorism, domestically or abroad, whether it is against assets or against people of the United States; but without legislation such as the Homeland Security Information Sharing Act, we certainly raise the chances of the possibility of another act of terrorism occurring. Again, I applaud the great support from a bipartisan standpoint that we have had as this bill has moved through the process. I urge all of my colleagues to support this measure.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentlewoman's concern and the point which she is raising. She is a very valued member of this body and particularly the Committee on the Judiciary, and her opinions are well respected. It is important that as much homeland security information, whether gained from whistleblowers or elsewhere in the government, be shared with the right people at the right time in order to help our emergency responders and local officials respond to terrorist threats and activity. The gentlewoman's amendment would specifically address information from whistleblowers. However, let me note that we have crafted the bill in a broad and flexible fashion, as noted by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman), so that the administration can determine the appropriate procedures for sharing and disseminating homeland security information, whatever the source, whether from whistleblowers or other relevant homeland security information should be shared. I think it is important that we retain this flexibility and focus on the original purpose of the bill, namely, to share as much appropriate homeland security information as possible with our State and local authorities. So my objection is that we have just seen this this morning, and I hope the gentlewoman would consider withdrawing it and let us have a chance as we move into conference to dialogue on this, and if we need to strengthen some provisions, obviously we will look forward to working with the gentlewoman and other members of the Committee on the Judiciary to ensure that we do so. Because we share the same concern that the gentlewoman has brought forward here. I have been open and outspoken about the fact that we need more courageous people like Ms. Rowley to make sure that not just from an oversight standpoint within Congress, but from an oversight standpoint in the public and within the agency and other Federal agencies out there, that we are able to do our job correctly and appropriately.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, just reiterating to the gentlewoman, I think her point is well taken; and I think there may be some merit to strengthening language, maybe even getting specific as the gentlewoman has done in her amendment. We will commit to the gentlewoman that we will look forward to working with her as we move into conference and dialoguing with her to make sure that we get her input into this specific area of the bill.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his remarks. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Rogers), a former FBI agent.

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

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Gibbons), a cosponsor of this legislation.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Gekas).

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume just to commend the gentleman from New York for his real insight into the practicalities of this issue. His amendment which was filed in the Committee on the Judiciary was readily accepted by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman) and myself because it gets right to the core of the practical problem out there and also allows for additional information to be redacted, declassified and get in the hands of the right people at the right time and within real time. I commend the gentleman for his insight and for his thoughtfulness on this issue. His particular amendment will go a long way toward saving additional lives of Americans. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I would like to thank the distinguished chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence for the great work that he and the ranking member, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), have done in leading our Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, not just post-September 11, but even before that. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss) has been a very level-headed individual, who has carried us forward in some difficult times with respect to dealing with our intelligence community; and since September 11 he has particularly provided the strong leadership that this Congress needed and that this Nation has needed in order to be able to ensure the American people that Congress and our intelligence community is doing everything we possibly can to ensure that another act like September 11 never occurs again. Since September 11 of last year, Congress has enhanced the capabilities of the Federal, State and local officials to prepare and respond to acts of terrorism. Information sharing is the key to cooperation and coordination in homeland security, and it has become abundantly more clear that better information sharing among government agencies and with State and local officials needs to be a higher priority. The intelligence community of the Federal Government does a great job of gathering information on terrorist activity, but we do a very poor job of sharing that information both horizontally and vertically within our agencies and with State and local officials. In the public hearings which our Subcommittee on Terrorism and Homeland Security held last September and October, we heard a recurring theme from witnesses ranging from New York City Mayor Rudolph Guiliani to Oklahoma Governor Frank Keating. They stressed the importance of an increased level of information sharing between Federal intelligence and law enforcement agencies and local and State law enforcement agencies. Governor Keating even told us a story about his State Adjutant General, a gentleman that he appointed, who informed the governor he could not share some information with him because, as governor, he did not have the right security clearance. The case in Oklahoma is no exception. These same types of communication gaps exist in every State, including my home State of Georgia. The result is that sheriffs and local officials do not have the same information as the governor, who does not have the same information as the FBI, who does not have the same information as other local officials. As we fight this war on terrorism, we must make certain that relevant intelligence and sensitive information relating to our national security be in the hands of the right person at the right time to prevent another attack and more needless loss of life. Critical homeland security information which Federal agencies and departments collect need to be quickly disseminated to State and local law enforcement officials and others who play key roles in protecting our communities. For these reasons, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman) and I, along with several of our colleagues, including the leadership of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence as well as the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Crime, introduced the Homeland Security Information Sharing Act. This bill will help to eliminate the stovepipes that exist in the intelligence and law enforcement worlds with respect to sharing of vital information and will assist officials across government to communicate with each other. Our bill will increase the level of cooperation between State, local and Federal law enforcement officials. Only when these organizations begin communicating on a more regular basis and sharing the information that they have with each other in relevant communities can we begin to effectively prepare for and defend ourselves against future attacks. I have traveled all across my State of Georgia and listened to the concerns of many of our community leaders and emergency responders, and I am more convinced than ever that we must pass this legislation. Our police officers, our firefighters, our sheriffs and other local emergency officials need to be informed about the threats that may exist to their communities. Georgia sheriffs like John Cary Bittick of Monroe County, who serves as the president of the National Sheriffs Association, or Bill Hutson of Cobb County need to know when there is information relevant to their community that will help them do their jobs better and prevent any type of terrorist attack. This bill has the support of all major law enforcement groups and other organizations of local officials. The events of September 11 left us staring into the eyes of our own shortcomings. In the days following, we began to connect the scattered and vague messages that in hindsight seemed to point to the devastation, but hindsight is 20/20. Now we must take the information and move forward. We must act, and our bill will go a long way toward helping our law enforcement officials protect us by giving them the tools they need to better protect us. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I rise in support of this resolution today. I am one of those who has resisted and been opposed to the legislation that has been filed in this House to this point in time, attempting to create and legislate the Office of Homeland Security. The reason I have resisted is as a member of the intelligence community, and one who has worked closely with Governor Ridge and his staff, I felt like the Governor, who has done a superb job as the Director of Homeland Security, needed to have the flexibility given to him by the executive order coming out of the White House to walk through the minefields and find out where the potholes are in homeland security. And once he has done that, let us come back and craft legislation. As the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) stated, we can then know we are doing it right. Well, the time has now come to do that. I applaud our President for making a bold decision to create a new Cabinet-level position and to restructure government, to meet this long-term issue of homeland security, and in order to ensure that we win this war on terrorism, it is now necessary that this office be created. This resolution is the first step towards doing it right. I applaud the leadership for their bold initiative to structure this committee the way it is. I think in order to get the job done, that is the way the committee should be structured. Every committee is going to have the ability to exercise their jurisdiction over their particular turf. Again, that is the way it should be done to do it right. This is the right way to do it. I support this legislation, and I urge its adoption today.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 225 I was inadvertently detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing legislation that would authorize the appointment of National Guard officers as commanders of units composed of both active duty military personnel and National Guard troops in nonfederal status. As a member of the House Armed Services Committee, I support many of the transformation initiatives our military is undertaking. Through the vision and leadership of Secretary Roche and General Jumper, the Air Force has been a leading proponent of transformation. The Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System, or JSTARS, and the 116th Air National Guard unit at Robbins Air Force Base are a prime example of a transformational mission. These unique units are on the verge of becoming even more transformational as they blend Air National Guard personnel into the active JSTARS unit. Currently, the 116th numbers more than 1,100 Air Guardsmen dedicated to defending our country. The 116th has been and will continue to be an Air National Guard unit that is the pinnacle of professionalism and honor; and will continue to be ready Anytime-Anywhere. The Air Force has long been the model of full and seamless integration of the Reserve Components. Its Guard and Reserve associate programs are long-term success stories that maximize weapon system utilization while leveraging the expertise of Guard and Reserve personnel. In addition, active duty officers have successfully commanded Air National Guard fighter units. My bill will provide another mechanism with which to further integrate active duty and National Guard members into blended units. At the same time, it preserves the unique non-Federal status of the National Guard officer while enabling that officer to command a unit of active duty and National Guard troops. This legislation is another step on the road of transformation.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the brave sailors and soldiers of D-Day. Fifty-eight years ago on this date young Americans joined by Allied forces undertook the most massive amphibious assault in the history of modern warfare, code-named ``Operation Overlord''. This direct assault on Hitler's Atlantic Wall was the first step in liberating occupied Europe. Led by General Dwight David Eisenhower, more than 150,000 men along with thousands more providing air and artillery support invaded the beaches of Normandy and although suffering heavy casualties pressed on into the heart of occupied France. We can only imagine what went through their minds as these brave men watched the gates open and they stepped into the cold Atlantic and onto those beaches. There were mortars' exploding all around them; sounds of bullets and planes flying overhead, but these men pressed on, while many around them fell and they helped secure the eventual Allied victory. I am here today to pay tribute to those brave Americans, ones who came home and those who remain there, buried, overlooking the beaches. It was these men who answered the call of duty and saved liberty from the jaws of unspeakable evil. Never had the world seen citizen soldiers come together and fight as brave and loyal as these men did. They left the comfort of home and were sent halfway around the world to preserve freedom, democracy, and liberty for the free world. These men showed the utmost courage in taking up the call of duty to defend freedom and for that our country is eternally grateful. So today, as we confront a new tyranny in waging the war on terrorism, let these brave men be our model. I am honored to have the opportunity to commend them and I pray that we will never forget the sacrifices that these men put forth so that they and generations to come could live in freedom.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, as someone who spent several years working on issues of terrorism and advocating better preparedness and readiness to meet the unique challenges we face from terrorists who want to harm Americans, I am very pleased with the final agreement on this bill. It is clear that we continue to face very real threats from sophisticated terrorists who would use dangerous biological agents in their savage and relentless efforts to carry out acts of violence against Americans. We must do all we can to keep dangerous biological agents out of the wrong hands. However, whether in response to a terrorist attack, accident or natural outbreak of infectious disease, our public health and disease surveillance system is not as robust and capable as it needs to be to meet the demands which will be placed on it in a severe public health emergency. We recognize that local officials and our doctors, police, firefighters and local emergency responders will be on the front lines of an attack, and we must make sure that they are trained and ready to respond. This bill will address many of these concerns. A critically important provision taken from the bill authored by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Linder), the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman) and myself will provide $300 million per year and multi-year contracting authority to the Centers for Disease Control to upgrade and modernize their old and decaying facilities which are in desperate need of repair. I am particularly pleased that we are taking concrete and far- reaching steps to address the particular issue of agro-terrorism. I have felt for a long time that our agriculture infrastructure is very vulnerable to the threat of intentional damage and disease. As part of this bill, we bolster the Department of Agriculture's ability to detect animal and plant diseases and respond as needed to protect our food supply and American agriculture. We expand inspection activities and provide much-needed increases in agriculture biosecurity at colleges, universities and laboratories, including funding for a biocontainment laboratory at the University of Georgia. Thanks to the strong leadership of the gentleman from Louisiana (Chairman Tauzin), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), Senator Frist and Senator Kennedy and their staffs, we worked in a bipartisan way to craft a bill that will go a long way toward making our country much better prepared to respond to biological attacks. Mr. Speaker, I urge the passage of this bill.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, in commemoration of National Law Enforcement Week, I would like to take this opportunity to recognize our nation's law enforcement personnel. In the course of our lives, certain events serve as reminders of the daily comforts we grow accustomed to and will mark for all time a change in our daily attitudes towards those comforts we enjoy as Americans. For Georgians--as for all Americans--September 11 changed us. We became more aware of our neighbors both down the street and around the globe. The world stopped briefly and we all stopped with it to look at each other and grieve with each other, then finally to help each other. Leading the charge to help were America's police officers, firefighters, and emergency medical personnel. We are all reminded of the sacrifice and devotion of our law enforcement. Each day, they leave their families and put their very lives in danger to make our neighborhoods, our schools and our communities a safer place for our children. Each day, they risk potential harm in order to protect and preserve the institutions and freedoms we all enjoy. Whether it is a city policeman, sheriff's deputy, or state patrolman, law enforcement officers are owed a tremendous debt of gratitude by our nation. We in Congress must continue to make sure that law enforcement personnel have the training and equipment they need to ensure their safety but we must also make sure that they have the tools necessary to be effective in fighting and preventing crime. To do this I have introduced legislation that will improve information sharing between local, state and federal officials--this will ensure that they will have the facts they need to fulfill the duty they have selflessly accepted. Mr. Speaker, I hope you will join me in honoring these brave men and women.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the fiscal year 2003 Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act, which will provide critical resources for our military to ensure that they have the adequate training, modern equipment, and sufficient resources to do their job in protecting our Nation. I am proud of the work of the House Committee on Armed Services and our chairman, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump), who has done an excellent job in crafting a bill that will support our warfighters. Chairman Stump is a hero of mine, and we will miss his great service in this body. This bill is important for our Nation. Our troops deserve a pay raise and we provide that to them. We provide our troops and their families quality health care and benefits which they have earned because of their service and sacrifice for our Nation. We provide significant funds for the development of technologies that are needed for our missile defense systems so that we are better prepared to meet the future threats this country faces. We increase the resources available to combat terrorism, which is an immediate threat to the people of the United States of America. We increase key readiness accounts so that we continue to increase our capabilities to support our warfighters who are actively engaged in protecting American interests around the globe. Let me say that this bill is also important for Georgia. We fund critical military construction projects at Robins Air Force Base, Fort Benning, Fort Stewart, and Kings Bay Navy submarine base. We fully funded the President's budget request for vital modern aircraft for our Air Force's F-22 Raptor advanced tactical fighter, the C-17, the C-130, and JSTARS, all of which are important to my home State as well as our long-term national defense priorities. Mr. Chairman, terrorism and our national security are not fleeting problems. This bill addresses our needs on terrorism from a force- protection standpoint, and I urge the passage of this bill.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Let me start off by thanking the chairman of the committee, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest), and the ranking member, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm). I know a lot of people have started off by saying that today, but I just want to tell my colleagues, having worked very closely with these gentlemen for the last 10 weeks and particularly over the last 2 years, 2\1/2\ years, almost, now, to construct this farm bill, these men have done yeoman work for the American farmer and they deserve every bit of the congratulations they are getting today. Let me tell my colleagues how this farm bill came about. Two years ago the chairman decided that we wanted to approach the new farm bill a little bit different than we had approached any other farm bill. We went all across America. We held 10 hearings around the country. We did not talk to commodity groups and we did not talk to commissioners of agriculture; we talked to farmers. We said what is working with the current farm bill? What do you want to see maintained out of that farm bill? And what do you want to see, what type of different approach do you want to see? Based on what we heard from farmers, the chairman and the ranking member came back, along with all of us who attended those hearings, and again, those of us who did our own hearings. I did a hearing in my subcommittee on the West Coast and the Midwest rural agriculture area and one on the East Coast, again, talking to farmers. We developed a philosophy that is entirely different from the approach in the current farm bill that we are operating under, but it is an approach that will allow our farmers to get a decent return on the investment they make every year. Most people in America do not understand that every farmer in America gambles his life savings every single year when he turns the ground and puts seeds in the ground and fertilizer on top of it and hopes that at the end of the day, he is going to be able to get some kind of return on that investment that he has had to make. This farm bill, irrespective of what crop it is, guarantees that our farmers will have an opportunity to plan right, to use good, sound business decisions to be able to get a decent return on their investment. There has been a lot said about payment limits up here. Well, I am one of those States that is criticized for the high payment limits that our farmers have. Let me tell my colleagues what that means to my farmers. My farmers would just as soon not get one dime from the Federal Government. They would much rather rely on the market. But the simple fact of the matter is that prices today for commodities that my farmers grow and every farmer across America grows are lower than what they were or equal to what they were almost 50 years ago. But yet the cost of a tractor, the cost of a combine, the cost of a cotton picker, the cost of chemicals, the cost of fertilizer, have skyrocketed. Our farmers deserve a break. Our farmers deserve to have an investment made in them so that every single individual who goes to the store or goes to the grocery store or the department store to buy food products or shirts or suits or whatever they may be can be assured that they are going to get a quality product at a reasonable price. We have seen the numbers up here about how much money the average individual in America spends on food products compared to what people spend around the world. The reason that is so is because of the investment the government makes under this payment limitation provision. Let us support this rule, let us support the underlying bill and, most importantly, let us support the American farmer.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the conference report to H.R. 2646, the Farm Security and Rural Improvement Act of 2002. I believe this compromise contains the best possible commodity title for Southern agriculture. Reforming the farm bill effective for this year has been a top priority for Georgia producers. Since passage of the 1996 farm bill, my producers have fully utilized planting flexibility, and the result has been a major shift in acreage from feed grains and oilseeds to cotton. Because producers wanted farm program benefits to more accurately reflect their most recent plantings, it was imperative that they have the option to update their bases. As this was a popular provision in the House bill, the Senate included it in their bill, and the conference report contains the measure. For the first time in my Congressional career, peanut producers, shellers, and manufacturers joined together in proposing a peanut program dramatically different from the decades-old quota program. Due to their unity, trade concerns, and political realities, the House Agriculture Committee took the proposal under serious consideration. The conference report retains these reforms by putting the peanut program on par with traditional commodity programs and fairly compensates holders of quota for their losses under the new program, which will infuse over $500 million into the State of Georgia. Of particular concern to Southern producers was the strict, burdensome payment limitations contained in the Senate bill. The Senate bill failed to take into consideration regional differences in farm size and structure, and would have yielded many unintended consequences. In anticipation of the Senate provision, producers in Georgia this year prepared land to substitute other corps, such as corn and soybeans, for cotton. The net effect, had the Senate provision been adopted, would have been a wreck of Midwestern crop markets. We did compromise with the Senate in the conference report on payment limitations, but not to the extent that would compromise agriculture in this country. This farm bill not only brings predictability to federal farm policy but also greatly expands and improves our soil and water conservation programs. The federal investment in these programs is increased by more than 80% above current program levels and costs $2 billion over the House-passed bill, adding $17.1 billion into conservation programs over the next 10 years. The bill makes needed changes to the CRP and EQIP programs to make them more usable and accessible to all producers in all regions of the country. As the title suggests, The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act makes significant investments in, and improvements to our rural development programs. These programs are important to sustaining rural communities by investing in programs that will aid in the development of rural infrastructure and create jobs in rural areas. The trade title of the conference report is designed to comport with the United States' international trade obligations under the WTO, and thereby to promote more free and fair trade for the future. It reauthorizes important programs related to trade, including the Food for Progress and Food for Peace Programs. The conference report illustrates to the research community that Congress recognizes the critical need for research and makes a significant new investment in research programs that will help reap rewards for producers and society for many years to come. The forestry title strengthens the commitment of Congress to sustainable forest management practices. In addition to assisting states in carrying out programs of forestry research, the forestry title provides enhanced community fire protection by directing the Administration to coordinate with local communities in implementing rural fire protection and control strategies. It also enables the Administration to undertake a variety of activities aimed at preventing fires on both federal and non-federal lands. For the first time, the farm bill contains an energy title to further our investment in energy research and encourage the production of biodiesel and fuel grade ethanol. This conference report seeks to ensure access to an adequate diet and the fruits of a productive agricultural economy to all eligible Americans. This farm bill includes a number of changes to simplify the food stamp program, gives greater flexibility, remove unnecessary barriers to participation, and increase assistance to working families. The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 provides for the very basic elements of life that we take for granted: food on the table provided by our nation's farmers, food stamps for those who cannot afford nourishment, grants to communities to provide safe and adequate quantities of drinking water, grants to help rural residents access their local television stations, and grants to provide training to rural firefighters and emergency personnel. Serving as a conferee on this bill over the past 10 weeks has not been an easy task, but I am pleased to see the conference come to a close. I can say with clear conscience that every aspect of this bill was thoroughly debated. As with any bill the Congress submits to the President, it's not perfect, but it is the best possible bill that could be reported out of conference. We have fought the good fight and have a balanced bill--regionally and substantively--that will contribute to the betterment of agriculture. I thank Larry Combest and Charlie Stenholm for their diligence in guiding the Committee in the spirit of bipartisanship and for providing the necessary leadership over the past 2 years in getting this bill done. To my farmers back home, you can stop watching and waiting on Washington--get in the fields and plant.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, again I would like to commend the chairman and ranking member of the Committee on Agriculture for crafting what I think is good sound farm policy and it will be a tremendous benefit to every farmer in America with this farm bill. My State is the largest peanut-producing State in the country, and my district happens to be the second largest peanut-producing district. We are very proud of that. We have a long and rich heritage. The peanut program in this bill is getting completely restructured and retooled for the reason that we have had a fight over the peanut program every year that I have served in this body. There has been a philosophical objection to the way the peanut program was crafted because of the quota program that existed within that peanut program. Well, this year our peanut industry has gotten together as a whole and has made a decision we need to do what is best for the long-term interest of the peanut industry, and so we have drastically changed the peanut program within this farm bill, a program that now is going to benefit our quota holders, our producers, as well as our industrial base within the peanut community. I am very pleased with the results we came out with. Is it perfect? No. But it does provide benefit to every aspect of the industry, and allows the peanut industry, particularly in my State, to have a long- term viable future. I urge the passage of this bill.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize the 90th Anniversary of the Girl Scouts of America. In 1912, Juliette Gordon Low founded the Girl Scouts in Savannah, Georgia with a membership of only 18 girls and the dream of giving the United States ``something for all girls.'' by the end of 1913, there were 535 members and 31 leaders. Today there are nearly 3.7 million Girl Scouts and the program continues to offer quality experiences for girls locally, nationally, and internationally. The Girl Scout program is girl-driven, reflecting the ever-changing ideas and interests of the participating girls. the program encourages increased skill building and responsibility, and also promotes the development of strong leadership and decisionmaking skills. Throughout its history, the Girl Scouts have provided aid and assistance to our country in times of need. During World War I and II, Girl Scouts worked in hospitals, grew vegetables, and sold defense bonds. During the Great Depression, Girl Scouts troops around the United States joined the relief effort by collecting clothes, food, and toys, volunteering at hospitals, and working on community canning projects. The Girl Scouts continue to offer enriching experiences through field trips, sports skill-building clinics, community service projects, cultural exchanges, and environmental stewardship. The growth and achievements of the Girl Scouts would not be possible, without the dedication and guidance of more than 942,000 professionals, 99 percent of those being volunteers, Mr. Speaker, I hope you will join me today in celebrating 90 wonderful years of Girls Scouts USA.