Rosa DeLauro

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition.

Ms. DeLAURO. I thank the gentleman. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. I'd be happy to yield.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I was just going to make one comment, and that's about fiscal responsibility. I am delighted that the gentleman has gotten religion on fiscal responsibility. As I recall, he spent the last 8 years here witnessing the kinds of tax cuts that have provided the tax breaks for the wealthiest people in this Nation and now has brought this Nation to this fiscal crisis that we have and the indebtedness that we have. I think he must have been missing in action for these 8 years where we experienced this. This indebtedness did not occur overnight. I once again urge my colleagues to vote in opposition to this amendment.

Ms. DeLAURO. Though the gentleman who sponsored this project could not be here tonight, he has provided me with the following information. This is a conservation project for a not-for-profit volunteer program. Natural Biodiversity was initiated in response to citizens' concerns for invasive plant problems in the 1,887 square mile Kiski- Conemaugh drainage portion of the Allegheny River and Ohio River Basin. Subsequent work has been expanded the geographic area to include the Juniata watershed of the Chesapeake Bay, the State of Pennsylvania, and a much larger mid-Atlantic region. Invasive plant management work has led to innovative approaches, including native plant restoration and comprehensive land stewardship practices. Some of their early achievements have been the early detection and rapid response to noxious weeds and 32 invasive plant locations; education and outreach to 10,000 people, with a potential audience of 500,000 each year; development of a management plan for the 1,000- square-mile Raystown branch of the Juniata River. So, again, it is a not-for-profit volunteer program that is dealing with a concern and a large area about invasive plant problems. And I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to this amendment.

Ms. DeLAURO. Across-the-board cuts apply a meat ax and don't have a precision cut and make a difference. I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment.

Ms. DeLAURO. We do not have the tools that are necessary in order to be able to understand what happened. This bill addresses--

Ms. DeLAURO. I just have 1\1/2\ minutes left--and less than that now. This bill is looking at how we can in fact meet the obligations that we have in a time of fiscal and economic crisis and economic insecurity all over this country. Under the jurisdiction of this bill is rural development. In addition to that, it protects the public health, which we're obligated to do. And when you see nine people die from peanut- based products because we cannot trace back, we cannot analyze, we do not have--

Ms. DeLAURO. I would just like to say that this bill addresses the plight of the American farmers, rural America. And I don't come from rural America. I come from the Northeast. But I have farms. I'm watching dairy farmers go out of business. That's happening all over the country. And watching the technical assistance programs with backlogs that are not addressing the needs of the American farmer. This bill addresses those issues.

Ms. DeLAURO. How much time is available?

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the gentlewoman's amendment, which would cut all the agencies and the programs in the bill by 5 percent. I understand. I have three beautiful grandchildren, and they are the light of my life. And for that reason, I'm opposed to this amendment. This would represent a cut of $1.1 billion from the bill. Now, this is exactly the wrong time to cut funding for critical programs under the bill that protect the public health, bolster food nutrition assistance programs, invests in rural communities, in agriculture research, strengthen animal health and marketing programs, and conserve our natural resources. While the bill received a relatively large increase over 2009, it is important to understand that the large majority goes to fund just three priorities: $681 million for higher WIC participation and for food costs, $560 million for International Food Aid programs, and $299 million for the Food and Drug Administration to better protect our public health. At the same time, the bill made cuts in a number of programs below 2009 totaling $274 million. We also rejected $735 million in increases in the budget request. So rather than using targeted, precision cuts, as we have done with this bill, an across-the-board cut would hurt core programs, would increase the investment deficits our communities across the country have had to overcome in the past years regardless of the value of the program. These increases are needed to support vital services and priorities, vital and effective programs which, quite frankly, have broad bipartisan support. The increases in these areas are needed to ensure adequate funding to support the food nutrition safety net for families that serve an estimated 10.1 million women and children in 2010, strengthen even more of America's commitment to meet humanitarian food aid needs, to enhance the FDA's capabilities to ensure the safety of our food and medical products. The bill also uses a portion of the increase to make up for cuts to farm bill conservation programs. We did not accept the cuts to priority farm bill conservation programs that the 2010 budget proposed. That budget made significant cuts to wetlands research programs, farmland protection, wildlife habitat programs, all effective programs with backlogs of applications from farmers and from ranchers. All told, the committee bill provides hundreds of millions in funding above the 2010 budget for farm bill conservation programs. Thus the bill uses a significant portion of the increase to make up for the cuts. In conclusion, I want to note that the increases in this bill are not based on the belief that we should just throw money at the challenges that we face. The increases are about meeting the Federal Government's obligations. Again, I think we need to take a look at core programs, whether it's USDA or FDA. The gentlewoman's amendment would force all of these agencies that cover rural development, food and drug safety, WIC, food stamps to seek drastic cuts in a time of acute need. I think this amendment is fiscally irresponsible. It will further harm our rural communities and our public health, and I urge my colleagues to oppose it. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time in opposition to the amendment.

Ms. DeLAURO. First of all, it's an 11 percent increase, not 14 percent. I'm trying to save your grandchildren's lives and other grandchildren's lives and my own as well. We have watched over the last several months and the last couple of years, and the ranking member of this committee understands this and knows this, and we inspect 1 percent of the food that comes into this country from overseas, 1 percent. And the cry has been that there have not been enough inspectors to be able to do that. We are unable to trace back what happened with regard to lettuce, to tomatoes, and others, all of which are putting our families at risk. Your cut, in fact, would put this agency back in jeopardy where it has been for the last several years. I resent the fact that you as a physician do not understand the value of what the Food and Drug Administration does and that it is responsible for lives. These are not roads. These are not bridges or parks. This is an agency that has authority over people's lives and the public health. I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. Announcement by the Chair

Ms. DeLAURO. I am happy to have you speak again. You reserved time. You know, we have just seen an E. coli outbreak in cookie dough. It highlights the importance of what these additional funds can help us to do. The E. coli bacteria lives inside animals, and that's why E. coli outbreaks are often associated with meat products. How, then, does E. coli get into cookie dough? Additional research on E. coli can help determine how it happened and results could prevent future outbreaks. In addition to the work on food safety, the increased funds will help the FDA work on new screening tests for blood-borne disease to better understand the adverse events related to medical devices that are used in pediatric hospitals. Another important tool that the additional funds will provide is to allow the FDA to make substantial investments in information technology for both foods and medical products. This allows the agency to receive and to better analyze adverse events electronically, support electronic submission of applications, and access old data for safety analyses. I strongly urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. I strongly oppose this amendment. This amendment would take away the entire increase over 2009 that is provided in this bill for the Food and Drug Administration. That increase will allow the agency to increase staffing, including staffing devoted to inspections and other field activities, make real improvements in FDA's work to ensure the safety of foods and medical products. For example, in the foods area, FDA will be able to conduct 1,150 more foreign and domestic food inspections and do 20,000 more examinations of imported food products. In the medical products area, FDA will conduct 3,300 more examinations of imported drug products and 4,400 more examinations of imported medical device products. The FDA will also be able to update its labs with new equipment, will allow it to do a faster analysis of examples. This is especially important during food-borne illness outbreaks. And we have watched what's happened in food-borne illness outbreaks not only in terms of the public health, but we have left industry out there to be exposed and to be able to lose their share, whether it is leafy greens, whether it's tomatoes, whatever it is, if we cannot allow these laboratories to function and to find out what's going on. The investments reap benefits in the next several years. New inspectors hired with funds in this bill are fully trained, bringing significantly more domestic and foreign inspections and import field exams and other activities by increases in the bill. We can do research on Salmonella and E. coli biomarkers, new methods of rapid detection of decontamination, improved ability to collect and analyze data on food-borne illnesses. And if you can't understand, when you listen to a mother who says my child of 2 years old died from E. coli contamination--

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.

Ms. DeLAURO. Well, what I would like to do is to see what the best opportunities are, but I have indicated my support for the amendment.

Ms. DeLAURO. This amendment increases the funding for the Natural Resources Conservation Service Account by $5 million by decreasing the Farm Service Agency salaries and expenses. While I am very supportive of the efforts of this amendment with regard to technical support and of easing the backlog, I must say that I do not think it is a good offset, but we did not write the language, and we will fix the offset in conference. With that, I urge the adoption of the amendment and ask for a ``yes'' vote on this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, though I plan to support the amendment, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. This amendment, as has been stated, increases funding for the Rural Energy for America Program by $2 million, taking that funding from the Office of the Chief Information Officer. The 2008 farm bill provided significant amounts of mandatory funding for this program, and this bill before us today increases that investment towards energy independence. I did not choose the offset that's included, and we may need to revisit that in conference, but I am a strong supporter of these efforts. I urge the adoption of the amendment and would ask for a ``yes'' vote on the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, though I plan to support the amendment, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.

Ms. DeLAURO. This amendment does transfer $10.038 million from the Office of Chief Information Officer to the Rural Water and Waste Disposal program. I support more funding for water and waste programs. I did not again here in this instance choose the offset that is included, and we may need to revisit that in the conference. I urge adoption of the amendment. I ask for a ``yes'' vote on the amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, although I plan to support the amendment, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.

Ms. DeLAURO. As I said, I plan to support the amendment, but the amendment as I say makes that transfer. I did not choose the offset that is included, and we may need to revisit that in conference. But I would be happy to accept the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.