Thad Cochran

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I first express my appreciation to the distinguished Senator from Pennsylvania, Mr. Specter, for his generous comments about my efforts in behalf of this legislation as chairman of the subcommittee. He also put in a lot of time and effort during the conference with the House and also during the development of this legislation in our subcommittee. He has been an outstanding member of the Appropriations Committee and, of course, chairs the Labor-HHS Subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee in the Senate and does an excellent job in that capacity. I thank him for his very generous statements. I also commend, as he did, the Senator from Vermont, who is chairing the Senate this morning, for his leadership on the drug importation issue. I don't think this would have been included in this legislation--I know it would not--were it not for the leadership of Senator Jeffords. It was this amendment that was included in the bill when the bill was on the floor of the Senate. As the occupant of the chair remembers, we had a very heated debate. It was contentious. It was a matter of a lot of controversy surrounding it. I offered an amendment to the Jeffords amendment, which was adopted as it turned out, helping protect the safety and efficacy of drugs that would be imported under the provision of the Jeffords amendment. Then in conference with the House, everybody got involved, not just the conferees but the leadership of the House and the leadership of the Senate. Everybody, it seemed, had an opinion or a viewpoint on how that language should be changed or modified or improved. As it turned out, the end result is something in which the Senator from Vermont can take a great deal of pride. His influence will always be remembered on this issue. I thank him for his courtesies during the handling of the issue and his good advice and counsel all along the way. Mr. President, the crop disaster provisions in this bill take a somewhat different approach to compensating producers who may have suffered significant quality losses during 2000 caused by bad weather, insects, or other natural occurrences. The bill authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to compensate producers for quantity, quality, and severe economic losses. Loss thresholds for quantity and quality losses are separated in this bill, whereas they have been combined in previous disaster bills. Different crops have different values associated with declines in quality. The report language accompanying the conference report takes care to discuss special rules that should be considered for cotton, for example. The conferees were concerned that this new calculation might have some unintended consequences and provided the Secretary of Agriculture with additional flexibility in devising an appropriate loss compensation program. Because there are crops, like cotton, that rarely have quality losses that are not accompanied by quantity losses, this bifurcated approach could have unintended detrimental consequences. The Secretary could use his authority to compensate for severe economic losses and calculate losses for cotton and other similar commodities in the manner done in 1999, when quality and quantity losses were combined to determine whether a producer had met the loss thresholds. The Secretary could also use the authority provided him to provide assistance for severe economic losses to provide appropriate compensation to producers that incur the necessary expense to bring their 2000 crop all the way to harvest. Mr. President, the distinguished Senator from Montana is on the floor.

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

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, this has been a very worthwhile discussion of an issue that has bedeviled the Congress on an annual basis for too many years. We now are considering a bill that has the effect of answering a question that doesn't have to be considered each year in the future. Although the amendments that have been offered ran the gamut of Chinese transgressions and shortcomings, both real and imagined, and many are very troubling, I am supporting this bill as reported by the Finance Committee. Two months ago I read an editorial in the Wall Street Journal which reflected my thoughts on the relationship between our concerns about Chinese proliferation of technology and missiles on the one hand and our trade interests on the other. The editorial appeared in the July 19, 2000 edition of the paper and I saved it to put in the Record during this debate because in my view it answers in a thoughtful and persuasive way why this bill should be passed by the Senate and sent directly to the President for his signature. I ask unanimous consent that the editorial be printed in the Record.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. I thank my friend from New Mexico and I appreciate your support for the use of this funding through existing delivery systems to provide needed assistance to the Delta. federal power marketing administrations and regional transmission organizations

Mr. COCHRAN. I appreciate the Chairman's response. Delta communities in my state have been unable to provide their local cost-share for rural water and sewer projects, road and railroad improvement projects, drainage and flood protection projects, and other developments that are fundamental to a viable, local economy because they simply cannot afford the match. Unlike more affluent areas which can take full advantage of the federal cost-sharing programs such as this, the Delta typically lags behind even further. Is it the Chairman's view that these funds could be used as a local match for other federal programs?

Mr. COCHRAN. As the distinguished chairman knows, the Delta suffers from an acute need for infrastructure development that inhibits economic growth. In the Report to Congress by the Lower Mississippi Delta Development Commission, which was co-chaired by then-Governor Bill Clinton of Arkansas, the Commission stressed that the ten-year goal of any plan to assist the Delta should emphasize, and I quote from page 92 of this report, ``every Delta resident will have access to adequate water and sewer, fire protection, flood control, roads, streets, and bridges, to improve the quality of life and provide for economic growth and development.'' Although there are many very important needs in the Mississippi River Delta region which are unique to that area, better roads, educational enhancements, protection from floods, natural resource conservation and equipment and instruction support for workforce training ought to be the primary focus of this funding. There are existing and proven delivery systems for these purpose which have the benefit of local planning and priority-setting by the people who reside in the Delta. Is it the intent of this committee that this founding be utilized in this way for these purposes?

Mr. COCHRAN. The historical Delta area is the Mississippi Alluvial Valley, which includes only small portions of Tennessee and Kentucky, the typically flat and gently-sloping land of eastern Louisiana and Arkansas, Northwest Mississippi, the boot-heel of Missouri, and the Cache River lowlands of Illinois. Is it the Committee's intent that the Delta, for purposes of the federal assistance in this appropriation measure, be defined as that land which underlies those communities, counties, parishes and part-counties, which are geographically delineated by the topography commonly recognized as the Delta alluvial floodplain?

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, the Mississippi River Delta possesses many common characteristics and unique problems throughout the 7-state alluvial floodplain which it encompasses. The subcommittee report includes funding for a new Delta Regional Authority, an economic development effort aimed at extending special help to an area of the country that I have long considered to be a special part of my state and this nation. I am concerned that many of the real needs in the region never feel the full impact of federal assistance efforts because of the centrally- planned and bureaucratic delivery systems which accompanied some of these initiatives. Because of this history, the people of the region have become skeptical about new election year promises of federal assistance. I would like to ask the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee for clarification of the intent and purpose of this funding. First, how is the Delta defined for purpose of extending this proposed federal assistance?

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, it is very hard to adjust to the sad reality of Paul Coverdell's absence from the Senate. I miss him very much. And the Senate, we have to admit, is not the same without him. It was always a genuine pleasure to be in his company. I enjoyed very much going to Georgia with him during his reelection campaign. I also returned with him to learn more about the severe problems his State's agricultural producers were experiencing from the drought. We worked together on these and other issues that were important to our region on the Senate Agriculture Committee. He was a very influential force in the Senate for the people of his State. And he was a thoughtful leader on national issues as well. While we continue to mourn his passing, we should try to carry on with the same determination and energy he brought to the challenges he faced. His example will be a very valuable legacy. Not only has Georgia benefited from his good efforts to represent its interests, but also through his leadership as Director of the Peace Corps, and on other international issues, he has made the world a better and safer place for all mankind. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. As I suggested earlier, if the Senator will yield further, it would suit me if we adopted both the Cochran amendment and the Harkin amendment on a voice vote to try to resolve the issue in conference with the House. I made that suggestion earlier.

Mr. COCHRAN. It is my hope we could proceed to dispose of that amendment.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield, the pending business is the Cochran amendment to the Harkin amendment. It would be helpful, just as a coherent way of proceeding with the bill, if we would proceed in regular order.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the vote on the Wellstone amendment occur immediately following the vote on the motion to table the McCain amendment, which is going to take place at 2 o'clock.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I am hopeful that the Senate will seriously consider the proposal the Senator from Minnesota made. Senator Wellstone offered an amendment to actually cut the Economic Research Service funding provided in this bill and add the money to the Grain Inspection, Packers, and Stockyards Administration for some investigations. He lists the investigations that ought to be undertaken, which would be funded by this additional money. The fact is, any amount of money could be spent investigating these subjects. He lists these: investigations of anticompetitive behavior; rapid response teams; the hog contract library; examinations of the competitive structure of the poultry industry, civil rights activities, and informational staff. What I am saying is that I would hate for the Senate to be put into a position of having to analyze this and trying to figure out if we have enough money for the Grain Inspection, Packers, and Stockyards Administration and all of the responsibilities they have. We have tried to go through the President's budget request, analyze it carefully, and then present to the Senate an allocation of limited funds, and suggest that this is appropriate for the Senate to pass. We think the Economic Research Service, to be cut as proposed by Senator Wellstone, would be put in a difficult position of trying to provide accurate, reliable information that is helpful to farmers who are in the business of producing crops and commodities, who make their living at this, and who depend upon the Government agency that will be cut by this amendment. We think the funds are needed. We have checked with that agency to see what the impact of this offset would be on them, and they--maybe predictably--suggest that it would work a real hardship. We have had a difficult time making available funds for some of these agencies to accommodate pay increases, staffing requirements, and all of the other items of expense in the operation of the Department of Agriculture that would support important economic activities in our country. And so rather than try to figure out what to try to do with this amendment and how to resolve it, I really think the best thing to do is to move to table it and ask the Senate to support the committee's judgment. I have a lot of regard for the Senator from Minnesota and his enthusiasm for these subjects. I sympathize with his concerns. He has made a good speech. He has made a persuasive appeal to the Senate. In spite of that, I really think we need to stick with the committee's judgment on this. This bill has been developed on a bipartisan basis, with the full participation of Senators on the Democratic side. We have listened to suggestions from all Senators on both sides. So my hope is that the Senate will trust the committee. That is what the committee structure is about when it comes to questions such as this. There is no way for each individual Senator to look at this amendment and figure out all the practical consequences of it, consider the offset suggested, and then make a decision. Do you support the amendment offered by the Senator from Minnesota or do you support the committee? That is the issue. I hope the Senate will support the committee's judgment on this issue. I know now, after inquiry, that there are no other Senators who have asked to speak on this amendment. I move to table the Wellstone amendment and I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the managers' package be agreed to en bloc and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

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

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I now have an indication that the managers' package has been cleared. I send the managers' package of amendments to the desk and ask that they be reported en bloc and considered en bloc.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I have no objection to passing the bill on a voice vote. Amendments Nos. 3982 through 4014, En Bloc

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I want to express my deepest appreciation for the excellent cooperation of our professional staff members of the Appropriations Committee. Our subcommittee staff, in particular, led by our chief clerk, Rebecca Davies, and other staff members, including Martha Scott Poindexter; Hunt Shipman; Les Spivey; and Coy Neal; the minority professional staff, Galen Fountain and Carole Geagley; the full committee staff member, Jay Kimmitt; Senator Kohl's personal staff members, Ben Miller and Paul Bock. They were all enormously helpful in the handling of this legislation and the passage of this legislation tonight in the Senate. For all of their assistance, I am deeply grateful. I also have to thank Senator Herb Kohl, the distinguished ranking member of the Democratic side of the aisle on this subcommittee. I appreciate the able assistance we received during the final, crucial stages of the handling of this bill from Senator Lott, the majority leader; Senator Stevens, chairman of the full Committee on Appropriations; and Senator Reid of Nevada, who provided assistance all during the handling of the bill on the floor of the Senate today. We appreciate all of the good work they did. We also thank all Senators for permitting us to pass this legislation tonight.

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

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, there are no more amendments. I appreciate very much the cooperation of all Senators. We are ready to go to third reading.

Mr. COCHRAN. The Senator has correctly characterized the Committee's intent.

Mr. COCHRAN. I understand that this project is a priority for the Minority Leader and the Senator from North Dakota. I will work in conference to consider $500,000 for the Red River Trade Council's Agricultural Diversity Project in the final version of the Agriculture Appropriations bill. Land-Grant University System

Mr. COCHRAN. I recognize the need to provide adequate support for the 1890 institutions. The Senator will be pleased to know that this bill provides increases above the fiscal year 2000 level for the 1890 institution's capacity building grants program and the facilities grants program. I share the Senator's interest in these institutions and will keep her comments in mind as we work to enhance funding for these programs in conference.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. (for Mr. Graham (for himself and Mr. Mack)) proposed an amendment to the bill, H.R. 4461, supra; as follows: On page 83, line 5, strike the following: ``; and (e) compensate commercial producers for losses due to citrus canker''. On page 85, after line 8, insert the following: Sec. . (a) Nothwithstanding any other provision of law (including the Federal Grants and Cooperative Agreements Act) the Secretary of Agriculture shall use not more than $40,000,000 of Commodity Credit Corporation funds for a cooperative program with the state of Florida to replace commercial trees removed to control citrus canker and to compensate for lost production: Provided, That the entire amount necessary to carry out this section shall be available only to the extent that an official budget request for the entire amount, that includes designation of the entire amount of the request as an emergency requirement under the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (2 U.S.C. et seq.), is transmitted by the President to Congress: Provided further, That the entire amount necessary to carry out this section is designated by Congress as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 251(b)(2)(A) of that Act (2 U.S.C. 901(b)(2)(A)).