Thad Cochran

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand in recess until the hour of 9 a.m., on Tuesday, September 19, 1995; that following the prayer, the Journal of the proceedings be deemed approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and there then be a period for morning business until the hour of 9:30 a.m., with Senators permitted to speak for 5 minutes each. I further ask unanimous consent that at 9:30 a.m. the Senate then immediately resume consideration of H.R. 1976, the agriculture appropriations bill, and under a previous order, there be 15 minutes, equally divided, on the Bryan amendment, to be followed by a rollcall vote on or in relation to the Bryan amendment.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I now ask for its second reading.

Mr. COCHRAN. I ask for its first reading.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I understand that S. 1254, introduced earlier today by Senator Abraham, is at the desk.

Mr. COCHRAN

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I think we have discussed this issue fully tonight, and we will have an opportunity to conclude debate tomorrow morning before voting on the amendment. I am prepared to move on to other subjects. I yield the remainder of my time.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I wonder if the Senator will yield for the purpose of trying to establish an agreement on time on this amendment.

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

Mr. COCHRAN. As the Senator from Alaska noted, the subcommittee did address the potato disease issue, but was not aware of the unique problem in Alaska. I am pleased to learn that a tuber has been developed that would be successful in Alaska, and agree that the Service should address this unique need of cold-climate States.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I am hopeful that Senators will look at the language of the committee amendment and recognize that we are not creating, by law, a new disaster assistance program. We are giving authority, however, to the Secretary of Agriculture to use his discretion, and if he feels that supplemental disaster assistance is justified under the circumstances, he has access to these funds to make such assistance available to cotton crop producers who are victims of one of the most devastating disasters that we have witnessed in the deep South. This is a disaster that has come upon us very quickly, without any warning. A lot of cotton farmers, as a matter of fact, had understood that the level of catastrophic crop insurance assistance would be about the same that usual disaster programs provide under circumstances that have become familiar to those in farming: weather-related disasters, floods, storms of various kinds. But, normally, weather-related disasters have triggered the availability of some kind of disaster assistance from the Federal Government. Relying upon that assurance, when the Secretary of Agriculture and this administration promoted this program and encouraged farmers to embrace the new crop insurance program--they were told that they would automatically be covered if they participated in the commodity programs--cotton producers, who were signed up for the program, about 90 percent of them nationwide, almost 100 percent of them in this region, thought that in case of a natural disaster they would have some predictable level of coverage. But, as it has turned out, the coverage that is being made available is substantially less than that which had been provided under disasters that had been experienced in the past. What makes this disaster different is that farmers, upon seeing the prospective devastation in their crops, began adding more pesticides, getting clearance through the EPA for emergency clearance of new kinds of insecticides to try to cope with this menace. And even with the expenditures of huge sums of money, in some instances, it did not work and cotton crops were devastated. Many of those who suffered from this disaster will not be able to gin a single bale of cotton. There are many who have suffered huge yield losses. As the insertions that I had printed in the Record earlier in the day will clearly show, in our State it is estimated there will be over $100 million in damages and losses. These are real losses to real people who have invested time, effort, and, over long periods of time, developed businesses and farms that now may be lost as a result of this infestation and the lack of response from our Government. It is my hope we will not just stand by and let this amendment be adopted and transfer these funds to other portions of this bill. I am hopeful the Congress will respond to this situation and give the Secretary the authority to do something for them. It does not say he has to, but it says if he feels it is justified, if the facts justify it, if the severity of the loss justifies it, if there is merit to the suggestion that the Government has a duty to respond to people in dire situations who cannot help themselves, the Secretary has the authority to do it. That is all this provision says. So, it disappoints me greatly that we are being asked to turn our backs on farmers who traditionally have been able to look to Congress as sort of the last court of appeal when they are in desperate straits. And they are. Many are--not all, but many are. Those who are need to have an opportunity to have their cases heard at the Department of Agriculture for additional and supplemental benefits under the crop insurance program. I am hopeful the Senate will agree to provide this opportunity for additional assistance. I do not know how far these funds will go. Mr. President, $41 million sounds like a lot of money, but if you look at all the States that are involved and all the acreage that is involved, this report we got from the extension service and the Department of Agriculture indicates the losses were substantial in our State and Texas, Alabama, Tennessee, Arkansas, Georgia, and there were some losses in North Carolina and South Carolina as well--but in our State, 160,000 acres have been either abandoned or have seriously reduced yields. In Texas, it is 500,000 acres; Alabama, 400,000; Georgia, 300,000. These are huge amounts of land, where either no cotton is going to be harvested this year or very little will be harvested. So I am saying that this is an unusual circumstance. Not only are the losses being suffered, but huge expenditures have been made by many of these farmers to try to protect themselves in this situation. So it has doubled the loss. Not only did they incur losses because they will not get any return at all, they have expended more money trying to save the crop that they had, that was well underway, that looked [[Page S 13717]] good, was going to produce a good crop up until just a few weeks ago. So I am suggesting that we look with a sympathetic heart upon the situation that we find ourselves in today and approve this committee's recommendation that these funds be made available if the Secretary thinks they can be used and that it is justified. And I hope he will find it is justified.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, how much time remains under the agreement?

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Under the usual form, and that no other amendment would be in order to the amendment.

Mr. COCHRAN. I thank the Senator. Let me see if this is suitable to Senators. I ask unanimous consent that we vote on or in relation to the Kerrey amendment at 6:30.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, the purpose of coming to this amendment in the regular order is that this amendment was the first offered today by the distinguished Democratic leader on behalf of the Senator from Nebraska and the Senator from Wisconsin, with the understanding that it would be taken up later in the day. It is later in the day. We have told Senators that we would not have a vote on this bill until 5:30. We now have reached that point and beyond. I have spoken against the Kerrey amendment, and for the committee amendment, which is the subject of the Kerrey amendment. The Kerrey amendment seeks to strike the committee amendment which contains funds--$41 million--for disaster assistance for cotton producers, which have been hard hit this year by a massive infestation of beet army worms, tobacco budworms, and unusually dry weather, which has exacerbated a very difficult situation throughout the South and Southwest. I notice that the Senator from Nebraska has come to the floor now to speak to the amendment. I am prepared to yield the floor and permit whatever time he may need to discuss his amendment. I hope that we can then vote on his amendment, or a motion to table his amendment. I am prepared to move to table his amendment and ask for the yeas and nays, but I am not going to do that if he wants to speak to that amendment now. Before I yield for that purpose, I wonder if we can agree on a time certain, for the benefit of all Senators, on a motion to table the Kerrey amendment. I am hopeful that the Senator could agree to take no more than 10 or 15 minutes. I think I spoke for about 10 minutes. Most Senators know what this is all about. If additional time is needed, I am happy to consider that, along with the interests of other Senators. I know Senators have made plans for other activities tonight. They thought they were going to vote at 5:30. I wonder if the Senator can tell us what his needs would be in terms of time to debate this amendment. I will be happy to yield to the Senator to respond, without losing my right to the floor.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished manager on the part of the minority for his cooperation and all Senators for cooperating to identify these amendments. Let me say now that if we called for the regular order, which I am prepared to do, as I understand it, the amendment of the Senator from Nebraska, Senator Kerrey, which was offered earlier in the day by Senator Daschle on his behalf, would be the pending business. Parliamentary inquiry. Is that correct?

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask that my UC be amended, as pointed out by the Senator from Arkansas, and to add a Gorton relevant amendment, plus a Gregg relevant amendment and, as modified, I so ask unanimous consent.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, we were successful in getting Senators to cooperate in identifying the amendments that remain to be offered to this bill. We are prepared now to seek unanimous consent to limit the amendments on the bill to those which we will read. These have been cleared on both sides of the aisle. I now ask unanimous consent that the following amendments be the only [[Page S 13714]] remaining amendments in order to H.R. 1976, other than the pending amendments; that they be offered in the first or second-degree; if a committee amendment still remains to be amended, any first-degree amendment be subject to relevant second degrees: A Stevens budget for Assistant Secretary of Natural Resources amendment; a managers' package; two Cochran relevant amendments; a McCain funding for travel colleges; Domenici on scoring; Abraham on advisory committees; Senator Bingaman requiring USDA energy savings initiatives; Senators Boxer and Feinstein on chickens, fresh and frozen regulations; Senator Bradley, two relevant amendments; Senator Bryan, one to eliminate the Market Promotion Program and three relevant amendments; Senator Bumpers, two relevant amendments; Senator Byrd, relevant amendment; Senator Conrad, an amendment to establish a United States-Canadian review on water in North Dakota, ARS potato research laboratory and a relevant amendment; Senator Daschle, two relevant amendments; Senator Dodd, two relevant amendments; Senator Dorgan, a United States-Canadian study on Devil's Lake; Senator Feingold, a rural development amendment and one on research grants; Senator Harkin, food stamps amendment; Senator Kerrey, cotton disaster assistance funds amendment; Senator Kerry of Massachusetts, prohibit Market Promotion Program, mink export amendment, and a relevant amendment; Senator Kohl, two relevant amendments plus an amendment on rural development grants; Senator Lautenberg, two relevant amendments; Senator Leahy, an amendment to restore livestock feed assistance and an alternative development amendment; Senator Levin, Michigan special research grant amendment and a relevant amendment; Senator Reid, sugar program amendment and two relevant amendments. Mr. BUMPERS addressed the Chair.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I congratulate the distinguished Senator from Colorado for his amendment and for his successful negotiation of the amendment with the administration. We are happy to recommend the approval of the amendment and hope the Senate will support it.

Mr. COCHRAN. I do not think that is appropriate since we have amendments where the yeas and nays have been ordered but we agreed that the votes will not occur until tomorrow. We have two amendments by Senator Brown from Colorado where the yeas and nays have already been ordered. We also have an agreement that has been entered into regarding an amendment by the Senator from California, Senator Boxer, where the vote will occur tomorrow afternoon after we have completed action on the welfare bill. So we have made progress. Senators have cooperated. We do have outstanding amendments, and we appreciate your suggestion that those Senators who do want to offer amendments come and offer them and talk about them, and we will have a vote on one tonight and stack the rest of the votes for tomorrow.

Mr. COCHRAN. If the distinguished leader would yield, I can say that we are trying to reach an agreement on a vote at a time certain later this afternoon, certainly not before 5:30. [[Page S 13711]] There is an indication that we could have a debate and a vote on the promotion program amendment which would be offered by the Senator from Nevada and the Senator from Arkansas, but that vote could occur as late at 8 o'clock, we are told. We are trying to work out an agreement on what our options are. We would like to have a vote later this evening.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Senator Nickles, I am aware of your strong interest in the ARS facility at El Reno, OK, and share your support for the agricultural research conducted there. The valuable work being conducted at the Fort Reno's facility is indeed unique and I recognize the importance of continuing research at the site. As this issue is revisited by a House-Senate conference committee, I will work to maintain this valuable research asset. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I understand that we have some amendments that have been offered and are pending now on this agriculture appropriations bill which is the business before the Senate. Amendment No. 2686 One of these amendments that was set aside for debate for later today was one offered by the distinguished Democratic leader in behalf of Senators Kerrey and Kohl. That amendment would strike a provision of the bill that was added as a committee amendment appropriating funds for use as disaster assistance to supplement the benefits provided by catastrophic insurance to disaster victims. The reason the committee approved this amendment was because we have seen throughout the South this year some very serious damage in the cotton fields of Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, Texas, Tennessee, and Arkansas as well. As a result of massive infestations of tobacco bud worms and beet army worms, and other pests in the cotton crops in these States, it has been hard to estimate the exact amount of damage done because harvesting has not occurred in many of the areas where we know the devastation is severe. So dollar amounts are simply estimates at this point. But one estimate that we saw in my State of Mississippi alone indicates that over 160,000 acres of cotton have been damaged at a loss of over $100 million. The reason the committee thought it was important to provide some additional benefits is that the catastrophic crop disaster insurance program is not sufficient to help farmers in this situation. And many of them are not going to be able to plant crops next year, and some are not going to be able to stay in business unless something is done to help them. We have already seen this last week a request from the Governor of Mississippi transmitted to Secretary of Agriculture Glickman asking for disaster declarations in many of these counties in our State which will make available emergency production loans. These loans will be at reduced rates of interest--I am told at about 3.75 percent interest-- and would be available as emergency loan benefits, if the damage assessment reports justify the declaration and approval of the declaration by the Secretary of Agriculture. One difficulty that we are encountering, though, is that the early estimates are proving to be much less than what the damages are turning out to be because of these massive infestations of pests. It is certainly a concern to me that the Senators from Nebraska and Wisconsin are urging the Senate to overturn this provision in our bill. We had hoped that the Senate and the House also would respond to this crisis situation and be generous--as generous as the budget permits and as generous as our rules permit--to provide some additional assistance to these disaster victims. I am urging the Senate to approve the committee amendment that provides this crop disaster assistance money. The Senate should also know that I have introduced separate legislation to authorize the Secretary, if he deems that additional disaster assistance is justified, to ask for additional appropriations. That legislation has been introduced here in the Senate. It has been introduced in the House in the companion bill which is sponsored by Congressman Roger Wicker and Congressman Bennie Thompson of Mississippi. Our entire delegation was invited to a meeting at the offices of the Mississippi Farm Bureau federation in August to hear firsthand the reports of cotton producers and those who were familiar with the situation--immunologists, an economist from the Mississippi Extension Service at Mississippi State University who was familiar with the facts. And, after hearing all of the information, it became very clear to me that we needed to respond both here in Washington and at every level of government to try to help overcome the effects of this serious disaster. It is one of those situations where it appeared that we were going to have a very good and productive cotton crop throughout the country this year. But all of a sudden, because of the excessive hot weather, hotter than usual, dryer than usual, and an enormous infestation of these insects and pests that almost overnight the complexion of the cotton crop this year was changed. Producers began trying to find out what kinds of control measures could be effective to deal with this problem. Some of them spent huge amounts on chemical applications that they were told by experts could help deal with this disaster only to find out that the money was really wasted. Hundreds of thousands of dollars have been spent by many farmers in our State to try to deal with and control these pests. And much of that money has been wasted. There are many cotton fields in our State which will not even have a cotton picker put in the fields. They will not even try to harvest the cotton because it is just not there to pick. So total losses in many of our counties have been sustained. I am going to ask, Mr. President, to put in the Record an estimate that has been compiled from various sources, including the Mississippi Department of Agriculture, the Texas Extension Service, the Alabama Extension Service, and the National Cotton Council. The States of Tennessee, Arkansas, Texas, Mississippi, Georgia, and Alabama are covered in this report. I ask unanimous consent, Mr. President, that this estimate of cotton losses due to the tobacco bud worm be printed in the Record.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I want to say I think the distinguished Senator from Georgia has really given a very eloquent, accurate, and persuasive statement about why this amendment should be rejected. There is no doubt about it; he is a very insightful Senator, and he has come to the Agriculture Committee with a great deal of good common sense and judgment which shows very clearly during his discussion of this amendment. We are dealing with an appropriations bill. We are at work, on the other hand, trying to reform all of the commodity programs so that we can make them more cost effective, we can make them respond to the challenge of deficit reduction, but at the same time maintain stability in the agriculture sector and the capability for the future, and that is the most productive country in the world. It is an enormously important sector of our economy, and to start nitpicking on this bill with these programs, like this peanut program that the Senator describes, we are running a great risk. It may sound good, it may make some feel good to vote for a change like this that is being recommended, but it is not going to serve the economic interests of our country as a whole and certainly not those regions of our country that are involved in this program. I commend the Senator for his eloquent statement and his hard work as a member of our Agriculture Committee. I hope the Senators who heard him will pay attention and vote like he suggests--vote ``no'' on this amendment.

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

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I am told Senator Bumpers, the distinguished manager on the Democratic side of the legislation, wishes to express his views on this amendment. So if the distinguished Senator will permit me, I ask unanimous consent that we set aside, temporarily, this amendment so that he may proceed to offer whatever other amendments he may wish to offer at this time; or if he would like to debate this issue further, that we proceed to do that. I would not want to go to a vote on the amendment until the Senator from Arkansas has had an opportunity to be heard.