Sam Farr

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and career of a remarkable American who has spent the last half century helping to turn food into public art. John Pisto is one of the original celebrity chefs. He is part of the cutting edge group of restaurant professionals who have brought the creativity, artisanship, art, and excitement of America's best professional kitchens to the attention of the general public. And in doing so he has helped make his hometown of Monterey, California, one of the world's finest culinary treasures. Chef Pisto was born in Syracuse New York, on October 16, 1941. His Italian immigrant parents, Santo and Santa Pisto, soon moved to Monterey, CA where Santo worked as a tailor for the Naval Postgraduate School. After graduating from Monterey High School, Pisto began work as a line cook at a fish house on Fisherman's Wharf, adjacent to Monterey harbor. Within a couple years he had learned, saved, and bought the place. The fish house began to acquire a large local following and soon celebrities such as Clint Eastwood and Doug McClure began flocking to what was one of the few wharf restaurants that actually served fresh fish harvested from the Monterey Bay. After years of working as a top line chef, Pisto found his calling in developing new restaurants. Pisto first established Domenico's on the Wharf in the late 80's, then followed up with the Abalonetti Seafood Trattoria, followed by Paradiso Trattoria, and finally the Whaling Station. Located in the heart of Monterey's famous Cannery Row, Pisto's Whaling Station has earned an international reputation for some of the world's best steaks and freshest seafood. Each of these creations have both boosted the Monterey Peninsula's dynamic tourism industry and added to Monterey's hometown charm for its own residents. However, Pisto is best known as the host of ``Monterey's Cookin' Pisto Style''. His unique style of cooking brings simplicity to recipes thought difficult to prepare, always with a touch of humor and informality. Pisto will often take viewers on adventures to culinary exploits around the world, then return to kitchen to prepare a recipe related to the excursion. The show has been filmed in China, Tunisia, Italy, France, Thailand, Portugal, Spain, Costa Rica, and Croatia, as well as dozens of U.S. locales. Celebrity guests have also been brought onto to the show, such as the legendary Julia Child, renown chef Charlie Trotter, musicians Michael Bolton, Johnny Rivers, Sammy Hagar, racing legend Mario Andretti, and the past Secretary of Defense and personal friend, Leon Panetta. As Pisto slows down his schedule after years of dynamic work, it is appropriate to reflect on how much he has enriched our lives. And while he may let his business involvement cool down to a low simmer, I know that Pisto will continue to enrich the community that has benefited so much from his efforts over the past 50 years. Mr. Speaker, I know I speak for the whole House in offering John Pisto, his wife Cheryl, son Dana, and daughters Kim and Gia our gratitude and best wishes. Buon appetito!

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to bring to the attention of the House the powerful effect that National Night Out has on our communities' continued unity and success. Next month, we will celebrate the event's 30th anniversary. The annual event was started in 1984 by the National Town Watch Association in order to incite local cultural and philanthropic interests in the name of crime prevention and promoting deeper community relations. On Tuesday, August 7, 1984, 2.5 million Americans participated across 400 communities in 23 states. Presently, through the efforts of thousands of hard-working Americans with those missions in mind, National Night Out comprises 37.8 million people across 16,124 communities in all 50 states, U.S. Territories, Canadian cities, and military bases around the world. My district contains the City of Salinas, an agricultural hub, providing fresh produce throughout the United States. The City of Salinas struggles with crime and, as often follows, social splintering among residents--partially due to gang-related violence. But time and time again, my constituents and organizations in the community come together to support each other and to remind the community that peace is the answer. This year the City of Salinas' National Night Out has approximately 30 organizations taking part in the Community Safety Fair and Peace March. Some of the organizations include: A Time for Grieving and Healing, Second Chance, County of Monterey, Clinica De Salud del Valle de Salinas, Monterey County Rape Crisis Center, Natividad Medical Center, Partners for Peace, Peacock Acres, United Farm Workers Foundation, United Way, and Sun Street Centers that are dedicated to creating unity and peace in the community. Mr. Speaker, National Night Out will spread the message of unity and positive energy to communities throughout the United States, including Salinas, the way Salinas has shared Salinas-grown fresh produce throughout the country. I commend all of the participants taking part in National Night Out on their contribution to the worthy goal of eliminating crime and encouraging deeper community relations.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I stand today in the well to appeal to my Republican colleagues about this debate, which isn't about the underlying bill, it is about the rule. You ought to all be worried. We all ought to be worried. This rule is a sham to the institution of Congress. I am an appropriator, and I am proud to do that. We respect the jurisdiction of all other committees. That is why we have standing committees. We don't do their business. This rule ignores all the standing committees in Congress. This rule says you can write a bill in the darkness of night. Nobody has read it. No Republicans read it, no Democrats read it. You can pick it up in the hallway here. I read it this morning. The rule waives all points of opposition, which we say in this rule, ``All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived.'' All points--that means all the ideas of all the committees that are supposed to be writing these bills. Nobody is going to be thanked if they vote for this. First of all, nobody is going to thank you for voting for the rule because it does so many things that misjudge the purpose of Congress, misappropriate the purposes of Congress, which is to have transparency and allow people to get into the debate. Nobody who understands the problem in the embassies of the host country was able to testify. Nobody in the administration who deals with the border was able to testify. No Member of Congress who has some knowledge about this was able to testify. This bill says: So what? We wrote the bill, and you just have to accept it, and if you any objections, we waive all those points of orders. So the rule does a disservice to Congress, and it ought to be rejected. Secondly, on the bill, when you get to it, if it isn't rejected-- first of all, if we reject the rule, nothing is broken. We can fix it. We can make it better because no own is going to thank you for voting for this. Just to show you how outrageous it is, it says to the host countries that: we are going to give you money, but you have 15 days to convene your legislatures and enact legislation, secure your borders, and make sure everything is secure. You couldn't do that in Washington in 15 days, much less essentially Third World countries. There are all kinds of provisions in here that don't make any sense and don't help fix anything that is broken, and for all the testimony you have just heard, there are a lot of other things that need to be addressed that aren't in this bill. So my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, the best thing we can do to respect this institution is to reject this rule and vote ``no.''

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of House Concurrent Resolution 105. From day one, I have used my voice and my vote to promote peace in Iraq. Now, more than ever, that country and its citizens deserve peace. Accordingly, any decision to escalate our military involvement in this war-torn country must be careful, deliberative, and include Congress. I was proud to be one of the first cosponsors of H. Con. Res. 105, which stipulates that ``the President shall not deploy or maintain United States Armed Forces in a sustained combat role in the Iraq without specific statutory authorization for such use enacted after the date of the adoption of this concurrent resolution.'' There is no question that sectarian violence in Iraq poses a grave danger to both the country and region's stability. But before military options are put on the table, we must exhaust every possible diplomatic solution. Diplomacy and debate leads to lasting peace and stabilization, and at this point, I do not believe that sending more of our brave women and men to Iraq will win the peace. And I know I am not alone in this call for peace. But while it is one thing to express the desire for peace, it is a perhaps more daunting task to do what it takes to achieve peace. Change is afoot in Iraq's leadership, and I am hopeful they can move swiftly towards a more inclusive government that reflects the diversity of religions and prioritizes the meaningful stability and security for all citizens. I will continue to watch this situation closely and insist that Congress be consulted for any matter involving U.S. military involvement. The stakes are too high and the cost is too great. I strongly urge you to vote in favor of this resolution.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Thank you very much for yielding. Thank you for your leadership on this bill. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill for many reasons. The first reason is that America needs to market itself. You think that, oh, everybody loves America, but I found in my travels in talking with people that not everybody has the same opinion about America. Right now, if you turn on your television, the rest of the world is trying to get people who live in this country to go travel to their country--go to Spain; go to the Caribbean; go to New Zealand; go everywhere; go to Canada. It is all trying to get our people to be tourists in their country. Well, finally, we did something about it. We have been doing this in agriculture for a long time. With the Agricultural Marketing Act, we decided, well, let's market America. Let's tell people what this great country is, how you can get here, and what you are going to see when you get here. It has had a tremendous effect. It really has. It, to me, is the biggest jump-starter for jobs that we can do because tourism is everywhere. It is all those things. It is little restaurants. It is museums. It is essentially Washington, D.C., from parks to rivers to everything. That is what America is made of. There is also, I think, in this hot world right now, this complicated world--the news is full of bad stuff, and, unfortunately, America, because of all our movies and television, also has an opinion of people this is the most dangerous country in the world to visit. We have got to get over that, because everybody who comes here finds that it is not true at all. It is very friendly people and wonderful help. So it is very important. It is kind of foreign policy to say: Come on, come see this great country, this little pillar of the world, and meet the people. Next year, we are going to have the 100th anniversary of our National Park System. We are the only country in the world that has a national park system like this one. They are the most beautiful places in America. I would suggest that, frankly, this is a great, bipartisan product. Mr. Bilirakis and I have been cochairs of this Tourism Caucus. We have been trying to get every Member to join. It was interesting; we got more Democrats to join the caucus than Republicans. And hopefully now with this bill and this sort of discussion of how important this is to your local districts, and there is isn't a chamber of commerce in the United States that isn't watching this vote and hoping that we will pass this bill because those tourists, just like politics, all of it is local. All tourism is local. They go to some community, and they go to the main street and they help the small businesses. I represent a pretty remote area of California called Big Sur, a beautiful coastline. The foreign tourists are carrying the economy of that area by their visits. The Europeans are visiting it in greater numbers than ever before. If you talk to any of the merchants, they will say, but for that European travel after the recession we have had, we wouldn't be recovering like it is. So I want every Member of Congress to join our caucus because what do we do? Caucuses produce things. We produced this reauthorization, a bill, and Mr. Bilirakis as cochair carried it, and he has done a tremendous job. It is important that we focus for a moment on the importance of tourism as an industry just like steel, electronics, and airlines, but it is made up of all these other parts. That industry is in every single congressional district. If this is the tide that lifts the ships that bring the tourists here, it is also the tide that will help leave that tourist tax dollar, that tourist expenditure dollar in our local community and hire people to be a service-oriented industry. So I applaud our colleagues in Congress for reauthorizing. We have done this before without controversy because it is a pay-for. It is already paid for. It is not a tax. It is a fee that is levied on tourists coming to this country to get a visa, and a portion of that fee then goes into paying for this promotion. So it is a win-win. It is a job promotion, and it is good for everybody. I hope we get a unanimous vote on both sides of the aisle, and I hope those that vote for it will also join the Tourism Caucus.

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, as co-chair of the Congressional Travel and Tourism Caucus, I am pleased to see the House of Representatives take up the Travel Promotion, Enhancement, and Modernization Act of 2014 today. I want to thank my caucus co-chair, Rep. Gus Bilirakis, for introducing this legislation to reauthorize Brand USA--our nation's Destination Marketing Organization or DMO. This legislation will allow our country to continue its success in the international travel and tourism market, bringing greater numbers of international visitors to our shores. These travelers provide a substantial boost to our economy and produce many U.S. jobs. Did you know that international visitors coming to the United States are measured as an export? They are, and travel and tourism is the top export industry. Number One! Seventy million international visitors, spending over $180 billion, have produced a trade surplus every year since 1989--and Brand USA is a crucial part of this. Brand USA's most recent annual report showed that FY13 saw an increase of 1.1 million visitors. That increase brings an additional $3.4 billion in spending to our economy and supports over 50,000 new jobs. International visitors are drawn to America's well known destinations like New York, Los Angeles, Orlando, and Chicago. And yet, it is our ``amber waves of grain'' and ``purple mountain majesties'' that attract travelers to all corners of our country. Our scenery sells us to the world and the upcoming 100th Anniversary of the National Park Service will highlight some of our most notable scenery. Brand USA's efforts bring substantial benefits to our economy with a return on investment of more than 30 to 1. If only my investments did this well. This unbeatable value is done at no U.S. taxpayer expense. Funding for this program is provided by the international visitors who come to the United States. Mr. Speaker, I like to point out that travel and tourism is in every state, every territory, and congressional district across this country, and I encourage all my colleagues to join Rep. Bilirakis and myself in supporting America's travel and tourism industry by voting aye for this bipartisan legislation.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise to bring to the House's attention the wonderful work of a California resident, Joyce Stevens. She is an environmentalist for all seasons and has done more in her quiet manner than any other single person in our community. She was a leading figure in the creation of the Big Sur Land Trust, the Monterey Bay State Seashore, the Fort Ord Beach State Park lands and numerous local parks and sanctuary lands protections. The residents of and visitors to the Monterey Bay region have Joyce to thank in no small way for the natural beauty they enjoy. Joyce was born in Seattle, Washington in 1927. She graduated from the University of Washington in 1954 with a degree in architecture. Encountering gender discrimination in this ``man's field,'' and looking at the experiences of female civilians working for the government, she decided that she would be happier in that environment. As a single mother, she moved to Carmel, California in 1962 and took a job as Post Engineer at Fort Ord, working there until her retirement more than 20 years later. One of Joyce's proudest achievements was designing the Post Chapel at Fort Hunter Liggett. It is located near the Hacienda, which was designed by another female California architect, Julia Morgan. She also convinced (pestered, actually) the army into protecting some rare native plant habitat at Fort Ord. Because of her persistence she had the satisfaction of seeing Fort Ord receive ecology awards. Joyce's commitment to the community is unparalleled. She appointed herself full-time activist to save everything we all love about the Monterey Peninsula. As chair of the Ventana Chapter of the Sierra Club, she was devoted to protecting our local natural setting. She served on the Board of Trustees of Big Sur Land Trust, which is dedicated to preserving the wild lands of Big Sur. Joyce joined Pine Watch to educate people about the significance of our native Monterey Pine Forest, with the goal of creating a Monterey Pine State Park. She also created the Hatton Canyon Coalition to preserve the scenic beauty of Carmel and the canyon. But of all her work, my personal favorite was the time she spent with my father, the late State Senator Fred Farr, in forming the Odello Land Acquisition Fund, or OLAF, to preserve the open space at the mouth of the Carmel River. That land now forms the heart of Carmel River State Park. For over 20 years Joyce served on the Carmel Area Wastewater District. She became known as the ``Sewer Queen'' for her work to save the Carmel River by encouraging the increased use of treated wastewater and thus reduce pumping from the river. She formed the Dunes Coalition to save the Monterey Bay shores from development. Eventually this concept grew into the Monterey Bay State Shore. Joyce Stevens has spent her life ensuring that the quality of life on the Monterey Peninsula be improved through sound land use management. She brings a voice of reason to every debate knowing so well the value aesthetics plays in our communities and the role resource protection adds to its economic value. Through interpretation, the education process is enhanced allowing the political leaders to enact best management practices. For all of us in elected office, her gift is our gain. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Members of the House we thank her for her leadership, showing one person can make a difference, and wish her the happiest of birthdays.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and celebrate the 30th anniversary of the Catholic Charities Diocese of Monterey. Established in 1984, Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Monterey is a faith- based, nonprofit social service agency providing aid to individuals and families in the four California Central Coast counties of Monterey, Santa Cruz, San Benito, and San Luis Obispo. Formed with a mission to assist individuals and families of all backgrounds and beliefs by providing them with tools, training, and resources to help meet basic necessities for life, Catholic Charities also provides information and referrals to social service agencies in each community it serves. The people of California's Central Coast are fortunate to be served by this distinguished organization. Serving over 20,000 individuals annually, Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Monterey provides help and creates hope through its three core areas of service: Mental Health Counseling, Immigration and Citizenship, and Family Supportive Services. By taking into account the whole person as well as the family and life situation, the organization takes a holistic approach to helping people change their lives, rise up out of poverty, and overcome the barriers to self-sufficiency. Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Monterey is affiliated with Catholic Charities USA, the nation's largest social services network that serves more than seven million people each year. Catholic Charities Diocese of Monterey is dedicated to addressing the root causes of poverty and participates in the Campaign to Cut Poverty, part of a nationwide effort started by Catholic Charities USA, and collaboration with coalitions of community- based organizations, interfaith allies, government representatives, and business leaders in the four counties of the Diocese of Monterey to cut poverty in half by 2020. Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Monterey is one of the few non- profit organizations in the region that is certified by the Board of Immigration Appeals, which is the highest administrative body responsible for recognizing and accrediting organizations that practice before the immigration courts. They provide guidance for those who struggle in achieving lawful permanent residence status and those who wish to become citizens of our nation. Catholic Charities staff are a significant resource in our communities known for their experience in the processes of becoming legal residents and/or citizens. Staff ensures full and accurate assistance for the current and ever growing, caseload of 5,000 clients annually in addition to over 9,000 services for consultation, replacement of legal permanent cards, work authorization renewal, applications for U.S. citizenship and English translation of certificates of birth, marriage, divorce, death and adoption. In the fall of 2013, Catholic Charities Diocese of Monterey assisted 400 youth and young adults with the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals and work authorization applications. No doubt those numbers will continue to grow given the recent extension of the program. Catholic Charities is one of the few trusted organizations in our community and we are lucky to have them. Mr. Speaker, I know the whole House joins me in congratulating Catholic Charities Diocese of Monterey on its 30th anniversary, and commend the organization for its many contributions and quality of service to the public.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a great American, George Tanimura, on the occasion of his reaching his 100th year. George has lived a remarkable life that has spanned the Great Depression, WWII, and the rise of the modern information economy. In that time George confronted prejudice, helped to rebuild a dislocated community, nurtured a large extended family, and fostered the development of the modern produce industry. George is a farmer's farmer. As one of the founders of the Tanimura & Antle, he has helped build one of the nation's largest private lettuce producers. So while you may have never heard of George Tanimura, I can guarantee that every Member of this House has eaten something that George and his family have grown. He has planted and nurtured a legacy that will produce a crop for generations to come. George was born in San Juan Bautista on July 2, 1915. His parents had emigrated from Japan to build a better life in the United States. While attending grammar school in Castroville, George thinned iceberg lettuce on his father's small farm. After his mother died, George, the eldest of 12 siblings, had to leave high school to farm with his father. Then when George was just 16, his father died leaving George with the responsibility for the family and their farm. In the midst of the depression, George became the patriarch of his large family. Under his leadership, the Tanimura children began their own prosperous farming operations. However, just as they were recovering, the U.S. entry into WWII turned the Tanimuras' lives upside down. In 1942, they found themselves imprisoned by our government along with other Americans of Japanese descent in remote internment camps across the desert West. And even though the Tanimuras lost everything, two of his brothers fought with the U.S. Army in Europe. For George, his time in the camp offered him another opportunity to find fortune in the midst of adversity. He met Masaye Yamauchi and they were married on September 21, 1944. Upon release, the Tanimura family farmed small patches of land, saved the profits, and ultimately purchased their first acre of land. This simple formula began the Tanimuras trek toward the American Dream. In the late 1950s, the Tanimuras began to grow exclusively for Bud Antle. Bud, and his son Bob, had been working closely with the Tanimura family for many years. Finally in 1982, George and Bob combined over 30 years of mutual friendship, respect, and experience to create Tanimura & Antle. The new company combined the Antle's shipping and marketing savvy with the Tanimura's growing expertise. That combination has helped T&A grow into one of the world's premier fresh produce companies. And it forms the basis of T&A's continued success. Family and community are very important to George. George and Masaye have two children, Glenn (Sheila) Tanimura and Leslie (Ken) Morishita. They also have 4 grandchildren and 2 great-grandchildren. George has served countless community efforts giving his leadership, dedication, and wealth to making his region a better place for all families. But his deep sense of humility keeps him from claiming any recognition other than his simple refrain of ``it doesn't matter, I'm just a farmer.'' That, Mr. Speaker, is the essence of George Tanimura--a humble farmer whose hard work and integrity have helped create one of the pillars of the American agricultural economy. George and the men and women like him are the bed rock of our nation. I know I speak for the whole House in extending the gratitude of the United States to George and his family for 100 years of excellence.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Thank you for yielding. Madam Chair, this bill has in its title ``America That Works.'' It is not going to work with this provision in it, and that is why the bill fails. I think year after year of failing and failing is a policy of upward failure. It makes no sense not to allow all the Federal agencies to coordinate. We do that in the military. This would be like restricting the ability of the military to coordinate between services. So we do it with shipping lanes, we do it with wildlife, we do it with habitat protection. It is just smart. The spatial planning in the National Ocean Policy, for the first time, saves a lot of money because all these Federal agencies now sit down and talk about how they can carry out the policies that they are responsible for. You wipe all that. No dialogue, no communication, no ability to reach agreements in a way by this crazy restrictive language. Without this amendment, this bill proves that America can't work. I urge adoption of the amendment.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Robert V. Antle on the occasion of his recognition by the Grower-Shipper Association with the E.E. ``Gene'' Harden Award for Lifetime Achievement. Bob is a remarkable American whose vision, innovation, and hard work has helped to shape the Salinas Valley and build one of the largest and most innovative family-owned produce companies in the world. Bob was born in Salinas, California, in 1935. In 1949, while still in high school, Bob joined his father, Bud Antle, in the family's lettuce harvest operation. During that time he started to learn the produce business from the ground up. After graduating from Watsonville High School, Bob attended Stanford University. While at Stanford, Bob married Sue Merrill Crawford. Bob and Sue have been blessed with four children, Rick, Karen, Kathy, and Mike and further blessed with 17 wonderful grandchildren and 1 great-grandchild. After graduating from Stanford in 1957, Bob joined his family's business and took charge of its carrot operation known as ``Antle Carrots.'' He excelled in all aspects of the business and even built a field pack carrot machine. Bob then moved into Sales and Marketing eventually becoming the General Sales Manager. In 1966, Bob relocated to the East Coast to develop the House of Bud, a fruit and vegetable wholesaler. Under Bob's leadership, the House of Bud opened facilities in New York, Boston, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, and Belgium. In 1972, Bud Antle unexpectedly passed away at age 58. Bob, following his father's leadership and example, then became the CEO of all Antle activities. After six years of further developing and growing these businesses, Bob merged the Bud Antle companies with Castle & Cooke, now Dole Food Company, and joined their senior management team. Over the course of his produce career, Bob is credited with implementing several major produce industry initiatives, such as wrapping fresh vegetables in the field, developing distribution centers for the introduction of wrapped lettuce and other source packaged fruits and vegetables, and producing crops from transplants. During the late 1940s, Bob met the Tanimura family who operated one of the produce farming operations that his father Bud worked with. Bob and the Tanimuras maintained and strengthened that relationship over the years. Finally in 1982, Bob and the Tanimura brothers combined over 50 years of mutual friendship, respect, and experience to create Tanimura & Antle. The new company combined the Antles' packing, shipping, and marketing expertise with the Tanimuras' growing expertise. That combination has helped T&A grow into one of the world's premier fresh produce companies. And it forms the basis of T&A's continued success. While Bob is a towering figure in the fresh produce community, his leadership extends well beyond the industry. Bob is Co-Chairman of the Leon and Sylvia Panetta Institute, past president of the President's Council at California State University Monterey Bay, and Founding President of Central Coast Water Quality Preservation, Inc. Bob also actively supports the University of Arizona. In March 2005, he was appointed to the California State Senate Commission: Agricultural Worker Housing and Health. Mr. Speaker, I know I speak for the whole House in commending Bob Antle for helping Americans eat better food and the people of the Central Coast live better lives.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise having cosponsored this bill as the ranking member on the Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee. I have to say that I think we have worked very well together. We have worked together as chair and ranking member over a period of time. It is an interesting perspective. I think we have crossed the cultural divide when a Californian can understand the language of an Alabaman, and we have become friends. I have to say that probably 90 percent of this bill is something we all agree on. Ten percent is what we don't agree on, and it is a horrible 10 percent--a big 10 percent. The bill allocates $20.8 billion, which is the same as what we came up with last year in the conference level. I appreciate the working relationship that Mr. Aderholt already outlined and the wonderful staff that both his office and I have, and my office and the committee has. We all work well together as a team. So we bring this bill to the floor today. It is quite a privilege to be able to have this position, and I think that we all understand the privilege, because the USDA, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which is our main focus, in addition to the Food and Drug Administration, and to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the Department of Agriculture, many people don't understand, was created during the Civil War by Abraham Lincoln. It was a department that needed to be created as the United States was facing the Western expansion. Abraham Lincoln was very insightful in realizing that people who moved out into the boonies needed help. There is no infrastructure there. There is nothing there. It became kind of a home ec department. And to this day, the Department of Agriculture still has a division of rural water, a division of rural housing, farmworker housing, and of rural telecommunications. It is obviously involved with all the science research in agriculture and a big research section. The USDA has a specialist in almost every county in the United States and almost every country in the world, as we have ag advisers in all of our Embassies. It is an awesome responsibility to govern a very complex system of trade and balances, of phytosanitary inspections, of fighting diseases that get into this country. And it is a lot of fun, also, and I think that is why we get along well trying to put together a good bill. Now, I voted against this bill in committee because of the concerns of several aspects. Among these concerns are two highly objectionable nutrition riders. I am really concerned that the bill would allow school food authorities to get waivers from complying with the improved lunch and breakfast nutrition standards in the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, which we enacted in 2010. The bill would allow them to get waivers if they show they are operating at a net loss. I believe that rather than going backwards and serving children in some schools less healthy meals, we should be encouraging the USDA to continue giving schools the technical assistance they need to meet the standards. We should also be encouraging USDA to continue providing flexibility, where warranted, in meeting nutritional standards. The approach in this bill, however, is unacceptable. Second, despite the recommendations of the medical community indicating that consumption of starchy vegetables meets or exceeds recommended amounts, and the food in-take data showing that white potatoes are the most widely used vegetables and therefore by law or by statute have been excluded from the WIC program, where you get vouchers to buy fresh fruits and vegetables, this bill allows white potatoes to be purchased under that program. It is not necessary at all. The white potato lobby is a very effective lobby. I am troubled by the inclusion of this bill requiring white potatoes be eligible for purchase in the WIC program. The WIC program, as I said, gives supplemental nutrition through specified foods, and white potatoes is not one of them. So there are some real concerns with this bill. This is the first time that Congress has dictated as to what has to be purchased with those vouchers, and we have never before mandated an inclusion of a specific food item in the WIC food package in the history of the program. While the funding levels in this bill are, in general, acceptable, there are some exceptions. The most notable to that is the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. This is a Commission that reviews about $300 trillion in trade. That is almost $1 trillion a day. And what we do is provide funding to have the referees so that they know when the trading is being fair or not fair, and it is essentially a review process, but they need money to hire those referees, as we call them. The President asked for $62 million more than we are allowing him to have to fill the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Those are big concerns. On the positive side, the bill restores the Food for Peace funding to 2014 levels. It increases the McGovern-Dole program by $13 million over the 2014 levels. But I am also concerned that in these programs there is an exclusion of important reforms that would have furthered the impact of each dollar spent on food aid. Given the high level of need, our food aid has to be as cost effective and as efficient as possible, so I am disappointed that food aid reforms enabling more people to be fed at lower cost were not included in the bill. I would like to say that you are going to hear a lot of my colleagues raise issues on some of these issues because it is very important that we try to get it right and hopefully defeat some of the bad provisions that are in this bill. Food is peace. America leads the world in food assistance. California is the number one agriculture State in the Union. I am proud to be the ranking member in bringing this bill to the floor for healthy debate. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), the ranking member of the full committee.

Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Roybal-Allard), the second generation of congresspersons from the Roybal family.

Mr. FARR. Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

Mr. FARR. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey, Dr. Holt.

Mr. FARR. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlelady from New Mexico (Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham).

Mr. FARR. Mr. Chair, may I inquire as to how much time each side has remaining?

Mr. FARR. Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from the great State of California (Mr. George Miller), the author of the Child Nutrition Act. He probably knows more about child nutrition than anybody in Congress.

Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. First of all, I would like to announce that the Tom Colicchio group-- he is one of those celebrity chefs and his group is called the Food Policy Action Network--they have told us that they are going to score the vote on this bill because of this provision that we are talking about right now and the amendment that I am going to offer to strike the provision. The reason I want to strike the provision in the bill is because it just gives it a blank waiver. It says, schools, you don't have to comply. That is too broad. We could have worked out some compromise language and more flexible language. But just to give them blank waiver, I think, is just an opt-out and doesn't necessarily get them back in, doesn't have any guidelines for how you can improve and get back on track. That's why I think it is a pretty extreme provision in the bill and ought to be knocked out. Another reason is that we are paying for it. The taxpayers of this country put up the money and we are allocating it to this program, and I don't think the taxpayers want their money to go to food that isn't nutritious, that doesn't help kids to be healthier. I am not insinuating that the other side wants that, but I am saying that with that money, as in everything we do in the whole rest of this bill, it comes with conditionality. Congress is a heavy parent. We don't just give money out. We also give instructions on what to spend it for and not to spend it for. When we are giving money to schools for school nutrition--for school lunch, school breakfast, school snack programs--we put some conditionality in it, and the conditionality is, let's buy healthy food with it, fruits and vegetables, and serve them to the kids. I know there are places that say that is not what the kids eat at home or what they like, and so they are throwing it away. That is called ``plate waste.'' But frankly, there is plate waste in our cafeteria here in Congress. There is plate waste everywhere. There is too much plate waste in America. When so much of the world can't get access to food we are throwing away about 50 percent of what we prepare every day, which is just appalling. How do you change that? One is you get kids to like what they are eating. We have to encourage our kids to eat vegetables. As was said earlier, you have to encourage your kids to take a bath, you have to encourage your kids to turn off the television set, you have to encourage your kids to do the math homework that they don't want to do. We give instruction. I think what is missing in this whole debate is the instructional opportunity. Frankly, America has got to face the fact that we have not really put much attention into raising a culture of people that have values in food health, in body health, and the fast food industry has been very good at getting a lot of sugar, a lot of salt, a lot of things out there that taste really great, and people want to eat that all the time, but your body is not made to handle all that. I think it is an opportunity for us to use the school nutrition program as a learning method. I point out that when I grew up there weren't any fast foods. McDonald's was the first fast food industry to come to our area. It came to the biggest city in my county in 1964. I had already graduated from college. So all my youth experience was eating at home, eating in the school, and there were never any fast foods. It was all fresh prepared every day. I didn't have the ability to get all that. If anything, it was in a can, and a whole new industry was developing to have fresh frozen. So we have an opportunity to help our national security problem with food nutrition because the military officers tell us that 75 percent of the youth today cannot qualify to get in the military--75 percent. That is just appalling. That is why they have indicated that we need to have a school nutrition program. We also see it in health care costs, the biggest cost in America. Why we did this whole health care reform was to bring down cost. Underlying all of that was, hey, we are going to raise healthier people in this country so we can avoid--the ounce of prevention--avoid those expensive costs when people get diabetes, obesity, and other things that are preventable. So what better way to teach the cost of prevention than through nutritional health and exercise. Lastly, why it is important that we wipe out this provision in the bill is because we are paying. The money is all there. So the schools that would be able to get the flexibility that you talk about, the waiver, they get to keep all the money but they don't have any of the responsibility to deliver the product, to deliver the nutritional foods. I think that is where we are wrong. We can't just give them money and then no responsibility to be wisely spent on the purposes for which it was intended. So that amendment is going to come up later, and I hope that I can get support from this amendment across the aisle.

Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining so I can see how much time I can yield?

Mr. FARR. All right. I yield to the gentleman from Tennessee for a colloquy.

Mr. FARR. Thank you for asking. The other provision is not in this school nutrition program, but in the WIC--the Women, Infants, and Children--program where we give vouchers to mothers of newborns or pregnant women in expectation that they are having children. To give them access to healthy fruits and vegetables we give them vouchers. In that recommended formula, what the voucher should be spent on is, they are not allowed to spend them on white potatoes. Why? Because Americans eat about 90 pounds of white potatoes or potatoes per year. Think of it. They have hash browns for breakfast, french fries for lunch, and baked potatoes for night. That is a lot of potatoes in one day. Certainly, a newborn and about-to-be-born are not necessarily needing potatoes. Nonetheless, the potato industry is very powerful here and they were able to get a provision in demanding that the vouchers also include the ability to buy white potatoes. That is what stirred up this whole comment, because Congress has never dictated as to what you have to buy with it or to get into buying things that haven't been recommended as nutritional.

Mr. FARR. It is often said as a food analogy that if you like sausages or laws you should never watch either of them being made. Perhaps what you are watching is that white potato mandate is getting stuck into this bill.

Mr. FARR. Mr. Chairman, we worked hard to try to put together a pretty good bill, except for these two provisions that we were just talking about and the underfunding of the Federal Commodities Futures Trading Commission, and we will be having amendments on those issues. I reserve the balance of my time.