Rick Crawford

Mr. CRAWFORD

Mr. CRAWFORD. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I must oppose, with respect, the gentleman's amendment. The addition of commercial fishing operations, which have traditionally not been recognized in FSA lending programs, unnecessarily extend the limits of an already oversubscribed lender. Commercial fishermen in need of disaster assistance are already able to apply for loans from both Farm Credit and the Small Business Administration. Mr. Chairman, with that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. CRAWFORD. I thank the gentlelady from Tennessee for yielding. And on behalf of the chairman of the Agriculture Committee, I would like to thank her for bringing this amendment to void the partnership with the Mexican Government that promotes participation in the SNAP program. We support this amendment, and urge our colleagues to vote ``yes.''

Mr. CRAWFORD. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I would just like to say, on behalf of the chairman of the Agriculture Committee, I thank the gentleman from Ohio for bringing this good government amendment before us today. Current law states that a State agency must return unused benefits to the Treasury after a 12- month period of inactivity. The gentleman's amendment simply shortens that time period that a SNAP recipient has to claim their benefits to 60 days. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this commonsense amendment.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Chairman, I respect the initiative here. I appreciate that. I think that we're kind of wandering into uncharted waters here because we're talking about a farm bill and nutrition title, and this is not, I don't believe, in our purview to authorize the use of nutrition funds to address personal hygiene items, and that's why I have reservations about this. I appreciate the effort put forth here and totally recognize the value of personal hygiene. I'm a big believer in personal hygiene. I just don't think that it's appropriate for us to address personal hygiene items in the context of nutrition. For that reason, I would respectfully request a ``no'' vote on this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CRAWFORD. I reserve the balance of my time, as I'm prepared to close if the gentleman has no further speakers.

Mr. CRAWFORD. I yield myself such time as I may consume. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program is just that--a nutrition assistance program--which is designed to provide nutrition assistance to eligible low-income individuals and their families. Personal hygiene items never have been eligible for purchase under a Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program transaction and should never be eligible under SNAP. We should be devoting our scarce resources to providing food to hungry Americans, not personal hygiene items. I urge my colleagues to join me in the opposition of this amendment and to vote ``no.'' I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CRAWFORD. I rise to claim the time in opposition.

Mr. CRAWFORD. I most respectfully oppose the gentleman's amendment. Mr. Chair, the MAP program has been a critical tool for producers in my district to access foreign markets. The program forms a private- public partnership that shares the cost of overseas marketing and promotional activities. The current agriculture export forecast for FY13 is estimated to be nearly $140 billion, which smashes our export records. For a country that operates under a net trade deficit, agriculture has been a bright spot and generates a surplus. Independent studies show that the MAP program is directly responsible for $6.1 billion of these exports. This is a 35 to 1 return on investment. How many other Federal programs have this type of economic benefit? Not many. With our trade forecast expected to increase this year, this reinforces the need for valuable programs such as the Market Access Program. I urge my colleagues most respectfully to oppose the amendment.

Mr. CRAWFORD. I thank the chairman. I would just like to respectfully oppose the gentleman's amendment. Mr. Chair, this amendment would dismantle one of the most effective diplomatic tools available to the United States. Food for Peace promotes the good will of the American people by providing American- grown food supplies to the poorest and most vulnerable populations in the world. This program has been in place for nearly 60 years and is the cornerstone of the United States' diplomatic and humanitarian efforts. If there are any inefficiencies, as the sponsors of this amendment suggest, then USDA and USAID must be held accountable for them because they coordinate the program's implementation. I reject the idea that direct cash assistance from the Local and Regional Purchase Program, or LRP, is a better way to go because it will simply provide food vouchers used to buy foreign-sourced food. This sounds less like reform and more like a proposal to provide food stamps to the world. Instead of giving USAID free rein to spend cash however they see fit, Congress must recognize that Food for Peace allows our farmers to serve as ambassadors. As you can see on the sign beside me, the first thing starving people see when they receive a bag of rice--and it likely came from Arkansas--is the stamp of the American flag. We are concerned about what the contents of that bag are. That American flag means something, and we don't want to diminish the brand and the quality of the product contained in that bag. I respectfully urge my colleagues to reject this amendment.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Chairman, I also rise respectfully in opposition to the gentlelady's amendment. My district located in the Mississippi Delta region grows nearly half all rice produced in the United States. This amendment jeopardizes the safety net row crop producers in my district depend on to manage risk and stay in business. Given the fact that price volatility is the primary risk mid-South farmers face, and the cost of production is extremely high, the Price Loss Coverage program is the only viable option to provide producers adequate protection. Leading experts and ag economists at Texas A&M University show the average cost of production for rice is $14.92 per hundredweight. The $14 per hundredweight reference price established in the FARRM Bill is realistic and will not kick in unless the producer experiences a loss. What is more, CBO projections already take into account the probability of price movements that can impact the overall cost productions of the PLC policy, and U.S. farm policy has come in well under budget projections for at least the last 7 years. This amendment is unnecessary and will do nothing but create more uncertainty for agriculture producers. The House Agriculture Committee has made a good-faith bipartisan effort to craft a farm bill that reflects a farmer's risk across all regions of the country. This amendment is a step backwards. With all due respect, I urge my colleagues to oppose the gentlelady's amendment.

Mr. CRAWFORD

Mr. CRAWFORD. I thank the chairman and the ranking member for their outstanding work in crafting the 2013 FARRM Bill. I would especially like to thank the farmers and ranchers across rural America for their patience as we work through this long, difficult process. Madam Chair, the bill before us today is the product of our extensive outreach to farmers, ranchers, and stakeholders across the entire country. I believe that the most essential aspect of writing any farm bill is the critical input we receive from our rural constituents. The Agriculture Committee made this possible through holding a series of farm bill field hearings in nearly every region of the country, allowing producers to contribute to the farm bill process by having their voices heard. Last year, I had the opportunity to host one of those field hearings in my hometown of Jonesboro, where all types of producers from Arkansas and around the Midsouth region had a chance to testify. They shared with the committee the challenges they face in the modern agricultural economy and provided suggestions about how the farm bill can be tailored to reflect their unique risk in the marketplace. This feedback was critical in helping us craft policy that meets the needs of producers not only in Arkansas, but around the country. After hearing from stakeholders across the Nation, it was remarkable to me to hear time and time again that ag producers are willing to do their part to reduce the deficit. This willingness has allowed the Ag Committee to craft a farm bill that saves nearly $40 billion. This was no easy task, mind you, and the committee had to make some very tough choices. But I believe we were able to fairly balance the needs of our producers with the need to pay down the debt. The final product is a bipartisan farm bill that saves taxpayers money, reduces deficit spending, and repeals outdated government programs while reforming, streamlining, and consolidating others. Whether it's through the elimination of direct payments, the consolidation of conservation programs, or eliminating abuse in the food stamp program, every part of this bill contributes fairly to deficit reduction. I proudly support the 2013 FARRM Bill, and I encourage my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. CRAWFORD

Mr. CRAWFORD. I rise today to recognize Viola Meekins and her lifetime of service to her community and to the State of Arkansas. The life of Mrs. Meekins will be remembered in every corner of Arkansas County as well as in the halls of Upchurch and McRae High Schools in Prescott and by her classmates of Philander Smith College. When Mrs. Meekins and her husband, George, first moved to Stuttgart in 1958, he became the principal of the former Holman School. Mrs. Meekins was the school's secretary as well as a teacher. After desegregation in 1971, the couple moved to Stuttgart High School. Even though Mrs. Meekins retired from teaching in 1989, her work in the community was just beginning. She spent countless hours volunteering at many places, including at the Holman Heritage Community Center. Upon the passing of her husband, George, Mrs. Meekins was appointed to fulfill his term on the quorum court and went on to serve for over 20 years. In closing, I want to highlight the reason Mrs. Meekins sought a career as a teacher: to add value to the lives of the students and their families she taught. The life of Mrs. Meekins will live on, Mr. Speaker, and I hope that everyone who came in contact with Mrs. Meekins will honor her legacy by finding ways that they, too, can add value to the lives of those they come in contact with on a daily basis.

Mr. CRAWFORD

Mr. CRAWFORD. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume just to simply say that by passing and enacting H.R. 742, it would send a clear message to the international community that the United States is strongly committed to global data sharing and is determined to avoid fragmenting the current global data set for over- the-counter derivatives. I urge a ``yes'' vote on H.R. 742, and I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Georgia. I again urge a ``yes'' vote on H.R. 742 and yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to thank the cosponsors of this bill, especially Mr. Huizenga, Ms. Moore, and Mr. Maloney, for joining me in this bipartisan effort to help bring transparency to the global swap markets. While I may not agree with every provision of the Dodd-Frank law, today I believe we're working towards its bipartisan goal of giving the regulators the tools they need to improve systemic risk mitigation in the global financial markets. I think everyone agrees that the lack of transparency in the over- the-counter derivatives markets escalated the financial crisis of 2008. In order to provide market transparency, the Dodd-Frank law requires post-trade reporting to swap data repositories, or SDRs, so that regulators and market participants have access to realtime market data that help identify systemic risk in the financial system. So far we have made great strides in reaching this goal, but unfortunately a provision in the law threatens to undermine our progress unless we fix it. Currently, Dodd-Frank includes a provision requiring a foreign regulator to indemnify a U.S.-based SDR for any expenses arising from litigation relating to a request for market data. Unlike the rest of the world, the concept of indemnification is only established within U.S. tort law. As a result, foreign regulators have been reluctant to comply with this provision, and international regulatory coordination is being thwarted. While the intent of the provision was to protect market confidentiality, in practice it threatens to fragment global data on swap markets. Foreign regulators would be forced to create their own SDRs, resulting in a fragmented global data framework where regulators would be unable to see a complete picture of the marketplace. Without effective coordination between international regulators and SDRs, monitoring and mitigating global systemic risk is severely limited. H.R. 742 fixes this problem by removing the indemnification provisions in Dodd-Frank. This legislation has broad bipartisan support and was unanimously approved by the House Agriculture Committee in March and the House Financial Services Committee in May. Additionally, last year, the SEC testified to the Financial Services Committee that a legislative solution was needed, saying: In removing the indemnification requirement, Congress would assist the SEC, as well as other regulators, in securing the access it needs to data held in global trade repositories. Many other U.S. and foreign regulators have echoed these same sentiments. If left unresolved, the indemnification provision in Dodd-Frank has the potential to effectively reduce transparency in the over-the- counter derivatives markets and undo the great progress already being made through the cooperative efforts of more than 50 regulators worldwide. In passing this legislation, we will ensure that regulators will have access to a global set of swap market data, which is essential to maintaining the highest degree of market transparency and risk mitigation. I strongly urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this bill. With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CRAWFORD. I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on the bill, H.R. 742.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Madam Speaker, I would like to yield 3 minutes to the lead cosponsor in Financial Services on this bill, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Huizenga).

Mr. CRAWFORD. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 742) to amend the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Commodity Exchange Act to repeal the indemnification requirements for regulatory authorities to obtain access to swap data required to be provided by swaps entities under such Acts.

Mr. CRAWFORD

Mr. CRAWFORD. I thank the gentleman from California for his leadership on this issue and for the opportunity to allow me to speak in support of H.R. 1038, the Public Power Risk Management Act of 2013. This is a good, bipartisan piece of legislation that would simply allow producers, utility companies, and other nonfinancial entities to continue entering into energy swaps with government-owned utilities, also known as utility special entities, without requiring them to register with the CFTC as a swap dealer solely because of their dealings with government-owned utilities. As a group, public power utilities deliver electricity to one in seven of every electric customers in the United States, over 47 million people--certainly some in major metropolitan areas such as Los Angeles, San Antonio, Seattle, and Orlando--but the vast majority of public power companies serve communities with populations of 10,000 people or less. H.R. 1038 will place utility special entities on a level-playing field with everyone else in the marketplace, allowing many of them to keep the same swap counterparties they have used to manage risk for years. Utility special entities should be allowed to keep using swaps to help manage their risk related to the generation of electricity or production of natural gas. To hinder these utilities' ability to manage risk would only increase their costs and possibly lead to higher energy rates for millions of Americans, an unacceptable result during a period of tremendous economic uncertainty. Madam Speaker, I urge passage of H.R. 1038 and urge a ``yes'' vote.