Marcy Kaptur

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, coming from Iowa, I am sure that the gentleman has noted the greater and greater concentration in the agriculture industry, and it is much harder for producers to be company-equal partners in any kind of negotiation related to farm product and to actually bring that product to market. So I wanted to emphasize what the gentleman has been saying about how farms have had to get bigger and bigger and bigger, and even to try to meet market of today, it is almost impossible for many of these producers to do that. So I was interested in the gentleman's co-op experience and why that is relevant as we try to finance.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I wanted to commend the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich) for his leadership and moving the Congress to assure that consumers have quality foods and they do not have to worry about reactions, allergic reactions or dietary reactions to what are in foods. Even though at this point the gentleman has chosen to withdraw this amendment, his leadership has encouraged the subcommittee to include in the report directive language to get the U.S. Department of Agriculture to work more closely with the Food and Drug Administration to make sure that decisions are based on sound, verifiable science. We expect the Department to provide sufficient information to consumers about bioengineered foods, and we have included language explaining that we want the Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Department of Agriculture to work across agency lines to provide a unified approach to this type of consumer safety and consumer information. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman for his active leadership on this issue.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) to discuss her second amendment.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment, Amendment No. 15.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, again I want to thank the gentlewoman for her national leadership on this issue, and to say as we move towards conference, believe me, I will take these amendments into consideration and see if there is not some way that we can get additional momentum within the Department. There is absolutely no reason that a farmer against whom injury has been found should have to go bankrupt simply because the agency has not delivered the assistance in a timely manner and the award in a timely manner. So I think the gentlewoman has some excellent suggestions here. I am sure the farmers who are listening and those who are facing this litigation are very grateful for her leadership. I was listening to our former colleague, Congressman Kweisi Mufume, yesterday at the National Association for the Advancement of Colored Persons discuss the agricultural issue, and I do not know that I have ever heard that from the President of the NAACP before, but it is great to hear. It is a priority for them as well. We look forward to working for the gentlewoman. I thank her for her leadership on behalf of civil rights for farmers, regardless of color or region. I would say to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters), we appreciate her great, great heart and her sense of justice.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I want to say to the gentlewoman that in traveling the country and seeing that at least 70 percent of these civil rights cases are in the State of Mississippi, and in following a bit about how the cases are being adjudicated, I think the gentlewoman brings a very important set of issues to the floor today, and that is the difficulty with processing these cases, some of the bureaucratic, not just inertia, but, for example, when a case is settled, a claim is settled, then, for some reason, even after injury has been found, then that family's case is turned over to the FBI. Why? What is going on out there? Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) on such a critical question that the Department should be moving on expeditiously, and there should be justice in this system and justice should be swift and sure.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I wish to use this moment with all of our colleagues to extend deepest appreciation to our fine chairman of the Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration and Related Agencies, the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Skeen), for his leadership and great victory on this bill. It has been a joy to work with him, and I know that under the rules of the House because of rotation, he may not be able to serve in this capacity in the next year, although I hope we can change those rules. But I want to say he has been a true gentleman, a real scholar, someone who understands farming and ranching from the get-go. He truly is an advocate for our farmers and ranchers and a real friend to every single Member of this House. It has been a joy to work with him on this bill in this first year of the new century.

Ms. KAPTUR. I am sure the gentleman would agree with me that the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle) did an excellent, very fair-handed job with dispatch in the chair throughout these deliberations which lasted many, many hours, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 hours on this bill alone. To Hank Moore, Martin Delgado, John Ziolkowski, Joanne Orndorf; and our detailees, Anne DuBey and Maureen Holohan; and certainly Jim Richards from your staff and Roger Szemraj from my own and David Reich from the minority staff, I think they did an outstanding job on this very complicated bill.

Ms. KAPTUR. In closing, Mr. Speaker, I just want to say that the judge of every Member in this House really is the character of that individual in the end. The gentleman from New Mexico truly is a gentleman of his word. There is not a Member of this House on either side of the aisle that cannot go up to him and get a fair hearing. In the end, that is the measure of ourselves as an institution. It is just a joy to work with him and to serve with him.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. For example, we have a Member here who may want to be recognized at this point to ascertain whether her amendments would be in order under this unanimous consent agreement. I would not want to preclude the gentlewoman from being at least able to inquire as to whether those amendments would be allowed.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I believe these would be the only three amendments on this side that currently are not allowed under the unanimous consent request. They all concern serious issues of civil rights and litigation related to that at the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman so much for that allowance. We realize it is in the nature of an unusual request, but we were unprepared as well until very recently. I also thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters). Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Coburn) yield?

Ms. KAPTUR. I yield to the gentleman from New Mexico.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I would ask very simple questions of those who have drafted this amendment and are offering it. Do the gentlemen wish to do anything in this amendment that would lessen the inspection that the FDA does of drugs that may be manufactured or sold in another country and used by U.S. citizens? I want to understand the full intent of the amendment, because when the FDA Commissioner came before our subcommittee and I asked the question about drugs from other countries, she said that they could not give certainty that they were of equal quality.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I reluctantly rise in opposition to the amendment.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I am concerned about this amendment and perhaps others that will be offered only from the sense of safety. I rise in opposition, reluctantly, to enter into a colloquy with the gentleman who is offering the amendment here on our side. That is to ask, if a senior citizen, for example, goes on a bus trip from Maine or Ohio up to Canada or down to Mexico, when they go to a pharmaceutical operation and they go to buy a drug, let us say it is Claritin, how do they know that that is manufactured in any of the countries the gentleman is talking about with his amendment? Is it labeled? How do they know that it was manufactured in an FDA-approved facility? The gentleman says in his amendment that these drugs were approved for use within the United States and manufactured in an FDA-approved facility. Does it say that on the box? Can the gentleman assure me, unlike the FDA commissioner who appeared before our committee and did not have the confidence that the gentleman has that seniors could be assured of equal content and equal inspection of these drugs? How can the gentleman be so certain that they are getting a product of equal import? If the gentleman could answer that question.

Ms. KAPTUR. I yield to the gentleman from Maine.

Ms. KAPTUR. I would just say to the gentleman, in the food area they obviously do not have the same standards. In the drug area, their system is quite different.

Ms. KAPTUR. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, perhaps the officials from the Food and Drug Administration are listening to this debate. If there is any doubt in their minds as to the net effect of this amendment as we move towards conference, we can tighten up the language to make sure that we do nothing to lessen the food, drug, and safety laws of the country, which are the strongest in the world, to protect the health of our people. I know that neither gentlemen would want to undermine that. Obviously, they would want to improve it. Maybe there is some way that FDA could indicate on the boxes that it is from an FDA-approved facility. I think we want to give consumers ultimate confidence that the purchase they are making will not harm them.

Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the gentleman. I just wish we could power some of those sheep with some ethanol, but we will probably figure out a way to do that in the future.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment. I want to commend the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) for her great leadership on assuring that every child in this country obtains proper nutrition. Obviously, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) represents a different area of the country than I might coming from northwest Ohio or the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Sanford), the author of the amendment. However, I can tell my colleagues, even in my own district, some of the most instructive people one can speak with are the food service workers in our schools. It is very shocking to go into some of the schools and to talk to these food service workers who tell us about a young child that comes in on a Monday morning who has not eaten all weekend and who asks permission to eat two school breakfasts because he or she has not had a decent meal all weekend. It is sad to think that that can happen in America; but in fact, it is happening every day. I am sure in some communities it is happening more than in other places. I think as we use the school breakfast program to try to make sure that every child in these early years receives proper nutrition, and maybe that is a mothering role and so maybe the women of America feel more strongly about it, I think it is important to recognize that we need to understand how to make these programs work better to make sure that we are providing proper nutrition, to really understand which children may not be getting proper nutrition and what we can do about it. Hopefully, every child would get the food they need at home; but we know that that just is not the case in today's world with people working two and three shifts, different jobs, split shifts, all the rest. Sometimes just finding family time for dinner is difficult in today's world. That is not the world I grew up in, but it is the world that so many families deal with today. The money that we initially provided for this study totaled $7 million; and, in fact, the study is under way. The remaining $6 million that the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) and others have supported is coming from transferring monies out of the WIC program, the Women, Infants and Children's feeding program that are carrying over balances that are not needed because we are being successful with enrollment in that program, taking great care to be sure that sufficient dollars do remain in the WIC program. Nothing is more important than a good meal with proper nutrition for the learning ability of children. When they do not eat enough and they do not eat properly, they get tired. Their brains do not grow fast enough. Their early years are absolutely critical in producing a child that can fully function in this society. So I would urge defeat of the amendment of the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Sanford) and again compliment the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) for her outstanding leadership and her great heart on making sure that every child in America grows to their full potential, beginning with good nutrition.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I offer a sense of Congress resolution in the form of an amendment concerning ethanol and diesel fuels. Mr. Chairman, we all have seen the price of fuel rise across the country, spike, and cause businesses and households a great deal of economic anxiety this summer. It was but yet another example of our overdependence on imported fuels to move this economy. There is no one answer to that problem, but obviously we should all have a strong, very strong-willed position to move America toward any energy independence in our lifetime. One of the most important departments to help us do that is the Department of Agriculture. In fact, the potential for the expanded use of ethanol and biodiesel and biofuels of all kinds using cellulose from our fields and forests is absolutely unlimited and it is renewable. In addition to that, it is much less polluting. The State of Ohio, for example, I think leads the Nation in mixtures that involve ethanol. We have shown that research can be done in producing alternative fuels that benefit our environment, can actually help our engines burn more cleanly, and end our growing dependence. Over 60 percent of the fuel used to power this economy comes from foreign sources. It is our major strategic vulnerability. USDA has been helping in research, albeit slowly, over the years. We are making some progress. The intent of this resolution is to further encourage the Secretary of Agriculture to use ethanol, biodiesel, and other alternative fuels to the maximum extent practicable in all of USDA facilities across the country. There are hundreds. One of the areas in which we are successfully working is in the district of the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) in Beltsville, Maryland, at the chief research station in this country to power many of the land vehicles, tractors, and cars, used in that major research station. What we are asking USDA to do in this sense of Congress resolution is to exert the maximum effort possible and look at the other sites around the country, including cooperative efforts with our land grant universities, with other research sites across the country, with the headquarters facilities here in Washington, D.C., and really help lead America forward and develop the set of connections that can move product from the farm into industrial and agricultural use by the end user. So it is very straightforward, and if we are to be serious about alternative fuels, we must use every arrow in our quiver. We are asking the USDA to put added muscle behind this in every single facility that it operates across the country.