Collin Peterson

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the chairman of the Livestock, Dairy and Poultry Subcommittee, my friend, the distinguished gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Boswell). (Mr. BOSWELL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Chair, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining on both sides?

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Chairman, I am now pleased to recognize the chairman of our General Farm Commodities Subcommittee, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Etheridge), for 2 minutes.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. I am now pleased to recognize another subcommittee chairman, the chairman of the Specialty Crops Subcommittee and my good friend from North Carolina (Mr. McIntyre) for 2 minutes.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Chair, I yield myself 15 seconds to respond. I just want people to remember what happened with the '95-'96 farm bill, which was a partisan farm bill. So, we've been down this road before. I recognize the distinguished subcommittee chairman, my good friend, Mr. Holden from Pennsylvania, chairman of the Conservation Credit, Energy and Research Subcommittee and vice-chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, for 2 minutes.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Chairman, I am pleased to yield 6 minutes to the distinguished Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, my good friend Mr. Lantos from California.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. We have a colloquy that I would like to do during this time if it's okay with the ranking member.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Chairman, I urge adoption of the amendment.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Salazar), one of our great new members of the committee.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Chairman, I am pleased to recognize the distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mahoney), one of our great new members of the committee, for 1 minute.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Chairman, I am pleased to recognize the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Space), one of our other new Members, and a great member of the committee, for 1 minute.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Chairman, I'm pleased to recognize for 1 minute my good friend and neighbor from Minnesota, a new member of our committee, Mr. Walz.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Chairman, pursuant to House Resolution 574, I offer amendments en bloc, including germane modifications. The amendments are at the desk.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. I want to thank the gentlelady and Mr. Obey and others for working to put together this bill. The Agriculture Committee is very interested, obviously, in the disaster provisions in this bill. It's something that we've been working on for a long time and we've been trying to get accomplished the last couple of years. In my particular district, we had our agriculture disaster back in May of 2005, and the guys are still having a tough time keeping their head above water. We've been waiting a long time for this. As has been said by other people, this is something that affects just about every part of the country. And it is a true emergency because this is something that is beyond the control of producers, and it is something that we ought to, as a government, be responding to. We do it for homeowners and businesses, when we have a hurricane or a flood or a tornado or some kind of event like that, with FEMA. We have a process where we take care of this. A lot of times we put emergency money into that to take care of the disaster, and it is only fit and proper that we do the same kind of thing for folks in agriculture. We, on the committee, have been working with the ranking member of the Agriculture Subcommittee and the full committee on this language. I just want people to know that this is the tightest language that has ever been written on a disaster bill. It has really been focused in on the folks that had the problem. One of the most important things, for the first time, and this has not been something that has been able to be accomplished in the past, we are going to require that people have crop insurance in order for them to be able to be paid under this disaster bill. That is a big reform, and it gets us a long ways in the right direction. What we are hoping to do this year in the farm bill is put in a provision so that we can have this covered in the regular order as part of our regular farm program.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. I thank the gentleman. Mr. Speaker, by nearly all measures, the situation in Iraq is a mess. And yet what seems crystal clear to most Minnesoteans the President says that we still have a realistic chance to achieve his vision for a free and democratic Iraq and that all is needed is a short-term addition of 21,000 American combat troops. Does nobody seriously think that this is true, that success is only 21,000 more soldiers away? Mr. Speaker, I am against the President's plan. I have given this President the benefit of the doubt on more than one occasion. But his plan to send in more troops does not pass the test of common sense. If a short-term surge was going to deliver victory and democracy in Iraq, we would have already done it. This idea would have made more sense at the beginning of this war. And more troops at the start were what many experts counseled. I was serving on the Select Intelligence Committee when the President, senior Pentagon officials, and senior intelligence officials told us that Iraq was a threat to our national security. At the time, we had a great deal of confusing and occasionally conflicting information. We questioned them about this, and their response was that the information that they had required us to act and that they had a plan for the aftermath. I gave them the benefit of the doubt then, and I believed them. But as time passed and events unfolded, we all learned that, at best, we had received unreliable information and, at worst, we had been misled. Mr. Speaker, I want to focus now on the soldiers in the Minnesota National Guard and talk about what the President's plan is going to mean for them. A Minnesota Guardsman, a staff sergeant who is currently deployed in Iraq, and, by the way, that is the same rank I held when I left the Guard, sent a letter to the editor of one the newspapers in my district; and I want to read some of it to you. He says, ``My unit, the Second Battalion, 136th Infantry, Bear Cats of Minnesota, which are now the 34th Infantry Division 1, First Brigade, is on its second deployment since 2003. In 2003, we were mobilized for a 10-month deployment to Bosnia. We returned home in April of 2004 and were mobilized again in October, 2005, for our current Iraq deployment. When our current deployment is complete, the 134th Combat Battalion will have spent 490 days in combat, exceeding the current record held by the First Armored Division, an active duty armor unit, by 35 days. A great deal has been asked of us and more will be asked of us in the near future. But our benefits do not reflect the burden that we carry.'' He says that, ``while the State and the people of Minnesota have been extremely generous towards their soldiers, the Federal Government continues to treat Minnesota soldiers like unwanted stepchildren by neglecting to give them the benefits that better reflect their roles in today's military, that is as full-time, front-line soldiers who are used on a regular basis, rather than sparingly. However, it is not our choice to be full-time soldiers, a capacity that we essentially fill for the military, given the frequency of deployments and the sheer numbers of National Guard and Reserve troops deployed across the globe at any one time. If the military is going to use the National Guard in an active duty capacity, it must increase our benefits to go along with the responsibility or there will be no National Guard for the Federal and State governments to rely upon in times of crisis.'' Mr. Speaker, I think he said it clearly; and I couldn't agree more. When called upon to serve our country, the Minnesota National Guard has a proud history of answering that call. Over 2,500 soldiers of the Minnesota National Guard are in Iraq. Many of them were already deployed overseas, as I said, in Bosnia; and they were slated to come home in March. But, instead, they are having their tour extended for 4 more months because of this administration's plan. Now they are scheduled to come home in July and will have spent 22 months away from their families. They will have been deployed a total of 36 months out of the last 5 years. In my opinion, that is unacceptable, and I say, enough is enough. The soldiers of the Minnesota National Guard are performing their duties admirably. They are performing well or better than the regular Army. They are serious about completing their mission; and, from my experience, they will always do more than what is asked of them. Another group of people that I would like to recognize are the Guard's families. They are not in harm's way, but they wake up every day worrying, not knowing what that day will about bring for their loved ones. They didn't enlist for the military, but they share their daily effects of this war. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to oppose this plan.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to submit for printing in the Congressional Record, pursuant to Rule XI, clause 2(a) of the Rules of the House, a copy of the Rules of the Committee on Agriculture, which were adopted at the organizational meeting of the Committee on January 23, 2007. Appendix A of the Committee Rules will include excerpts from the Rules of the House relevant to the operation of the Committee. Appendix B will include relevant excerpts from the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. In the interests of minimizing printing costs, Appendices A and B are omitted from this submission. Rules of the Committee on Agriculture, 110th Congress

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to a leader on the Agriculture Committee and in the Congress on renewable fuels, the distinguished gentlelady from South Dakota (Ms. Herseth).

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), the Chair of the Agricultural Appropriations Committee and a leader on agriculture issues and energy independence.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I have been around agriculture all my life, and I have never seen the excitement that is generated by this opportunity, because not only are we going to have economic benefits; we are going to help get this country off oil dependence. The internal combustion engine and diesel engine were invented to run on alcohol and peanut oil. They went to gasoline because it was cheaper and I guess more available. Well, times have changed and we are going back to the future, and this legislation is going to give us the opportunity and the resources to do that. So I encourage everybody to support H.R. 6.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Etheridge), the chairman of the General Farm Commodities Subcommittee and a leader on renewable fuels on the committee and in the Congress. (Mr. ETHERIDGE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, my good friend, the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel).

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to recognize a new member of the House Agriculture Committee, the distinguished gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Ellsworth) for 1 minute.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on Livestock, Dairy and Poultry, Mr. Boswell of Iowa.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished vice chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Holden).