the morning the senate will come to order the chaplain dr barry black will lead the senate in prayer ordained human government for the good of humanity guide our senators by the wisdom of your word deliver them from the pride that leads to shame as they make obeying you their top priority remind them of proverbs twenty nine two that when the right shows are in authority the people rejoice but when the wicked rule the people groan help our senators also to remember your wisdom in proverbs twenty nine seven a right person knows the right of the poor a wicked person does not understand such knowledge made the business done in this place conform to your justice and equity we asked this in your name and for your glory  communication to the senate washington d c december eleventh two thousand and seven to the senate under the provisions of rule one paragraph three of the standing rules of the senate i hereby point i will sheldon whitehouse a senator from the state of rhode island to perform the duties of the chair by robert c byrd president pro tempore this president the majority leader will be in a period of mourning business for one hour times equally divided as usual the republicans control the first half majority controls the final half the following morning business senate will resume consideration the farm bill and say mr president there's been tremendously good movement on that all the republicans amendments have been offered five democratic amendments have been offered we're going to set up a program for voting on these for example some of the most controversial for example in the one that we thought would be controversial that center diminishes offer regarding a renewable fuel program i think probably we could agree to just take that  every indication that we can complete this bill before we leave and hopefully have it go to conference i've spoken to the republican leader about the conference and we have an idea of how conference in this instance and while in some others could not be done i caucus recess period today with the first vote today there could be other votes this afternoon all talk to the republican leader about that if we if we can't schedule more votes afternoon we'll schedule a load of them in the morning twenty four forty a bill to amend the foreign intelligence surveillance act of one nine hundred seventy eight to modernize and streamline the provisions of that act and for other purposes at twenty four forty one a bill to amend the foreign intelligence surveillance act of one thousand nine hundred seventy eight to modernize and streamline the provisions of that act and for other purposes mr president majority leader during the next ten days we have a lot of work to do as i've indicated we're going try to finish the farm bill we're going to try to make and the most significant effort to complete our work on the foreign intelligence legislation we have the a m t which is still pending even though we've passed it here we understand the house is going to send us something dealing with that we have to do our work on that we have the energy legislation we're trying to work through that and we also have our spending i had a conversation with the republican leader this morning on that and while the hopes don't appear as hopeful as i would wish i'm kind of reminded of president you know i i i did not object to th further proceedings on the two bills i'm real for detaining so what do i but the chair not my objection to those two bills but jackson has been heard now sorry about that the believe placed on the calendar i'm so anxious to get the farm bill the other issues that i got ahead of myself anyway must present i'm reminded of president lincoln and we go to lincoln memorial and you see on the wall the carved words confident we're doing the right thing on the farm bill fice and our spending programs but you know i'm realistic enough to know that tom there's hopefully some way in between us to work all this out and even though we're both we're all hopeful that our side is right i've come to over the years to learn and i'm there's usually some way of working through these things although loose is pretty difficult duty we on the appropriations process which will require the white house lawn with house and senate republicans to be responsible and reasonable in the pursuit of a common ground will work believe the energy bill with a bipartisan compromise will take our country toward lower energy prices for consumers and a cleaner environment more work to complete faisel legislation to ensure that we have the tools to fight terrorism with fair and yes constitutional tools and pass a continuing pattern of legislation that will fund this government we know that we're going to have to do it very very short c r a continuing resolution to keep the governor also and hopefully that will be for a matter of days and certainly not multiple weeks so i look forward to some i hope that can be done like to speak this morning though mr president briefly about another issue that concerns not just democrats but members of both parties and our entire country it's often said that a man has nothing but his reputation his honor and integrity i believe that to be the case this is true not just for man but for countries in a thousand years in a hundred years when historians write the story of these early days of not just with words but with deeds the true measure of america is our moral authority this president over the past seven years that authority has been significantly damaged the war in iraq that didn't have to be waged a cia agent exposed to harm for telling the truth valerie plame adjusted and justice department in shambles attorney general gonzales the treatment of prisoners held up to no mr president that the interrogations were by using water torture something that originated in fourteen ninety two by queen isabella and king ferdinand in the inquisition here it is these hundreds and hundreds of years later the great america has reverted to what took place in the the damage to our moral authority will matter to the history books but more importantly it matters right now it puts our troops at greater risk of captured in pairs or relationships with nations who want to be our allies in peace or ability fight an effective war on terror it creates terrorists this latest news of destroyed tapes raises far more questions and we have answers for example who is responsible for destroying these tapes why was something being covered up the possibility of a struct structure that justice is very real the american people deserve a full accounting for what took place and answers for all these questions well that eradicate what's gone on the last seven years of course not but it will help chairman rockfeller has launched an investigation in the senate intelligence committee i'm happy that the intelligence committee has been working on a bipartisan basis that's good senator bond has been working with center rock cellar and they've done i think we spent a good working there's been very little fighting and fighting between them attorney general the united states newly selected has said he will launch an inquiry we will see what this inquiry will be so i express expect both the intelligence committee and the attorney general the united states to investigate aggressively the answers to questions regarding this cover up but the cia and the justice department bush white house and every american should know that if these investigations encounter resistance or are unable to find the truth i won't hesitate to those calling for special counsel for example this weekend joe biden chairman foreign relations committee called for a special prosecutor he may be right i'm willing to wait and see what develops before i join in that call the republican leader misread and let me say i share the view of the majority leader that there is clearly a way forward on the farm bill we are now making substantial progress and should be able to complete that build in the near future and also i think here on the spending issue it is indeed hard to understand the complaints we're hearing from the other side on our supposed lack of compromise on spending that we've sought actually compromises all year dozens of appropriations committee and subcommittee hearings which is the normal process but we're now a quarter of a way into the fiscal year reasonable responsible people understand the time to get the work done is now as a majority indicated majority leader indicated christmas is two weeks from today we can keep going back and forth with the house maybe endlessly but that would only further delay our fundamental responsibility of getting these spending bills signed into law so what's the way to do it the way forward let's protect the taxpayers while it's funded troops and is otherwise unproductive exercise mr president  the previous order the leadership time is reserved under the previous order there will be a period of morning business for sixty minutes with the time equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees with senators permitted to speak for up to ten minutes each with the republicans controlling the first half and the majority controlling the final half center from text as president asked believe we have two speakers on our side in morning business morning so i would ask unanimous consent that time be allotted fifteen minutes of that and senator graham the senator from south carolina be a lot of the second fifteen minutes there objection without objection it is so ordered mr president i come to the floor today to talk about an issue that should be the first priority of this congress and that is to fund our troops during a time of war to get make sure they have the funding that they need to have the equipment to have  logistical support and other support they need in order to fight this global war on terror there's been a lot of rumors circulating around congress about what the way forward is going to be on the appropriations i can only call it the mess that confronts us with only one appropriation bill that's been signed by the president out of twelve and yesterday i've heard the reports from the chairman of the said this and this is what i agree with in his statement the one part i do agree with he said i want no linkage whatsoever between domestic spending in the war i want the war to be dealt with totally on its own we shouldn't be trading off domestic priorities for the war mr president i would refrain is that we shouldn't be doing anything to tie the fate of our troops to wasteful pork projects or excessive washington spending and i'm glad to see the distinguished majority whip on the on the floor because i do have a unanimous consent request mr president that i know he'll be interested in i would ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number four eighty four and s twenty three forty i ask unanimous consent that the bill be read it third time and pass the motion to reconsider be laid on the table and that any statements relating to the bill appear at this point in the record is their objection is president reserving the right to object and i'd like to ask consent that the remarks i'm about to be about to make not be taken from the time allotted to the gentleman from the senate or rather from texas in terms of morning business without objection thank you and reserving the right to object and i will object to this unanimous consent request let me say at the outset that what the gentleman with senator has asked and gentlemen has asked for is to return to a bill which was considered by the senate on november the sixteenth of this year november sixteenth two thousand and seven and there was a failure of a cloture vote which was a vote requiring sixty senators to vote affirmatively before the bill goes forward and that the final vote was forty five to fifty three in fact three of the republican colleagues of senator from texas joined in opposing cloture vote this is a senate appropriations bill and as the senator from texas knows the constitution requires spending bills originate in the house so the house would either object or ignore this bill or blue slip the bill in a in a way that would mean that whatever we would do here would not achieve the result asked for by the senator from texas i would just also add that as of today we have lost three thousand eight hundred eighty eight american lives in iraq the amount of money which we have provided according to the administration were allow them to continue this war at least to the end of march and perhaps beyond so the troops are not without the resources that they need and what the senator from texas has proposed is a an approach which is on its face unconstitutional has been rejected by the senate on november sixteenth including three republican senators and for that reason i object to the unanimous consent request objection is heard and mr president i differ from the other stingless senator from illinois obviously the bill that was voted on earlier contained a numerous restrictions and deadlines on the deployment of our troops in iraq and for that reason cloture was denied it's not that there wasn't support and indeed i would hope there would be unanimous support to make sure that our troops get the emergency funding they need in order to continue military operations until such time as congress can appropriate the remainder  president's request of one hundred ninety six billion dollars it's important to note that this is emergency bridge funding for the troops and while i don't disagree with the distinguished senator from illinois that that the military can borrow from peter to pay paul and move funds around within their budget to avoid disaster up until about mid february the fact of the matter is that the white house has now warned that one hundred thousand civilian jobs one hundred thousand civilian jobs depend on this emergency funding and here's a story in my and in army times dated december the tenth two thousand and seven it says the department of defense is sending notices of layoffs this week two weeks before christmas to one hundred thousand civilian employees warning them unless congress acts that they're going to be out of a job this is not the way to show our support for the troops in fact this is non support for the troops it's important to know what's included in this emergency funding that should be voted on today and decoupled from the debate over the omnibus appropriation bill or any other continuing resolution here the most notable provisions one operation and maintenance funding this finances a broad range of activities including combat operations transportation of personnel and equipment you equipment maintenance and general base support for our troops but also funds the iraqi security forces and afghanistan security forces if we have any hope of bringing our troops home sooner rather than later it's because we've succeeded in training the iraqis to take our place to provide that security so we can bring our troops home soon as possible and from the by not providing the funding as we are delaying that prospect not advancing the prospect a third general category of funding for joint improvised explosive device defeat organization the joint i e d defeat organization which as we all know is dedicated to finding new ways to neutralize the primary threat to our troops in iraq which is improvised explosive devices and we ought to be providing the funding for this joint i e d defeat organization so that they can saved the lives and limbs literally of american troops this also includes this emerge funding that's being blocked by senate democrats would go to repair replace and upgrade military equipment it also provides for military personnel funding special pay and benefits including hazardous duty pay for our troops as well as the defense health programs those are the categories of items that are being blocked by today's objection by the democrat leadership i have to tell you mr president i'm disappointed by the decision to block th funding for our troops in iraq this is the material support we can provide to shore troops that we are behind them regardless of our differences on the war or how the war is being conducted we've seen time and time again how this congress egged on by special interest groups like move on dot org have been willing to use our troops as part of their political debate this is particularly appalling when we're the ones who have first asked and voted by a vote of seventy seven to twenty one i believe was seventy seven i know affirmatively for the use of force in iraq were the ones who voted and have the responsibility for authorizing that use of force and for us now to deny the funding they need to foster a situation where the money has to be moved around from accounts just be able to get by and one hundred thousand civilian employees are being put on notice that they're going to be out of a job unless congress quits playing a game is just simply unsustainable last january of course we unanimously confirmed general david petraeus to lead our forces in iraq as we all know there was serious concern about the way the military operations in iraq were being conducted and many if not all of us called for a new way forward we unanimously agreed that general petraeus was the right man for that job and in fact i'm proud to say that that vote to support general petraeus his nomination and that vote of confidence of the new strategy the so called surge of forces and operations in iraq proved to be a correct one general petraeus with his counterinsurgency strategy and with the hard work and dedication of our men and women in the military have brought us closer to a stable iraq that many had simply given up and thought not possible reports are appearing daily in the newspaper and on on the electronic media showing that violent attacks continue to decline in iraq and occur in communities across that nation reports show people not only feel safer but they are safer refugees who've left iraq to go to syria and other places just to protect their lives and their families are now returning to iraq because iraq is indeed safer taxi drivers resume their routes and neighborhoods without regard for whether predominantly shiite or sunni neighbors and families previously separated by the war reuniting as i've said as refugees are returning by the bus alone my colleagues have had a chance to show their support for the troops and unfortunately we see that support sorely lacking unfortunate as i've said the call of groups like move on dot org seem to be so loud and have such command on the other side of the aisle that it drowns out these positive reports about improved security situation in iraq and it leads some unfortunately to block emergency funding that our troops need in order to carry out the continued security operations the training for iraqis to take our place so we can bring our troops home and unfortunately end up being part of the partisan political games that the ten do tend to dominate washington d c my colleagues who continue to insist that iraq is lost and that the surge has failed or that iraq is not making political progress or not talking about the iraqi of today i've said it before and i'll say it again mr president that betting against the men and women of the united states military is always a bet that you're going to lose and when our colleagues on the other side of once volatile region of fallujah wrote last week of the new york daily news quote there's a gigantic perception lag in america these days iraq of the popular imagination iraq of the real world are not the same country secretary of defense gates said on saturday that quote civilian deaths across iraq are down about sixty percent recently there were the lowest number of single day attacks across the nation in three and a half years he said the progress is real but it's also fragile why in the world given this progress and given the fragility of the conditions in iraq would my colleagues on the other side of the aisle deny the emergency funding that our troops need what possible rationale could there be for making that part of the political gains and dysfunction that seems to dominate the united states congress we have to make our policy decisions based not on the rock that many ever remembered from the past but the situation on the ground today which is improving rebounding and growing and we still hear the doom sayers and those admonishing general petraeus in the strategy i'm reminded mr president of something a professor once told me when he said speaking louder doesn't make you any more right we need to listen to the facts and not the loudest voices we all have an important question to ask ourselves it's not about should we have gone into iraq or why we went into iraq those are questions now relegated to the history books the fact is we're there and the question we must ask now is given the current situation in iraq in the middle east what is the best course of action for the united states we should ask ourselves would drawing troops from iraq before securing it make us any more or less secure here at home i have no doubt mr president and history i think will agree that the more stable we can make iraq the better chance they have of becoming a fully functioning partner in the middle east a democracy governed by iraqis for separate us withdrawal whether caused by deadlines imposed by congress or by cutting off funding or by leaving funding in doubt as  our democratic colleagues have done by objecting to this unanimous consent request today a precipitous withdrawal would be detrimental to this security and stability of iraq and would endanger american lives here at home how could that be skum unity tells us that a power vacuum in iraq left by rapid american withdrawal would create a failed state and an opportunity for al qaida to reassemble and reorganize it would create an opportunity for training ground and an organizing location for al qaida and islamic extremists to launch future terrorist attacks against the united states or our other allies or american forces in the middle east such action would also likely necessitate future american military operations in the region that will put us behind where we are today not advance where we are today i think we can all agree that that kind of scenario is completely unacceptable and certainly not in the best interest of the united states the situation in iraq as it stands now needs a continued military presence with a force large enough to handle potential problems until the iraqis are able to govern and defend themselves and the more capable the iraqi military and police forces become the fewer of our troops are necessary to assist them in that effort but it doesn't help them to  cause them to question whether we are going to provide the financial support for our troops and for the training of iraqi recchi military and police forces but that's exactly what the senate is doing today by blocking this unanimous consent request many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle still now are left to claim that the iraqi political reconciliation is the reason that they are dissatisfied with the outcome in iraq having lost the argument by the improved security arrangements as a result of the surge in the counterinsurgency strategy of of of general petraeus you know i have to wonder mr mr president whether we're holding the iraqi government as president i would ask unanimous consent for two more minutes without objection mr president by now moving the goalposts and saying first that the surge wouldn't work to now having to declare the obvious that the surge is working and the military situation is better now our colleagues on the other side of the aisle in the nay sayers are saying well the really the problem is a lack of political reconciliation but i have to ask mr president whether we are a congress that's proven itself to be dysfunctional over this last eight months or eleven months now whether we're holding the iraqis to a different standard that we would actually hold ourselves to we exactly have not exactly been a model for how congress is should function and i think it's unfair for us to continue to move the goalposts and say that the significant reconciliation efforts that are occurring in tribal areas in the provinces and local areas doesn't count because clearly it does count with things like the end bar awakening and the work being done around iraq now from the bottom up as opposed to the top down what's helping to make for a more secure iraq and making sure there are rocky's rather than americans who are principally responsible for maintaining security and safety in iraq in conjunction with american military troops so mr president i'm i'm discouraged and disappointed that our colleagues have blocked this emergency funding for our troops putting one hundred thousand civilian employees of the department of defense in doubt during this christmas season as to whether or not they're actually going to have a job come february and causing our troops to question our commitment to support them during a time of war that is not the present then or from south carolina is it nine or standing i'm recognized for fifteen minutes is that crack fifteen minutes without objection ok thank you mr press  d to start this discussion about what to do in iraq i think we need to sort of take inventory of where we're at what common ground we do have i do believe that there's a vast why didn't any support for the man i'm a layman in the  military the average republican and democrat independent citizen and member of congress and that is indeed good news for our country it's not one of those situations where people come back from vietnam and are not well received by their fellow citizens a nd for that we should all be grateful i would like to put this debate in a little different context as my colleague from texas said whether we should have gone into iraq anon is sort of a matter for the for historical discussion the question for us as a nation is winning and losing can you put iraq in terms of winning and losing i think you have to because our enemy has our enemy out qaeda and other extremist groups look very much at rock as a battle front and a battle they want to win and that they want us to lose that's why bin laden has rallied the jihadist in the al qaeda sympathizers to go to iraq and go to the land of two rivers and drive the infidel out because i think they understand pretty clearly that if iraq could reconcile itself become a stable functioning democracy with the iraqi spin to it where a woman could have a say about her children well the rule of law would reign over the rule of gun and be a place that would exhort religious tolerance it would be a nightmare for their agenda so our enemy is very certain in their own mind about what would happen if we won in iraq and again winning to me would be a stable functioning democracy tolerant of religious differences were all groups would have a political say or a woman would have a meaningful role in society regarding her children and their future and it would contain iran it would be a buffered iranian and bishan and it would deny extremist groups like al qaeda say safe haven that to me is winning and that to me is very possible and the reason i say it's very possible in the best interests of the iraqi people themselves to achieve that goal there's a shia majority in iraq but there are iraqi shia there are arabs the persian shia majority there's been a war between these t countries in the past decades and a lot of animosity so the general feeling on the streets that i have found for many visitors to iraq is that generally speaking the iraqi population doesn't want to be dominated by anybody including iran now the biggest news of the surge is not being reported enough in my opinion is that given a choice and an opportunity a muslim population the iraqi sunni arabs rejected the al and then bar the al qaeda movement in iraq was formulated and inspired by outside forces leaders from al qaeda internationally came into iraq to rally people that they al and they played a very heavy handed and are brutal from the small things like banning smoking to burning children in front of their parents who did not cooperate and they imposed a way of living on the anbar province that the iraqi and bar sunni arab said no i don't want any more of this in the shakes and all the tribes came because al qaeda overplayed their hand so the real good news for me is that given an opportunity and being reinforced the al qaeda agenda will not fail and people within the region will turn it down and reject it and that would not have happened without the surge i think most of us don't appreciate what life is like in a country where if you raise your hand to be a judge not only do you become personally at risk they try to kill your family the forces who do not want to iraq political debate and discourse in this country can be very contentious but on occasion we find that middle ground to solve hard problems is hard and difficult to compromise an environment where the people who want you to fail literally will kill your family so the lack of security in the past has been our biggest impediment to reconciliation and thank god for general betray us so to narrow in all under their command you have done a wonderful job this we should all agree upon that the surge is a military operation has been enormously successful and i think it will be the gold standard in military history for a counterinsurgency operations instead of bleeding it dry funds and putting it in risk we should reinforce it politically minded terribly in every other way a political leader can reinforce a military leader our military because of our system of government depends on us those of us in elected office to give them the resources to execute the mission they've been assigned who among us believes we understand iraq better than general petra militarily advocated the surge as proposed by general petraeus who among us understands counterinsurgency operations better than general and his staff none of us if we'd be honest with ourselves as the expert in this area is given he's been given an ability to engage in military operations with a completely new theory and it's working undeniably working security in iraq is better and bars literally been liberated if you told me a year ago this time last year that we'd be moving marines out of anbar because the security environment would justify this optimism on what i can but it's happened and all throughout this country called iraq people are beginning to reconcile themselves because of better security and quiet frankly their war weary but i'm not going to reinvent history the blame is across the board and across aisle how many times did republicans go to iraq after the fall of baghdad for maybe three years and say it's really going well it's just the media's fault it was not going well and it was not the media's fault we've got a new general with a new strategy and is a lot more complicated than just thirty thousand new troops we're deploying them differently we're going after the insurgency in a different way and the biggest nightmare for al qaeda has been the surge if you asked the pick winners and losers of the surge it would be extremists groups at the top of the list the al qaeda in this soon going to be the shia militia aligned with iran there's an offensive about to take place in iraq that's going to put the nail in the coffin of extremist groups they are not defeated yet but they're greatly diminished now is not the time colleagues for us to put this surge in jeopardy our troops are in a political crossfire here home they're not in the middle of a heated sectarian war security does exist in iraq now to get business done they are extremist groups and is still dangerous but the military has done its part to allow the iraqi people to reconcile itself we themselves we have not done our part we're still fighting a battle as if nothing that happened we're still holding on to the position stated in april and may as if nothing has changed and that's not fair to those who sacrificed to make it change a lot to this floor for a very long time senator mccain a handful of others arguing that the department of defense had a strategy doomed to fail thank god the president changed course thank god for general petraeus and all under his command now to my colleagues on the other please let us allow general petraeus to finish the job that he started within a few months the troops begin to come home based on the surge being successful they will return with victory at hand victory is not yet achieved but it is possible and the only way to roll back the security gains is to change the mission and have the congress to start running the war the political speak of is that some people want to give the money to support the surge only if they get eleven billion dollars of domestic spending unrelated to the military some people will not give any money for the surge continued operations in iraq unless we change the mission and withdraw all troops by the end of the next year that's a cross fire politically that is doing more harm than good that should end beginning in march general petraeus will come back he will tell us the situation as it exists on the ground and i am here to tell you in december that i am disappointed in the progress at the central government level in baghdad they have passed a budget in iraq forty eight billion dollars all revenue being shared among all groups is a great step forward but it is a permanent solution to the problem we need a permanent law a national law that will tell every group in iraq the wealth of the country part of it will come to your area and you don't have to worry about it budget budget political reconciliation in iraq has to happen for the surge to be successful i have said on numerous occasions if there's not some major breakthrough on the benchmarks by january we'll look at reconfiguring the aid we give to the racket government not changing the troop missions other troop numbers on the way that up to the military it is in our national security interest to maintain the gains we've achieved on the ground to keep iraq from going into chaos but we're giving this government hundreds of millions of dollars of aid and if they can't reconcile themselves we may find other places to spend that money and other ways to spend that money so i would urge my colleagues to allow the troop funding that is required to make to complete the surge to go forward stop this political crossbar of trying to extract from this necessary funding of it more money to spend domestically here at home or to try to take the nation away from the military commanders best out where our troops need to find themselves at this crucial moment in time and i can promise you as we go into next year at the central government baghdad has not done a better job reconciling themselves with it and with anyone republicans and democrats alike to find a way to put political senator from arkansas thank you mr president first i want to acknowledge my colleagues who've been helping on s two zero four senator menendez and through bill nelson and senator chuck schumer have all helped craft this legislation relating to the consumer product safety commission because we're now in the holiday  season naturally public at attention is focused on consumer product safety i had come today prepared to ask for unanimous consent to try to move to this legislation however  last week i talked thursday i met with al hubbard of the white house in a very very constructive meeting to talk about some of the areas of disagreement on the legislation as it came out of the senate commerce committee it was a very constructive meeting very frank i hope in the end we will consider that a very productive meeting read it we don't know if there's a meeting of the minds yet but i'm cautiously optimistic that the white house is starting to engage in this very very important issue to this country and to the families of america let's talk just for a moment about the consumer products safety commission for a lot of people the s see is just one of these alphabet soup agencies they don't really know what this t p s seed is but i will tell you it touches every americans why every day it's in the small things that we use things like batteries coffee makers lawn mower ways lawn mowers toys baby cribs the consumer products safety commission is there to make sure that these products are safe for people in my state of arkansas to buy and also for people all over this country to buy and use one of the things that the consumer product safety commission should do is give people in this country including parents when it comes to toys give them peace of mind to know that the toys they purchase another product that they purchase me american safety standards this that we're talking about today s two zero four five was called recently by the wall street journal quote the most significant consumer safety legislation in a generation in quote and i think that accurately sums up the nature of our legislation it is consumer safety reform legislation it is very significant it's very comprehensive our efforts in reforming the c p s see predate a lot of these recalls that we heard about this summer we've been working on this all year in the subcommittee but basically the c p s see now looks after fifteen thousand consumer products fifteen thousand separate consumer products every year there are about roughly twenty seven thousand deaths in this country caused by consumer products that are faulty there are thirty three point one million people who are injured every year through consumer products that the c p s the regulates so this is an agency that says it's a public safety agency it's a good government agency unfortunately it is completely overwhelmed today and i believe the senate and the house and the president should all work together to reauthorize the sagem c and put it back together again just let me give you some examples from this year alone this year there have been thirty seven million products recalled thirty seven million and some people may say well gosh it's working because all these products have been recalled first a lot of products had never been imported in this country the first place but secondly  a lot of those products were recalled by the manufacturers not by the government so we know to make that distinction but in any event we've seen stories in the news media about lead coated big bird elmo barbie accessories with lead we've seen collapsing cribs we've seen kerosene filled toy eyeballs we've seen building tollways with small very powerful magnets that when kids ingest cause all kinds of problems we've seen craft toys that contain the date rape drug i know some believable but we have seen in this country a craft set a craft toy that contains the date rape drug these products should never be in the marketplace in the beginning they should never be here let me let me talk about the status quo just for one moment and that is the status quo today with this flood of imports coming into this country completely unacceptable we should not stand idly by and allow these products to saturate our markets present some stories in the last few days about charities and charitable giving one of the great organizations during this time of year is the u s marine corps they do the toys for tots program they've been doing it for years it when i was a kid toys for tots was a big deal because they're always kids in the community less fortunate than than than i was and you know we would gather up our toys around our house take them down to a little drop station wherever it may be and the marines would sort  deliver to kids who needed toys on christmas morning or during the holiday season one of my staff members jason smedley is a marine and yesterday went down here in d c to volunteer on the marine corps toys for tots here the the big dispersing office here unfortunately what i found was that the donations this year to toys for tots are way down because parents and other they don't have confidence in the toys that they're giving to toys for tots that there might be something wrong with them and also what you find is as jason told me at the toys for tots location here in washington d c they have three three ring binders big heavy binders with all kinds of toy recall information in them every toy that comes in every toy they go through that the to make sure that toy hasn't been recalled is that that efficient anyone know that means a c p s c has not been able to do its job and protect our marketplace from these dangerous toys there's an another story that was in our local paper in arkansas all the arkansas democrat years that i believe it was yesterday where toy recalls have its in state charities the locally based charities you see the same story there where you see the donations down and it's just been a very very hard season for those people who are in that toy distribution operation during the holiday season in fact there's a great leader in arkansas in little rock area named hezekiah stewart is a reverend and he runs something called the watershed human development center lot of people in our state just called the watershed project and basically he tries to meet the needs of the most needy in the little rock area and he does a great job when i was the turning general we had a program we try to donate as many toys as we could a watershed and also toys for tots by the way but we tried to really help a watershed because they are touching people in the community that a lot of times just fall through the cracks but here again hezekiah stewart is in that article in yesterday's arkansas democrat is that saying that the donations are down there have no screen for the toys and it's basically just a big mess in addition to that i talk to parents in arkansas and i talk to grandparents in arkansas and they're telling me the same thing they're saying hey when we go buy this holiday season we want to buy toys for our children we don't know interest anymore you know we look on the package or says made in china we don't buy it well that's not a good screening process because you know hopefully most of the toys that we're seeing in the marketplace are safe today but the truth is that the public has lost confidence in the system that we have today and we here in the united states senate in the u s house and also in the white house we need to do a much better job of giving the consumer product safety commission the tools it needs let me talk just a little bit about the consumer product safety commission and help lay out the problem here in this chart we see something that is very very revealing but we see in this in this top chart are are the imports that are coming into this country what we see on this bottom chart is the consumer product safety commission staffing level year by year and one thing you'll notice and this is very clear in the numbers here and mistake of all one thing you notice here starting in one nine hundred seventy four you see the general trend even those up and down a little bit the general trend is for him words to increase coming into this country we've seen a lot more import we all know that everybody here in this body knows that we have seen imports in increase dramatically in the u s in the last few years and this is mor in this chart in the last few years unfortunately as the imports are going up the staff as a consumer products safety commission is going down and you can see these numbers again they're on mistake  all these numbers and this is an agency and a stress if you look at what it was at its high versus what it is today the numbers are just unmistakable and the problem with these numbers is when you see  low numbers like this on the staffing level at the consumer product safety commission when you understand the situation that their lab is in where their lab is very to laugh a dated and antiquated when you understand they're losing so many people through attrition just when you understand all the problems that agency has it's just totally overwhelmed look at this number here they're in an all time low but this number up here the imports are all time high you know we've got a problem and so we need in this body we need to address that problem there's no better time to address that than right now let me talk about just for a moment what i think we need at the consumer product safety commission we need a robust and proactive watchdog agency we need to prevent toxic toys from ever landing on our shores or on our shelves we need to be able  very very quickly when there's a problem and we need to have a system in place where we can punish the bad actors and punish the repeat offenders now again i've been talking the white house i'm encourag me cautiously optimistic on what the white house is has told me on the phone in meetings i'm cautiously optimistic but we all need to work together to try to get this done let me just run through some of the things that  four five basically what we are doing is we are taking this agency that needs an overhaul and we're overhauling it and what we're trying to do is we're trying to increase the staff by nearly twenty percent over time we're trying to upgrade their testing labs we're trying to increase their agents at the ports of entry again so those products never actually enter this country we're trying to allow the state attorneys general to be almost like more cops on the beat to help the c p s see enforce the laws in all the fifty states not just in one centralized location at the c p s see itself we want to increase the civil for pot fines and also the criminal penalties and also as part of this we want to do our dead level best to streamline the recall process it takes too long is too secretive and we're many many examples of people dying as there are discussions going on between the manufacturers in the c b c on how recall is going to be conducted we also and this is a very important point this bill bans lead  children's products i think it's very very important for the american public to understand right now there's not a ban on lead in children's products we know it's dangerous we know the problems and go that's well documented our doctors and our medical researchers and our scientists will tell us that there's no doubt about that we need to ban lead in children's products we also this bill also allows the consumer product safety commission to select a recall remedy it doesn't really leave it up to the manufacturer or a bad actor in some cases and by the way not all manufacturers are bad not all retailers bad fact the vast vast vast super majority of them are not there trying to do is right but it's the end of the day the consumer product safety commission needs to make decisions that are in the public interests not some of these manufacturers and retailers and distributors etc etc etc to do it in their own corporate interest we a watchdog agency who's going to be there to protect the public interest also this bill increases public disclosure i think is very very important because most parents in this country have heard a little something on the news or read a little something in the paper but they really don't have an easy way to know what's been recalled or exactly when it gets recalled we want more public disclosure and we want it to happen quicker we also with regard to children's products we want to third party process where a third party will will certify that those products meet us safety standards we have that a lot of other areas electronics and on and on and on there are a lot of third party certification process is out there that exist right now in the marketplace we need that for children's products and last two three things it does is it improves the tracking labels on children's products but hey we all know that we get a toy of some sort and they say there's a recall on a certain kind of doll where there might be ten different varieties of that aisle when they bought a doll that was made a year ago it's just been in a warehouse somewhere we don't know so we want to better labeling and tracking system we want to provide whistleblower protections if there are people out there who know there's wrongdoing and maybe somebody is covering it up if there's a whistleblower we see this in other contexts we want to allow that whistleblower to come forward and not be punished for doing the right thing and the last thing i want to mention on this is it prohibits the sale of recall products again a lot of people in this country may be shocked to know that in many circumstances not all but in many circumstances you see recalls products still for sale out in the open market i think i think parents would be shocked to know that but it's true so we're trying to do our best give it our best effort here to have a serious and fundamental reform of the consumer product safety commission just one more point in closing this president and that is that there are two major goals we're trying to accomplish with this legislation first we're trying to rebuild the agency and that's very very important for the function of that agency like i said before it's over well we showed you some charts here there are many many others that we can point to to show you how overwhelmed the stage and you know so first and foremost we want to rebuild the agency but second and this point flows from the first point we want to restore the public confidence in the marketplace we don't want to be that next holiday season moms and dads are coming up to me in arkansas and come up to my colleagues all over the country and say should abbott's voice for my children or grandchildren this year because that's what i'm hearing when i go back home people are concerned they're scared they are uncertain about the american marketplace and that's too bad we don't need that to happen we need our people to have confidence in the marketplace here in this country so i asked my colleagues on both sides of the aisle and in the house as well and in the white house we would ask everyone to give this legislation a serious look we would like to move it this month before the end of this year during this holiday  season i know that there are some folks who have expressed interest in trying to help get that done i'm available any day any ny my staff is available we definitely want to work with whoever is willing to work to get the consumer center file present to farming free and hoary what what is before the senate at this moment if there's no further morning business morning business would be close the morning business is closed and the the senate is back on the farm bill at the present time under the previous order the senate agreement whereby we will have twenty amendments max maximum of twenty members we don't have to have twenty members but a maximum of twenty members on either side we now have a list and we do have the amendments in order on the republican side there is twenty listed i hope that maybe not all of them were required of vote maybe we can work some of those out that we won't require votes on or have much time on any of those only seven the members listed on the democratic side and i hope that might be the limit of those amendments so republicans have about twenty we have about seven members that i know of right now now also  we know that the yesterday the senate entered into a unanimous consent agreement that beginning at eleven a m this morning the senate would begin three hours of debate on the lugar lott berg amendment number thirty seven move ahead after that on amendments and i don't know exactly what the next amendment will be will work that out but hopefully we can work out some more votes today and i don't know how late the leader wants to keep us in the night but i'm prepared to stay here very late tonight very very late here tonight to move these amendments forward we're reaching a point where i know everyone wants to get out of here for the holiday season for christmas new year we're approaching the end of hanukkah coming up and so i know what people would like to leave and get together with their families so i think if we put in a couple of long days here we can reach some pretty good agreements on these on these amendments on the farm bill so i hope will well we'll have a long day today and and get some amendments offered and debated and disposed of one way or the or the other and so i just want to senators men the senators amendment number thirty seven eleven is pending under three hour time limit this president as appropriate to commence the debate yes it is i thank the chair i is not an easy task to be chairman a ranking member of the senate agriculture committee during a farm bill and having a serve in both capacities i know well of the challenges that both have faced in putting together a bill let me point out as i have during the debate in committee some achievements have occurred both the chairman and ranking member of outlined a number of these in the areas of conservation rural development research nutrition and energy i'm also pleased by the effort to provide interested farmers with the revenue base program that should be an improvement over the status quo however the farm bill we ha before us does not provide meaningful reform our current farm policies sold the american public as a safety net actually hurt the family farmer in the name of maintaining the family farm and preserving rural communities the day's farm programs have benefited eight select few leaving the majority of farmers without supports or a safety net and they review the history of these farm bills the genesis of our current foreign policies began during the great depression as an effort to help alleviate poverty among farmers and rural communities at that time one in fo americans lived on a farm and the rural economies vitality was largely dependent upon farmers farm programs were instituted that stifles agricultural productivity in order to raise commodity prices through a federally administered supply and demand program supply control programs cost u s taxpayers handsomely in higher food costs and job loss and now about half of the nation's farmers are essentially prevented from growing other crops such as fruits and vegetables to date this same antiquated idea is promoted even though farm income is higher on average than other industries times have changed dramatically since then that day one in seventy five americans lives on a farm and only one in every seven hundred fifty lives and lives on a full time commercial farm and i furthermore nearly ninety percent of total farm household income comes from off farm sources ninety percent in response to these ongoing changes in one thousand nine hundred six congress finally recognized that farmers not the government could best ascertain what crops are profitable and granted roughly half of our farmers flexibility in planning choices so called freedom to farm bill and began to transition away from federally controlled  programs but in two thousand and two congress and the bush administration reversed these reforms and created the so called quote three legged stool end of quote which in addition to expand these defective policies without regard for the fact that the majority of farmers do not have a safety net the first leg of the so called three legged stool is direct payment subsidies to specific farmers who grow certain crops direct payments are fixed annual taxpayer funded subsidies that are based on a farm historic production and a federally set payment rate for the five major subsidized crops the average payment rate is roughly fifteen dollars per acre for wheat twenty four dollars breaker for corn thirty three dollars breaker for cotton eleven dollars breaker for soybeans and ninety four dollars for a cure for rice these subsidies were originally called transition payments they were meant to be a temporary bridge from supply management based subsidies to free market based agriculture they were never intended to be a continuing entitlement direct payment policy these are particularly irresponsible because the taxpayer funded subsidies go out to farmers regardless of whether a case is flowing in or out of their farms or whether they farm at all although many of subsidize farmers are projected to receive record crop prices and earn record farm incomes over the next five years the senate farm bill is agreed to b the senate agriculture committee doles out up to twenty six billion dollars in direct payments from taxpayers much of which will go to some of the largest and wealthiest farming operations in america in fact over fifty percent of these subsidies will continue to go to farmers in just seven states brad ran total of thirteen point one billion dollars some find these statistics surprising but this is simply a continuation of business as usual when it comes to farm subsidies keep in mind that in the years two thousand to two thousand  the farm sector received one hundred twelve billion dollars in taxpayer subsidies but only forty three percent forty three percent of all farms receive payments this is because the majority of the payments go to just five props corn soybeans cotton and rice the largest eight per cent of these farms received fifty eight percent of these payments in fact the top one percent of the highest earning farmers claimed seventeen percent of the crowd subsidy benefits between two thousand and three and two thousand and five smaller farms that qualify in the current system and they could benefit from the additional support did not do as well two thirds of recipients farms receive less than ten thousand dollars accounting for only seven percent of their egos farm in minority farmers fared even worse with only eight percent of minority farmers even receiving federal farm subsidies furthermore half of the federal crops subsidies paid between two thousand and three and two thousand and five went to only nineteen congressional districts out of four hundred thirty five each one of th illustrates that our direct payment system is an equitable and in conflict with claims you will hear on the senate floor that our current farm policies are a safety net for the family farmer a marketing loan program that allows farmers to put their crops up as collateral to receive operating capital however of provisions allow farmers to go ahead and sell the crop and repay the government at a lower rate leaving taxpayers to make up the difference because these two programs do not appropriately correspond with market forces they have the effect of creating artificial markets for crops markets do not exist yet neither program provides any help to farmers when they arguably need it most during disasters such as drought  greater concern these programs have been ruled to violate our trade agreements but this new farm bill actually increases target prices for at least five crops loan rates or seven crops and adds a number of new subsidized robbed of some sun senators may wonder why we should be concerned that we are in violation of our world trade organization o off building up more barriers to trade at this farm bill is about american taxpayers american farmers rather and not farmers in brazil or elsewhere however if senators look further down the line they will see that our w a t l violations could cost the united states billions in revenue until actual property and loss trade opportunities and failure to move toward compliance will invite retaliatory terror of legally can be directed at any us industry in fact this is happening now brazil will soon have the authority to retaliate in kind united states products whether they be agricultural products or intellectual property due to our unwillingness to fix our farm policy is unclear and brazil will follow through with these threats but what is clear as the dead has repeatedly found the united states cotton program to be in violation of our commitments as a result of a host of challenges to other agricultural commodities have ensued including a case brought forth by brazil and canada and november that targets all of our commodity programs upon the initial findings of the  congress did repeal some caution related programs found to violate these agreements namely the so called step two program which is a program that uses taxpayer money to pay companies to use u s cotton however the farm bill we are currently considering makes virtually no attempt to bring the rest of the current program into compliance the administration earlier this year put forth a number of policy changes that they argue  have fixed our trade problems with the debbie geo including a revenue based counter sex is a program marketing loans that respond to market prices and eliminating planting restrictions f fruits and vegetables none of these proposals were incorporated into either the house or the house of representatives bill or the farm bill from the senate before us today in fact this farm bill significantly increases the likelihood that other programs will be further challenged by the world trade organization specifically the w c l found that countercyclical payments and marketing loans are trade distorting and the direct payments are going to be trade neutral or a trade violation as long as planting restrictions are retained astonishingly the farm bill increases payments made under these trade distorting programs almost across the board further exacerbating our trade situation in the midst of all of this the united states department of agriculture's chief economist projects that exports of agricultural products for this year are likely to reach seventy nine billion dollars nearly thirty percent of all farm cash receipts in two thousand and seven nearly forty percent of soybeans half of our wheat and over ninety percent other u s farm subsidy programs as challenged by brazil and canada do not comply with that detail rules the potential for retaliation by other countries is immeasurable mr president a farm bill before us today establishes a new permanent disaster trust fund at that apartment of the treasury to provide an additional five billion dollars in spending for commodity farmers amendment does not touch this provision nor any of the other provisions related to the finance committee package of this five billion dollars it's estimated that nearly half of the money will be given to farmers in count designated as disaster counties by the president and the other half will go to crop insurance companies as a subsidy to add honester higher levels of crop insurance coverage the idea of a permanent disaster program may have merit especially when you consider that congress has passed legislation to fund disaster payment assistance nearly every year for the last twenty years but we should ask ourselves i the current expensive farm bill is failing to provide a safety net to farmers in these devastating events do happen then what is the purpose of the farm bill why do we need a new program administered by a separate federal agency if the film what most americans believe is the core purpose of the legislation before us we should fix the root problem namely that they current subsidies says does not work and waste taxpayer dollars mr president if you are now a farm land owner in america it is highly probable that your land will increase in value why because a land owning farm or our agriculture business can count upon receiving substantially more money through subsidies as a result you are able to leverage your land and crops to expand if you are one of hundreds of thousands of farmers in this country who rent land as opposed to owning land you face a very tough set of circumstances your rents are likely to go up each year the value of the land goes up we're still if you are a young farmer who hopes someday to own land then your prospects diminish year by year as a result there are young members of farm families w hopeful that with a reduction a repeal of federal estate taxes that they might inherit the land other young people who are interested in farming are simply out of luck as it is too difficult to get into the business so as a result it is predictable that the average age of farmers in this country will continue to increase as it's been increasing in reason to cade's consider the fact that six percent of farmers are younger than thirty five twenty six percent are over sixty five years of age furthermore elderly farmers who may be land rich but caged for will be more inclined to sell their farms as their retirement nest egg the most likely buyer that farm is an owner of a larger farm was in a position to expand thanks to government subsidies in spite of all of the rhetoric and all of the attempts to talk about perpetuating the small family farm or even the medium size farm the facts are that consolidation is increasing and this bill will perpetuate that cycle to emphasize this point because it reflects the an equity of this entire bill our farm policy is transfer a great deal of money from ordinary taxpayers to a few farmers if this transfer from the many to the few produced a stable farm economy with prospects for a greater trade success wraps one could argue that this approach is more justified further these policies could be justified if they truly did support a lower to middle class farmer and reduce the number of farm consolidations i am arguing that our policies promote the exact opposite for all of these reasons senator frank lautenberg and i along with senators hatch reid menendez carden allan's domenici mccain and white house are introduced an amendment today that would provide a true safety net for all farmers regardless of what they grow or where they live for the first time each farmer would receive at no cost either expanded it county based crop insurance policies that would cover eighty five percent of expected crab revenue or eighty percent of a farms five year average adjusted gross revenue these subsidized insurance pools already exist but are reforms that make them more effective and universally used loud controlling administrative costs farmers would also be able to purchase insurance to cover the remainder of their revenue and yields the eighty five percent of county level based simply looks based policy simply looks at the expected revenue annually in each county in the united states for crap such as corn soybeans wheat cotton and rice but it can be expanded under this bill to any commodity so long as adequate market information is available to satisfy actuarial concerns the u s d a uses prices from the futures market in late february and multiplies them by past county average crowd deals collected by the market conditions and yields and the old trends farmers would receive a safety net payment the actual county revenue for a crowd they're growing below eighty five percent of the target revenues this program ensures that the only incentive to grow crops is the market not federal he said prices under the foreign policies before the senate today for example in marion county indiana where my farm is located expected yields for corn in two thousand and six where one hundred forty six bushels an acre the future price for corn in late february two thousand and six was two dollars and fifty nine cents a bushel so target revenue for corn was three hundred seventy eight dollars an acre after the harvest u s d a found that actual corn in marion county were one hundred forty bushels an acre and that harvest prices were three dollars and three cents a bushel producing average revenue of four hundred twenty four dollars an acre actual revenue exceeded target revenue so that no additional subsidies were paid to corn farmers in marion county in two thousand and six by contrast corn farmers in the county  colorado experience poor weather expected yields were one hundred sixty one bushels an acre and the future price for corn was two dollars fifty nine cents a bushel so expected revenue was four hundred eighteen dollars an acre after the harvest u s d a found that actual yields are much lower at one hundred sixteen bushels an acre and even though the harvest price of three hours and three cents a bushel was higher than expected actual average revenue was three hundred fifty dollars an acre since actual revenue was only eighty three percent of target revenue corn farmers in bakken county would receive five dollars and thirty cents cure under the safety net or the difference between actual revenue in that county and the eighty five percent guarantee the other choice would allow farmers to protect against adverse change in their own historic average revenues this program looks at the whole farm recognizing the same resist for an apple orchard as the soybean field on the same farm on farms five y average adjusted revenue is calculated using annual tax forms the adjusted revenue is essentially a farm overall revenue minus expenses as indicated on the tax forms on the farms adjusted revenue falls below eighty percent of that five year average a safety net payment makes up the difference this program is currently operating as a pilot program in a number of states but has been limited to the amount of revenues that can be covered for some agricultural products such as livestock and forest products our bill expands the program and expand it nationwide and allows the u s d a to include more agricultural products it also requires us day to minimize double payments under situations where farmers may also have products covered by remaining farm support programs  revenue insurance producers who are eligible for direct payments would receive transition payments phased out over the next five here's what should be deposited into their accounts they would then be eligible to withdraw from their available balance those accounts to supplement their income in years on their grows revenue falls below ninety five percent of their rolling five year average growth revenues they can invest in a rural enterprise purchase additional revenue or prop insurance or upon retirement utilize it as a farmer retirement account these accounts provide farmers who are generally asset rich and cash poor greater incentive to save for the future and will help maintain family farms by providing retirement benefits without forcing illiquid a sion of farm assets the fresh act six point one billion dollars more than the underlying bill in new investments to assist farmers with conservation practices to encourage rural development to develop renewable energy expand access to healthy foods for children and consumers and assist more hungry americans are in them and provides an additional one billion dollars for important environmental and conservation programs i'm pleased that we were able to expand and improve u s d a is voluntary conservation incentive programs which provide financial and technical assistance to farmers ranchers and forest land laufer to take steps to prevent soil erosion and improve water quality air quality and wildlife habitat says two thousand three roughly two thirds of farmers seeking assistance through u s d a conservation programs have been rejected due to insufficient funding most of these conservation programs are cost share programs that means that farmers are offering to put their own money into environmental improvements from which the public benefits we are missing an opportunity to utilize private dollars to produce environmental benefits such as cleaner water and cleaner air and we underfund cost sharing conservation programs one of the most popular of these programs the environmental quality incentive program equip has had an application backlog that has averaged one point six billion dollars a year over the last four years yet the farm bill before us provides no increase in funding for this popular conservation program the current farm bill also provides no increase in funding for the farmland protection program this program is critical because in many areas are working farms and ranches are under tremendous developmental pressures from one thousand nine hundred two to one thousand nine hundred seven this country lost more than six million acres of agricultural land an area the size of the state of maryland to development and yet this bill doesn't provide the funding needed to assist state and local governments and private land trust in important work they do to conserve our nation's farmland increasing funding for the farm bill as conservation programs also provides another way to make our farm policies more equitable all producers can be eligible to participate in conservation programs regardless of what they grow or where they grow it by contrast only producers of a handful of commodity crops can participate in commodity programs a lot of sketching of commodity policy dominates much of the farm bill debate and discretionary funding production agriculture remains a comparatively small and shrinking part of the rural economy farm employment has fallen from just fourteen percent of total employment in  sixty nine to six percent in two thousand and five the number of counties with farm employment accounting for even twenty percent or more of total employment has shrunk dramatically from one thousand one hundred forty eight in one thousand nine hundred eighty nine to just three hundred forty eight in two thousand and five furthermore only one in seventy five americans one in seventy five americans lives on a farm today a nearly ninety percent of total farm household income comes from off farm sources despite this fundamental shift the two thousand two farm bill committed sixty nine percent of total spending to commodity payments thus another thirteen percent to conservation payments and all four fifths of the total funding went to a select few farmers only seven tenths of one percent went to rural development initiatives aimed at boosting overall rural economies we now have evidence which suggests that direct payments to farmers have little positive impact on rural experienced losses during that time furthermore most of these payment dependent counties experienced population losses during that same time period such job and population lost to suggest that our current system of support for overall rural communities which rely on farm subsidies like direct payments does not work mr president i'm also pleased that the amendment we are offering expands agriculture markets and decreases oil dependency by dramatically increasing research and development efforts for cellulosic ethanol and other renewable funds and expanding clean renewable energy opportunities to all of our rural areas this is an area of considerable interest to the chairman who has been a stalwart supporter today's growth in ethanol production is creating jobs and bringing new sources of revenue into our communities because of our energy demands we are witness to a palpable sense of optimism in rural communities for economic growth in areas that have stagnated under the current farm bill failure to give clear and strong government commitments in the farm bill to developing biofuels from diverse feedstocks as unnecessarily can find new markets to midwestern states rich in corn spreading the economic benefits of biofuel production nationwide or require breakthroughs in technology and agricultural techniques to make more fields from farm in the civil and you'll waste of ailill from coast to coast strong support in the farm bill will help galvanize private investment and bring jobs across the country yet the opportunity before us involves more than economic growth dramatic advancements and biofuels will help build a more secure and self reliant america by reducing our dependence on foreign oil global competition for oil continues to grow as demand stores and oil rich states tighten their control over suppl already we have witnessed russia cut its exports to select countries for political gain and the governments of iran and venezuela have threatened to do the same each year americans spend hundreds of billions of dollars to import oil some of that money enriches authoritarian governments suppress their own people and work against the united states meanwhile and for structure is being targeted by terrorists and into day's tide on oil market even a small disruption in oil supplies shortages and send prices much higher than the ninety dollars plus barrel prices americans have paid in recent days biofuels will not make america completely independent of energy employees but they can strengthen our leverage over oil rich regimes hostile to the united states give greater freedom to our policy options in the middle east help protect our economy and foster rural development reaping the economic and energy security benefits of biofuels and other rural renewable energy requires breakthroughs in research and incentives for infrastructure development i remember revise an additional one half billion dollars to transform renewable energy opportunity and to reality mr president during the markup of the agriculture committee i offered an amendment to increase nutrition funding and the farm bill by almost one point six billion dollars through cuts to direct payments unfortunately my amendment was defeated seventeen to four however the m m inspired constructed bipartisan debate on the importance of strong funding for the nutrition programs  provide a safety net for people across our country who are on the cusp of poverty i am thankful to the senators harkin and chambliss for taking that discussion seriously as a result of using the savings generated from not commit change t underlying village provide additional funding for the nutrition title of this farm bill but even as i applaud the efforts of the agricultural committee members for their attention to nutrition program i have serious concerns that the nutrition program in this bill is essentially authorized for only five years at the end of the five years senators should understand funding for nutrition programs drops dramatically agriculture bill before us is front loading spending during the first five years and virtually zero out spending four years six through ten so the bill would come out budget neutral on paper but will cost taxpayers handsomely in reality this is just one of many budgetary tricks performs as the scoring works out favorably without regard to the practical application of such maneuvers and  nutrition programs would not end in fact we increased funding for these important programs by two billion dollars over the underlying farm bill and make these funding increases permanent we cannot and should not build a safety net with holes mr president lead me to another benefit of our reform proposal our amendment provides critical funding for each of these priorities and yet pays for itself on the existing agricultural budget passed by congress without employing deceptive budgetary maneuvers in fact our bill will save taxpayers four billion dollars unfortunately this is not the case  underlying bill and if you take a thorough look you realize just how precarious that bill's budget situation truly is in fact the bush administration's statement of administration policy highlighted a number of budget gimmicks used to make the farm bill a goal compliant at least on paper the fresh act that we are offering that amendment today is fully paid for fiscally responsible and provides a framework for growth for farmers and rural communities furthermore the long term budgetary savings from our proposal will allow for us to make considerable investments in key priority areas mr president there is an inappropriate political assumption that agriculture policy is impenetrable for consumers taxpayers the poor and the vast majority of americans who are being asked to pay for these subsidies while getting little in return even if only a small number of farmers in a state raise a program crop or one of the protected specialty crops such as milk sugar or peanuts they're focused advocacy somehow has more political influence than the broader wellbeing of consumers and taxpayers in short those who benefit from current agriculture programs are virtually the only for test events in the debate that fact is probably best illustrated by the fact that one of the most contentious debates on this bill has been whether farmers with incomes of over one million dollars a year after farm expenses have been paid should continue to receive subsidies i have even seen media reports that indicate that if a payment limitation amendment or passed the farm bill could be filibustered keep in mind that the median household income for americans were two thousand and six the forty eight thousand two hundred dollars average income food stamp recipient is less than ten thousand dollars there is also an ongoing reluctance to consider change members will say quote farming is conservative by nature you can't demand too much change end of quote but in two thousand and two i offered a similar type of reform proposal and opponents argue that the calls it was too new too radical required too much change you will hear that same baseless argument today as president members of the s what when and where is the time for reform when will we fix this broken system when will we act on the clear evidence before us as senators we clearly must understand our responsibility and whether we understand all the complexities of our current farm programs we know where the money goes the bulk of the money and the underlying farm bill goes to a very few farmers a very few that has been clear throughout this is not a great humanitarian effort this does not save the family farm or the low income farm or even the middle income farmers this bill is about making choices and it's incredible to me that with all of the budgetary pressures we're facing to fund critical needs such as providing better health insurance coverage for americans protecting social security and pension saving improving education increasing border security providing our men and women the armed forces the propre of pay and equipment consider a bill that enrich is so few individuals i believe this year is farm bill debate is a good time to begin changing these dynamics this year an unconventional alliance unconventional alliance of conservation humanitarian business and taxpayer advocate groups as entered the fray with success in framing the issue and building support for the fresh act that we introduce in this amendment they represent the broadest ever political support for change newspapers in forty one states have written editorials in support of changing our farm programs to a fair trade compliant and fiscally responsible system and i have distributed these articles to all of my colleagues perhaps more importantly there is never been a better time for farmers to change thanks to strong foreign and domestic demand for energy crops net farm income is forecast to be eighty seven billion dollars this year up twenty eight billion dollars from two thousand and six and thirty billion above the average for the previous ten years as a result average farm household income is projected to almost eighty seven thousand dollars in two thousand and seven eight percent from two thousand and six and fifteen percent about the fi or average between two thousand and two and two thousand and six and i might point out well above m household incomes farm revenue may be high today but this will not always be the case is critical we have an appropriate safety net in place to assess these farmers during times of need a real culture policy is too important for rural america and the economic and budgetary health of our country to continue the current misguided path r m m that provides a much more equitable approach reduces higher net farm income for farmers increases farm exports of voids stimulating over production and gives more emphasis to environmental nutritional energy security and research concerns more important mr president this proposal will protect the family farmer to a strong safety net and encourage rural development and a fiscally responsible and trade compliance manner i thank the chair president the senator from montana  hundred twenty one perhaps meatpackers from engaging in any course of business or doing any act for the purpose or with the effect of nipping later controlling prices this act was passed in congress way back when when that was act the f t c act for instance insufficient to promote competitive markets unfortunately back in two thousand and five three judges decided to rewrite the package of stockyards act instead of interpret statute what this amendment will do is reinstate the packers of stockyards act and with that reinstate free market competition in the marketplace i think the chair the senior senator from montana senator lott living alone as mr president as long as it's understood that this time is not charged against the pending amendment present more than two hundred years ago richard whately in english logician said a man is called selfish not for pursuing his own good but for neglecting his neighbors not only is our current neighbor just ninety miles away in a market of eleven million consumers in that market of course is cuba in the year two thousand congress authorized limited sales of food medical goods to cuba under the trade sanctions reform and export  peak american farmers and ranchers those in montana sold over four hundred million dollars worth of beef wheat to cuba in one year in fact in the year two thousand and three i led a trade mission to i walked away with a ten in two thousand and five the treasury department issued rules to stymie such sales under the guise of clarifying the intent of congress the treasury department stead undermined expressed will of congress by restricting the ability of u s farmers in cash basis sales specifically the new treasury rule requires cuba buyers to pay for their goods before they leave u s ports what's the effect of that that converts the goods to cuban assets which makes them vulnerable to seizure in american pars just as unrelated american claims against the cuban government now in order for american farmers and ranchers to sell their wheat beef and pork to cuba they must work with foreign legislation to expand trade with cuba with the expectation that the ministration which then seek to restrict congress would not approve legislation today with sales of products by our farmers and ranchers while the same time make it possible as by treasury department mr president senator baucus and i see eye to eye on about ninety five percent of the issues in front of the senate this is one that we do not agree on and i want to thank senator baucus for withdrawing his amendment he has been a outspoken in very articulate spokesman for his point of view of warning  agricultural products to go to cuba and coming from his state of montana i certainly understand that there is greater issue here in this senator opinion and that is the issue of the foreign policy of the united states this issue this senator believes ought to be a foreign policy debate on the relationship of the united states with cuba in the future and there will be an appropriate forum in which for us to engage in that debate and i believe that that debate will come sooner than later because there is change in the air and change on the island of cuba the dell is transitioning out raul is transitioning in and there is a great deal of un wrasse among the people increasingly in a police state that has been so effective in taping down any dissent over the course of the last four decades increasingly we are seeing the people of cuba start to resist to dissent and to do it openly we are right on the cusp of the castro government starting to disintegrate and stop being able to cal the people by imprisoning them as they have in the past now what should therefore be the foreign policy of the united states when we are right at this moment of change and i think we ought to have a deliberative discussion about that issue instead of on the farm bill that's why i am thanking the senator from montana for withdrawing the image and i look forward to that debate and look forward to this extraordinary change that is occurring on the island of cuba so that ultimately those people will be able to break the shackles of bondage that they have been in and that we can have a normal relationship with the government of cuba with the government of the united states when that country finally does become free that is our hope that is our prayer that should be the goal of the foreign policy of the united states and i think it is within our grasp shortly i yield the floor the senator from florida express i want to join with my senior colleague from florida in thanking a distinguished senator from montana for withdrawing this amendment which was ill time and this farm bill much important farm legislation and related items are in this bill and to now inject into it the very difficult issue as my senior colleague from florida well describe a very fine tuned policy of foreign policy issue with cuba into this bill would be as a grave mistake i want to speak in a little broader context about the relationship between the united states and cuba it really is one that is rooted and the reason why this proposed amendment would be so wrong is rooted in the steps that the castro government took against united states economic interest in the island almost a half a century ago all on compensated never accounted for and never taking care of it is a debt that still exist legitimate business interests had their property taken with them without just compensation and that's why we are the in the policy that we have today but the question really is how can we influence events how can we better help the cuban people to overthrow the shackles that have held them in prison for forty seven years the fact is as senator nelson rightly pointed out there is an awful lot happening in the island people are increasingly saying enough is enough it is time for change cambio the spanish word for change in this little bracelet that people around the island are wearing increasingly and that which so much represents the desire of the cuban people or the cuban regime true to its nature continues to repress the people here is why we should not reward the cuban government with a change in united states policy yesterday human rights day around the world was celebrated in cuba by a small group of people seeking to simply peacefully march to gandhi park a park where gandhi that peaceful icon of the world is represented on their way their government thugs and arrested them took him into unmarked so dan's and removed them from the area so threatened as that government that they also arrested seventy young people a week or a month or so ago for wearing this simple little bracelet but that's not all the most on heard of human right abuses taken place in recent days in addition to the illegitimate detention of political prisoners in the most unspeakable conditions is the fact that the cuban government thugs entered a catholic church just a few days ago and arrested eighteen young people who were there exercising the very limited right that they have to at least the ten charge and to be there to hear a sermon and to maybe have  conversation their hopes and their dreams the q and p the cuban government invaded that sacred space took the people from there and arrested them these are just but a few of the examples of why this government so illegitimate each day loses a little more of their grip upon the cuban people i believe that the time will come when we can trade with cuba when we can have open relationships and when we can see the fruits of that relationship benefit the people of cuba not just the government structures with whom american farmers today are dealing with we should not give credit to the cuban government we know that these cash sales are the only way that we can be sure that our people will be paid and we should not enhance or increase the opportunity for the cuban government which is the only owner of anything in cuba there no one owns any property in cuba but the cuban government to trade with cuba does not mean trading with  farmers it means trading with the cuban government apparatus the cuban got the cuban people only see the meager droppings from the table of the tourists i go to cuba with and they're not allowed to even have a conversation many oftentimes people so if we only open the opportunity for people to freely travel if we only allowed for the contact that americans would have with ordinary cubans everything would change where you know there are canadian tourist british tourists spanish dirs italian tourist their impact upon the cuban people has not change a thing because the tourists are prohibited from interacting with the people themselves the people are just their servants the people are just the people who facilitate a fun time in the sun but they're not allowed to have any political influence upon the people of cuba so let me just say that i know there was a hearing this morning and i would love to comment further on that hearing because much was said there which i believe to be completely wrong but i want to thank the senator from kentucky senator bunning who in this hearing this morning spoke about his five months in cuba i saw senator bunning when he was in cuba during that time as a young boy i had the pleasure of going to a stadium and watching him pitch which was a thrill for me little did i know that i have the honor of serving with him in this united states senate and i want to just thank the senator from kentucky for his very good words and his  clear understanding of the cuban situation as it is today mr president i thank the chair i thank the senator from montana for withdrawing this ill timed and ill advised amendment and i yield the floor consent that whatever time is used in the courtroom be charged equally without objection thank you i note the absence of a court the clerk will call the ro mr alexander mr president the senior senator from new york i ask unanimous consent that the quorum be dispensed with without objection a mr president i have nine unanimous consent requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders i ask unanimous consent that these requests be agreed to and that these requests be printed in the record without objection thank you mr president second i ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside so that i may call amendment to the farm bill i'd like to commend chairman harkin senator chambliss and all of the members of the agriculture committee for their hard work during the drafting of this farm bill i'd particularly like to thank the committee for its commitment to making this bill the most fair in our country's history the committee's farm bill includes all agricultural producers not just growers of commodity crops with new programs for specialty growers and expanded protections for dairy and livestock producers this bill is truly a winner for all parts of the country and i'd like to thank my colleague from iowa once again now that he's here for his great work and for being inclusive as he always is i'm here to more this morning to offer an amendment that i believe builds on the spirit of the committee's bill i asked to call up amendment amendment thirty seven twenty and i ask that for the reading be dispensed with i believe i've done that already has a thirty seven twenty and i also ask unanimous consent that thirty seven twenty be made pending without objection this amendment increases funding for vital conservation programs that are important to all working farmers it provides an additional four hundred eighty million dollars over five years to the environmental quality incentives program equip and additional sixty five million over five years to the farm land protection program and additional sixty million to the grassland reserve program to offset these increased payments the amendment makes small reductions in federal subsidies of crop insurance it increases the cut in the end of ministration operations payment to four percent above the committee's two percent and retains the important snapback provision that senator roberts introduced the amendment also raises the underwriting gain share to twelve point five percent that's the level to which the house raised it working farmers are the most important stewards of our natural resources farmers and ranchers own seventy percent of the land in the country they deserve help from the government preserving these resources because all americans benefit from them and i'd also like to add mr president i'm in full support of the amendment i'm co sponsor in fact of the amendment the senator from ohio senator brown has offered this amendment along the same lines and i will not offer it of his and then when succeed i will not ask for a vote on it if his amendment succeeds because i think it's an outstanding amendment with that i yield back the floor and and  president senator from new york i now ask unanimous consent that the quorum be dispensed with without objection i ask unanimous consent consent that the senate now recess to resume at two fifteen because sort of the senate stands in recess until two