Nita Lowey

Mrs. LOWEY

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Durbin], the ranking minority member.

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Meehan].

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Arkansas [Mrs. Lincoln].

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Schumer].

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Andrews].

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Durbin].

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Greenwood].

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I think the intent of this amendment is clear. It was ruled in order by the parliamentarian, and as I understand it, we do not have an obligation to define it further. This amendment certainly expresses the intent.

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, as I understand it, I do not have the obligation to develop the point of order.

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, the intent of the amendment is clear.

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, as I understand it, it is not the responsibility of myself to develop the point of order.

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I believe, as the gentleman is aware, the amendment is printed in the Record, and the gentleman will have to state his point or order.

Mrs. LOWEY. Would the gentleman clarify the point of order?

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, may I have clarification on the gentleman's questions? Are they all part of the point of order?

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, as I believe this body is aware on appropriations bills, we have the right to offer a limitation amendment, but we do not have the right to dictate the policy. The intent of the amendment is clear.

Mrs. LOWEY. I am saying that I understand that the Department of Agriculture would understand the intent of the amendment and the appropriate process would follow.

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I received assurance that the Department of Agriculture would understand the intent of this amendment and would put in place appropriate steps to carry out the intent of this amendment.

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, the Lowey-Greenwood-Andrews-Schumer amendment would disqualify those earning more than $100,000 in off-farm income for receiving subsidy payments. That is off-farm income. The proposal would stop wealthy landowners who often do not live or work on their farms from receiving these subsidies. Mr. Chairman, the farm subsidy program was originally intended to help family farmers stay on their land and produce a crop. Today, too many subsidies go to independently wealthy, non-resident farm owners who do not work their own land. This amendment affirms our commitment to those family farmers who struggle each year to keep their farms an grow a crop. There are many people engaged in this debate who are saying we should eliminate all agricultural subsidies. I do not agree. But clearly we must make this program more accountable to the needs of America's farmers. This rational change in the program will ensure that those people receiving these subsidies truly deserve them. In an era of tight budgets, how can we justify giving these subsidies to millionaires like Sam Donaldson? It just does not make sense. According to USDA, this proposal will only affect 2 percent of farm owners. The proposal is supported by the Clinton administration, and groups as diverse as Citizens Against Government Waste, Citizens for a Sound Economy, the Environmental Working Group, the National Taxpayers Union, and USPIRG. It is in the CBO's Spending and Revenue Options, and even the Heritage Foundation supports the concept. CBO estimates that this amendment will save $41 million in fiscal year 1996 alone, and USDA estimates a 5-year savings of $450 million. Mr. Chairman, this proposal makes fiscal sense, and it makes policy sense. I urge my colleagues to support the Lowey-Greenwood-Andrews- Schumer amendment.

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, is the gentleman from Kansas proceeding with his point of order?

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mrs. LOWEY. I just want to be sure that at the end of yielding the time I still have the 30 minutes, 15 minutes on each side to debate.

Mrs. LOWEY. Yes, Mr. Chairman.

Mrs. LOWEY. I certainly accept that Mr. Chairman.

Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.