Thad Cochran

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I move to waive the point of order pursuant to section 205(c) of H. Con. Res 290 with respect to all emergency designations in this bill and to all the amendments to this bill filed at this time, and I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, let me make a point of order and say that it is the intention of the manager to read a description of each of the amendments in the order in which they have been submitted to the Chair so that all Senators will be advised of the nature of the amendment. I renew my request to ask that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. COCHRAN. That is correct. I have modified my amendment according to what the Senator has just said would be accepted. I assume the Senator will accept the amendment and we can adopt it.

Mr. COCHRAN. I ask unanimous consent that my amendment to the Harkin amendment be modified as suggested by the Senator; that the last phrase be stricken--``and that are shown to be a adulterated''--so the amendment to the amendment reads: Strike ``established by the Secretary'' and insert in lieu thereof: ``promulgated with the advice of the National Advisory Committee on Microbiological Criteria for Foods.''

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. I further ask consent that the Harkin amendment No. 3964 and the other emergency designation amendments now pending at the desk be considered en bloc and agreed to en bloc and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. notice of intent to move to suspend paragraph 4 of rule xvi

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the Cochran amendment.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, time has been used on this side. Does the Senator yield back his time?

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, to respond to the question of the distinguished Senator, I answer in the affirmative. Yes.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I yield the remainder of the time on our side to the distinguished Senator from North Carolina, Mr. Helms.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I yield 10 minutes to the distinguished Senator from Louisiana.

Mr. COCHRAN. I thank the Chair. I remind Senators that this doesn't mean we have to use all the time between now and 5. I encourage Members to make brief statements. We can vote before 5 and then move on to another subject.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I am pleased to announce to the Senate that we have been able to secure an agreement on a unanimous consent request to limit debate on the pending Cochran amendment and the underlying Jeffords amendment. I understand it has been cleared. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to vote in relation to the pending Cochran amendment, No. 3927, at 5 o'clock p.m., and the time between now and then be equally divided in the usual form. I further ask unanimous consent that following that vote, the Senate proceed to vote immediately in relation to amendment No. 3925, as amended, if amended, the Jeffords amendment.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I yield 15 minutes to the distinguished Senator from Tennessee, Mr. Frist.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, the purpose of this second-degree amendment is to try to help ensure the result of the change in this law, in the authority for importing drugs into the country or selling drugs to American consumers from Canada, which I think this amendment the Senator has offered is targeted to address, will not result in any new dangers to the consuming public, and would require the Secretary to certify that that would be the case for any new regulatory regime implementing the amendment if it is adopted. One problem we need to bring to the attention of the Senate in connection with this amendment is the added cost that is going to result from this, in terms of added appropriations for the Food and Drug Administration. It is estimated by that agency that $92 million would have to be appropriated to provide the funding necessary to implement and carry out the obligations of that agency in connection with supervising this amendment. The distinguished Senator is chairman, as Senators know, of the legislative committee that has jurisdiction over this overall subject area in the law. I regret this is an issue being brought to the Senate as an amendment to the Agriculture Department's appropriations bill. It would be more appropriate, in my view, for the legislative committee which the Senator chairs to deal with this, to report out legislation, and in the usual way of managing changes in the law, have the Senate address it on a freestanding bill. The body is put at a disadvantage to try to understand all the nuances, the implications of the legislation, what the practical results will be. It has become very controversial. I think the Senator from North Dakota, in opening remarks as we brought this legislation up yesterday or the day before, talked about the advertising that was being run in the newspapers by the pharmaceutical industry. I think that is on this subject. It is related to this subject. So there is a great deal of attention being focused on this highly controversial issue. All the States along the northern tier that border on Canada have a great interest in this. It has become a hot button political subject for debate in senatorial campaigns and, I guess, all the congressional elections and the Presidential campaign. So this is a big political item here we are called upon to understand, to sort through, and then to make sure we legislate in a fashion that serves the public interest--not somebody's private political interest, not somebody's private financial interest, but the broad public interests of the United States. That is our responsibility. So what I am seeking to do with this second-degree amendment is ensure that is the result; that we are not putting in jeopardy, by changing this law, if this survives the process here in the Senate and conference with the House--we are not putting in jeopardy the well- being of American consumers and we also prepare to add to the funding requirements of the Food and Drug Administration to enable them to carry out their obligations under the law. With those words of explanation as to where I see this and how I see this playing out, I am not going to prolong the debate. Let me point out one other thing. Some might say this is legislation on an appropriations bill; Why don't you just raise the issue in that way? Make a point of order under rule XVI. The point is the House has included language in its Agriculture appropriations bill and this amendment, as it is drafted--as I am advised by the Parliamentarian--is not subject to a rule XVI point of order but, rather, it is germane and would not fall if a point of order is made. That may be tested by somebody if they want to argue with the Parliamentarian about it, but that is what my staff advises me. With that information about this situation I am prepared to let others talk about it. Let me say, before I yield the floor, just as a matter of general information now that we are on the bill, Senator Kohl is the cosponsor of this second-degree amendment. I have offered the amendment with him. Also, as we began consideration of the appropriations bill, he did not have an opportunity to make his opening remarks. At some point this afternoon, we will give him that opportunity or he can take that opportunity when he gains recognition from the Chair. I hope this will not be a long, drawn-out debate. It is not necessary. We have heard a lot of speeches about this. We have had a lot of information sent to our offices on this issue of reimportation and selling drugs and pharmaceutical products across the borders, importing from manufacturers, the rights of pharmacists--all the other related issues. It is a serious matter. But we do not need to have a long, drawn-out filibuster of it in my view. We need to vote on it. If the votes are here to adopt this amendment, so be it. We will take it to conference and try to resolve the issue in the way we always do, give and take, trying to understand what is best for the country. Also in connection with the broader picture of the bill itself, we do not have a lot of troublesome issues in this bill, in my view. I have not heard from Senators. We have asked Senators to let us know if they have amendments, to bring them to the floor and offer them, and let's dispose of them and complete action on this bill. I was heartened today by conversation, as we were getting started, from the Senator from Nevada, the assistant Democratic leader, Mr. Reid, who suggested we could finish this bill today. He saw no reason why we could not. I see no reason why we could not finish it today. I hope as we proceed we will keep that goal in mind. Let's finish this bill today. I hope we can have third reading at about 6 o'clock. I do not see any reason why we cannot. There are some Senators who want to offer amendments. We want to hear them. We want to consider them and consider them fully and fairly, but it should not take an unnecessarily long amount of time to do that. So I encourage the Senate to act with dispatch, deliberation, but all deliberate speed. That is a Supreme Court phrase that has been used from time to time.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I send a second-degree amendment to the desk.

Mr. COCHRAN. I yield 10 minutes to the distinguished Senator from Utah, Mr. Hatch.

Mr. COCHRAN. How much time is remaining on this side of the issue?

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I am very pleased to present for the Senate's consideration the fiscal year 2001 Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and related agencies appropriations bill. This bill provides fiscal year 2001 funding for the programs and activities of the Department of Agriculture, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The U.S. Forest Service is funded by the Interior appropriations bill. This bill, as reported, also provides fiscal year 2000 supplemental appropriations and rescissions to respond to emergency needs resulting from natural disasters and other unanticipated funding requirements. The fiscal year 2001 provisions are contained in Division A of the reported bill. It provides total new budget authority for fiscal year 2001 of $75.3 billion. This is $295 million less than the fiscal year 2000 enacted level, excluding emergency appropriations, and $1.5 billion less than the President's budget request. Just over eighty percent of the total recommended by this bill is for mandatory appropriations over which the Appropriations Committee has no effective control. The spending levels for these programs are governed by authorizing statutes. The mandatory programs funded by this bill include the Commodity Credit Corporation, the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, and the Food Stamp and Child Nutrition Programs. About twenty percent of the total appropriations recommended by this bill is for discretionary programs and activities. Including Congressional budget scorekeeping adjustments and prior-year spending actions, this bill recommends total discretionary spending of $14.850 billion in budget authority and $14.925 billion in outlays for fiscal year 2001. These amounts are consistent with the Subcommittee's discretionary spending allocations. I would like to take a few moments to summarize the bill's major funding recommendations. For the Food Safety and Inspection Service, appropriations of $678 million are recommended, $29 million more than the fiscal year 2000 level. For the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, $468 million is recommended, $25 million more than the 2000 level. Appropriations for USDA headquarters operations and for other agriculture marketing and regulatory programs are approximately $84 million more than the fiscal year 2000 appropriations levels. Included in this increase is $25 million to support information technology investments in support of the Department's Service Center Modernization initiative; $42.4 million to support the Department of Agriculture's buildings and facilities and rental payment requirements; $5.9 million, as requested, for costs associated with implementing the Mandatory Livestock Reporting Act; and $6.2 million for the Agricultural Marketing Service to implement a microbiological data program. For farm credit programs, the bill funds an estimated $3.1 billion total loan program level, the same as the fiscal year 2000 level, excluding additional loans funded through fiscal year 2000 emergency appropriations. The amount recommended includes $559.4 million for farm ownership loans and $2.4 billion for farm operating loans. For salaries and expenses of the Farm Service Agency, total appropriations of $1.095 billion are recommended. This is $89 million more than the 2000 level and the same as the President's budget request. The bill provides total appropriations of $1.4 billion for agriculture research, education, and extension activities. Included in this amount is an increase of $3.8 million from fiscal year 2000 for Agricultural Research Service (ARS) buildings and facilities, an increase of $41.2 million for research activities of the ARS; and a $19.2 million increase in funding for the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service. For conservation programs administered by USDA's Natural Resources Conservation Service, total funding of $867.6 million is provided, $63 million more than the 2000 level. This includes $714 million for conservation operations, $11 million for watershed surveys and planning, $99 million for watershed and flood prevention operations, $36 million for the resource conservation and development program, and $6 million for the forestry incentives program. USDA's Foreign Agricultural Service is funded at a program level of $117.7 million, $4 million more than the fiscal year 2000 level. In addition, a total program level of $996.7 million is recommended for the Public Law 480 program, the same as the fiscal year 2001 budget request and $51.4 million more than the fiscal year 2000 level. This includes $159.7 million for Title I and $837 million for Title II of the program. The bill also provides a total program level of $2.5 billion for rural economic and community development programs. Included in this amount is $749 million for the Rural Community Advancement Program, $33 million for the Rural Business-Cooperative Service, and $75 million to support a total $2.6 billion program level for rural electric and telecommunications loans. In addition, the bill devotes additional resources to those programs which provide affordable, safe, and decent housing for low-income individuals and families living in rural America. Estimated rural housing loan authorizations funded by this bill total $4.6 billion. Included in this amount is $4.3 billion in section 502 low-income housing direct and guaranteed loans and $114 million in section 515 rental housing loans. In addition, $680 million is included for the rental assistance program. This is the same as the budget request and $40 million more than the 2000 appropriations level. Appropriations totaling $35 billion for USDA's nutrition assistance programs continue to command the highest percentage of the total appropriations recommended by the bill--nearly 47 percent of the total new budget authority provided. This includes $9.5 billion for child nutrition programs, including $6 million to complete funding for the school breakfast pilot program; $4.05 billion for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC); $140 million for the commodity assistance program; $140 million for the elderly feeding program; and $21.2 billion for the food stamp program. For those independent agencies funded by the bill, the Committee provides total appropriations of $1.2 billion, $54 million more than the 2000 level. Included in this amount is $67 million for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and $1.1 billion for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The bill also establishes a limitation of $36.8 million on administrative expenses of the Farm Credit Administration. Total appropriations recommended for salaries and expenses of the FDA are $33.7 million more than the 2000 appropriations level. This additional amount, along with $34 million redirected from FDA's tobacco program in light of the recent Supreme Court decision, provides a total increase of $67.7 million for fiscal year 2001. Included in this amount is the full increase requested in the budget for FDA rental payments to the General Services Administration; an additional $24 million for FDA food safety initiatives; and $25 million for premarket review activities. The additional funding for premarket review will continue to strengthen FDA's ability to perform its core statutory mission of reviewing drugs, foods, medical devices and products within statutory time frames and to ensure patients' speedy access to new products and the latest technology. The bill also makes available $149 million in Prescription Drug User Fee Act collections, $4 million more than the fiscal year 2000 level. The discretionary budget authority allocation for this bill is approximately $200 million more than the CBO baseline level, or a ``freeze'' at the 2000 enacted appropriations level. To provide the increases the Committee felt were necessary to maintain funding for essential farm, housing, and rural development programs, several mandatory funding restrictions are included in the bill. Modest limitations on the Environmental Quality Incentives and Conservation Farm Option programs are maintained at the fiscal year 2000 levels. Funding for the Initiative for Future Agriculture and Food Systems and the Fund for Rural America is deferred until fiscal year 2002, as proposed in the President's budget. Although the total discretionary spending recommended by this bill is approximately $277 million in budget authority below the President's budget request level, as reestimated by the Congressional Budget Office, the President's proposed budget relies on additional revenues and savings to accommodate much higher levels of discretionary spending. The President's budget proposes to generate a net total of $564 million in collections from new user fee proposals, and to redirect funds from ongoing projects and Congressional initiatives to pay for Presidential initiatives. This Committee does not have the luxury of relying on revenues and savings from legislative proposals that have not been acted on by the Congress and signed into law. Consequently, within the discretionary spending limitations established for this bill, we have not been able to afford many of the discretionary spending increases and new initiatives proposed by the Administration, and still remain consistent with the Budget Act. Food safety continues to be a high priority of this Committee. This bill, as recommended to the Senate, provides the funds necessary to ensure that American consumers continue to have the safest food supply in the world. Not only does this bill provide increased funds required for meat and poultry inspection activities of the Food Safety and Inspection Service, it provides total funding of $377 million, a $53 million increase from the 2000 level, for USDA and FDA programs and activities included in the President's Food Safety Initiative. Turning to ``Division B'', the reported bill recommended a net total of $2.2 billion for emergency and regular supplemental appropriations and rescissions for the fiscal year 2000. A number of these provisions have been enacted into law as part of the conference report on the fiscal year 2001 Military Construction Appropriations Act. The substitute amendment deletes those provisions and makes other accompanying technical and conforming changes to Division B of the reported bill. The Chairmen of the various Appropriations Subcommittees may speak to those provisions in Division B of the reported bill under their respective jurisdictions. However, for programs and activities within the jurisdiction of the Agriculture Subcommittee, Division B, as modified, recommends $1.1 billion in emergency supplemental appropriations for fiscal year 2000. Supplemental appropriations for emergency housing and relief to farmers as a result of the North Carolina hurricane and other natural disasters; for the Farm Service Agency to meet high workload demands; and to offset the assessment on peanut producers for program losses have now been enacted into law. The remaining emergency supplemental appropriations recommended in the bill reported to the Senate still must be addressed. These include the $13 million requested by the President to cover a shortfall in available funding for crop insurance premium discounts; $35 million to support ongoing acreage enrollments in the Conservation Reserve and Wetlands Reserve programs; and an additional $130 million for the Rural Community Advancement Program. Just as devastating to producers as losses from hurricanes, drought and other natural disasters are losses from new and emergent diseases and pest infestations. The bill provides authority for the Secretary of Agriculture to compensate growers for losses as a result of the plum pox virus which has devastated the stone fruit industry; citrus canker; Mexican fruit fly; grasshoppers and Mormon crickets; and Pierce's disease, a new problem plaguing the grape industry. In addition, emergency assistance totaling an estimated $443 million is recommended for dairy producers and $450 million for livestock producers. Mr. President, this appropriations bill was reported by the Committee on May 10th. It was one of the first of the thirteen fiscal year 2001 appropriations bills to be reported to the Senate by the Appropriations Committee. Although the companion bill was reported from the House Appropriations Committee around that same time, on May 16th, the House did not begin consideration of the bill until June 29. The House resumed consideration of the bill immediately following the July recess and passed the bill on July 11 by a vote of 339-82. There are approximately 26 legislative days remaining before the October 1 start of the fiscal year. It is my hope we can expedite the Senate's consideration of this bill so we can go to conference with the House and get this bill to the President as quickly as possible. I thank the distinguished Senator from Wisconsin, the ranking member of the subcommittee, Mr. Kohl, as well as other members of the subcommittee, for their support and cooperation in putting this bill together. It is never easy to determine funding priorities, or to balance the many competing and legitimate needs that confront agriculture in this bill and stay within the subcommittee's required spending limitations. I believe this bill represents a responsible funding recommendation. I ask the Senators to give it their favorable consideration. I suggest the absence of a quorum.