got nowhere when the majority worked with us the result was a mutually beneficial agreement that will soon lead to an accomplishment that both sides can be proud of but the bill we're voting on today is a massive tax hike and a utility rate increase for consumers across the southeast it is not a serious attempt to make a law and it is not a serious attempt at an accomplishment it is a partisan bill that must be improved or set aside so let's not waste even more time re learning the lessons of the past eleven months if you're serious about an accomplishment let's fix this bill walking away from a bipartisan deal in favor of raising taxes and raising utility rates as they house majority has done well not make a lot but working with us to find common ground to increase the use of renewable fuels and raise fuel economy standards a historic levels without costing american jobs is something that would enjoy widespread support i stand ready to work with all of our colleagues on a realistic bipartisan bill but i will vote no on this partisan tax increase and this rate increase up per consumers and i urge our colleagues to do the same mr we've worked very hard to shear to accomplish things but it takes a lot of work because everything we've done ben after having filed cloture on sometimes multiple occasions trying to terminate debate on the other side my friend distinguish republican leader said finally we did the right thing on the farm bill is present the only reason we're able to get the agreement on the farm bill is because cloture likely would have been invoked this morning the farm ranch in communities in america are up in arms that the republicans have stalled the farm bill for months now i'm satisfied where we are it's been difficult to get where we are we'll work through the farm bill and finish it for people to indicate that it was a result of how we handled the legislation is taken so long to get there is without any foundation this bill energy  we're going to take in a few minutes is a historic vote we hear words all the time in the senate about landmark and historic these words are often used but occasionally appropriate that now is a time to talk about historic because this is a historic vote this energy and security act will finally put america on a right track solve our grave and growing energy crisis and no support it is too strong to express help porton this bill is for our country's future our country's future and to a certain extent mr president the world's future because we are the ones polluting the air more than any other nation in the world by far today america consumes twenty one million barrels of oil that's today tomorrow twenty one million barrels plus a few more it's not going down it's going up most of this oil comes from very unstable regions of the world what did president chavez say from venezuela during the height of his recent constitutional crisis he said will cut off oil supply to the united states think about that we are dependent on this tyrant for a while but he is not the only t we're depending on for a while most tronic of governments in the world today exist in the middle east countries we ask for oil some say the war in the middle east is going on now is based on oil i don't necessarily believe that but people who do are not in any way without foundation and reason is present with the twenty one million barrels of oil a day going to these nations that have these despotic governments we send as a nation at least a billion dollars every day overseas to pay for oil addiction those twenty one million barrels that we will use today and those that will use tomorrow has created a three pronged crisis that threatens our economy of course of the us my last trip to california i saw prices on the pump more than four dollars for a gallon of gas when our national security our national security the example i just gave the dictator venezuela is that affecting our security of course and that's only one example our environment does that affect our environment using twenty one million barrels of oil a day sixty five percent of which is imported from these individuals and governments i just talked about what does this do to our environment that pollutant the cost of the pollution in our environment is affecting us in june the senate took action to begin reversing these threats we passed the energy bill with a bipartisan vote of sixty five was a good vote but the house is done even better than we did mr president they sent their version to us with a strong majority i urge all my colleagues on of the house bill and send this critical legislation the president bush as i've indicated with gas prices all over the country with of gasoline being more than three dollars and working americans spending more than ever just to make their commute to work the time to act is not tomorrow it's now with home heating prices at record highs and the cold winter months now upon us the time to act is now with the threat of global warming growing by the day and that's why there's more than ten thousand people assembled in bali as we speak to talk about the global warming that's taking place the time to act is now as president i so appreciate the chairman of the energy environment public works committee the work they're doing in that committee and the bipartisan measure reported out of that committee this week lieberman warner led by the committee chair senator boxer to report out a global warming bill the first global warming bill that meets the needs of our world was reported out of that committee this week now this bill adds to that i appreciate very much the work of the chairman got that work to get the bill out of the senate and i've worked to get the message from the house to us senator bingaman energy and natural resources senator in a way commerce senator boxer environment public works that's the bill we have before us the bill tackles each of the supply challenges by addressing both sides of the crisis consumption and supply and the consumption side it increases fuel efficiency of cars and trucks for the first time in thirty the thirty five miles per gallon is present that is significant we think about well what was america like with its automobiles thirty years ago think back  their eight tracks ariel we now had cassette players and the closest thing to the global pacific positioning system we now have on a lot of vehicles that you can buy was a map you went to a service station and most of the time they gave you that map and you would look at the map my wife we used joke she was the navigator as we proceeded with the kids in the back seat yelling and screaming that's how we found our way the navigator was my wife it's not the way it is now in this present things have changed in those thirty years today we have cars that were in the past science fiction a hybrid electric car my wife has one runs on a big battery runs on gasoline she loves her car but it's new she just bought it a few months ago ethanol cars cars burning fuel produce from corn and other products and electric cars total electric car these things will add to the ability of americans to lessen our dependence on foreign oil but this bill that we have now with creasing the cafe standards well it will save american families at least a thousand dollars a year the gas pump and for our country it'll save a total of twenty two billion dollars by two thousand and twenty twenty two billion dollars a year and also reduce greenhouse gases by the equivalent mr president listen to this the equivalent of taking twenty eight million cars and trucks off the road we take twenty eight million cars and trucks off the road by passing this legislation that's pretty good and also reduce greenhouse gases in other ways this increase  thirty five mpg a supported by the environmental community of course it is as president i would if my time has expired i would use a later time now mr president the increase of thirty five mpg supported by the environmental community of course of this but mr president it is now supported by the automobile industry mr president i received a and as a result of that the vote time  extended mr president i ask consent that be the case this present the automobile actressy i got a letter in my office this week from the president of the senate will be in order as present i got a letter to this week from ron gettelfinger president united auto workers so she should thank thanks for your work on the energy bill the automobile workers detroit savers this legislation the environmental community the unions and the automobile industry pretty good deal that wasn't the way it was just a short time ago but that's the way it is now environmentalist support it because it will make our air cleaner and take one step in a long road to stem the tide of global warming the automobile industry supports it because they know they can do it and they know it will make them more competitive it will make american automobile industry more competitive it also saves americans hundreds of billions of dollars through other things new energy efficiency standards for appliances lighting and buildings if you have a washing machine that consumes forty gallons of water and another that does a good job with ten we should save those thirty gallons that's the principle we're working on if one lightbulb lasts as long as three lightbulbs want to say that electricity is common sense and that's what this legislation does but consumption to just half the battle on the supply side this energy bill requires the first time that fifteen percent of our electricity comes from renewable sources that have sound like anything that is too big of a hill  what's more this renewable energy portfolio rewards innovation by allowing states lots of states but for example nevada that have already taken the initiative and our national leaders in alternative energy to sell their excess product other states i've heard some complain mr president will know that it has more wind and more sun and more geothermal than other states but mr president the news last week was we're now off the coast of florida producing going to be producing electricity with the current with waves nevada doesn't have the currents or waves so it all balances out that's what this is all about it rewards innovation that's what america's been about since we were founded this legislation makes an unimpressive commitment to the american grown biofuels by increasing the renewable fuel standard to thirty six billion billion gallons by the year tw twenty two which will not just reduce our addiction to oil but create american jobs as well and it repeals billions and billions of dollars in tax giveaways to big oil that exports products from overseas investing instead in tax incentives to bruce clean renewable energy here at home all across america businesses entrepreneurs and local governments are taking the lead to solve this energy crisis my last trip mr president silicon valley the discussion with these geniuses was on two topics health care and energy the great minds of america are focusing on this they need some incentives to do this you can't invest unless there are some incentives in this new field all they want is a tax credit here a tax credit there they deserve it and with these great minds else they'll take as much further than we can imagine in california for example a professor is working on a new technology that can manufacture fuel out of simple plant material in any industrial park in america and pennsylvania amish farmers are charging their batteries their buggy batteries with solar power in nevada local governments are using solar energy water pumping stations to move water uphill something that is passed would have required tremendous nonrenewable power that kind of innovation is exactly what america does best but as of right now the federal government is lagging not leading this must change and today it can our energy crisis will not be solved overnight but this bill that is now before us is a crucial very big big first so let's take that step together to do so we can't let procedural disputes get in the way of this much needed bill my republican colleagues object to this bill before going to conference i wish we could have gone to conference but that's their right even without a conference we work with republicans consulting and sharing proposed language and that's an understatement many provisions were removed and modified at the request of republican senators and house members we've acted on this bill in good faith now it's time for republicans and democrats to put politics aside and unite behind a bill that will deliver cleaner safer energy future call america there will be no more votes this will be the only vote today the next vote will be tuesday morning i've spoken to senators harkin and chambliss they're going to work the farm bill this afternoon to try to have some amendments offered i would hope that those people who want to be one of the twenty on each side will start offering these amendments we're going to move through and finish the farm bill before we leave here and we can complete some of that work today and also monday afternoon monday there as i venture stand again there will be no vote but we're going to come in monday afternoon and work on a farm bill get back to this bill on tuesday i will be conferring with the distinguished republican leader and other republicans to decide how we're going to proceed i have an idea but i want to make sure that mr coleman ms collins mr conrad mr feingold mrs feinstein mr lieberman mrs lincoln mr lott mr lugar mr martinez mr mccain mr roberts mr rockefeller mr salazar mr sanders mr warner mr webb mr white house roberts shelby specter stevens and vi mr lemon i mr bunning mr bunning no mr warner mr warner  l lows with the energy and natural resources committee be granted for privileges for the remainder of debate on the energy bill without jackson president our new mexico mr president said it will the senate will be in order but i asked my colleagues please take the conversations  from new mexico this president and this this does mark the end of this bill and this marks the beginning of completing a process here in the senate so that we will have a bill that can be signed and that will be an excellent bill for the american people that means that we've got to go to work and trying to count trying to fix some of the problems that the house bill as has generated for us first of all when we're talking about ethanol to that and the kinds of things that the going to go into space the thing that follows ethanol we can't accomplish them and it would seem to us with what they have in this bill we have to look at that and see what we can what has to be done to fix it in addition we have to do something about both the taxes and the fifteen the mandatory fifteen a fifteen percent that is required for electric generation in this bill we have to look at that and others i would hope that this sends a signal also that senator bingaman and i he is the chairman i as ranking go to work with everybody that has the concerns and put together an amendment so that we can get to offer an amendment to send this bill back to the house corrected and fixed where it can become law and where it's more to to the accomplishment of what we working on that along with my colleague i know the majority leader intends to revisit this issue as soon as this next week perhaps is to present you with louisiana mr president magistad comments to what the chairman  just said i voted against cloture this morning but i am most certainly willing to come to a compromise on some of the issues that are in disagreement between the two sides and look forward to working over the weekend to that problem some of us have had in our region with the cost of electricity that would occur if this were to pass as it came back from the house i do think the legislation has a lot of good things in it hopefully we can work for work forward to it and in a way that we can pass it because we have a need to be more energy independent and we need to create more energy in a cleaner way three nine five submitted earlier today clerk will report as rest three ninety five expressing a sense of the senate regarding national pearl harbor remembrance day without objection proceed to consideration of the president the resolution be agreed to the preamble agreed to and motion so reconsider be laid upon the table and block that any statement relating there to appear at the appropriate place in  record as a bread valid jackson so ordered as president i rise today in honor of national pearl harbor remembrance day this wednesday my good friend and colleague senator inhofe and i introduce a senate resolution expressing the sense of the senate regarding national pearl harbor remembrance day and paying tribute to those service members and civilians who died in an attack on pearl oben december seventh nine hundred forty one as well as the current members of the pearl are a survivor association today is a sixty six anniversary of that attack on pearl harbor memorial ceremony in the taking place of naval station pearl harbor to commemorate the sixty sixth anniversary of the attack later the dedication ceremonies the new u s s oklahoma memorial will also take place on fort island at pearl harbor the battleship oklahoma was anchor destroyed that fateful day to get its own memory will clearly this memorial is long overdue prayers reflections and tributes will be offer during each of these ceremonies to honor the service and sacrifice of the men and women who fought and died in defense of our great country there's sixty six anniversary of attack on pearl harbor also marks the beginning of a new commemoration for all of our nation's fallen called old glory garrett journey of remembrance the journey begins  the country the journey culminates in every servant of the national moment of remembrance on memorial day at three p m local time with all glory being flown above the u s americans and i'll buy an across the nation to remember and honor the more than two thousand four hundred courageous american sailors soldiers and marines who were killed in the raid on pearl harbor as well as a lot of those who survived the attack i heard to set a sense of this nation to remember that it was the sacrifices made by ordinary men and women who rall in defense of freedom liberty and the great promise of democracy that preserved our nation's freedom and liberty their sacrifices represent the greatest heroism and patriotism in the service of our country as president i hope that my senate colleagues would will join me today in prayer and remembrance for those as president i ask unanimous consent to go into a period of mourning business with senators allowed to speak for ten minutes and with myself recognized for fifteen minutes without objection so ordered so i was recognized for fifteen minutes thank president me first say how moved i am to be on the senate floor after the remarks of the very distinguished senator from hawaii commemorating this day but i rise to discuss a different question a question that involves the foreign intelligence surveillance act as the president we will shortly consider making right the things that are wrong with the so called protect america act a second rate piece of legislation passed in a stampede in august at the behest of the bush administration it is worth for a moment considering why making this right is so important president bush press this legislation not only to establish how our government can spy on foreign agents but how his administration can spy on americans make no mistake the legislation we passed in august is significantly about spying on americans a business this administration should not be allowed to get into except under the closest supervision now we have a plain and tested device for keeping tabs on americans it is our constitution our constitution has as its most elemental provision the separation of governmental powers into three separate branches when the government feels it is necessary to spy on its own citizens each branch has a role the executive branch executes the laws and conduct surveillance the legislative branch sets the boundaries that protect americans from improper government surveillance the judicial branch oversees whether the government has followed the constitution and the laws that protect u s citizens from violations of their privacy and their civil rights it sounds basic but even an elementary understanding of this balance of powers eludes the bush administration so now we have to repair this flawed and shoddy protect america act why are we in congress so concerned about this why is it so vital that we energetically assert the role of congress and of the courts when the bush administration s determine the rules under which it will spy on americans because look what the bush administration does behind our backs when they think no one is looking for years under the bush administration the legal counsel within the department of justice has issued highly classified secret legal opinions related to surveillance this is an administration that hates answering to an american cour that wants to grade its own exams and o l c is the inside place the administration goes to get legal support for its buying program its president as a member of the senate intelligence committee i was given access to those secret opinions and spent hours poring over them sitting in that secure room as a lawyer as a former u s attorney legal counsel to rhode island's governor and state attorney general i was increasingly dismayed and amazed as i read on to give you an example of what i read i have gotten three legal propositions from these secret o l c opinions declassified here they are as accurately as my note taking could reproduce them from the classified documents listen for yourself i will read all three and then discuss each one one an executive order cannot limit a president there is no constitutional requirement for a president to issue a new executive order whenever he wishes to depart from the terms of a previous executive order rather than violate an executive order the president has instead modified or waived it number two the president exercising his constitutional authority under article two can determine whether an action is a lawful exercise of the president's authority under article two and three the department of justice is bound by the president's legal determinations let's start with number one bear in mind that the so called protect america act that was stampeded through this great body in august provides no zero statutory protections for americans traveling abroad from government wiretapping none if you're a business woman traveling on business overseas none if you're a father taking the kids on vacation to the caribbean none of your visiting your aunts or uncles in italy or ireland none even if you're a soldier of the united states of america in uniform serving overseas the bush administration provided in that hastily passed law no statutory restrictions on their ability to wiretap you at will to tap your cell phone your e mail whatever once you are outside the borders of the united states the only restriction the only restriction is an executive order called twelve triple three which limits executive branch surveillance to americans who the attorney general determines to be agents of a foreign power that's what the executive order says but what does this this gratian say about executive orders and executive order cannot limit a president there is no constitutional requirement for a president to issue a new decade order whenever he wishes to depart from the terms of a previous executive order rather than violate an executive order the president has instead modified or waived it when ever the president wishes to depart from the terms of a previous executive order he may do so because an executive order cannot limit a president and he doesn't even have to change the executive order or give notice that he is violating  because by departing from the executive order the president has instead modified or waived it so unless congress acts here it's what legally prevents this president from wiretapping americans traveling abroad at will nothing nothing that was among the most egregious flaws in the bill passed during the august stampede orchestrated by the bush administration and this i will see opinion shows why we need to correct it here's number two the president exercising his constitutional authority under article two can determine whether an action is a lawful exercise of the president's authority under article two that's right the president according to george w bush office of legal counsel has article two power to determine the scope of his article two power never mind a little decision called marbury vs madison written by chief justice john marshall in eighteen zero three as fabulous showing the proposition that it is emphatically the province and the judy of the judicial department to say what the law is does this administration agree that it is emphatically the province and the duty of the judicial department to say what the press didn't that already is under article two of the constitution no it is the president according to this office of legal counsel who decides the limits of his own article two power the question whether an action is a lawful exercise of the president's authority under article two is to be determined by the president's own minions exercising his constitutional authority under article two mr president it really makes you wonder where do they get these people you have to be smart you have to be really bright to get a job within the office of legal counsel how can people who are so smart be so misguided and then it gets worse remember point three department of justice department of justice is bound by the president's legal determinations let that sink in a minute the department of justice is bound by the president's legal determinations as president we are a nation of laws not of men that this nation was founded in rejection of the royalist principle that  do no wrong our attorney general swears an oath to defend the constitution and the laws of the united states we are not some banana republic in which the officials all have to kowtow to the supreme leader imagine this in another context imagine a general counsel to a major us corporation telling his board of directors in this company the counsel's office is bound by the legal determinations of the c e o the board o that lawyer out that is very probably malpractise and perhaps even unethical wherever you you are if you are watching this do me a favor the next time you are in washington d c take a taxi some evening to the united states department of justice stand outside look up at that building shining against the starry night look at the sign outside the united states department of justice think of the heroes who have served there think of the battles fought think of the late nights the brave decisions the hard work of advancing and protecting our democracy that has been done in those halls think about how all that makes you feel then think about this statement the department of justice pound by the president's legal determinations if you don't feel a difference from what you were feeling a moment ago well well i guess congratulations because there's probably a job for you somewhere in the bush administration consider the sad irony that this theory was crafted in that very building by the george w bush office of legal counsel mr president in a nutshell these three bush administration legal propositions boil down to this one i don't have to follow my own rules and if i break them i don't have to tell you that i'm breaking them to i get to determine what my own powers are and three the department of justice doesn't tell me what the law is i tell the department of justice what the law president when the congress of the united states is when the congress of the united it's is willing to roll over for an unprincipled president this is where you end up we should not even be having this discussion but here we are i implore my colleagues on both sides of the aisle reject these feverish legal theories i understand political loyalty trust me i do but let us also be loyal to vist great institution we serve here in the legislative branch of government let us also be loyal to the constitution we took an oath to defend from enemies foreign and domestic and let us be loyal to the american people who live each day under that constitution's principles and protections we simply cannot put the authority to wiretap americans whenever they step outside america's boundaries under the exclusive control and supervision of the executive branch we do not allow it when americans are here at home we should not allow it when they travel abroad the principles of congressional legislation and oversight and of judicial approval and review are simple and long standing and americans deserve their protection wherever on god's green earth they may travel i thank the presiding officer and i yield the floor shortages of food banks supplies empty shelves and those shortages pay place children the elderly and working families people who have lost jobs people who've had it had a string of bad luck families across th nation at risk i spoke yesterday of norm an elderly man in cleveland who after spending his few dollars on rent on utilities and medicine has one thousand dollars left he needs the cleveland food bank cleveland food bank i would add is was awarded the food bank best food bank in the country last year but it's running short as food banks everywhere in this country are running spoke yesterday of christian who's a nurse trained to be a nurse's assistant just gave birth she is unable to find a job as a nurse's assistant even though she's well trained to do that she run short of food and she relies on as does normal on neighborhood food programs the cleveland food bank and other church groups and others in greater cleveland too many cases no dinner on the table too many cases no food at christmas time too many cases just not enough food for the wealthiest nation in the world yet we can't feed our own people this is an emergency this is an outrage yesterday i talked about emergency funding to overcome that shortage we asked for forty million dollars until we passed a farm bill which will have some dollars in it to provide some supply for these food food banks we found out that food banks that planned that there were food banks were running out of food projected in february when they originally this food was there and thought until july in case after case and food banks and cleveland and columbus and toledo and cincinnati food banks in the presiding officer war food banks all over this country are running short of food grocery stores are contributing a little less this year and the government has not done its part as i said yesterday i talked about emergency funding some forty million dollars to overcome that shortage today i want to talk about how to pay for it we can pay for it through shared sacrifice the budget for congress includes firewood for fireplaces in the capitol fireplace in most cases that don't get used when children are hungry we can give up firewood we can give up some travel we can give up some new technology we can make easy sacrifices to address a tragic need the budget for federal agencies includes annual buying sprees to exhaust what is whatever is left in departmental budgets when children are hungry buying sprees are offensive we can sacrifice we can pay for emergency funding for food banks by putting our heads together and shaving some less necessary spending from our own budgets and that of the federal agencies whose oversight is our responsibility i'm asking that we do that food banks need resources we don't need firewood we don't need buying sprees we can do without some other things we do need to help longer people i'm going to propose a package of cuts to pay for an emergency increase in food bank funding i hope every member of this body supports me on that  a friday morning the senate began the day debating on whether to agree to the house version of a package of energy related legislation including higher fuel efficiency standards for cars light trucks and s u v s they had a vote on whether to move forward and they they fell short seven votes short the vote was fifty three to forty two that appears are going to set aside an orgy legislation and move on to the farm bill a new agreement has been reached on that bill setting agriculture nutrition and conservation programs and policy for the next five years senate leaders have agreed to allow twenty amendments from democrats and twenty from republicans more than two hundred fifty amendments have been filed and leaders have to decide which amendments to allow under the agreement the white house says it will veto a farm bill as it currently stands the proposed bill keeps the overall spending at about the same as the current farm bill but it changes subsidy programs including alternative energy in increases conservation programs by four billion dollars the bill also continues nutrition programs such as food stamps and the w i see programming providing food for mothers of babies so coming up we're likely to see debate on the farm bill here on the senate floor houses not in yesterday they yesterday as the last piece of legislative work for the week they passed that energy bill two thirty five two to one eighty one the house will be back on monday pro forma only and back to legislative work on tuesday in the house right now we're going to try to get back on the farm bill as you know an agreement was reached last night between the majority leader and republican leader on the process that we will be following and so i'm going to propound a unanimous consent request i  hope that's been cleared on both sides that will basically bring us back to the farm bill and i word it will take down the so called tree that was filled it will take down all amendments that are pending and the just it will be pending but then it's open for amendments at that point for any amendment that has already been filed and as a as the agreement was reached last night there will be twenty  on each side and so and so i thank senators if they have an amendment to the farm bill they probably ought to get over here and offer amendments and senator chambliss and i are going to try to work together to try to make an even flow of this and to get the mammoths up and try to reach time agreements and things like that so that we can move the farm bill this expeditiously as possible so if  mr president behalf of the majority leader i ask unanimous consent that the house message on h r six be returned to the secretary's desk is their objection val mr president what is the pending business the clerk will report the pending business calendar number three thirty nine h r twenty four nineteen an act provide for the continuation of agricultural programs through fiscal here as i understand it now then mr president there are the farm bill is before us and there are no pending amendments whatsoever the harkin substituted spending that's what i mean the very bipartisan way to craft a farm bill that's going to be a great benefit to farmers and ranchers across america over the next five years and this is a critically important piece of legislation that was passed out of the committee by a unanimous vote with only one person who was not there saying he would not have voted for it and that's significantly unusual it's also unusual to complete the markup of a farm bill in a day and a half which we did and  credit chairman's leadership for the fact that we were able to work in a strong bipartisan way to make sure that we got a bill that is not exactly like any of us would would  we were so the sole authors of the bill but that's the way it's supposed to work in this body and i do truly want to thank chairman harkin and his staff i say marcab over there who has worked very closely with mosco on dexter on my staff to clear so many of these almost three hundred amendments that popped up over the last four weeks and with that the staff doing the work that they've done we simply would not be where we are today also want to say to senator conrad that very much here is work again in a very bipartisan way to come together and make sure that we get relevant amendments and they're going to be some that are going to be irrelevant that may be considered but again that's part of the way this body works and to the two leaders for their discussions their negotiations and allowing us ultimately to get to the point where we have now r agreement that we have twenty amendments offered by democrats we have twenty amendments offered by the republicans and over the next several days we're going to debate these amendments have votes on and move ahead with the conference with the house on a farm bill that  is desperately needed by our farmers and ranchers and i think at the end of the day it's going to be a farm bill it's going to have a positive influence on american agriculture so  for starting the process that was under his leadership on the agriculture committee that a lot of field hearings were held across the country in preparation for this farm bill and then by dint of the elections last year i was then took over as chairman this year and we worked very closely to continue the great progress that senator chambliss had made in moving the ball forward we had some bumps along the way obviously i hear my friends frustration over the last few weeks but we came out of a committee with a good bill a good good bill a good bipartisan bill and i would say a bill that really responded to agricultural needs around the nation and also responded to d to nutrition needs a large part of this bill over fifty percent of this bill goes for nutrition food stamps things like that and we took some great strides in the committee to make sure that  years that type of thing so we've got some strong measures in there for nutrition also energy good provisions in this bill on energy on conservation i think a good strong safety net for all of our agricultural producers across the country obviously a lot in here for specialty crops kind of a new provision a new part of our buildings here reaching out to get more people involved in our process here especially crops all over the country isn't just a lot of good stuff in this farm bill for everyone in this country and so i never like to look at the look dwell on the past we've had some problems over the last few weeks but we're through that  and i think senator chambliss for and his staff for working with us to get to this point i think we have a manageable bill now with twenty members on either side i'm hopeful that as we get amendments that will expedite matters also again we are here we're hopefully going to start moving the bill as we know there are no more votes today but amendments can be offered and laid down and debated today and of course they'll be in the queue for voting when we get back here next tuesday so if anyone has any amendments i would suggest now might be that the time to come forward on either side and talk to either to senator chambliss for me about getting in the queue to to offer those offer those in them which so we have a very important bill hopefully we can get it done i'm i remain hopeful that well i hope before the next but then the under agreement that we have will be setting it aside for any other member to come up so as president i call them a number thirty six ninety five and ask for me to consider a local report is consent to speak as if in morning business senators recognized without objection as president this morning this paper report that the central intelligence agency and other intelligence agencies have destroyed evidence videotape evidence of the interrogation of prisoners is a startling disclosure the united states of america a nation where the rule of law is venerated is now been in the business of destroying evidence evidence of a very sensitive nature evidence which clearly should have been protected for legal and historic purposes the latest story in arth schlesinger junior said this about this administration's legal defense of torture no position taken has done more to damage the reputation of america in the world ever mr president we have been tested since nine eleven as a nation tested in our resolve to protect america but also tested in our commitment to the values that we hold dear a time of war in a time of insecurity is a time of the greatest testing many presidents even great presidents in the past have failed that test president abraham lincoln during the civil war suspending habeas corpus during world war one serious questions raised about the patriotism of those who did not agree with our government during world war two under the administration of perhaps our greatest modern president franklin roosevelt japanese internment camps which became a national embarrassment during our cold war enemies  current hearings things that we look back on now and realize did not reflect well in the united states and certainly don't reflect our values now this administration this war on terror this treatment of prisoners and detainees it comes to our attention almost on a weekly basis that sadly some have crossed the line every week a new revelation about how this administration is engaged in activity that's not consistent with american laws or values when it comes to the issue of torture in this morning's paper the central intelligence agency officials disclosed that they destroyed videotapes of detainees being subjected to so called and i quote enhanced interrogation techniques and of quote we don't know what that included this was a period of time when the bush administration had decided to cast away the international standards of conduct the geneva conventions that we have been held to and proudly displayed for decades this is ministration redefined torture and within a memo which has now been made public we know that they reached extremes which eventually they even had to repudiate the cia has also reportedly withheld information about these videotapes from a federal court and from the bipartisan nine eleven commission today i'm sending a letter to attorney general michael mckay z calling on him to investigate whether cia officials who covered up the existence of these videotapes violated the law in a statement yesterday general michael hayden the cia director acknowledged that the tapes were destroyed and stated and i  in two thousand and two during the initial stage of our terrorist detention program cia videotaped interrogations and destroyed the tapes in two thousand and five in the quote the new york times reporte that the tapes were destroyed in part because officers were concerned that video showing harsh interrogation methods could expose agency officials to legal risks several officials told them now the defense of the cia is that they wanted to protect the identity of those cia employees who were engaged in the interrogation mr president that is not a credible defense we know that it is possible in fact easy to cover the identity and faces of those who were involved in any videotape something more was involved here the cia apparently with the old information about the existence of these videotapes from official proceedings including the bipartisan hamilton baker nine eleven commission and a federal court according to philip zelikow the executive director of the nine eleven commission and formerly a high ranking official in the bush administration and i quote the commission did formally request material of this kind from all relevant agencies and the commission was assured that we had received all the material responsive to our request no tapes were acknowledged or turned over nor was the commission provided with any transcripts prepared from recordings mr president cia in turn east told the sensitive and important hearing just as the hartmann has now acknowledged in a letter to the court that this was not true the courts of america were misled by the justice department about the existence of this evidence cia director hayden asserts that the videotapes were destroyed quote in line with the law close quote but listen to what the federal obstruction of justice statute says and i quote whoever corruptly alters destroys butyl later conceals a record document or other object or attempts to do so with the intent to impair the object's integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding or otherwise obstruct influence or impedes any official proceeding or attempts to do so shall be fined or this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years or both that is the federal criminal statute it's not my role or to determine whether the law was violated that is the responsibility of the department of justice that is the responsibility of the attorney general michael mckay z as mr selig has said the executive branch and congress need to decide how much they care about this question if they want to get to the bottom of it it's pretty easy for people to dig up the relevant records and answer the questions that either officials of the executive branch of the congress could pose this is the first real test of attorney general michael mckay z i hope you will do the right thing what is its stake here goes to the heart of the rule of law and justice in america if our government can destroy evidence  can misrepresent to our courts whether that evidence ever existed if it can attempt to cover up wrongdoing that mr president goes way beyond the standards of justice and the values of america this disclosure of the destroyed ssion of these videotapes really goes to the heart of who we are as a people i don't know what was on those tapes it was clearly something very troubling or they wouldn't have been destroyed i don't even know if it was incriminating but we have a right to know in america because in america everyone is held accountable including officials at the highest level of our government it is time for this department of justice to turn the page from an era when we were engaged in a new definition of torture a new definition of whether the geneva conventions were applicable and bring us back into that rule of law into those standards of conduct which have made america proud for so many generations today i'll be sending a letter to attorney general casey calling on him for an official investigation of whether there was destruction of evidence and abstraction of justice in the destruction of these videotapes senator from ohio i asked attending many men might be temporarily set aside and i sent an amendment to the desk clerk will report insurance to mcgovern dull long term bipartisan program that this congress has supported in a few other things i will i will outline in more detail on tuesday and i ask mr president that the men would be set aside jennifer minnesota is recognized i call up my management numbers three three eight ten which is at the desk and i will set it aside after i say a few words about it the clerk will report the senator from minnesota miss clode which are proposes a me thirty eight ten beginning on page two ten strike line fifteen and all that follows through page two fourteen line nine and insert only see modification limitation one in general mr president to be a member of the agriculture committee and to be involved in this forward looking farm bill i also want to thank the many authors that we have on this amendment that i'm going to speak to today including senator durbin and senator brown both of whom  were in here in the last few minutes this amendment includes some reasonable income eligibility limits for subsidies under the farm bill the focus of this amendment is to make sure that the subsidies in the safety net in the farm bill goes to the people who it will most help and that is the family farmers of this country not to real estate developers in florida or art collectors in san francisco the focus here is on family farmers throughout this country mr president america's farm safety net was created during the great depression as an essential reform to help support world communities and protect struggling family farmers from the financial shocks of volatile weather and equally volatile commodity prices almost seventy five years later the reasons for maintaining that strong safety net still exist the two thousand and two farm bill has spurred rural development by allowing farmers in minnesota and across the country to take risks to expand production because of productivity gains in innovation including advances in renewable energy the farm support programs in the two thousand and two farm bill are projected to come in at seventeen billion dollars under budget so we debate the current farm bill as we will in the coming days it is important not to underestimate the value of a strong bill to our country to agriculture to the rural communities throughout this nation strong safety net permanent disaster relief so important for farmers and additional funds for conservation and nutrition and of particular importance the country should know that we've balanced our budget in this bill with every dollar of new spending fully offset so there are a lot of good things for minnesota in the rest of the country in this farm bill there is however one critical area where i believe we could do some more reform and that is to make sure that urban millionaires do not park pocket the farm subsidies that are intended for hardworking farmers hear the facts in my state minnesota is the sixth largest agricultural state in the nation nationally however sixty farmers have collected more than one million dollars each under the two thousand and two farm bill none of those farmers are in my state the top twenty business recipients in the country have each gotten more than three million dollars under this farm bill yet the average income of farms in minnesota after expenses is fifty four thousand dollars but under the current system a part time farmer can have an income as high as two point five million from outside sources and still qualify for federal farm benefits i do not believe that we should be handing payments out to multimillionaires when these payments should be targeted to family farmers big payments to big city investors threaten to undermine public support for the farm bill as a whole even though people should know that the commodity programs are projected to be just under fifteen percent of the total farm budget over the next five years now poster boy for what needs to be changes maurice wilder the florida based developer who is the nation's top recipient of farm payments not conservation payments but commodity payments for properties in five states even though his net worth is estimated to be five hundred million dollars this man is not a farmer he's independently wealthy is a real estate developer and he should not be getting these government checks we have examples of course from all over the country of people that have been getting these checks from david letterman to paul allen but the private home doesn't stop with the extremely wealthy and checks that are intended for farmers are being sent all over urban areas since the enactment of the two thousand and two farm bill three point one million in farm payments have gone to residents in the district of columbia four point two million has gone to people living in manhattan and one million of taxpayer money under the farm bill two thousand and two has gone to beverly hills nine zero two one zero now last time i checked there wasn't a lot of farmland in these communities we can fix this problem and do better for our farmers by using the new farm bill to close loopholes tighten payment limits and enforce tougher income now again i am a strong supporter of this farm bill i believe the two thousand and two farm though it's a wonderful things for our country in terms of expanding production and revitalizing our rural communities and what we want to do is really build on the two thousand and two farm bill think something's and make sure that we go forward with a strong world economy now here's one thing that was already fixed in the bill that came out of our committee and that is that three entity rule the current senate and house has actually gone through the house floor those proposals eliminate the three entity rule that will this will cut down on abuse by applying payment limits strictly to individuals and married couples and ending the practice of dividing farms into multiple corporations so that they can multiply payment second as but already mentioned by our chairman of the longstanding amendment proposed by senator dorgan and grassley would limit annual payments to two hundred fifty thousand dollars under this farm bill this amendment would also bring meaningful limits to the marketing loan program and close enormous loopholes that allow millions of dollars to individual recipients under the current law i support the dorgan grassley amendment and i urge my colleagues to do the same but i believe a third kind of reform is also needed congress should act to prevent payments that are intended for hard working family farmers from going to urban millionaires we can do this by placing reasonable limits on the incomes of people in businesses who participate in the clotted the program under current law if you are not a full time farmer meaning that less than seventy five percent of your income comes from farming you are eligible to get to magdy payments as long as your adjusted gross income is less than two point five million dollars per year again this is part time farmers under current law so let's figure out what that means you can live in the city have a job as an investment banker make two million dollars a year and still get government checks if you own shares in a fine now if you are a full time farmer or farm corporation meaning that more than seventy five percent of your income comes from farming under current law there is absolutely no limit on how much net profit you can have in a given year and still get farm payments so what we're talking about here is expenses are actually deducted for us to get to these to these numbers and even with the expenses deducted you can make for part time farmers two point five million per year and then there's no limit for full time farmers and you're still eligible for these subsidies it also means that mega farms that span entire counties can bring in untold million dollars in revenue and still get these kinds of payments this flies in the face of common sense it is against the intent of congress and is given rise along with these other two other men with said i support one that's already in the bill one that we will consider the dorgan grassley amendment and this one it will allow us to address these problems that have given rise to scandals that have already provided ammunition to those who say we should have a farm bill and mr president i believe we must have a farm bill i've been pushing for this i'm glad that we finally reached an agreement on the total number of amendments that we can actually move forward with this farm bill next week i'm offering this amendment along with senators durbin brown and we have many other senators interest in this place reasonable limits on the incomes of those who read the farm payments here's how this amendment works if you are a full time farmer meaning that more than two thirds of your income comes from farming you can participate in the farm program and you can get the subsidies as long as your income after you deduct the expenses does not exceed seven hundred fifty thousand dollars if you are a part time farmer or farm investor and you have substantial sources of income off the farm you can participate in the farm program if your income does not exceed two hundred fifty thousand dollars it's that simple now i'll note that it is somewhat similar to some of the reforms the house in acted off the floor in their bill their amendment puts it a million dollars for a full time farmer and then five hundred thousand dollars income for a part time farmer right now the bill that came out of our senate  committee places no limits on the income of full time farmers and then places a limit on a part time farmer at seven hundred fifty thousand dollars what we're doing here is trying to put the limits at seven hundred fifty thousand for a full time farmer two hundred  fifty thousand for a part time farmer i'd also note that i think this is better than the original proposal by the administration which sort of lumped part time and full time farmers together and i think that this makes more sense than having talked to farmers in my state and across the country as some of my colleagues have said to me that seven hundred fifty thousand dollars is too low that some cars have a high cost of produce crops have a high cost of production and that they need a higher income but again i want to remind my colleagues that the income limit is applied after your expenses are deducted including all your labor your equipment your fuel and your fertilizer we're talking about how much profit you have made at the end of the year if you own a farm that has netted a million dollars in a single year after all your expenses are paid i salute you that is wonderful there's nothing wrong with that i think every farmer in minnesota i would love it if they had a million dollars in the bank at the end of the year but if they did this amendment simply says well then you can't get the subsidy but if you have gotten seven hundred fifty thousand dollars income if you're full time farmer two hundred fifty thousand  your part time then you would be some of my colleagues have said that the two hundred fifty thousand dollar limit on part time farmers and non farmers is too low again i say if you live in a city and you own shares in a farm and you have a substantial source of income outside of farming that puts you over two hundred fifty thousand dollars a year that's great for you that's a good thing lots of americans would love to be in that position and have that problem but they do not  necessarily want to provide their tax dollars to give subsidies for these people who are living in beverly hills nine zero two one zero or new york and are simply have investments they don't want to give i believe the vast americans don't believe that's where those seventy should be going they should be going to our family farmers who make their income off this who are facing that volatile weather facing those volatile prices that could basically put them under we don't want to have that happen because not only for our economy but also for our national security we must have farming and we must have a strong agricultural sector and conclusion i want to say that the intent of this amendment is to strengthen the farm bill all americans have a vital stake in the fortunes of our plans and our world community agriculture remained central terminations economy especially our prosperity in the global marketplace that's why i support to build this farm bill this basically match a national security bill and i intend to support it i supported it out of the committee and i tend to support this bill when it comes to a vote but it's not enough to have the support of just this farm state senators i believe that support important have the support of this entire country we need this kind of reform because we need to have support from the entire country if we want to pass this bill you know an inertia maybe the most powerful force in the political universe but after seventy five years the best interests of america's role economy demand that we correct the abuses of the past so we can move forward to ensure a strong safety net for our hardworking farmers i urge my colleagues to support my amendment and i ask mr president at the amendment on this bill that objection is present i will respond just quickly to the senator from minnesota who has filed on a second the one of two amendments to  the issue of payment limits in this bill and i think it is important that we understand the history of payment limits this is always been a controversial issue in every farm bill this is my third farm bill and certainly we had significant debate significant reform in the two thousand and two far below the ninety six farm bill and here we are again with the same am argument being presented that farmers  to be entitled to significant payments from the federal government in very tough times when prices are low or yields are low which is absolutely the direct intention of the farm bill and i would simply say to a friend from minnesota that she referred to two things that i want to agree with their own in first is that two thousand and two farm bill spent approximately seventeen billion dollars less the first five years of that farm bill than what was originally projected and the reason that there was less money spent than was projected by the pundits back in two thousand and two is the fact that the two thousand and two farm bill was very market oriented we provided farmers and ranchers with to utilize and their their credit measures as well as crop insurance measures as well as other marketing to that when co operated end of the two thousand and two farm bill that calls prices not necessarily raw but when supply arose  mand was there to meet that's and therefore the ultimate amount of money coming from washington into the hands of farmers and ranchers across america was seventeen billion dollars over five years less than what was projected how does that impact payment limits and has a direct impact on the payment limit issue because that simply is a part of the the reasoning that an additional amount of money within that seventeen billion dollars was not spent we made significant reforms in the two thousand farm bill to ensure every precaution we could possibly take that payments going from washington to any state in the union went to the pockets of farmers we did everything we could to ensure that but in spite of trying to do that there were abuses i knowledge that the always going to be abuses and this doesn't apply to just farm programs it and unfortunately a blast about every federal program we have here but once again we have taken measures i see my friend from arkansas on the floor  he and i worked very diligently over the last several months to try to make additional reforms to the payment limit issue from the two thousand and two farm bill into this farm bill and once again we have made significant reforms there we have reduced that two and a half million dollar limit down to a million dollars in two thousand and seven hundred fifty thousand dollars for each year after that so that somebody who is a hobby farmer who has a high that in our opinion does not desire payments is not going to get those payments somebody who gets dirt under their fingernails and frankly if they make more than seven hundred fifty thousand dollars a year it means they work hard as a farmer to generate that kind of income on an operation but i assure you if they make seven hundred fifty thousand dollars this year they could lose every bit of that next year so to say that we are to take a farmer who makes seven hundred fifty thousand dollars one year where he's gambled all of his life savings to invest in his crop which undoubtedly would have been millions and millions and millions of dollars for him to generate that kind of income that we're going to strip the payments in the next year when he may lose lose everything he's saved all of his life i don't think is looking out for the best interest of farmers and ranchers from an overall standpoint we did make changes in the bill this time around payment limits we reduced the three hundred sixty thousand dollar cap down to one hundred thousand dollars we eliminated three in a day and if you tell me ten years ago that in two thousand and seven we're going to be eliminating the three entity rule in the payment limit provision i would have though if you were crazy as you can be you told me that five years ago i said there is no way will eliminate three entity that's kind of been a standard under the payment limit provision but we have decided that it is in the best interest of agriculture that that be eliminated and we've worked very hard to make sure that we try to be fayre to farmers and try to encourage family farmers to continue and the main reason we've always said the three entity rule is to allow for the children of farmers to begin operating as a farmer without having to worry about the that has been very advantageous to young farmers and we're replacing it with some other measures that will allow young farmers to get into the two business where their parents and come back to that family farm which i think all of us would like to encourage my family happens to be the beneficiary of that exact situation media family but my son in law and i'm very excited about the fact that he's back in his family farming operations we've added a two and a half million dollars adjusted we did add two and a half million dollar a g i to the two thousand and two farm bill in response to media criticism that high income individuals were receiving conservation and commodity program payments and we sought to ensure that benefits word and the wealthy individuals who did not rely on farming for reported that by the senate committee there's a provision that reduces the encumber level for determining program eligibility by seventy percent over the period of two years two thousand and ten if income exceeds seven hundred fifty thousand dollars down from the current two point five million the individual is not eligible for payments unless two thirds of that individual's income is derived from farming ranching or forestry through a deliberate and balanced approach the agriculture committee brought reform to the means test by further targeting program benefits to those individuals that depend on farming for their livelihood even though committee  approached this matter with caution there are simply no reliable statistics term on the actual impact of the new age level further modifications of the means test the young those approved by the financial reality of commercially viable farms senator from minnesota mentioned that a g e is basically the net profit that it covers all payments for fuel nitrogen and equipment  interest payments are covered no payments for the purchase of any additional real estate are covered so seven hundred fifty thousand dollars is a lot of money is no question about that but here you have an individual who is invested millions of dollars into their farming operation has generated seven hundred fifty thousand dollars of a g i without looking at the books that individual act and tell you from our most forty years of experience in agriculture that individual has either gotten take a payment that cost two hundred fifty thousand dollars or get a pay for a corn combine payment that cost a couple hundred thousand dollars i got to pay for a couple of tractors that probably cost in the range of one hundred thousand dollars i got to pay for land rent they've got their rent would be deducted they've got land payments that have to be made so the say that somebody who has that kind of income just out to be severely pennell as because they are a big farmer is not the way farm bills have ever operated and i don't think it's the way that this farm bill needs to operate do we need to make sure that farm payments go to farmers you bet you bet we do and we're doing everything we can to see if we can't make sure that happens secondly the problem with the  if the exclusion for people who depend on farming and ranching is ended then it indicates that the purpose behind the means test has changed from excluding millionaires who happened to own a farm to specifically targeting farmers and ranchers thirdly an unreasonable a g m means test creates uncertainty for growers and their lenders back creating a ping pong effect of being eligible one year and being an eligible the next making it difficult or impossible for lenders to measure with any degree of certainty the future call a cash flow of thousands of farm and ranch families in order to make both short and long term lending decisions i've already discussed said in some detail and i won't go into that any further but that is a critical aspect of this when you have folks who are gambling all of their life savings that the good lord is going to provide them with enough rain and that the prices are going to be there to at the end of the day of them to be able to justify the annual investment they just made again proponents of an a g m means test state that of all schedule f dollars only one point two percent or twenty five thousand had an a g m have two hundred thousand or more and receive farm program payments this statistic fails to reflect the fact that most operations that could be directly impacted by the a g m means test did not file schedule left tax returns therefore this statistic seriously understates the number of producers and perhaps more importantly the share of acres or production that would be left unprotected furthermore those percentages are deceptive because the population of schedule left fowler's is not limited to producers currently eligible for title one program benefits next building on affirmation provided by the internal revenue service a recent study by u s d a s economic research service used survey data to estimate the em fact of the a g m means test on producers organized as partnerships and corporations the study estimates that two point five percent of farm partnerships and nine point seven percent of farm corporations could be subject to the proposed can further r s estimates that nine point three percent in eight point five percent of cotton and rice farms respectively would exceed the limit it's important to note that these impacts are estimates based on the small sample of tenant and beginning farmers and ranchers as well as lenders landowners main street businesses and rural communities one statistic that you'll hear me talk about again during the course of this debate comes from a study done by the college of agriculture in my home state university of georgia where according to the research recently produced in a study it was determined that one dollar and five cents in taxes taxes is returned to the federal government for every one dollar of agriculture farm payments that are made across america that's a pretty significant statistics when you think about what happens in main street america main street rule america as a result of farm payments that are made and overly restrictive a g i would make it difficult or impossible for farm and ranch families to lease a land where their eligibility for any one year may be in doubt and force a change to cash rent shifting all risk to the tenant as opposed to a share rent that allows the landlord to share in the production risk if a landlord wants to help out a young farmer under this amendment they simply would not be able to do so because they're not going to take that risk they'd be foolish to take that risk further tightening of the a g r rew severely inhibits ordinary commercial activity involving the sale of land and other assets which would jeopardize benefit eligib age rules clamp down on spouses who take all farm jobs to help provide family income especially in years where little or no take home pay is generated from the farm or ranch to provide health insurance for the family or simply to continue a profession such as teaching and lastly estimates of the m fact of an a g m means test focus on the percentage of producers that will be affected however these estimates do not address the true impact of the means test because they failed to address the percent of acres or production that will be affected for example the census of agriculture indicates that the largest ten percent of cotton and rice producers account for thirty to fifty percent of cotton and rice production in many states and i would dare say that the statistic that again you will hear as we continue further debate on this amendment as well as the dog and grassley amendment about eighty percent of production agriculture in the united states is generated by approximately twenty percent of america's farmers and ranchers so who should get the biggest benefit of agricultural programs that are available to farmers is that the twenty percent that produce the minimum amount take the least gris least ris have the least chance of suffering a significant loss or should it be those farmers who are willing to take the risk invest all of their life savings on an annual basis and the operation with the idea that they will have that safety net underneath their operation in the event that they suffer disasters as a result of weather disaster as a result of price or disasters result of insect infestation or some other disease infestation that might occur so mr president this amendment simply is not realistic when it comes to american agricultural production for either a small farmer or a large farmer because if you take an a g m at test and you look at how much money that farmer b at a small farm or a large farmer has to pay for land that they hope they will own one day for equipment and the other deductions that have to come out of that all of a sudden there's an entirely different picture out there that is actual and is not imagined so mr president i am opposed to this amendment and at the proper time and i'm sure we'll talk more about it and we'll look forward to fact that people don't often realize when you read some of these reports in the paper that it came in seventeen billion dollars under budget that that money went back to the government and also that we had a lot of success with that bill i don't think that success stem from the fact that the some of these scandals were occurring with the money going to million dollars to beverly hills nine zero two one zero and some of these other places and i also will say that i appreciate the efforts that we made in the committee toward reform as senator chambliss mentioned getting rid of the three entity rule was a very important step also making some movement on the part time farmers to go to seven hundred fifty  thousand for the income limit for part time farmers is a very important step and what i'm trying to do with this amendment and my colleagues that supported are trying to do is just simply as take it as a step farther because we believe that this money should be more targeted to family farmers and i'd say if you think first of all the as you know as we discuss this amendment does exclude expenses when you're looking at the number seven hundred fifty thousand dollars for full time farmers we're talking there about profit and even for a large farm deducting all their expenses seven hundred seven hundred fifty thousand dollars would be a very good year and so i believe that if you look at this as a whole were we people have to understand that we're talking about profits and not expenses the same with a part time farmers and the definitions that we use in this bill are similar to the ones that in fact the committee used to define expenses so if it is good enough to define expenses for an agreed to come on committee bantered at two hundred seven hundred fifty thousand dollars for part time farmers then i believe if you look at going down to two hundred fifty thousand dollars in profits for part time seven hundred fifty for full time the expense definition should be the same outcome wanted to respond to the remarks about the u s d a study on the a g i limits my college should understand that that was based on the administration's proposal that study the president's proposal which actually put part time and full time farmers at the same number which was two hundred thousand dollars and clearly we worked with our farmers talk to them across the country this amendment different it there differentiates between the part time farmer and the full time farmer understanding that they are in different positions i would also note that that study the u s d a study found no regional bias in those who would be affected by this g i g i limit so i believe as we go forward we have to keep in mind that those of us that support as a mentor from states like minnesota and illinois i support a strong farm bill we believe that we have to have a strong safety net for our farmers but the money should be going to beverly zero nine zero two one zero and it should be going to art collectors in san francisco and it should be going to investment bankers in new york or real estate developers in florida it should be targeted in a reasonable way to those who actually farm and to those part time farmers who make a reasonable income not get people who are making a million two million three million four million a year that's what this is about making sure the safety net is there for those that need it and by the way if you have a large farm that has a bad year and their profits go down they could well qualify for the subsidies under that scenario that's what we're talking about here and i'd also add the house bill that came off the house floor does have some income limits and has a million dollars for a full time farmer five hundred thousand dollars for a part time farmer we have no income limit for a full time farmer in the existing senate bill no income limits at all and for a part time farmer our limits at seven hundred fifty thousand are significantly higher than the house bill so what my colleagues and i are trying to do with this bill is to get it in line so that it shows some actually form of income limits slightly lower than the house but still in the ballpark so that we're actually doing some reform and not just giving lip service to it i appreciate the work of senator harkin senator chambliss in the reform we've made so far i think we need just need to go a step further so we target the money on the family farmers and not urban multimillionaires thank you very much mr president as we go forward you have the floor  mr president does the ranking republican of the ide committee want to introduce an amendment and set it aside before i speak sen being spent dispensed with and that the amendment the without objection is present then rado's reckons mr president many of us here in the senate have been waiting now for well over a month for this document twenty three zero two to come to the floor and to begin what is a right and responsible approach toward legislative offering it up to amendments allowing senators under the rules of the senate to work the will and completed on time the democrat leader thought he could short circuit that that he could what we call load the tree up and not allow these kind of amendments only to find out in the end that wasn't about to happen both democrats and republicans alike would not allow the rules of the senate to be forwarded and to deny the responsibility of each and every senator if they choose to offer an amendment later on in the course of this debate next week i and senator domenici and senator thune will be offering an amendment that relates to our as renewable fuels standard and it is with that that i come to the floor  oday to talk about a farm bill in a substantially different context we believe and we have always felt that agricultural policy was critical for america for american farmers yes but for america's consumers of food and food products most importantly there is no doubt today that the average consumer in america spends less on a high quality food than any other consumer in the world and america's food supermarkets are full of food there are no shortages there are there is great abundance there is phenomenal variety and without question that food supply is the safest in the world i believe in large part that is a result of a combination of two things happening the phenomenal capability of america's free and independent farmers but a government who was willing consistently down through the decades down through the depressions and the droughts and the hurricanes in the hailstorms and all of that to work with their farmers to ensure that they could stay on the land and produce but rarely in the course of all of these decades of foreign policy have we thought in the context  we're beginning to think today and that is that america's farmers can become or are becoming one of america's largest suppliers of energy it is not a new phenomena it is a rapidly growing diversity in the american ag portfolio that is doing what we have wanted done for a long time but simply because of a combination of program and price in the market i didn't see it happen so for a few moments this afternoon i'd like to talk about the farm bill but in the context of energy and energy supply farmers we have always believed america's agricultural producers are very large consumers of energy but it's only been in the last decade that they have big again to become large consumers producers of energy and as that has happened and as we have changed and shifted policy in this country to incentivize and toward reword that production we've watched that production grow very very we are now around about eight billion gallons of ethanol produced annually we encouraged it in the five energy policy act and america's farmers went to the task of building the ethanol distilleries and beginning to supply the market as we allowed ethanol to enter the market at ever higher volumes now an old farmer told me not long ago you know this is nothing new for american agriculture before we had tractors farmers supplied all of their fuel for their farming and i haven't put it in that context now i grew up on a farm and ranch where one side of a barn once housed i'm talking the horse barn once housed ten teams of horses that pulled the plow pull the harvesters and did all of that and it was energy from our farm that fed the horse that produce the energy of the horse we were not importers of energy to our farm we were producers of energy but that was ninety years ago and then american farming changed dramatically and we became increasingly more productive and we could producing our own energy and started consuming it from outside sources and it became gasoline and diesel it isn't that we will see a reversal but we are seeing phenomenal new opportunity of production and that is in combination a result of farm policy and this bill is a good farm bill and the senator from georgia and the senator from iowa need to be congratulated for the cooperative effort in which they've worked to produce it and it will be if you will in part one of the directives of american agriculture for the next five years when it is pass what is important now is to try to look down the road and talk about for america a role that we must increasingly play if we are going to continue to be the strong power we are for ourselves and our citizens but also for the world what has happened from that time when horses once pulled the plow till now that big tractor out there with hundreds of horses under the hood if you will hauling multiple plows is that we began to be come a nation of energy importers and since i've been in congress over the last twenty seven years we went from thirty percent to forty percent to fifty percent to sixty percent dependent on foreign countries producing our energy for us and i did say countries i didn't say companies because the bulk of the oil in the world is owned by governments not companies and almost every one of those governments today is less than concerned and in many instances hostile to america and so it seems only fitting to me that as we shape public policy in this country we do so in a way that begins to move america toward energy independence and the american farmer more than ever before can be combat producer of energy and help in that equation of energy independence in a way that even a decade ago we didn't think possible at all with the passage of the energy policy act of two thousand and five and the expansion of entry of ethanol into the market we saw that market begin to take off and we saw production of ethanol begin to take off and we saw the spurgeon that always occurs in a market when a new demand begins to occur for a commodity that isn't overly abundant in that case it was corn and we saw our dairy farmers and our feeders of beef cattle and hog farmers began to be concerned about the high price and the high cost of that input because corn had been shifted from the feedlot to the distillery to produce ethanol and we're continuing to encourage that one of the things that we will do with a renewable portfolio standard in the farm bill is begin to shift that equation t is produced by corn almost exclusively in this country and many of us believe with the new science that's coming with the new loans and  coming out of the energy department because of the environmental policy or the energy policy act we've passed in over five that we will begin to see a shift toward a combination of ethanol fuel both corn based and  value los fiber not only could it be the grain of the corn itself producing but it could become the ear of the corn in the stock of the corn and grasses and other kinds of fibers is dominant it could become a major producer in the energy act that the senate passed this year that went to the house and the house largely destroyed by trying to use it as a taxing mechanism more than a production mechanism we had placed in it a renewable fuel standard that did the combination of things i'm talking about we said we could take corn up to about fifteen billion gallons a year and we could take cellulose produce ethanol up to about fifteen billion gallons a year by the year twenty twenty and by the year and twenty two we would add another six billion gallons of science has that technology began to be increasingly more efficient and refined and here's a reason why we would want to do that right now corn based ethanol only reduces the output of c o two into the environment by about nineteen percent compared with conventional conventional fossil fuels it's a hell but it isn't where we want to be if we want a clean world out into the future and i know a lot of farmers and i've always said in my life that farmers are probably the finest environmentalists in the world because they are phenomenal stewards of the land and they want to constantly make sure that land is viable  produces in the water qualities around it are sustained and they themselves want to produce a better quality product so what we're suggesting here is that we increasingly shift the equation and that american agriculture in its participation in the production of energy to make us more energy independent find new sources and cleaner sources and in the hand when we eighty six percent cleaner that's what we want that's what we ought to ask for and that's why for the first time at least in my time in the united states congress americas farm bill america's agricultural policy is in part an energy policy because for the first time agriculture is looking at not only its him put cost of energy but its opportunity to produce energy and there are a lot of other things that i could talk about as it relates to taking biomass and animal waste and converting them into energy and all of that starting to happen but the big production the production that makes the difference the production that makes america and america's energy consumers more independent from the venezuela or from the middies is this right here ethanol both corn based and cellulosic that's what we're about that's what we've got to be about as a country there is every reason for the american consumer to say why can't we be energy independent and we should be but our policies of not taken is there in part because i think we didn't think we could get there but largely because there were all kinds of bias out there in the whole energy arena and the bias were quite obvious we all like big cars we all like our s u v s we all like what we like until we can't afford liking them anymore because the cost of feeding them has gone up dramatically and that's helped us a little bit developed changes for the first time this year i under duce to build senator dorgan to have mandatory mandatory cafe standards the auto industry was quite upset with me i've always defended them not changing that standard i've been here twenty seven years we haven't changed a standard twenty seven years and they haven't changed i want to change that standard i want to force the american marketplace in the american producer to look at what can happen if they become more realistic in consumption efficiency rommany what a difference a day makes when a car makes another mile or two to the gallon nationwide in the consumption o so it is a balancing part it is a total picture it's big oil production i'm going to be back to the floor all during two thousand and eight talking about energy independence talking about drilling offshore talking talking about all the kinds of things america must do to get independent of foreign sources of energy and to get clean i know my children and they're all adults now out working say to me and all pretty conservative folks dad why can't we produce clean energy why can't we be energy independent why are you allowing a little dictator down in venezuela to jerk us around what's wrong with this great country that we can't do for ourselves what we have always done for ourselves stood up and be counted for and we're independent and strong and we can and america's farmers now for the first time have a phenomenal role to play beyond just putting food on the consumer shelf which they have done so beautifully for two hundred years now they have a role to play of putting fuel in the fuel tank and we ought to be encouraging that in every way but balancing the policy as i think this final bill will do to make sure that we don't distort the markets that we allow them to grow responsibly that we allow them to work their way into a fifteen billion gallons a year production of corn based  and by twenty twenty six to fifteen to twenty billion gallons a year of cellulosic based ethanol it is doable we know how to do it we're putting programs in place to promote it and advances america's auto fleet will change and adjust to it and america will be a stronger nation but more importantly it will be an independent nation from the small countries who have underneath their deal logic structures large bodies of oil that they now see as tools to the promises as tools to shape the world and as tools to control this great country called america so i'll be back next week along with many of my colleagues to make it colleagues to make a few changes in the farm bill but let me say today that s twenty three zero two is a good work product mr chairman and i am pleased that finally finally a majority leader of the united states senate has said ok put it on the floor let it work its will because by the end of next week we'll have a farm bill and it's about a month late that could have happened a month ago it will happen now i guess patients counts many of us have been patient america's farmers need a new farm bill and i believe the senate ag committee has done a worthy job in producing it and i yield the floor for this president or for massachusetts record that mr president ask be able to proceed as if they're morning business for up to ten minutes i don't think i'll use all that time without objection and i'd ask that to my comments be printed an appropriate place in the record not to interfere with the debate and discussion about objection mr president the torture debate took another deeply troubling turn yesterday the nation learned that the cia had destroyed videotapes of its employees in the act of using torture or other harsh interrogation techniques on detainees those tapes were not shown to congress they were not shown to any court they were not shown to the bipartisan nine eleven commission instead they were destroyed what would cause the cia to take this action the answer is obvious coverup the agent was agency was desperate to code damning evidence of their practices employees who engaged in these practices but that excuse won't wash i'm second to no one in wanting to protect the brave men and women of the cia but how is it possible that the director of the cia has so little faith in his own agency does the director believe that the cia's buildings are not six sure would it be beyond the agency's technical expertise to preserve the tapes while hiding the identity of its employees does the director believe that the cia's employees cannot be trusted not to leak materials that might harm the agency or does he know that the interrogation techniques are so of aren't that they could not remain unknown much longer it is particularly difficult to take the director's explanation at face value when the news that these cia tapes were destroyed came the very same week that we learned that is many as ten million white house e mails have not been preserved despite a law that requires their retention at the same time that the president continue to insist that we grant immunity to the phone companies for their role in the illegal wiretapping of american citizens the pattern is unmistakable the past six years the bush administration has run roughshod over our ideals and the rule of law for those six years the republican congress did little to hold the administration accountable now when the new democratic congress is demanding answers you ministration is feverish really covering up its tracks we haven't seen anything like this since the eighteen and a half minute gap in the tapes of president these types of tapes violated the law we also must redouble our efforts to make sure that future interrogations by the cia conform to our laws and values no part of our government should engage in practices that are so horrific that we cannot bear to see them on tape to that end i introduce legislation to require that all government agencies including the cia follow the standards of the army field manual language that would take that importan step was recently included in the conference report on the intelligence authorization bill and we must act to adapt it as soon as possible and as founder john adams said our nation is a nation of congressional investigations the cia's role in this cover up is only the latest remind to that congress must fight hard to prevent this administration from making a mockery of the rule of law at a preserve the right of the american right thank you mr president mr president i'm very proud to come to the floor akin to discuss and debate talk about something that is critically important to this country the working families of this country and to the well being of the entire world quite frankly and that's the third in energy security act of two thousand and seven much is already been said and i know as we progress through the remainder of this week and next week there will be much discussion about what's the best way to proceed with the food and security act and having looked back and what we did in two thousand and two we worked hard to be more focused on how we could do a better job in this country in providing the kind of support and safety net the producers in our nation needed so that they could be competitive in the global marketplace but also encouraging the appropriate and proper way of production in this country as americans would want to see not only making sure that there's an abundant source of food and fiber in this country but that it would be produced in a way that would be safe to the environment to the consumer that it would be affordable so that our farmers would be the most efficient that they could possibly be we took a big step in two thousand and two in producing a bill that  moved us very much in that direction and mr president as we look at what we have done in the senate agriculture committee i'm very proud of the product that the committee has produced and brought to the floor in senator harkin's amendment a lot of time and energy was put into that committee bill to ensure that we maintain the enormous blessing in this country that is american agriculture the hard work that goes into american agriculture from the hard working families the farm families the businesses that support them the rural community that supports them to be able to do just that to produce the most affordable abundant the safest supply of food and fiber in the world and that's what our american farm families do mr president they do it very proudly they do it very distinctly and they do it very differently in each region of this great country but message today is the same as it's been for weeks and months and really the years that i have served in both this body and the other and that is we have an opportunity to reinforce those farm families to reinforce the values that we feel as americans that not only do we want an affordable supply of food and fib we want to be safe for our families and for those that we share it with globally we want to make sure that we're doing it with respect to the environment and we've through the years expanded this bill in order to make sure that it is obvious that we want to do that in the nutrition programs that we have in the conservation programs that we have in the development the rural development portions and now in a new energy title that we started in two thousand and two to really show our commitment to american agriculture and what it does not just for the farmers not just for the farm community not just for the children and the families that we feed in this country but globally in terms of what we do in fading those that are hungry and also pushing the on the low just a little bit each time with our competitors globally so that he too will do it in a responsible way towards the environment our message today here is that this is a good bill this is a good bill that has been produced in the senate ag committee and we need to pass it to the farm bill does so many good things that i've already discussed and many of us will continue to talk about that our investments here in nutrition are tremendous conservation rural development energy programs they've all been dramatically increased and will benefit our country greatly take the nutrition is an example you know i know how important it is just from looking at my own children in my own family how important nutrition is in all of our lives but to kilian working families the poorest among us to who we need to put first and we need to make sure that we are acting responsibly and i was pleased to see in the committee bill that we provide an additional five billion dollars increase in programs targeted at reducing food insecurity can we do better we're going to work hard each and every year to do better but that is a great start of where we can be conservation the chairman chairman harkin and many other members i know my state is a huge user of the conservation programs but the chairman himself has been a tireless advocate for conservation programs and i'm pleased that once again he's produced a bill that is progress in this area it ensures that we are the best stewards of the land that anyone can be globally and that our children we will leave our children the environment they deserve that we will we will try each time to do better but in the conservation dollars the four billion plus extra dollars that we have put into conservation are meaningful in terms of what we have achieved in this bill rural development broadband is such an incredible tool that we see in rural america senator stabenow now and i have worked together and had a hearing not too long ago with telecommunications folks from all across this country in terms of how do we get rural america connected to the rest of the world how do we ensure that they are connected whether it's for the educational benefit whether it's the economic development that they need but making sure that they have access and in this bill through the broadband and some of the other rural development rural development wi fi and unfortunately that disproportionately people and in rural areas are lower income particularly our seniors nutrition programs that exist are but also the divs the delivery mechanism the community programs that deliver those nutritious meals to our seniors many of those are supported by our community  development that comes through the rural development section of this bill all very critically important whether it's economic development caring for individuals in rural america health care in the advancement of health care technologies whole host of things that we do in rural development energy my colleagues and your crag brings up the issue of reducing our dependence on foreign oil and how important it is it is critical it's critical that we become more dependent on ourselves for the energy that we need a and that we are responsible and how we do that responsible to the to the environment ensuring that the renewable fuels that we can invest ourselves and are the fuels that will take us through the twenty first century not just through the next five years and we begin here in this energy title of this farm bill to see those renewable fuels that are going to make a difference in lessening our dependence on foreign oil and also cleaning up our environment but look at what else they do they provide a secondary market for our producers so that we aren't as him dan and dependent on the global  marketplace but that we once again begin to depend on ourselves and that we give those secondary markets to our farmers so that they can be competitive continuing to provide a safe in abundance affordable supply of food and fab are but also at the same time marketing their crops in a way that they can also draw from that whether it's the cellulosic value or others an energy source that will make us independent i think most importantly to me as  mother of twin boys the farm bill does something that i think we should all be very very proud of and that is what i mentioned earlier it ensures us mr president of a safe domestic food supply that is the in the of the world yes we want to share with the rest of the world but we also want to make sure that our children our families have the confidence that when they are able to get the products from this country grown by the responsible farm families of this nation that they can be assured of the safety of those the many of my colleagues in most if not all of the media seem to take a lot of that for granted unfortunately you know one day they're reporting about the dangers that our nation is facing with and safe issues that are entering the country or the atrocities of outsourcing job and what that means to working families and then the next day they're here on the floor or on the front page of the paper or in the news on the television criticizing farm programs are agricultural programs that allow us to ensure that saif and affordable supply of food for our children and our families you know over all for our budget the farm bill budget is one half of one percent of the whole budget mr president but if you look at the portion of this bill that provides a safety net to our producers so they can stay in business so they can stay competitive with the growers all across the globe who don't meet those environmental regulations who don't meet those the regulations who are not meeting the condom of regulations that we put into place to make those safety assurances fifteen percent of this farm bill only fifteen percent mr president is what we use in those safety net programs that's a huge return on our money that is a small investment to be assured that when our families go to the store the grocery store shelves are not empty or that when we service those at our table that we are assured of the safety of our children and our families and what we're bringing to that table you know it's amazing to me mr president as we see again all of the the  confusion about the unsafe imported foods and what we have there and the same people that are worried about that that could criticize these farm programs and yet if we don't provide those safety net programs there's no way we can keep that production here at home unless we lock our markets to the imports from other countries which we've done in some commodities but in th sustenance of life if you go down to the botanical gardens you will see a display that talks about rice and wheat and these types of grains that are the staple in sustenance of life if we can't produce those competitively in this country we will lose our sale to other countries and their production which again is not done in the safe and reliable way that we do the lead oldest of disparities in terms of global agricultural trade that u s farmers space a brawl i know from my standpoint as a region where rices is is a big crop for us because we're suited to grow rice it's an expensive crop to grow but we are suited to do that and our farmers do it more efficiently and effectively than any farmers on the globe and yet we are shut out from trade agreements and markets all across the globe and yet our markets are open to them and to their commodities mr president we are i dare a diverse nation our crops are different in each region of our country and that's something we should be proud of that our nation is so large and so productive and so fruitful that we can produce all of those diverse crops from across this ours and for that reason we have several different programs to support individual commodity needs and i'm very proud of that diversity and i'm proud to support it initiatives for farmers all around our country i fight hard for the ones that are important to the farmers and producers in map rachins but i also know that farmers in other parts of the country are important to know whether it's the production of milk or or sugar or other types of crops that we don't grow as well in our in our region but i don't just support those that are programs for me i support those programs because i believe that as a team as one country we must support the programs that produce all of these incredible commodities that we enjoy in this country i've also fought hard to ensure that american agriculture gets the respect deserves in the world marketplace because as the budget chairman has pointed out with his now a very fine chart the world market for our farmers isn't free or fair my message is simple mr president we should make our global competition and we shouldn't unilaterally disarm our farmers in the global marketplace we've worked hard in this bill to bring about reforms that people have clamored for but if we want to go in the direction  of my colleague from minnesota senator clover char and just unilaterally begin to disarm some of our growers it's not decided that we don't want reform there's tremendous reform in this bill decided that we're not going to look at the diversity of production and how commodities are produced in this country and we're not going to understand that each of those has to be just a little bit different she's all talked about how important it is for these reforms in the reforms that we have in the bill that's good she wants to go one step further but we need to stop and think how dangerous is that mixtape and doesn't throw out hardworking families who have made huge investments mr president to form a thousand acres of cotton you've got to take out a five million dollar operating loan that's a big the sign your name to if you're a hard working farm family and you don't know what's going to happen this year you may have lost a good bit last year you might lose some more next year you might have a profit this year but this sign your name on a five million dollar operating loan for a thousand acre farm which is not that much if you're going to try to recoup and make a little money that year is a tough decision to meg and oftentimes it may be sharing your risk with other people maybe it's family members but that's critically important for us to remember in terms of the diversity of this one tree you know it's an unfortunate reality that our our global agricultural competition is heavily subsidized more subsidize certainly than we are and their markets are closed to the agricultural goods that my state produces particularly but certainly we have to negotiate those and try to agreements but when my commodities are completely shut out of the markets in other countries and yet our markets are open to their goods i've got a huge disadvantage from the very get go not to mention the subsidies that might be provided or are provided particularly to the developed countries across the globe and as a result we have grown our operations in our state because we don't have a lot of those protections and try to create an economy of scale that allows us to be competitive and if we're not careful with the tiger payment limits that are being talked about and certainly to any limits that the senator from minnesota mitch is we're going to make our producers a staple commodities like rise less competitive internationally and mr president when we put them out of business they're not going to go to another area of our country they're not go grow their rice in in you know indiana or because that the environment is not suited for that they're not even probably going to go to maryland to grow their rise well we're going to do is end up with our markets open importing that staple commodity from countries who don't regulate how it's grown who don't care what types of fertilizers or water sources they use in farming that commodity mr president i didn't invent the global subsidies in agriculture but i am committed i'm very committed to ensuring the u s senate help on farmers our farmers meet the kind of global competition that they say to not do so will simply result in an outsourcing of our food supply and our jobs in rural america within the deputy own negotiations we've asked our trading partners to reduce subsidies and their tariff levels on the u s agricultural products that  we're shipping but what we'd say is that we'll come down farther and we'll come down faster in our subsidies but the response from the rest of the world has been abundantly clear they continue to cite to us no thank you america we want you to bring your stamp but we're not going to bring our stance we've got to maintain a domestic supply of food you go right ahead and lower your subsidies and we're going to hang on to ours because it's really important to us well mr president for the first time in the history of this country a deficit a trade deficit in agriculture is being predicted for the next couple of years we need to stand up and say what those other countries are saying and that is that it's very very important to us as well here at home i've heard some of my colleagues in most media outlets say that we needed to lower the caps on programs and you know we went around to talk to folks after seeing what the two thousand and two farm bill did h productive it was in terms of the savings that that were realized that senator chambliss mentioned well we did we did what we heard people were looking to see happen and the committee bill lowers the overall caps from three hundred and sixty thousand to one hundred thousand for individual one hundred thousand mr president we also heard that we needed to address the loopholes that allow producers to avoid the cap and the committee bill eliminates both the l most frequently cited that's the three entity rule and the generic certificate two things that people have tried to abuse in the past they were very necessary tools in many instances for hardworking farm families that use them correctly but there was room for abuse and we eliminated them mr president we eliminated them because people wanted good reform in this bill i heard that we needed transparency so the committee bill added direct attribut which will track payments directly to an individual farmer direct attribution so that you can follow that payment but mr president now remember remember that this is only applicable to the commodity program so the three commodity programs that are most used obviously the direct payment the countercyclical in the marketing loan this doesn't include some of the other special last programs that we've developed for specialized commodities like the milk program or the sugar program or the ethanol tax programs and  conservation programs for instance so we haven't we haven't done this across the board we're just focusing on a few of our growers not a few probably the majority in terms of grain but the commodity programs that are the most traditional we also heard that we needed to disqualify millionaire non farmers walking around fifth avenue or hollywood and again my colleague from minnesota continues to bring those up so when the committee bill we move the adjusted gross income means test from its current level of two point five million to seven hundred fifty thousand despite the fact despite the fact mr president that a recent g a o report brings to us the information that this administration isn't policing the current payment limit regulations effectively i'd be willing to bet you that the millionaire real estate individual that senator club which are continues to bring up and in in debate probably is covered under certainly the existing committee bill but and unlikely under the existing law quite frankly the problem is we're not seeing those time limits  exist being implemented by this administration well what good is it to go ahead and implement even stricter rules if we don't even implement the ones that are existing and if it's not something that is already breaking the support that they need that they're going to get the safety net that they need in whatever the particular crop is that they grow in a sound way you know it's interesting as well when we talk about  the the g a o study and the implementation of of these restrictions that exists because so many of the stories that we hear mr president are about individuals might be celebrities or what have you  who maybe are getting a conservation time and maybe they're getting a conservation time if they're not going to be corrected by this amendment because we don't extend this idea to ask everybody we're just they're just targeting it to once one specific group i would beg to differ that you know there's a lot of things does that mean that we're going to say to a large medical practices that we're going to give you an a g m means test before we're going to allow you to accept medicare payments if you're over the a g i mean staff and you're an eligible for medicare i don't think we're going to do that and we're talking about sustenance of life we're talking about keeping our farmers competitive in the global marketplace my sincere hope mr president is that the committee bill will be seen as what it is a tremendous good faith effort on my hart and a host of other members in the agriculture senate agriculture committee to address concerns and to recognize that this is the most significant reform in the history of farm programs we've done a tremendous job with both what senator dorgan and grassley want to do as well as what senator c  are wants to do in reining in some of those things you can safely side anybody that there's more reform in this bill that we have ever seen mr president i'm enormously appreciative of this time the time that we have now to debate and talk about what it is the farm bill does for this country and what it does for farm families all across the nation i know it's not particularly glamorous and i know for a lot of members it's not a lot of fun to talk about farmville it's not a glamorous something that's intricate and detailed in terms of what they can take home and talk about and yet it is interested in details it's very complicated the programs that we have designed to provide the support for our growers the safety net that still meet the condom gabbed lines in our trade agreements and a whole host of other things are very difficult to understand and a lot of times members don't want to take the time to understand them and they don't want to understand the differences that are affected to all of the different regions and all of the different growers but it is critical and we've come to a critical time in our nation's history that we've got to recognize how important this bill is i think many of us on the  necessarily just because somebody put us there were there because we asked to be there we have to be there because we know how important is to our state and we know how important is to this country we as a country are fortunate we're very fortunate mr president to have this and i'm not going to let anyone in this in a chamber forget that on and on but it is critically important whether it comes from me as a a senator that represents an agricultural stay whether it's  that of a daughter that is grown up on a farm in an agricultural operation and seeing all of the unbelievable dilemma whether it's whether or trade or farm programs or whatever all of the things that agricultural farm families are up against that they have no control over or whether it's me as a mother looking into the twenty first century and knowing how critically important it is not just that our children of today will have the opportunity to farm or to carry on that legacy but that the children of all american families will have a say in abundant and affordable supply and there are multiple reasons for every one of us to get excited about this bill and i hope that we will so i am hoping that that no one in this body you know will will again take for granted this enormous bounty that we have what it does for us and what it does for for lands as well in the peoples all across this globe and i appreciate the time now mr president i look forward as we move forward in in reminding my colleagues that we've done tremendous reform in this bill we've done tremendous reform most of it is levied on farmers come from our region a lot a lot of that's not extended a lot of that reform is not extended to other regions of the country and that's ok because my farmers are strong  and they are proud of who they are and what they do and they're going to be willing to lead the charge in terms of reforms but i do say mr president that as we look at the bill that we've produced it's a good balance bill we've made huge investments in things that are important to us in the values that we hold as americans and we've made a huge step in terms of the reforms that make a difference to many americans that were doing it is officially and effectively as we possibly can thank you m probably worked it out and i do think that the american farmers and the industry can be basically happy frankly we finally do pass this farm bill hopefully next week while we're here though i'd like to address another subject and that's the the tax package on the energy bill not too long ago a month or two ago when the energy bill is before the congress was up before the obligation as senators to help make our country as energy independence as we possibly can for a whole host of reasons one clearly is our national security we are somewh to that we want to be control of our destiny as americans as much as possible and energy is such a key component we should do ever we can help make ourselves more energy independent they cap a versions of the bill  a long way that direction some the other provisions of the bill also help with the tactile i daresay goes as far as any other part of that building help make us energy independent and that bill is before the senate some time ago it was about thirty two billion dollars and again that would have got sixty votes here in the senate and all the senators been present we now scale that back significantly kind of back by a third so it's now about twenty these technologies elect help make america more independent but we need to have those provisions in the law so investors know what the tax provisions are within sam's are and how long they will be in place we don't pass the tax title  solar energy add to that the clean renewable energy bonds what's that those are basically ways for nonprofits whether it's counties co ops or indian tribes also half of the power that we consume in america today is generated by coal we all know that coal has very important generate energy we all know that coal it's part of the climate change problem but we need to have clean coal technologies which drafted this tax title as the two billion dollars worth of clean coal technologies that dirty coal technologies like clean coal technologies so we can help make ourselves more independent but in a way t hybrid cars can get driving a garage you can plug it in and that's going to extend that real life of those hybrids well able to get close to one hundred miles a gallon just think if we allot more cars in our country get a hundred miles a gallon we'd be doing very well here as we become more independent commercial buildings conservation credit that's helps commercial buildings install conservation divisions to help save energy to add it all up mr president and there's a lot in here it's really important we have an obligation to help make ourselves more energy to pad it these are provisions to do so but also in a way that's it's  energy let thousand energy technologies bloom is you know i'm not saying which technology works better than others that compare to others but let's at least get these provisions in place so that entrepreneurs and developers and investors who want to make up a lot is the american my colleagues i'm working with families they have any objections to this tax tiles and figure out a way of to modify it to get work because our goal here frankly is to gather here in the senate and to become more energy independent this tactile go long way help make that happen unanimous consent to set aside pending amendment and to call up amendment number three six eight seven that objection so or ten that it meant to be set aside without objection sworn and as president let me just say she has left the chamber now but to my colleague from arkansas who has been such a great fighter for farmers and ranchers all across america for all of my years and united states congress and i've had the privilege of serving with her in both the house and the senate i would associate myself with her earlier comments she is dead on target when it comes to not just the issue of payment limits which she spoke a lot about but the issue of the underlying bill the substance of this bill and the benefits of this bill that farmers and ranchers all across america and i appreciate her great the senate today failed to advance the house passed energy bill falling short of the sixty votes needed republicans objected to tax provisions and requirements that utilities use more alternative sources for their electricity leaders say the senate is likely to make some changes to the bill after the energy vote senators return to the farm bill setting agriculture policy for the next five years leaders agreed to limit amendments to the farm bill work on that bill and amendments continues into next week we talk to a capitol hill reporter today about negotiations going on behind the scenes on the energy and farm bills iraq funding and spending measures martin kady from the politico joins us you write that the democrats are starting to make deals and potentially sacrifice campaign promises in order to make the legislative machinery work what's the biggest deal they've gotten solved so far  night the senate read to pass a one year temporary patch on the alternative minimum tax and they agreed to do it without paying for it and this is a violation of their pay go promise the fact that they would not cut taxes unless they cut spending or raise revenue but rather than stick you know millions of americans with a potential tax increase under this a m t they just agreed to do it because there's no way republicans would go along with any tax increase to offset it looks like they're going to go ahead and work on the farm bill in the  senate they were on that for weeks and then moving forward what did they agree to well they agreed to twenty amendments on each side now you'll see that the senate was doing the energy bill this morning and that's probably going to go down they're not going to get cloture on this but they'll move on to this farm bill and it looks like there's an endgame in play on the farm bill as well they might cut a deal on the energy bill as well if they take out the tax provisions and just stick with these cafe standards so that is a lot of anger rhetoric hunt both sides it's december people want to get home but it seems like the fog starting to lift and we might have a number of deals just in the next week but the issue of iraq has been with the congress all year and now we have the additional funding bill what might happen with that well you know it's there's a chance and it's looking more and more like democrats are going to try to figure out a way to provide troop funding without a troop withdrawal timetable this would be a big sacrifice for democrats but they realize that you know the surge has that has shown some success they also realize that they don't want to leave for the year with one of the last images being refusal to provide money for the troops just wanted appears as though there's been some military success in iraq so last night standing hoyer said the anticipat that the democrats will provide troop funding without the serious withdrawal conditions that a lot of democrats still want is there agreement on how they're going to solve the annual spending bill problem only gotten defense done there's no agreement yet but this is a time of year where you see a lot of people going in and out of the closed door meetings on one wednesday we saw the budget director jim nussle up in the capitol and we also saw president bush's chief of staff josh bolten going in and out of meetings with the harry re it looks like they're going to start negotiating something the democrats already offered to cut eleven billion from their remaining domestic spending bills i've heard from some senate aides they might go a little further to get closer to the president's number like it's another thing they don't want to leave in two thousand and seven with all this unfinished business why wasn't some of this deal making done earlier in the session that's a perennial question with congress you know they always have to do a lot of posturing and arguing and the they want to try to maximize their political positioning but there's nothing like the calendar and the presence of the holidays to to get their mind focused and realize they have to make a few sacrifices to get things done i mean i had republicans telling me last night why couldn't we have done this a m t thing back in june because that's what we've always wanted but the democrats tried to hold out hold out for more you know they want to max out what they could get but the republicans held firm and they you know it's december this is when they cut deals up there martin kady reporting for the politico writing about the gridlock easing on capitol hill you can read his work at politico dot com thanks for joining us thank you the senate is working on the farm bill at this time but members are currently in a quorum call or waiting for a member to come to the floor to speak on the farm bill over on the other side of the capitol the house is quiet today not in session that members in the house back next week we'll have live coverage on our companion network c span right now on c span live coverage of a forum on nursing home reforms twenty years after major nursing home legislation our live coverage of the senate continues here on c span to the senate waiting for a member to come to the floor we're in a quorum call right now members working on the farm bill today earlier today senators rejected an attempt to move forward on the house energy bill that includes higher fuel efficiency standards for cars light trucks and v s republican republican leaders are objecting to provisions requiring utilities to create more of their electricity from alternative fuels and adding energy savings tax incentives offset by cuts to certain oil and gas subsidies the senate failed to get the sixty votes needed to move on the bill senate leaders say the vote means the senate is likely to make changes to the house passed version earlier we talked to a capitol hill reporter to get an update on the energy bill joined on the phone by gene chen nikken assistant editor at plants inside energy the senate failed to invade vance the energy bill that the house had passed what's the next step well this probably means that the energy bill that the senate passes will be different from the house bill and they're going to go into negotiations today and over the weekend and probably monday and at the end of the bill will look somewhat different and the provisions that are most likely to  have some changes made to them are twenty one billion dollars tax package and new a bill electricity standard for utilities that the house passed the senate didn't manage to pass or actually didn't bring up for a vote last spring were why are those concerned about this the tax package this twenty one billion