Pat Roberts

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I rise to urge the Senate to fully investigate the circumstances regarding the attack upon our U.S. consulate in Benghazi and the torture and killing of our Ambassador, the deaths of three American patriots and the following attacks and deaths involving marines in Afghanistan. Americans are watching a conflagration of an estimated one-half million jihadists in over 30 countries, burning portraits of our President, American flags, and threatening attacks upon our consulates and embassies while shouting ``Death to America.'' No, Mr. President and my colleagues, the war against terrorism is not over. We find out now, 10 days later, that al-Qaida was involved in the planned attack in Benghazi, and dangerous protests continue in Pakistan and throughout the Muslim world. This morning, the Commandant of our Marine Corps informed the Capitol Hill marines there are 153 marine units at the ready to protect U.S. consulates and embassies at the direction of the State Department. They should be deployed, and he believes the current danger may well last decades. The sobering truth hurts. Was there actionable intelligence prior to this attack? If there was not, why not, especially given recent intelligence reports, press reports and testimony by Matthew Olsen, National Counterterrorism Center Director. We are on a merry-go-round of excuses with this administration. There is no strong horse or weak horse. It is a merry-go-round that has to stop.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, today I wish to commemorate the Lowell Milken Center's 2012 National Projects Kick-off. Located in Fort Scott, KS, the Lowell Milken Center discovers, develops, and communicates the stories of unsung heroes who have made a profound and positive difference on the course of history. The Lowell Milken Center was opened in 2007 as an international nonprofit organization focused on creating a better future by developing projects that teach respect and understanding. This approach has been built upon student-driven, project-based learning so that Americans and people around the world may learn that each of us has the responsibility and the power to take actions to improve the lives of others. During its 6 years of operation, the center has hosted over 15,000 visitors and reached over 550,000 students in 5,000 schools by telling inspiring stories of unsung heroes to influence change in behaviors and attitudes. In May, I had the pleasure of visiting the Lowell Milken Center. During my visit, I was able to meet the center's visionary and founder Norm Conard and its program director Megan Felt. Both are outstanding Kansans who have helped shape the way we approach history and learning. Ms. Felt has been honored nationally and internationally for her projects with students, and she is the founder of the internationally acclaimed work, ``Life in a Jar: The Irena Sendler Project.'' Irena Sendler was a devout Catholic who helped save the lives of 2,500 children during the Holocaust in Poland. She smuggled children out of a Warsaw ghetto and placed them with families not threatened by the Nazis. Toward the end of the war, she was arrested, severely beaten, and almost died for her actions to save these children. In 1999, three high school students from Uniontown, KS, uncovered the remarkable story of Irena Sendler after Uniontown High School teacher Norm Conard tasked his students to compete in a National History Day contest. The students investigated an article published in 1994 mentioning Sendler and uncovered a heroic story that had gone virtually unreported. The students eventually met their hero and began exchanging letters. This relationship inspired the students to write a play about Sendler's life and work. ``Life in a Jar: The Irena Sendler Project'' continues to be performed in Uniontown, KS, and has been preformed across the U.S. and in Europe. Fortunately, this project brought Sendler much overdue national attention in Poland, and in 2007 Sendler was nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize. In 2008, Irena Sendler passed away at age 98. The Lowell Milken Center continues to pursue those often missed in history books and to promote cross-cultural understanding in the world. It is an honor to represent the Lowell Milken Center in the United States Senate, and I commend their efforts to promote the unsung heroes who changed the world through the 2012 National Projects Kick- off.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I wish to thank my distinguished friend and colleague, Senator Lieberman, for his leadership and for urging Members of Congress to bring amendments down that are germane on very serious national security issues. So I again thank him for his comments and his leadership. Honor Flight Network

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize a distinguished group of World War II veterans from Kansas who are now visiting their Nation's Capital this week as part of the Honor Flight Network. The Honor Flight Network is an organization with the main mission to give veterans the opportunity to visit their memorials on the National Mall, free of cost to the veteran. The veterans who participate are many times unsung heroes of World War II, and in many cases their remembrances and their stories are shared for the first time and become public for the first time for families and hometowns. In many cases, young people traveling with these veterans hear the stories and can put the stories of these famous battles that protected our country in their local newspapers and in their school newspapers. It is history--it is history shared, lessons learned, and certainly renewed thanks to the ``greatest generation.'' Many of these veterans are in their eighties and nineties. There are fewer than 20,000 World War II veterans in Kansas. As time marches on, that number only decreases. Nationwide, the VA estimates that approximately 740 members of the ``greatest generation'' pass each day. So I am especially pleased that this Tuesday a group of 28 veterans will fly in to our Nation's Capital from Kansas to see their World War II memorial, and other memorials, and allow us the privilege to pay homage to their heroism. With five regional hubs in Kansas, there is a steady stream of veteran groups making their way to our Nation's Capital. The leaders of these groups include Brian Spencer and Bill Patterson leading the Honor Flight Kansas Student Edition from Lyndon, KS; Adrianne McDaniel and Peggy Hill, who lead the Jackson Heights Honor Flight; Beverly Mortimer and Denise Cyr head up the North Central Kansas Honor Flight out of Concordia, KS; Mike Kastle and Jeff True guide the Southern Coffey County High School Honor Flight out of Leroy, KS; and finally, the leaders of this group coming in on Tuesday are Mike VanCampen and Lowell Downey. These hub leaders and the many volunteers deserve our recognition for the hours of work, organization, and fundraising that go into planning these trips. Thank you for what you do and for setting such a fine example in remembering and honoring the sacrifices made by those who stood in defense of our country in World War II. Kansans and all Americans should know that this program--as a matter of fact, the World War II Memorial itself would not even exist without our former Senate majority leader, the senior Senator from Kansas and a World War II veteran himself, Bob Dole. Bob was instrumental in bringing the World War II Memorial to the National Mall. And even now Bob meets personally with Honor Flight groups who make their way out to see their memorial. When veterans learn that Bob Dole is at the World War II memorial, there is a crush of veterans like a flock of chickens going to the mother hen. I am not sure Bob Dole will appreciate that allegory, but at least I think that indicates everybody comes to hear him and thank him for his efforts. Finally, I wish to recognize each member of this Honor Flight trip from Kansas visiting their memorial, and I ask unanimous consent that their names be printed in the Congressional Record.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I rise to share my concerns over the proposed changes in the estate and gift tax provisions of the current Tax Code that will be considered within hours on the floor. Similar to much of the Tax Code, the estate and gift tax provisions are terribly complex, costly to comply with, and have very serious negative consequences. These negative consequences disproportionately harm farmers and ranchers and worry their lenders. Visiting with farmers and stockmen today--livestock producers--one had better stand back. They are upset, they are frustrated, they are angry, they are concerned, and they are worried. All across farm country, we are suffering from a severe drought-- which is a real emergency, historic in scope and damage, particularly for our livestock industry. Congress should respond. At the same time, they are facing a farm bill that is in limbo, regulations that defy any commonsense cost-benefit yardstick, and no farmer or their lender can plan in this environment. In farm country, there is no certainty. But just to split the shingle, now we have proposed changes to the current estate tax--the infamous death tax--all based on a select few in Washington deciding who is wealthy, what is a fair share people should pay in a tax and how they should pay that tax, playing again with the politics of envy and class warfare. I think we ought to quit this business. The classic example is that under current law, the Federal estate tax is set at 35 percent on estates over $5 million. If nothing is changed, on January 1, 2013--or if Senators vote for a particular version of the two tax bills we are going to be considering in just about 1\1/2\ hours--if nothing is changed, the estate tax exemption will drop from $5 million to $1 million and the estate tax rate will jump from 35 percent to 55 percent. If we do not act to extend the current death tax structure--I would like to eliminate it; I would like to repeal it but at least extend it--the Joint Committee on Taxation reports that over 10 years, the number of small businesses subject to the death tax will increase from about 1,800 folks to 23,700, and the number of farming estates subject to the death tax would increase from about 900 farmers and ranchers to 25,200. That is more than 20 times additional farming estates that would be hit with this massive death tax hike, a 2,000-percent increase. It is not just farmers and ranchers who would be affected. Nine times more small businesses would be hit with this massive death tax--a 900- percent increase. Twelve times more taxable estates would be hit--a 1,200-percent increase. While I support permanently repealing the death tax, if we cannot achieve that goal, how we structure this tax in particular has immediate real-world implications for folks in Kansas and across the country. The looming 2013 change to the estate tax law would be a huge disservice to agriculture because it is a land-based, capital-intensive industry with few options for paying estate taxes when they come due. The current state of our economy, coupled with the uncertain nature of estate tax liabilities, makes it tremendously difficult for family- owned farms and ranches to make any sound business decisions. They are on the sidelines of our economy. They are not on the economic playing field. Again, there is no certainty. Obviously, raising the estate tax burden will strike a blow to farm and ranch operations trying to transition from one generation to the next. A $1 million exemption sounds like a lot. To some people in this Chamber--and obviously to some people within this administration--at $1 million a person is rich, they are wealthy, with no consideration as to what the personal situation is for that individual, but somebody just determining what a fair share is and then taking from that individual and redistributing to those whom they think deserve it. But a $1 million exemption is not high enough to protect a typical farm or ranch able to support a family. When coupled with a top rate of 55 percent, that is going to be especially difficult, if not impossible, for farms and ranches and businesses to pass on their wherewithal to the next generation. Yet our Nation's estate tax policy is in direct conflict with the desire to preserve and protect our Nation's family-owned farms and ranches. Individuals, family partnerships, and family corporations own 98 percent of our Nation's 2 million farms and ranches. When estate taxes on an agriculture business exceed cash or other liquid assets, many surviving family partners will be forced to sell land, buildings or equipment needed to keep their businesses operating. With 85 percent of farm and ranch assets illiquid, producers have few options when it comes to generating cash to pay the estate tax. Recent increases in agricultural land values--on average, 25 percent from 2010 to 2011--have greatly expanded the number of farms and ranches that now top the estate tax exemption. How on Earth can farmers, ranchers, and small businesses even plan for this? In order to keep farm or ranch businesses operating after the death of the owner, families must plan for the estate tax. But under the majority party bill we will vote on shortly, many more farmers and ranchers will face increased filing, paperwork, and other hassles in planning for succession, not to mention lawyers, CPAs, and estate planners. In fact, if we don't extend the current estate tax, estates required to file paperwork with the IRS rise from about 8,600 to 107,500. That is a lot of time and cost that could be avoided. The planning costs associated with this tax are not only a drain on business resources but also take money away from the day-to-day operations and investing in the business. Even with planning, uncertain tax law combined with changing land values and family situations make it impossible to guarantee that an estate plan will protect the family farm or ranch. This not only can cripple a farm or ranch operation, but it hurts all throughout our rural communities, up and down Main Street, every business that agriculture supports. The death tax is one of the worst offenders in bringing real complexity to the Tax Code, and I believe it is one of the most distortive provisions in our system. Some believe and will point out that the estate tax is an instrument of social justice; that it is designed to limit wealth accumulation and to spread that wealth around, something I think that is contrary to what this country is all about. Why do you work? You work hard to make a difference, and you work hard because you enjoy the work and hopefully you get paid for it--and, hopefully you get paid for it enough that you can at least have enough wherewithal so your kids and their kids can continue that kind of endeavor if they so choose. But some people say we want to spread that wealth around. Even if someone holds what I consider a socialistic view--a tough word; it is a pejorative, I know, but I think that applies here--the estate tax, which distorts no end of economic decisions, isn't the most efficient method to redistribute wealth. If you are a wealth redistributor, if you will, in this body, clearly taxpayers facing the death tax respond to the tax by cutting back on investments, consuming more of the capital and other assets that could be passed on to build businesses. So the disincentives the death tax creates in the end lead to lower growth, fewer jobs, and less savings. How do we redistribute that? There is nothing to redistribute. In a troubled economy, this forced outcome does not make sense. Being able to plan for the future is critical. The current uncertainty leads to the repeated provisions of wills and trusts, which burdens taxpayers and advisers alike. I don't care what farm organization I am talking to, what commodity group, what small business group, wherever I go in my State of Kansas--and I think it is the same in regard to other States that Members are privileged to represent-- over and over, I have been asked again what Congress will do with these provisions: What should a rancher do? How can they pass farms on to their children? I have even been asked, for planning purposes--I am not making this up--if this is a good year to die. That is astounding, if not outrageous. It may be a good year to die because this egregious change is going nowhere. These two bills we are considering in just a few moments are not going anywhere. We will vote in a little while, but they are both subject to a point of order--not having originated in the House, they will be blue-slipped. That is a fancy word, a parliamentary word, saying they are going nowhere because bills on taxes have to originate in the House. Talk about a real income redistribution--a nothing burger. That is what we are considering. But it is indicative of what is being considered in this Chamber and indicative of what we have to take care of in true tax reform. Folks in Kansas should not have to make such important decisions on a tax law that is changing all the time. We need to repeal or permanently reset the death tax. If this tax cannot be repealed, it needs to be set in stone--hopefully, not a gravestone--and at a rate and in a manner that provides certainty. While it is important to permanently eliminate this very punitive tax, until this can be accomplished, Congress should at least extend the current $5 million exemption, indexing it to reflect land values and continuing the spousal transfer and maintaining the top 35-percent tax rate. We pay taxes all of our lives. It just doesn't make sense to be taxed again when we die. I suggest the absence of a quorum, although I note that my colleague from Illinois is perhaps ready to speak. I will be happy to yield back any time I have.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to congratulate the University of Kansas on its prestigious designation as a National Cancer Institute Cancer Center. I do regret I can't be at the KU ceremony today to mark this designation by the NCI because of anticipated votes in the Senate, but I am certainly there in spirit. This designation of `` cancer center'' is such an important development for my state and others in our region because it means that many Kansans and their families who have faced frightening diagnoses-- and trying treatments--will no longer have to seek cures all the way down to Texas or up to Minnesota. They can, and will be able to, stay closer to home and their support systems. Simply put, it's great news for Kansas cancer patients in the region. I am personally gratified by this designation because it represents more than a decade of work with so many outstanding partners. It has truly been a team effort to achieve this important Federal designation. When I was first elected to this body in 1996, I created a blue ribbon committee of Kansas leaders in government, academia and the private sector to advise me on the State's science and technology needs. The goal was to make us more competitive in a global marketplace increasingly reliant on research and technology and to provide economic opportunity to stop out-migration of our best and brightest young people. The Roberts advisory committee set out to implement policies and secure Federal investments to further the research goals of Kansas State University in plant and animal science, Wichita State University in composite and aviation research and the University of Kansas in life science research. I personally took this goal to the Kansas legislature in 2001 and again in 2002 encouraging my colleagues in the Kansas State legislature to help promote State investment in research infrastructure--to be part of it. At the time, I spoke about how the statistics showed that Kansas was lagging behind other States in the race for Federal and private research dollars. In response, the Kansas legislature more than stepped up to the plate with special thanks to leaders like Representative Kenny Wilk, Senator Kent Glasscock, Representative Nick Jordan and Senator Dave Kerr. The legislature voted in favor of bonding authority--and we constructed and invested in buildings at the KU Cancer Center and the Biosecurity Research Institute at K-State. Likewise, Wichita State's work in composite research is now revolutionizing industries from aircraft to health care. And about this same time, Stowers Biomedical Research Institute came into existence, which provided a key private source of research excellence. Our Kansas motto is ``To the stars through difficulty.'' Well, in short, the stars aligned. KU's then-Chancellor Bob Hemenway and I sought out other opportunities to help raise KU's research profile. In 2004, we invited then-NIH Director Elias Zerhouni to KU for a tour and discussion about KU Medical Center's research facilities. Dr. Zerhouni recognized--as many Federal research directors do--that there is great promise in research conducted at Kansas universities. Chancellor Hemenway and I worked in concert to design congressionally directed programs to supplement KU's internal NIH cancer research successes. This included those won by Dr. Jeff Aube, who leads one of four NIH drug discovery centers. Furthermore, this coordinated effort with Chancellor Hemenway and his leadership team also provided KU with the flexibility to recruit new cancer research faculty who brought considerable expertise and NCI cancer research programs to KU. In 2006, with the critical mission of the National Cancer Institute in mind, from my post on the Senate Health Committee, we fought to reauthorize funding for National Institutes of Health which oversee the National Cancer Institute. This reform bill reaffirmed the various centers of NIH including the Cancer Institutes and reauthorized their funding. In fact, this was a continuation of Congressional efforts from 1999, when we were successful at doubling NIH funding over 5 years, at a time when many wanted to divert Federal funds to other research. My then-partner in the Senate, Sam Brownback, now our State's Governor, and I worked together to advance this push. In 2009, Senator Brownback and I secured $5.5 billion in Federal investments for the University of Kansas to purchase equipment needed to further its cancer research. Sam's leadership, both then and now, is immeasurable. Over those 10 years, there were many other excellent team members supporting this effort who should be recognized. I apologize I will not be able to name everyone who played such a big and important role. First, Dr. Howard Mossberg, dean emeritus of the KU School of Pharmacy. He was the force behind the regular meetings of our Science and Technology Advisory Committee. Howard, who lives in Lawrence, home of KU, did this work for free because he recognized the opportunity to use the advisory committee to provide us with key facts to support our research and technology initiatives. KU, in fact, hosted many of our advisory committee meetings down through the years. I truly appreciate that. Riding shotgun back in Kansas on this effort has been my tireless staff member Harold Stones. Harold provided the hard work of collecting and then distilling and providing to everyone concerned the valuable contributions among our technology leaders for more than a decade, helping me turn them into policy and progress. Credit must also go to former KU research directors Dr. Bob Barnhill and Dr. Michael Welch. They were instrumental in my research about the KU Cancer Center. Jim Roberts, who sadly passed away from cancer himself, was a valuable KU adviser to me, as is Steve Warren today. I have appreciated getting to know Dr. Roy Jensen, who leads the KU Cancer Center. I know Roy will continue to stay in close touch with me and the entire Kansas delegation about the KU Cancer Center as it continues to progress. Our work is ongoing. It is not done. I would also be remiss not to mention the contributions of my former legislative director, Mr. Keith Yehle. Keith was the point person for KU to contact, whether it was about the KU Cancer Center, the advancements in special education or the Hoglund Brain Imaging Center, where we also secured $1.8 million in Federal investment for renovation and equipment. Keith went on to work at KU for Chancellor Hemenway to help him and our current Chancellor Gray-Little navigate the corridors of Capitol Hill. My former chief of staff Leroy Towns, former deputy legislative director Jennifer Swenson, and my current senior health care policy adviser Jennifer Boyer round out the list of the Roberts team who spent countless hours working on behalf of the University of Kansas--whether it is the cancer center designation or any other of KU's initiatives. Let me stress that my current colleagues in Congress, Senator Jerry Moran, Congresswoman Lynn Jenkins, and Congressman Kevin Yoder, have each carved out important initiatives to promote this designation and have helped make this day possible. This partnership will continue for KU. We could not have accomplished something this encompassing without strong public support. In this regard, I also wish to thank the publisher and the editor of the Lawrence Journal-World, Mr. Dolph Simons, Jr., for his comprehensive coverage with regard to all these initiatives over the years. What we have with the NCI designation is proof of what I said to the Kansas State legislature back in 2001; that public and private and academic partnerships are critical to developing our State's economy over the long term. I applaud the generosity of the Kansas Masonic Foundation, Annette Gloch, the Hall Family Foundation, and others for their key contributions to this effort. In the Senate this week, we have talked a lot about the need for job growth--jobs, jobs, jobs. According to the University of Kansas, since 2006, the National Cancer Institute's designation pursuit alone has created 1,123 jobs and had a regional economic impact of $453 million. We can only expect, with the announcement of the cancer center designation today, that these numbers will grow jobs, jobs, jobs. Our work does not end today. We will always be focused on ensuring a better treatment of cancer victims. A great thanks go to so many--past and present. I am honored to have been there at the beginning, but in some ways I believe you ain't seen nothing yet. Congratulations to the University of Kansas and to the entire State of Kansas. ``Rock Chalk Jayhawk.'' Well done, KU. Medical Device Tax

Mr. ROBERTS. I ask to be recognized for 15 minutes.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I wish to talk about the farm bill. As we can see from an open Senate, I think we have done our work, and we have been successful. Most of what we can say on this bill has already been said. After final passage, I simply wish to reiterate what the chairwoman has said, what I have said all along: This is a reform bill. We cut $23 billion in mandatory spending. These are real cuts, no gimmicks. We have eliminated four commodity programs--four commodity programs. We have streamlined conservation programs from 23 to 13. We have eliminated numerous other authorizations. In total, approximately 100 authorizations for spending and appropriations are eliminated. This is real reform. I also wish to take a quick moment to thank all the staff who have worked so hard on this legislation, especially the committee staff on both the majority and the minority sides. I especially wish to thank the legislative magician, if I may call him that--expert--David Schiappa and his staff. They are no longer here, but they guided us through some difficult times, as he always does--as they always do. I would like to take a few moments to recognize the members of my staff who worked on this bill. For me, this is a very special occasion. We are only as good as our staff. I have been blessed with the very best, and I have been a bucket toter. That is what a staff member is. When someone totes buckets, they try not to spill anything. Sometimes they are successful and other times they may trip and fall. Other times it is just the way it is. I was administrative assistant to Senator Frank Carlson, the only man in Kansas to serve us as a Member of Congress, as a Governor, and a Senator, prior to our current Governor, Sam Brownback. I was the administrative assistant for Congressman Keith Sebelius, who was on the House Agriculture Committee, and learned an awful lot about agriculture with Keith as we went through those days. Obviously, if someone is from Kansas, they are a legislative assistant or a bucket toter or whatever description you want for Bob Dole forever. These people, as far as I am concerned, are not only my staff, they are my family. They have persevered. Anne Hazlett, my chief counsel, in my opinion, is the best chief counsel in the Senate, one of the top legislative drafters in the Senate, former director of the Indiana State Department of Agriculture under Gov. Mitch Daniels. When she is at my door, I know I am going to be told no on something. I actually had better listen to her. Eric Steiner. Eric has charged me with cruel and unusual punishment for putting him in the charge of dairy policy. After the 1996 farm bill and all that--and the 2002 and 2008 farm bills--I said I don't do dairy anymore. Then, in came Eric. He also became a dad for the first time earlier this year as we worked on this bill--talk about working 24/7 and giving up your family. Keira Franz is a former Bob Dole staffer. Bob still tells her what to do so she can tell me what he says I am supposed to be doing. Autumn Veazey, our southern bell and specialty crop guru, has also had the pleasure of getting to know places such as Dodge City and the inside of a meat processing plant--something that should be required of every agriculture assistant. Don't ask her. Gregg Doud. Here is a real Kansas cowboy and one of the top agriculture trade experts in Washington, and he still wears his boots. Tara Smith, our commodities and crop insurance expert, helps me navigate the minefields of both. Thank you so much, Tara. You have been wonderful. Janae Brady keeps our staff--and, most importantly, my staff-- director organized. Andrew Vlasity, a great young man and a tremendous writer, has helped create a research title for the future. Max Fisher, our No. 1 crunching guru, also became a dad for the third time as we worked on this bill. Chris Hicks, our other legal counsel, is a former Senate-confirmed general counsel at the Department of Agriculture and provides the wisdom of that position as we work on complicated matters. Patty Lawrence is our Department of Agriculture detailee on conservation issues and the ultimate professional. Also, in my personal office: Ryan Flickner, a young Kansas farm lad who will soon return to Kansas to get married and become my deputy State director. Wane Stoskopf is another Kansas farm boy who is taking Ryan's position, and Emily Haug. Also, my communications director, Sarah Little--dear Sarah is never short of work when it comes to cleaning up what I have said and should not have said. My State agriculture representative is Mel Thompson. I used to work with Mel. He was a legislative assistant and I was administrative assistant with Keith Sebelius. We went through two farm bills. There is no better person to have eyes and ears on the ground than Mel Thompson. Then, there are Joel and Mike, the ``two musketeers,'' who saw me every morning, every afternoon, and every evening. I have a tendency to wander, to reflect on past farm bill stories, and to occasionally give ranks. These are not particularly helpful in regard to moving legislation forward, and so Joel and Mike would say: Sir--at least they said ``sir''--Sir, keep your eye on the ball. Stay focused. Where there is a will, there is a way. If you rank, if you wander, you will be lost in the midst of the desert farm bill purgatory. Don't be lost in the desert farm bill purgatory. Stay focused. I tried. I think we succeeded, for the most part. The chairwoman also has a great staff. Everybody likes to brag on their staffs, and I know she will mention many of them. I especially thank her staff director, Chris Adamo, and chief counsel, Jonathan Coppess, for their outstanding work on this legislation. They have been professional throughout. I don't know what you guys are going to do now that we are not breaking into your office in the mornings, afternoons, and evenings to see your smiling faces--and then we wonder why you are not smiling. Thank you for a top job. I also thank all those in Senate legislative counsel and the Congressional Budget Office who helped us get to this point today. They all worked behind the scenes, but we could not be here today without them. I view my staff as family. I thank my family over here for their tremendous work in achieving what I think is a great farm bill and for doing something to restore the Senate back to the Senate. I yield the floor.

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I ask to be recognized to speak as in morning business.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Very quickly, we all wear coats and ties in this body. This amendment would put us in lab coats. Don't wear a lab coat. Vote ``no'' on this amendment.

Mr. ROBERTS. Madam President, when you go back home or if you conduct a press conference or if you have any contact with anybody about what we are doing here in Washington, the No. 1 question is: Why can't you all get along? Why can't you quit pointing fingers of blame? Why can't you end the rhetoric? Why can't you work together? Why can't you get something done? We knew we had something special when we had a farm bill and the current farm bill was going to expire and you would go back to a farm bill that nobody wanted, or the 1949 act, which is ridiculous, and that we had to move. Farmers and ranchers and their lenders and everybody concerned with agribusiness knew we had to have a farm bill. We went to work and we got a 16-to-5 vote out of committee, it was bipartisan, and we did it in 4\1/2\ hours. That set a record. I don't know of any time where in an Agriculture Committee, House or Senate, that it has been moved in 4\1/2\ hours. Now 2\1/2\ days, with 73 amendments, opening it up to everybody regardless of circumstance, regardless if they voted for the bill or not? That is what we have accomplished--2\1/2\ days, 73 amendments. It is what can happen if we break the logjam of partisanship and work together to get something done. A tremendous amount of credit goes to the leadership of the Senator from Michigan. I feel very privileged to have worked with her and to work with her staff. They have been like Musketeers, every night, every morning, meeting: What can we do; how can we fix this? It has worked. So after 2\1/2\ days and 73 amendments I thank you all for your patience. If anybody did not get an amendment, I am terribly sorry, I don't know how I missed you; consequently, on that side as well. Let me say again, $23 billion provided in deficit reduction through reduced mandatory spending. The chairwoman is right, this is probably the only time on the Senate floor we will actually have a reduction in Federal spending and make our deficit contribution. This is a good bill. Is it the best possible bill? No, it is the best bill possible. We should move it and we should vote for it. I urge you to vote for it. I yield.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I am not going to speak in opposition, but I do ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. ROBERTS. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I encourage my colleagues to join with me to oppose the amendment. The amendment would provide government loans for brick-and-mortar projects, including food refrigeration capacity. We are talking about refrigerators--big refrigerators. At a time when we are working to streamline current programs and reduce the size of government, I am concerned we would be expanding the size to serve a new pool of applicants competing for very limited resources at the Department of Agriculture. In this regard, the gleaners would be taken to the cleaners. I encourage my colleagues to oppose the amendment.

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I will support the yeas and nays and stand with the chairwoman and Senator Thune.

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, on behalf of Chairwoman Stabenow, myself, Senator Thune, and every farm organization and commodity group in America, I rise in opposition to this amendment. It will impact every single producer in the program, not those that exceed this arbitrary limit or ``rich producers.'' The rest will pay higher premiums when they are out of the program because that is what happens with an insurance pool. I have no doubt, just as sure as I am standing here and the Senator from Oklahoma is sitting there and contemplating this, that under this amendment we will soon return to the days of low crop insurance participation, multibillion-dollar ad hoc disaster programs, just as in the 1990s--$36 billion over 10 years, $11 billion in 1 year. These are a disaster to plan, to legislate, and to implement. If you are for these ad hoc disaster programs, you better hide for at least 6 weeks in your office. We just passed two where you are hiding for 2 and 4. Now you are going to have to hide in your office for 6 weeks. Don't hide in your office for 6 weeks. Vote no.

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I ask for a division vote.

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I rise to speak in opposition to the amendment of my friend and colleague. The battle cry for conservation compliance requirements to be attached to crop insurance seems, strangely, to assume that conservation compliance is somehow eliminated in commodity programs in this new bill. This is not true. Conservation compliance is attached to the new farm revenue program in title I of the bill. Conservation compliance is also attached to the marketing loan program. To duplicate the same requirements in crop insurance is wasteful of government resources, taxpayer dollars, and will cause a lot more paperwork. When your farmers find out you are wasting taxpayer dollars and are in charge of a duplicative effort and making them fill out more paperwork, you will have to hide in your office for 4 weeks. Do not hide in your office for 4 weeks. Vote no.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I know of no objection at this point. I yield the remainder of our time.

Mr. ROBERTS. Yes, that is correct.

Mr. ROBERTS. I agree.

Mr. ROBERTS. I yield back the remainder of our time.

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, this amendment makes permanent the current Office of Tribal Relations with the Department of Agriculture, and that is very important in terms of outreach for Native American farmers and ranchers. We have no objection, and I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. ROBERTS. Well, we will stop at ``pillaging.''