Collin Peterson

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on the bill just considered.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3454) to provide for the conveyance of a small parcel of National Forest System land in the George Washington National Forest in Alleghany County, Virginia, that contains the cemetery of the Central Advent Christian Church and an adjoining tract of land located between the cemetery and road boundaries.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.J. Res. 15. H.J. Res 15, a resolution introduced by Congresswoman Virginia Foxx of North Carolina, recognizes the success and importance of the live- cut Christmas tree industry in the United States. It is an appropriate time of the year for Congress to consider this resolution, as I think that most of us here today have memories of decorating a Christmas tree during the holiday season. The live-cut Christmas tree industry ensures that this tradition continues every year for families across the Nation. Likewise, there are private forest landowners all across America for whom Christmas trees are an important source of income. Over 35 million live-cut Christmas trees are produced this year, and they are growing in all 50 States. Christmas tree growers are responsible land stewards who provide wildlife habitat, give us cleaner air, protect watersheds, and improve the environment. The economic strength and cultural contribution of this industry makes this resolution worthy of congressional support. I encourage the support of the resolution. With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the dedicated service of Dr. Keith Collins who has served with distinction as the Chief Economist for the U.S. Department of Agriculture for almost 14 years. At the end of this year Keith will retire, and he will be missed, not only by his colleagues at USDA but by all of us who came to respect and rely on his nonpartisan, thoughtful and detailed analysis of economic issues in agriculture. Keith began his career as an economist with USDA in 1977, and his tenure there has spanned four presidencies of both political parties. He has served under nine Secretaries of Agriculture. In 1994, Keith was named Chief Economist at USDA, and in that capacity he has been responsible for economic forecasts and projections and has advised the Secretary of Agriculture on the economic implications of alternative programs, regulations and legislative proposals. His advice has not been limited to the Secretary either; he has become a valued advisor to Members of Congress and others involved in agriculture policy. On highly charged political issues, Keith is known for his honesty, competency and influence. Even when facing tough questions from Members of Congress, nothing seems to rattle Keith's calm, rational demeanor. Keith has also earned the respect of his peers in the field of agricultural economics. Keith is a Fellow of the American Agricultural Economics Association, which is the highest honor the agricultural economics profession can bestow. One economist who worked with Keith over the years measured the potential success for newly appointed Secretaries of Agriculture using what he called the ``Keith Collins intelligence test.'' If the new Secretaries reappointed Keith as Chief Economist, they passed. Keith's colleagues at USDA have also recognized his outstanding contributions. He received the Presidential Rank Award for Meritorious Executive in 1990 and 1996 and the Presidential Rank Award for Distinguished Executive in 1992, the highest award a Federal executive can receive. Madam Speaker, Keith's retirement is a real loss for American agriculture. Through his service at USDA, he has influenced agriculture policy in many positive and lasting ways. His work truly has touched the lives of many Americans, especially our Nation's farmers and ranchers. On behalf of the House Agriculture Committee, I extend to Keith our deepest appreciation for his service to American agriculture and wish him great happiness in retirement.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the dedicated service of Dr. Keith Collins who has served with distinction as the Chief Economist for the U.S. Department of Agriculture for almost 14 years. At the end of this year Keith will retire, and he will be missed, not only by his colleagues at USDA, but by all of us who came to respect and rely on his non-partisan, thoughtful and detailed analysis of economic issues in agriculture. Keith began his career as an economist with USDA in 1977, and his tenure there has spanned four presidencies of both political parties. He has served under nine Secretaries of Agriculture. In 1994, Keith was named Chief Economist at USDA, and in that capacity he has been responsible for economic forecasts and projections and has advised the Secretary of Agriculture on the economic implications of alternative programs, regulations and legislative proposals. His advice has not been limited to the Secretary either--he has become a valued advisor to Members of Congress and others involved in agriculture policy. On highly charged political issues, Keith is known for his honesty, competency, and influence. Even when facing tough questions from Members of Congress, nothing seems to rattle Keith's calm, rational demeanor. Keith has also earned the respect of his peers in the field of agricultural economics. Keith is a Fellow of the American Agricultural Economics Association, which is the highest honor the agricultural economics profession can bestow. One economist who worked with Keith over the years measured the potential success for newly appointed Secretaries of Agriculture using what he called the ``Keith Collins intelligence test.'' If the new Secretaries reappointed Keith as Chief Economist, they passed. Keith's colleagues at USDA have also recognized his outstanding contributions. He received the Presidential Rank Award for Meritorious Executive in 1990 and 1996 and the Presidential Rank Award for Distinguished Executive in 1992, the highest award a Federal executive can receive. Madam Speaker, Keith's retirement is a real loss for American agriculture. Through his service at USDA, he has influenced agriculture policy in many positive and lasting ways. His work truly has touched the lives of many Americans, especially our Nation's farmers and ranchers.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on the concurrent resolution just considered.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I just want to again thank my good friend Mr. Goodlatte for his leadership on this issue and the rest of the members of our committee who have worked very hard. We've produced a farm bill that is going to do our part in getting this country off of energy independence. I also want to thank our leadership, especially Speaker Pelosi for her leadership on this issue. As I said, we have a tremendous opportunity in rural America and agriculture with this whole effort to get energy independent in this country, and this resolution will help us by establishing that goal. In Minnesota, where I'm proud to be from, we have led the way. I was just at a grand opening on Friday of a new plant that's turning turkey manure into electricity, and we have had mandates in Minnesota in ethanol and biodiesel, electricity, and it works. We've had a tremendous economic development that's come about because of the renewable energy industry that we've developed in Minnesota. So we're proud on the Ag Committee of our work, and we urge our colleagues to join us in supporting H. Con. Res. 25.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I am now pleased to yield such time as she may consume to the gentlelady from South Dakota (Ms. Herseth Sandlin) who has been a leader on renewable energy in her State and in the country for a long time.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kagen), a new member of our committee who has been a leader on this issue as well as many others.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Holden), the chairman of the Conservation, Credit, Energy, and Research Subcommittee.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 25, and urge its adoption by the House. H. Con. Res. 25 embodies the vision of farmers and ranchers who have been leaders in renewable energy and land conservation activities, and recognizes that forestry and agriculture will play a leading role in our country's transitions to energy independence. The 25x'25 Resolution sets a national energy independence goal that by the year 2025, 25 percent of the total energy consumed in the United States should come from homegrown, renewable sources. This resolution has received strong bipartisan support, was passed out of the House Agriculture Committee under my good friend, Mr. Goodlatte's leadership last year, and again in May under the new Congress. The 25x'25 Resolution has been carefully crafted to set national renewable energy production targets, while allowing farmers, ranchers, entrepreneurs and industry the flexibility needed to reach these important goals. Madam Speaker, the new face of energy security and rural development is in the form of a biofuels plant, a gasifier, a windmill, a methane digester or any other technology that will reduce dependence on foreign energy sources. In times of high energy prices, I can think of no one better to supply the United States with a renewable source of energy than the same American farmers and ranchers who have provided the United States and the world with an abundance of safe food and fiber. Expanding the production and the use of renewable energy is an important priority, not just for agriculture, but for the entire country in our pursuit of energy independence. The 25x'25 Coalition has grown over the past several years, and now includes endorsements from more than 590 business, conservation, agriculture and forestry organizations. As renewable energy use continues to expand, new innovations, including the promising growth of cellulosic ethanol, will not only provide for our energy needs; they will also produce environmental and conservation benefits. I think the future of energy production from agriculture and forestry is the most exciting thing that has happened in rural America in my lifetime. The 25x'25 Resolution states our commitment to support the development of renewable energy sources. I believe we can not only meet but exceed the goal of 25 percent by the year 2025. But every journey starts with a first step, and this resolution is a very important first step that we can take in achieving this energy independence. Madam Speaker, I thank my colleagues for their support and again urge the support of the House for the passage of this resolution. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 25) expressing the sense of Congress that it is the goal of the United States that, not later than January 1, 2025, the agricultural, forestry, and working land of the United States should provide from renewable resources not less than 25 percent of the total energy consumed in the United States and continue to produce safe, abundant, and affordable food, feed, and fiber.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, today, with the passage of H. Con. Res. 185, we honor the brave young men and women from the Minnesota National Guard who returned home this past summer from a 22- month deployment, the longest of any combat unit during Operation Iraqi Freedom. I want to recognize these citizen-soldiers, because that is what they truly are--citizens first, soldiers second. They have full time jobs, families to take care of and daily commitments that regular army soldiers don't have. When these men and women were initially deployed, no one imagined they would be gone for so long and so often. Some of them spent close to a year in Bosnia before being deployed to Iraq. The soldiers of the Minnesota National Guard performed their duties admirably. They knew their mission and I know from my personal experience with these men and women that they would always do more than what was asked of them. Today I also would also like to recognize the families of the Minnesota National Guard. They were not in harm's way, but they woke up every day worrying, not knowing what that day would bring for their loved ones. They didn't enlist, but they shared the daily effects of this war. I also want to thank the families of the fallen soldiers. These families have sacrificed more than anyone could have imagined. We thank you for giving us one of your own to defend this great Nation from its enemies and we honor all who believe that doing your duty is a noble act. I would like to enter for the Record the names of the Minnesota National Guard soldiers who lost their lives: Staff Sergeant David Day of Saint Louis Park, MN; First Lieutenant Jason Timmerman of Tracy, MN; Sergeant Jesse Lhotka of Alexandria, MN; Specialist Brent Koch of Morton, MN; Specialist Kyle Miller of Willmar, MN; Sergeant Joshua Hanson of Dent, MN; Specialist Bryan McDonough of Maplewood, MN; Specialist Corey Rystad of Red Lake Falls, MN; Sergeant James Wosika of Saint Paul, MN; Sergeant Greg Reiwer of Frazee, MN; and Sergeant Joshua Schmit of Willmar, MN. I ask my colleagues to remember these brave soldiers, their sacrifice on behalf of all of us, and the family they leave behind in Minnesota. You all will be missed but not forgotten. Once again, I congratulate the Minnesota National Guard and the first Brigade Combat team on a job well done and thank all the men and women who have served the State of Minnesota and the Nation as members of the Minnesota National Guard. We are thankful you are home.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the courageous people of southeastern Minnesota who have banded together to rebuild their communities after the devastating floods this past August. Minnesota has had a tough summer with the unanticipated bridge collapse in the Twin cities and now extensive flooding in numerous smaller communities. Minnesota is known for its strong spirited communities and for how people come together to help one another in times of crisis. There is much to be admired in the way Minnesotans reached out to help their fellow neighbors. It reminds me of how truly devastating storms can be. In 1997 and 2001, my district saw some terrible flooding along the Red River and its tributaries. I remember how hard it was for people to rebuild their lives, to have to start all over again after losing everything. Flood recovery is a long and hard road, but I know that southeastern Minnesota has the support of the Minnesota legislature, the Minnesota Congressional Delegation and others across the State who have pitched in to help rebuild. I also want to commend the Minnesota National Guard and local officials, and those everyday heroes amongst us who saved lives, led their communities and helped to provide relief for all who needed it. My heart goes out to the families that have lost loved ones and to those who have suffered injury in that devastating flooding. I pray that the healing will be swift and that your communities will recover and rebuild, stronger than ever.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I rise today to commend the good people of Minnesota who have banded together to begin the healing process. When that bridge fell on August 1st, every citizen of my state felt the grief and the pain together. It has certainly been a difficult month for everyone, but I am so proud of the first responders, of the volunteers, and of my colleagues here in the House. I'd like to give a special thanks to Chairman Oberstar, for acting so quickly. He has represented the State of Minnesota, and the House very well. I'd also like to say that Representative Ellison has done a remarkable job in representing his district during these trying times. It is a shame that it sometimes takes the worst events to bring out the best in people, but I am so proud of the wonderful actions Minnesotans have taken to help the victims of the I-35W Bridge. I think the people involved in the recovery actions have truly demonstrated the incredible character of Minnesota's citizens. Nothing can replace what was lost on August 1st. No amount of money will do that. Neither will a new bridge. But the strength of the community has shown through during this long road to healing. Thank you Representative Ellison, thank you to the members of the Minnesota Delegation and thank you to all my colleagues who have helped support the citizens of my State.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend the good people of Minnesota who have banded together to begin the healing process. When that bridge fell, every citizen of my State felt the grief and the pain together. It has certainly been a difficult couple of days for everyone, but I am so proud of the first responders, of the volunteers, and of my colleagues here in the House. I'd like to give a special thanks to Chairman Oberstar, for acting so quickly. He has represented Minnesota, and the House, very well. I'd also like to say that Representative Ellison has done a remarkable job in representing his district during these last 48 hours. It is a shame that it sometimes takes the worst events to bring out the best in people, but I am so proud of the wonderful actions Minnesotans have taken to help the victims of the I35W bridge. I think the people involved in the recovery actions have truly demonstrated the incredible character of Minnesota's citizens. Nothing can replace what was lost on Wednesday. No amount of money will do that. Neither will a new bridge. But this bill is a strong step on the road to healing. Thank you Chairman Oberstar, thank you to the members of the Minnesota Delegation and thank you to all my colleagues who have helped support the citizens of my State.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the accomplishments and the retirement of Dr. W. Ron DeHaven of Crofton, MD. Dr. DeHaven has secured his legacy within the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and with the public he served during his 28 years with Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). Dr. DeHaven will continue to shape the course of APHIS' work for some time to come due to the integrity and professionalism he brought to his role as APHIS administrator, and the initiatives begun under his leadership. In all of his activities, he repeatedly demonstrated a deep compassion for both animals and humans alike, including the thousands of employees who have served under his leadership. His recent initiatives include, among others: the ongoing efforts to streamline the regulatory review for the imports of fruits and vegetables; creating electronic permitting systems for APHIS stakeholders; developing supervisory programs to keep the agency well- managed; and building international coordination and capacity for handling animal disease outbreaks. In combination, Dr. DeHaven's many initiatives and his personal conviction for ``doing the right thing'' have set a high bar for those who follow him as Administrator. I want to thank Dr. DeHaven for his service to American agriculture and wish him well.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, the attached language was inadvertently omitted from H. Rept. 110-256, in regard to Country of Origin Labeling, to H.R. 2419, the Farm, Nutrition and Bioenergy Act of 2007. Country of Origin Labeling for Meat Agreement The Committee recognizes that the issue of Country of Origin Labeling for meat has become increasingly contentious. With implementation of the statute enacted in the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 looming, the Committee leadership requested that representatives of the various interested parties discuss opportunities to resolve issues of division. These discussions resulted in general agreement on aspects of the law which could be modified to achieve the goals of: improving marketability of meat products; providing consumers the information they may seek with regard to the origin of meat products; and, doing so in a manner which minimizes the cost of compliance on livestock producers and the meat trade. During consideration of H.R. 2419, the Committee was presented with a list of items that were agreed upon by the various interested parties. The list included suggestions to improve the statute with regard to issues including product labels, records, and recordkeeping. With regard to product labeling, the Committee adopted amendments to Section 281 of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 that would establish four categories of country of origin labels for meat. The legislative language outlining these categories is self-explanatory. Another area of concern was labeling of ground meat products. The amendment adopted by the Committee provides that the label will include a narrative list of reasonably possible countries from which the product may have been derived. While the Committee recognizes the interest in providing consumers with information regarding the origin of their meat products, the Committee also recognizes the potential cost associated with complying with any label mandate. As such, the Committee has adopted a grandfather provision to address concerns about the transition. With regard to requirements for records and recordkeeping, the Committee has adopted provisions that will enable less burdensome verification requirements. Specifically, the Committee has adopted an amendment that will place limits on the authority of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) to audit covered entities. To further shield all parties from liability, the amendment limits the records upon which these USDA audits may rely. By limiting these records to those kept as part of a normal business practice, it is the intent of the Committee that retailers and other covered entities will not impose unnecessary or burdensome obligations on their suppliers. The final item of agreement dealt with the issues of liability and enforcement. The amendment adopted by the Committee will limit the applicability of civil penalties to a covered entity that has not made an effort to comply and continues to willfully violate this section. The Committee specifically intends that violations resulting from a good faith effort to come into compliance shall not be subject to civil penalties.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Madam Speaker, I submit the following information for the Record on H.R. 3006: House of Representatives, Committee on agriculture, Washington, DC, July 27, 2007. Hon. Nick J. Rahall II, Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: I ask your help in scheduling H.R. 3006, a bill to improve the use of a grant of a parcel of land to the State of Idaho, for consideration by the House of Representatives as soon as possible. H.R. 3006 was referred to the Committee on Agriculture and additionally to your Committee. The purpose of H.R. 3006 is to allow the University of Idaho to construct a Center for Livestock and Environmental Studies to research environmental issues facing the dairy industry in central Idaho. In the interest of expediency, I ask that you allow the Committee on Natural Resources to be discharged from further consideration of the bill. This action would not be considered as precedent for any future referrals of similar measures or seen as affecting your Committee's jurisdiction over the subject matter of the bill. Moreover, if the bill is conferenced with the Senate, I would support naming Natural Resources Committee members to the conference committee. I look forward to your response and would be pleased to include it and this letter in the report on H.R. 3006. Sincerely, Collin C. Peterson, Chairman.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. I want to thank the gentleman from Vermont for bringing up this very important issue. As you know, that version of the farm bill that the House Agriculture Committee reported contains a request for the study of Federal Milk Marketing Orders. As we began the farm bill process last year, we traveled around the country listening to producers, processors and other members of the dairy industry. What we heard was that the Federal Milk Marketing Order system was in need of reform, and we have taken steps to address that. The committee bill establishes a system to review this system and report its findings to Congress and the Secretary of Agriculture. The committee hopes and expects that this study will provide information necessary to develop the changes that modernize and rationalize milk marketing regulations in this country. The committee recognizes the concern that this commission could lead to delay within the Department regarding ongoing efforts to reform the improvement of the Federal Milk Marketing Order system. We do not wish this to be the case and have directed the Secretary to address that concern in the committee substitute. So, if the gentleman is willing to withdraw his amendment, I would extend an offer to work with him in conference to make sure that his concerns on energy and feed costs are incorporated into the commission study.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Manzullo and I are good friends, and I allowed him to modify his amendment, but I have to very strongly oppose this amendment. We've added several billion dollars to the conservation baseline in this bill, and even with that, we still have big backlogs in these programs. It's going to go a long ways to correcting that, but one of the ways that we're going to make this money go further is by applying the same payment limitations to these conservation programs that we're applying to title I. And the question to me is the same. If the argument is that we have large farms that shouldn't be entitled to title I payments, then why is it all right for large folks to be entitled to title II payments? What this will do, the changes that we've made are going to make this go further. It's going, I would say, to allow smaller producers a better opportunity to have access to these limited programs. And so I guess I would just say what is good for the goose is good for the gander, that we're applying these same limitations all across the programs. I understand that some of the larger folks aren't going to like this; but, you know, this is what we need. So I hear arguments against this because somehow or another conservation is different, but with the payment limitations, the effect of that is to actually weaken the title I safety net for producers. So, it is just not right to have a different standard for these conservation programs. I ask my colleagues to stick with the committee's position. I strongly oppose this amendment. Mr. Chairman, we reserve the balance of our time.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Boehner is a good friend of mine, and I am reluctant to oppose this amendment but I must. This provision was part of the administration's farm bill proposal. The benefit of daily posted county prices is that farmers have the greatest amount of flexibility in responding to market price changes, which have become, as indicated by Mr. Boehner, increasingly volatile, and the farmers have very little power in this marketplace. This is something that I think we clearly should retain for them so that they've got some ability to deal with what happens in the marketplace. Moving to a monthly posted county price may save money, but as I said, it hampers, weakens the effectiveness of the marketing loan program as a safety net feature, which is one of the primary things we're trying to do in this farm bill. According to a letter from the National Grain and Feed Association, this proposal would be highly disruptive to the efficient operation of the cash grain marketplace. The entire General Farm Commodities and Risk Management Subcommittee, Republicans and Democrats alike, rejected this approach when it defeated an amendment containing the administration's proposal that had this feature in it. This amendment, this idea has no support in the agricultural community; and, therefore, I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back my time.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentlewoman's leadership on this issue. I think this is a very good amendment. We appreciate her interest in promoting healthy foods in schools. That is something that the committee is very much interested in. We support your amendment.