a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. merkley: madam president, i call up my amendment 2382. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from oregon, mr. merkley, proposes an amendment numbered 2382. the presiding officer: there will now be two minutes of debate equally divided by each side. mr. merkley: thank you. colleagues, this bill is about holding -- this bill is about holding usda accountable. our organic farmers, when they

get crop insurance, they pay a 5% premium up front, and the whole concept was that on the back end that they would be compensated at the value of their organic crop should they need to utilize their insurance. however, to establish the price of the organic crop, usda has to do the studies. we instructed them to do this four years ago. they have been dragging their feet. organic farmers are left in the most untenable position, paying the premium up front but not getting the fair organic price on the back end. so this amendment simply says the department of agriculture, get the studies done that you were told to do four years ago so that the whole equation is fair to our farmers. that's the story and i'm so pleased olympia snowe is my cosponsor, and if she is here and would like to make comments, i yield the floor. i reserve the balance of my time.

the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: just for the information of the senate, senator demint's amendment was next. we have not seen him on the floor yet, so we move to this amendment. as soon as he arrives, we will return to the demint amendment. in the meantime, it's my understanding we can proceed to a voice vote. the presiding officer: who yields time? ms. stabenow: i would yield back all time. the presiding officer: without objection. all time is yielded back. the question is on the amendment. all those in favor say aye. all those against say nay. the ayes appear to have it. mr. roberts: madam president, i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators wishing to vote or change their vote?

hearing none, the ayes are 63, the nays are 36. the amendment carries. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from south carolina. mr. demint: i'd like to bring up demint amendment 2270 --, 2273. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from south carolina, mr. demint, proposes amendment numbered 2273. the presiding officer: there will now be two minutes of debate, equally divided. mr. demint: thank you, mr. president. the farm bill adds a new grant component to the existing rural utility service broadband loan and loan guarantee program. my amendment would eliminate the authority of the secretary of the department of agriculture to

increase the taxpayers' share of these broadband grants beyond 50%. please keep in mind these are not direct loans. these are grants that require no payback. it's important that recipients have some skin in the game so that they make good decisions. my amendment allows the 50% threshold cost sharing but does not allow the secretary to waive to make that a 75% share by the taxpayer. i encourage my colleagues to support this moment of fiscal sanity here. thank you. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: thank you, mr. president. i rise today to oppose this amendment. it has a similar impact to one yesterday that we defeated by the senator. it basically goes to the question of whether or not we're going to allow investment in rural communities.

the hardest-hit communities, farthest apart communities, whether or not they will have access to broadband. it really goes to small businesses, living in small towns and villages, whether or not they're going to have access to sell products to consumers around the globe. we're in a global economy. 30's and 40's we did rural electrification to make sure the farmer at the end of the road was connected with electricity. this is the same kind of thing but it's the internet. it's broadband. we want to make sure everybody is connected, even those in the most row moat, rural areas. i yield back time and ask for a no vote. the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll.

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? hearing none, the ayes are 44, the nays are 55. the amendment is not -- does not carry. without objection.

mr. coburn: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from oklahoma.

mr. coburn: i address my comments to amendment 228. the presiding officer: order, please. the clerk will report. the clerk: mr. coburn proposes an amendment numbered 2289. mr. coburn: i'd ask that the amendment be considered as read. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. coburn: this is an amendment that falls in line with what the recommended -- recommendation of the administration is as well as every outside group that's ever looked at this program. the department of agriculture has five marketing programs. this is just one of them. the administration recommended a 20% reduction. we have put forward an amendment to reduce it by 20%. we spend $2 billion over the next ten years on market access. american contribution to total world agricultural products is on the decline in spite of these program, and the waste in these programs, if you look where the money is spent, is unbelievable. i reserve the balance of my time.

the presiding officer: the senator michigan. ms. stabenow: thank you, mr. president. i would rise to oppose my colleague's amendment. the relate thank you for us that american agricultural exports are the only real area where we have a surplus right now, and we want to continue that. the current program that the senator is speaking about is all about exports. it's all about jobs. for every $1 invested in this particular market access program, $35 is generated back in economic activity. i think that's a pretty good investment. we know that a very important part of the future, not only for our traditional production agricultural parts of the country but for smaller, value-added food products really is in exports. and this supports that. and so i would reserve the balance of my time. mr. coburn: mr. president? the presiding officer: the

senator from oklahoma. mr. coburn: i would assume by the chairman's response that she supports the $20 million that went into a reality tv show in india to purchase cotton other than made in the united states. that's where $20 million of it went. that's what's wrong with this program. i'm not objecting to the fact that we ought to have market access programs, but when we're wasting $20 million on something that has no connection whatsoever with american agriculture products -- the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. ms. stabenow: mr. president, let me say again, and i'm not familiar -- i know we're trying to redevelop an american denim industry -- the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. ms. stabenow: -- we're trying to support our cotton industry -- the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. ms. stabenow: i would urge a no vote. mr. coburn: i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll.

vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? if not, on this vote, the yeas

are 30, the nays are 69. the amendment is not agreed to. the senator from oklahoma is recognized. mr. coburn: i'd ask that amendment 2293 be called up. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from oklahoma, mr. coburn, proposes amendment numbered 223. mr. coburn: i would ask unanimous consent that the amendment be considered as read. the presiding officer: without objection. burn this is mr. coburn: this iy straightforward amendment. last year the department of agriculture paid $10 million to two different individuals that had adjusted gross income over $1 million through a waiver granted through the department of agriculture. both of these were ineligible, but we give the department of agriculture the right to waive that. what this amendment would do would be to restrict that right for a waiver for people making more than $1 million a year in

terms of conservation payments, and i would put into the record my entire statement, if i may, mr. president -- the presiding officer: without objection. mr. coburn: -- and also note that there's nothing wrong with conservation programs, but most often these payments are paid in addition to what people are going to do anyway. so what the department of agriculture has done well over $180 million to millionaires through our conservation payment on programs they would have otherwise done themselves. so i would -- the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. mr. coburn: thank the chair. ms. stabenow: mr. president, i would just indicate that the conservation program is a very strong, effective program but i'm not objecting, nor is the ranking member, to moving forward with the vote. i believe the member would like to have a record roll call, is that correct? so we would ask -- i would yield back timed and ask for a record roll call vote. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be.

there is. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber who wish to vote or

change a vote? if not, on this vote the yeas are 63. the nays 36. the amendment is agreed to. ms. stabenow: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: i would call up my amendment 2453 and ask unanimous consent to add senator snowe as a cosponsor. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from michigan, mrs. stabenow, proposes amendment number 2453. ms. stabenow: i would ask further reading be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. stabenow: thank you very much. this amendment simply addresses what has happened with severe and devastating freezes across the country for those who have crops that don't have crop insurance. we did something similar for livestock in drought areas yesterday, allowing them to buy into a program for 2012 that is in the bill.

this would simply allow those in the states that are affected to buy in to a program we have called the noninsurance assistance program, that allows them to get some kind of help for the freezes. and i believe that we can move forward on a voice vote. the presiding officer: is there further debate on the amendment? if not, all in favor say aye. those opposed, no? the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the amendment is agreed to.

without objection.

a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts. mr. kerry: mr. president, i call up amendment number 2454, my amendment together with senator lugar. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from massachusetts, mr. kerry, proposes amendment number 2454. mr. kerry: mr. president, i ask further reading be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. kerry: mr. president, the

kerry-lugar amendment is a side-by-side amendment frankly. it's an amendment that you will counter the amendment -- it's an amendment that will counter the amendment of the senator from arizona, senator kyl, whose amendment we all join in in abhorring the conduct of the government of north korea. nobody contests that. the question here is whether you want to have a complete prohibition on any humanitarian assistance without the possibility of a presidential waiver in the event that the president as a matter of national policy, as a matter of our humanitarian policy, decides that something has changed in korea or there is behavior that has been altered in korea. as in burma, if you don't have the presidential waiver, the kyl amendment permanently locks in until there is other congressional action, a complete prohibition on any humanitarian

assistance to the people. not the government, but the people -- the children and families of korea. ronald reagan -- the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. mr. kerry: -- he said a hungry child knows no politics. i believe we ought to uphold that principle and have the presidential waiver in this particular case. mr. kyl: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from arizona. mr. kyl: i oppose the kerry amendment and would hope it could be defeated and my amendment would be adopted. he has correctly characterized the amendment as prohibiting food aid to north korea, but it is not just about abhorring north korea's bad behavior. it's about also dealing with the administration's bad behavior. on four separate occasions the state department assured members of this united states senate that food aid would not be used as a condition to the negotiations with the north koreans. under no circumstances would the united states provide any incentives or rewards, as the way they put it, to north korea. in each case we inquired we specifically talked about the food aid.

four times they said it wouldn't be done. two weeks before the negotiations were to begin this spring, all of a sudden $240 million in food aid is put on the table and only because the north koreans launched their so-called satellite long-range missile were those negotiations canceled. mr. president, a national security interest that can simply be provided by the president based on his views -- the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. mr. kyl: -- does not solve the problem. mr. kerry: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts. mr. kerry: there is much to counter that but we don't have to do it, but i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote: the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber who wish to vote or to change a vote? if not, on this vote the yeas are 59, the nays are 40. the amendment is agreed to. a senator: mr. president?

the presiding officer: without objection. the senator from arizona. mr. kyl: let me call up my amendment, which is number 2354 and ask for its consideration. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from arizona, mr. kyl, proposes amendment numbered 2354. mr. kyl: mr. president, and colleagues, what i said before on a four separate occasions over a couple of months the emergencies had assured members of the senate it would not use food aid as an enticement to the north koreans to come to the negotiating table. comments like i had no intention of rewarding them for the actions their government has already agreed to take. reaffirm there are no financial incentives to engage in talks. secretary of secretary state bill burns. to be clear, the administration will not provide any financial

incentives on the negotiations and further, any engagement with north korea will not be used as a mechanism to funnel financial reports. we heard media reports and quote, these media reports are not accurate. the u.s. policy toward north korea has not changed, we have no intention of rewarding north korea and a mere three weeks later we do exactly the opposite. that's why a waiver for the president to say otherwide doesn't do any good and i urge my resolution which simply prevents the administration from providing food aid to north korea. mr. kerry: colleagues, there's an -- mr. president, there's an important distinction here. if you're going to provide humanitarian assistance in some circumstance and the administration made good on its promise to do that, it's hard to separate it from events as they are going forward that you don't control. no matter who's president, the

united states senate should not tie the hands of any president with respect to this policy. ronald reagan said it best when he said very clearly that a hungry child knows no politics. that was ronald reagan's policy. that's the policy of churches all across our country. and the fact is that if the kyl amendment were to pass you would have tied the hands of any president on a sensitive national security issue where the president deserves that kind of flexibility. without a national interest waiver you lock into -- in place, what if suddenly had you a change like in burma? you'd be locked in and unable to respond it to. the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. mr. kerry: the president has shown flexibility. the president ought to have flexibility here. i hope we will not have a total prohibition on humanitarian assistance. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be.

the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: is there any senator in the chamber who wishes to vote or change their vote? if not, on this vote, the yeas are 43, the nays are 56. the amendment is not agreed to. without objection, so ordered.

the senator from colorado is recognized. mr. udall: mr. president, i want to call up my amendment 2295. the clerk: the senator from colorado, mr. udall, proposes an amendment numbered 2295. the presiding officer: two minutes of debate. the senator from colorado is recognized for one minute. mr. udall: mr. president, i have offered this amendment along with my colleague, senator thune, from south dakota. it's a commonsense amendment that would increase resources to land managers to address insect and disease epidemics that are spreading across our forests while maintaining -- and this is an important point -- the farm bill's more than $23 billion in mandatory savings. this epidemic which is in many, many states has left dangerous and dying stands of trees that worsen the threat from forest fires. it's particularly evident in my home state of colorado as we stand here today. we have an 86-square-mile fire, more than 1,600 brief firefighters are challenging this blaze. it's already the most destructive in colorado history. we have lost hundreds of homes

and we won't fully bring this fire to ground for a number of additional weeks. the forest service, mr. president, has a goal of doubling the amount of acres they want to treat next year. this would help them reach that goal. if we don't pass the amendment, they wouldn't have the wherewithal and the resources to do so. i ask my colleagues to support this bipartisan amendment. the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. who yields time in opposition? who yields time in opposition? the senator from kansas. mr. roberts: mr. president, i'm not going to speak in opposition to the amendment, but i do want the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: is there any senator in the chamber who wishes to vote or change their vote? if not, the ayes are 77, the nays are 22. the amendment is adopted. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from utah is recognized. mr. lee: i call my amendment 2313. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: the senator from utah, mr. lee, proposes an amendment numbered 2313. the presiding officer: there will be two minutes of debate. the senator from utah is recognized for one minute. mr. lee: mr. president, i've reduced this amendment to repeal the forest legacy program. this is a program that is designed to protect lands in the

united states of america. now, it's important to remember that the federal government is already a massive landowner and has abundant programs already in place to try to conserve that land, to protect it. the federal government owns about two-thirds of the land in my own state. it owns nearly 30% of the land mass within the territorial boundaries of the united states of america. we do a lot to conserve that land but when we use this money, money estimated to amount to about $200 million a year in authorization, about a billion dollars over a five-year period. we're using that money to take land out of use. we're using that money to pay people not to use their land for anything. whenever we look for areas in which we could save, one area where we should save is to pay people not to use their land. the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. who yields in opposition? the senator from vermont. mr. leahy: mr. president, i strongly disagree. this legacy program affects almost every one of us in our

states for more than two decades it's led to the conservation of 2.2 million acres of forest land in 49 states. the national association of forest owners estimates this supports more than 2.9 million jobs, contributes $115 billion annually to the gross domestic product, and doesn't use taxpayers' dollars. it takes a small percentage of oil drilling receipts from the land and water conservation fund. our forests are under attack by real estate development and others. we really need this. we're going toluide lose up to 75 million acres of forestland over the next century. this at least allows us to make sure that the forests we keep are not fragmented. a lot of -- every single senator in this body benefits from this program. the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. the question is on amendment

2313. mr. lee: i call for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: is there any senator who wishes to vote or change their vote? if not, the ayes are 21. the nays are 77. the amendment is not agreed to. mr. leahy: move to reconsider. move to lay on the table. the presiding officer: without

objection. the majority leader is recognized. could i ask everyone's cooperation. senators please take their seats. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: right now we have 34 amendments left plus final passage. that's 11 hours. i was hoping we could dispose of quite a few of these on voice. but that hasn't worked out very well. we've had a number of people who have offered to have their votes by voice, but those were objected to. we have to finish this bill. we have to do flood insurance this week. and i know people have schedules. we have all kinds of things going on. but we have to have, show a little bit of understanding about the ordeal we have ahead of us.

now i'm confident that we're not going to stay here until 2:00 this morning but we're going to stay here awhile, because until we have a way of finishing this bill that is set in stone, we're going to have to proceed forward on this. this is an important piece of legislation. but also flood insurance is an extremely piece of legislation. if we don't complete that by the end of this month there will be thousands and thousands of people who cannot close their loans every day. not a month. every day. with the economy in the state that it's in now, we need to close every loan, every home that's purchased, every commercial piece of property that's bought. we have to close those now. we can't tell the american people, we tried to get it done, but we couldn't because we were whatever. so people have indicated they want to get out of here early tonight. the -- i will be happy to debate

that subject with them. mr. president, we need to show some cooperation here. we have two of the finest senators we could have managing this bill. let's work together and get this done. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from virginia. mr. warner: mr. president, i ask to call up amendment 2457 and ask the clerk to report. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: the senator from virginia, mr. warner, proposes amendment number 2457. mr. warner: i further ask that the amendment be modified with the changes at the desk. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection, so ordered. there will be two minutes of debate. the senator from virginia is recognized for one minute. mr. warner: mr. president, this is a broad bipartisan amendment. warner-crapo-kirk-shaheen-bennet -webb. it accelerates access to those areas that are underserved. we have a 2009 usda i.g.a. report that shows many loans

that went toward underserved communities. it creates greater access in transparency. these are items brought forward from the g.a.o. and the i.g.a. at the usda and c.r.s. third, it also allows greater levels of accountability in ensuring that those states that correct -- that collect data by address, that that information is relayed to r.u.s. so we don't have counties where a certain part of the county is served and other parts of the county are left unserved. it has broad support of the u.s. conference of catholic bishops, national taxpayers unions and the legal of rural voters. i'd ask bipartisan support of this amendment. the presiding officer: who yields time in opposition? the senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: i'm not yielding time in opposition. i want to commend senator warner and everyone on this amendment for the tremendous amount of work. it's a bipartisan amendment. it makes a tremendous amount of sense. it's real reform. i would -- i believe we have an

understanding to proceed with a voice vote on this amendment. the presiding officer: the question is on the adoption of amendment 2457. if there is no further debate, all those in favor signify by saying aye. opposed nay. the ayes appear to have it. the amendment is adopted as modified. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from alaska. mr. begich: i would like the record to reflect that if there had been a roll call vote i would have voted "no" on this item. a senator: mr. president? mr. president? i would like to also be recorded as having voted "no" if there had been a roll call vote. a senator: mr. president, i would too. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from utah is recognized. mr. lee: mr. president, i call up my amendment number 2314 which is at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: the senator from utah mr. lee proposes amendment number 2314. the presiding officer: there

will be two minutes of debate. the senator from utah is recognized for one minute. mr. lee: mr. president i propose 2314 to repeal the conservation reserve program and conservation stewardship program. we have another instance of the federal government paying people not to use their land. in this circumstance, they're being paid not to grow crops on their land, not to use agriculture land. we have an almost $16 trillion debt. c.b.o. says that this amendment would save over $15 billion in mandatory spending over ten years. national doing something is something that should be free. only the federal government would try to defend the practice of spending billions and billions of dollars -- the presiding officer: the senator will suspend for one moment. we're having a hard time hearing the senator. please, if the members would cooperate, take the conversations out of the well. the senator from utah is

recognized. mr. lee: only the federal government would rye to defend the -- would try to defend the barbaric, outmoded practice of paying people billions and billions of dollars not to use their land. that's what these programs do. we need to get rid of them. that's why i propose this amendment. i invite my colleagues to join me in supporting it. mr. kyl: who yields time in opposition? the senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: mr. president, i strongly oppose this amendment. we have over 643 conservation environmental groups supporting our consvation reforms in this bill from every state in the union. this is about protecting land and water and air, habitat, wetlands, ducks unlimited are a huge supporter of what we've been doing. let me say the conservation reserve program which has been in place for 25 years was shown last year with a drought to have had a tremendous effect. we saw some of the worst droughts on record since the dust bowl in the last number of

months, but yet we didn't have another dust bowl. and that's because the c.r.p. prevented erosion and the soil stayed where it should stay. this is about our country, protecting our land, resources for our children and our grandchildren. i would strongly urge a "no" vote. the presiding officer: the question is on amendment 2314. all those in favor signify by saying aye. opposed nay. the noes appear to have it. the noes have it. the senator from utah. is there a sufficient second? at this moment there is not a sufficient second. is there a sufficient second?

there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators wishing to vote or to change their vote? seeing none, the yeas are 15, the nays are 84. the amendment fails. ms. stabenow: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: thank you. i move to reconsider and lay it on the table. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. stabenow: thank you, mr. president. before moving with senator wyden, we want to go back to an agreed upon amendment for a voice vote, schumer 2427, deals with the small focus effort to increase research and education

promotion, and i would ask that we move forward with a voice vote. excuse me. i need to call up the amendment. i apologize. 2427 is the amendment. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from michigan, ms. stabenow, for mr. schumer, proposes amendment numbered 2427. ms. stabenow: i would yield back all time. the presiding officer: if there is no further debate, all in favor say aye. all opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the amendment is agreed to. ms. stabenow: i would ask at this point, mr. president -- i appreciate senator wyden allowing us to go out of order -- or come back into order, i should say. we would now turn to senator wyden for his amendment. mr. wyden: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. wyden: mr. president, i call up my farm to school amendment

2388. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from oregon, mr. wyden, proposes amendment numbered 2388. mr. wyden: i ask that further reading be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. wyden: mr. president, the american academy of pediatrics, the country's pediatricians, is recommending to the united states senate that this amendment be passed to encourage healthier foods for our kids. and the congressional budget office has stated that this amendment has no cost. this rammed would for the first time test out farm-to-school programs through a competitive pilot project with at least five farm-to-school demonstration projects, so it would be possible to fill in the information void about what works and what doesn't. the agriculture department's own economic research service reports -- and i quote here --

"data and analysis of farm-to-school programs is scarce." under this amendment, the schools win, the farmers win, the taxpayers win and i do hope we can take it on a voice vote. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: i would yield back all time and we do have agreement on a voice vote. the presiding officer: all time is yielded back. the question is on amendment 2388. all those in favor say aye. all those opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the amendment is agreed to. a senator: mr. president? mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from arkansas. mr. boozman: i call up amendment 2355 which is at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from arkansas, mr. boozman, proposes amendment numbered 2355. mr. boozman: mr. president, the

farms and ranches and forests of the united states are impacted by complex and rapidly evolveling web of international, federal, state and local laws, the vast agricultural community of the united states including farmers, ranchers, foresters, attorneys, policymakers and extension personnel need access to agricultural and food law research and information provided by an objective, scholarly and neutral source. this amendment includes the secretary of ag acting through the national agricultural library to get the information out by entering into partnerships with institutions of higher education that have expertise in this area. the amendment does not authorize a new program or increase the authorization for the national ag library. again, c.b.o. says it has no cost and i would urge a voice vote in the affirmative. i yield back. ms. stabenow: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: i strongly support

this amendment, as does our -- my ranking member and i want to congratulate senator boozman on great work on this amendment, and i believe that we can proceed with a voice vote. the presiding officer: the question is on amendment number 2355. if there is no further debate, all he those in favor say aye. all those opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the amendment is agreed to. mr. wyden: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. wyden: i would call up amendment number 2442, mr. president. the clerk: the senator from oregon, mr. wyden, proposes amendment numbered 2442. mr. wyden: i ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. wyden: again, i hope we can handle this on a voice vote.

this is an amendment that would help the gleaners all across the country who, of course, are the volunteers, they're volunteers, who help across america get the food that is now being wasted and get it out to the hungry. at senior centers and at various kinds of food kitchens and other critical programs. 34 million tons of food and food waste is generated each year. that could feed a lot of people. and the gleaners are trying to come together to make sure that this perfectly good food goes on the plates of struggling americans as opposed to millions of pounds of it going into landfills and incinerators. this amendment, again, costs no money, it simply --. the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired.

mr. wyden: to finish the sentence, it allows them to collect the food. i hope we can do it on a voice vote. mr. roberts: i hope my colleagues would, it provides government loans for bricks and mortar projects including food refrigeration capacity, we're talking about big refrigerators, at a time we're trying to streamline programs, i'm concerned we would be expanding the size to serve a new pool of applicants competing for very limited resources at the department of agriculture, and in this regard the gleaners would be teen to the cleaners. i encourage -- taken to the cleaners. i urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment. mr. wyden: has time expired? the presiding officer: time in opposition remains. mr. wyden: this costs no additional money. senator stabenow supports it.

the presiding officer: all time in support has expired. ms. stabenow: i strongly support the amendment. the presiding officer: is there further debate in opposition? if there is no further debate, all in favor say aye. all those opposed, no. the noes appear to have it. is there a sufficient second? is there a sufficient second? there is not a sufficient second at this time. mr. roberts: mr. president, could i ask for a division vote.

i would like to ask for a division vote. the presiding officer: all those in favor, stand and be counted. all those in favor, stand to be counted. would all those now opposed stand and be counted. the presiding officer: the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the amendment is agreed to.

the senate will come to order. the presiding officer: the senator from arkansas. mr. boozman: mr. president, i send a modification to the desk of my amendment. 2360. the presiding officer: is there objection to the modification?

the senator from rhode island. the senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: sorry, mr. president. we were in discussions and i would ask for -- at this moment if we might just pause. we will just object for a -- for a moment. object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. the senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: we're now told this has been reviewed so we have no objection. to proceeding to it. the presiding officer: the senator needs to call up the -- mr. boozman: mr. president, i call up amendment 2360 as modified. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report the the clerk will report the amendment as modified.

the clerk: the senator from arkansas, mr. boozman, proposes amendment numbered 2360 as modified. mr. boozman: my amendment redirects funding currently going to states for good administration of the snap program. it puts this money in the tfat program which provides funding for the secretary of agriculture to make commodity purchases given to food banks. i'm sure that my colleagues are aware of the difficult situation in our food banks right now. they're under immense pressure in these very difficult economic times. the importance of the tfat program is it provides food banks with commodities. this amendment takes money currently used to encourage the states to do something that they ought to be doing anyway and reinvest in a program that actually provides food to americans who need it the most. i urge a yes vote and yield back

my time. ms. stabenow: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: thank you, mr. president. i reluctantly rise to oppose my colleague's amendment. i appreciate what he's trying to do. i couldn't agree more about the needs of food -- food banks. that's why in this legislation we increase food bank funding by $174 million. the pblem is the way the senator wants to do this is by reducing the funding available to stop food stamp fraud efforts. it would reduce the snap error rate efforts and right now what has been done to tackle waste, fraud, and abuse has actually reduced error rates dramatically by 43%. we want to keep that going. so i certainly support what he's trying to do, but not taking money away from waste, fraud, and abuse efforts within the food assistance program. so i would have to ask for a no vote.

the presiding officer: all time has expired. mr. boozman: mr. president, i ask --. the presiding officer: the question is on amendment 2360. mr. boozman: mr. president, i ask for a recorded vote. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? seeing none, the yeas are 35. the nays are 63. and one is "present" -- votes "present." the amendment is not passed.

mr. leahy: mr. president in. the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. leahy: mr. president, i call -- i move to -- the presiding officer: could we have order in the house -- in the senate, please. mr. leahy: move to reconsider. mr. reid: lay it on the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. leahy: mr. president, i call up my amendment number 2204. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: mr. leahy proposes an amendment numbered 2204. mr. leahy: i ask that further reading be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. there will now be two minutes of debate equally divided. mr. leahy: mr. president, it is very simple. it is a state rural development councils. reauthorizes the state council's on-the-ground leadership. it does not cost a single farm dollar. it maintains the state's statutory authority and i would

urge all norse to support this amendment. -- all senators to support this amendment. the presiding officer: the nuclear from michigan. ms. stabenow: i first want to commend senator leahy, who as a former chairman of the agricultural committee, is just a tremendous champion, not only for vermont but for the entire country on these issues. i would yield back the time. i believe we have agreement for a voice vote. the presiding officer: if there is no further debate, all in favor say aye. all opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the amendment is adopted. without objection. nor senator mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from pavement. mr. toomey: mr. president, i would like to call up amendment 2226, which is at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: mr. toomey proposes amendment numbered 2226. mr. toomey: and -- the presiding officer: there will now be two minutes of debate equally divided.

mr. toomey: thank you, mr. president. this is an amendment that repeals the biorefinery assistance program. this is a program that primarily provides loan guarantees to cellulosic ethanol plants. mr. president, the fact of the matter is, the taxpayers are already subsidizing ethanol plants in many, many ways. the federal government already provides a tax credit of $1 a gallon to ethanol. the federal government creates a mandate that forces consumers to buy this product, whether they want to or not, thereby creating a market for eth nothing. we provide -- for ethanol. we provide grants for ethanol. do taxpayers really have to also risk their money by guaranteeing loans to subdice this activity -- to subsidize this activity? i don't think so that's a good idea. this is the same idea that got us into trouble in so many ways. a similar loan program was the source of hundreds of millions of dollars of losses to solyndra. just this year this very program cost $40 million with the

bankruptcy of range fuel. so i urge my colleagues to vote for a modest reform here, repeal this one narrow program, the biorefinery assistance program. and i urge a "yes" vote. ms. stabenow: mr. president, i strongly oppose this amendment. and in fact we're not talking about ethanol. we're talking about, first of all, advanced biofuels being -- using food waste or animal waste or biomass materials, we're talking about bio-based manufacturing which is an exciting new opportunity to bring -- making things and growing things together in a country, whether it is corn or wheat by-products, whether it is soybeans. in fact, if you drive a ford vehicle today, a new vehicle or new chevy volt you're sitting on soy-based foam in the seats. biodegradable, better fuel economy, grown by american soybean growers. this is an opportunity of new growth in jobs that's in this

bill. it's a part i'm very excited about for the future for every part of this country. it involves more than 3,000 innovative companies right now engaging in new cutting-edge manufacturing to use -- the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. ms. stabenow: -- to get us off foreign oil. i urge a "no" vote. the presiding officer: the question is on the amendment. all those in favor say aye. all those opposed, no. the noes appear to have it. is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any other senators wishing to vote or change their vote? seeing none, the ayes are 36, the nays are 63. the amendment is not adopted.

the presiding officer: the senator from nebraska. the senate will be in order. mr. nelson: i rise to call up my amendment numbered 2242 addressing rural housing. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from nebraska, mr. nelson, proposes amendment numbered 2242. mr. nelson: i ask that further reading be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. there will now be two minutes of debate equally divided. mr. nelson: this amendment would ensure that rural communities in all of our states remain eligible for housing assistance from the department of agriculture. my amendment simply extends the grandfathering clause that these communities have operated under since 1990 and ensures that these communities remain eligible through 2020. this is a bipartisan amendment supported by my colleagues,

senator johanns, senator moran, the chairman of the banking committee, senator johnson and my good friend and neighbor, senator tester. i urge the adoption of my amendment. thank you, mr. president. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from nebraska. mr. johanns: mr. president, i rise to take ten seconds to support my colleague's amendment from nebraska. it does keep in place a program that dates back to 1990. it's a good amendment. ms. stabenow: mr. president? i want to commend both senators from nebraska. certainly senator nelson for this amendment. i strongly support it. i believe we have agreement for a voice vote on this amendment. i would yield back all time. the presiding officer: hearing no further debate, all those in

favor say aye. all those opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the amendment is agreed to. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. toomey: madam president, i call up amendment 2433. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from pennsylvania, mr. toomey, proposes amendment numbered 2433. the presiding officer: there will be two minutes of debate equally divided. mr. toomey: madam president, i will claim the first minute but yield the first 30 seconds of that minute to the senator from new hampshire. mrs. shaheen: thank you, madam president. i'm pleased to join my colleague from pennsylvania in supporting his amendment. this is the last opportunity for a bipartisan amendment to reform

sugar subsidies that are costing consumers $3.5 billion a year and losing 20,000 jobs a year in this country. this amendment maintains the current sugar program but it rolls back the additional subsidies that were provided to sugar in the 2008 farm bill. mr. toomey: i thank the senator from new hampshire. let me point out that this amendment is such a modest reform, it lowers the price support on raw sugar, for instance, from 18.75 cents a pound all the way down to 18 cents per pound. this is an amendment that will save consumers money, it will save taxpayers money, and most importantly it will save jobs as the department of commerce has pointed out for every job saved by the sugar program, three jobs are lost. it's a modest amendment that simply restores us to the policy prior to 2008. mrs. to be: madam president --

ms. stabenow: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. miss stabenow: if you want to jeopardize 142,000 american jobs, this is the amendment to do it. these jobs will be shipped overseas. the bottom line is this program operates at zero cost to the taxpayers. the congressional budget office says it will continue operating at zero cost for the next ten years. this is about american jobs in american communities all across this country. we're talking about 142,000 jobs, yet we're -- if we're importing cheap sugar at a point where we undermine american jobs, what have we gained? we want to export our products, not our jobs, and that's what this amendment would do. i urge strongly a no vote. the presiding officer: the question is on the amendment.

is there a sufficient second? there appears to be a sufficient second. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators who wish to vote or to change their vote? on this vote, the yeas are 46, the nays are 53. the amendment is not agreed to. the presiding officer: the senator from minnesota is

recognized. ms. klobuchar: mr. president, i call up my amendment 2299. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from minnesota, ms. klobuchar, proposes amendment numbered 2299. ms. klobuchar: i ask that further reading be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. klobuchar: i ask my colleagues to support this bipartisan amendment, senator hoeven of north dakota is a cosponsor. it addresses the transportation needs of rural america. this amendment simply calls for a study on rural transportation and takes a close look at the issue of captive shippers. farmers, energy producers and manufacturers who depend on freight rail service find themselves trapped today in a back to the future world, mr. president, struggling with a problem that has resurfaced from a century ago. many of these end users, these captive customers, have only one railroad to serve them. three decades ago, there were

63 class railroads. today, only seven remain. this amendment simply looks at the effect of this situation on transportation in rural areas. it's supported by nearly 40 national and regional agricultural and energy organizations. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and i'd ask for a voice vote. ms. stabenow: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: i strongly support senator klobuchar's amendment and appreciate her work on this. i yield back all time and it's my understanding we can proceed to a voice vote. the presiding officer: if there is no further debate, all in favor say aye. opposed say no. the ayes have it. the ayes appear to have it, the ayes do have it. the amendment is adopted. mr. lee: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. lee: i have a motion at the

desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from utah, mr. lee, moves to recommit the bill s. 3240 to the committee on agriculture, nutrition and forestry, with instructions to report the same back to the senate with a reduction in spending to 2008 levels so that overall spending shall not exceed 714,247,000,000. the presiding officer: there will be two minutes of debate, equally divided. the senator from utah. mr. lee: i've introduced this motion to recommit to move us back to 2008 levels. we cannot continue to kick this can down the road in perpetuity. our current spending levels threaten to impair -- imperil all of our ability to pay all bills. this would cut the ten-year cost of this bill by $254 billion. we need to do it and we need to send it back to the committee where the committee will have discretion to decide exactly how

to accomplish that. i reserve the balance of my time. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan is recognized. ms. stabenow: madam president, i would strongly oppose this motion to reconsider. -- motion to recommit. i want to read the estimate, this spends $23.6 billion, less than we would project if those programs were continued as under current law. this bill is $23 billion in deficit reduction according to the nonpartisan, independent congress of the united states states -- independent congressional budget office. we believe in agriculture on a bipartisan basis. we have done our job, we have scoured every page, reduced the deficit by $23 billion plus, eliminated 100 different programs and authorizations within our jurisdiction. i think frankly we are offering up within what with we can do reform and deficit reduction

that we should all feel very proud of. mr. lee: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator is recognized. mr. lee: about 20 seconds remaining. if you want to continue on the same budgeting process that's put us nearly $16 trillion in debt, then we can proceed and just vote against this. if, on the other hand, we want to turn this around, maintain our ability to fund essential government programs, we need to pass this. i urge my colleagues to support the motion to recommit. i call for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be a sufficient second. ms. stabenow: if i might have just a second to say this bill turns us in a different direction, $23 billion plus in deficit reduction. it may be the only bipartisan deficit reduction proposal we pass in the senate before the election. i urge a no vote. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll.

vote:

vote:

vote: the presiding officer: are there any senators who wish to vote or to change their vote? on this vote, the yeas are 29. the nays are 70. the amendment is not agreed to. ms. stabenow: madam president?

the presiding officer: the senator from michigan is recognized. ms. stabenow: thank you, madam president. we've been hard at work to pull together some amendments that we can do as a voice vote together, and i would ask unanimous consent that the following amendments which are in order under the consent agreement be agreed to ayotte 2195, blunt 2246, moran 2403, moran 2443, and vitter 2363 as modified with the changes at the desk. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection, so ordered.

mr. carper: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from delaware is recognized. mr. carper: madam president, i call up amendment number 2287 and i ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from delaware carper proposes amendment 2287. mr. carper: madam president, can we have order? the presiding officer: can we please have order for the senator from delaware. there will now be two minutes of debate equally divided. mr. carper: thank you. roughly two-thirds of the cost of raising a chicken is the cost of feed and in recent years the cost of tpao*ed -- feed has risen dramatically raising with it the cost of chicken and other meats in our supermarkets. rising costs placed a strain on the poultry industry, among others, and on consumers too. that's why i've joined with senator boozman in offering an amendment to the bill that improves the digestability and nutritional value of poultry and

livestock including corn, grains and other by-products. by improving the feed used to raise our chickens and livestock, we can provide the poultry and livestock industry with a greater variety of feed choices for their operations, but this research will not only benefit our country's food producers, it also benefits our nation's families by continuing to provide consumers with affordable high-quality food. senator boozman and i urge its adoption. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: madam president, i commend senator carper. i have to say that he's mentioned to me many times that there are 300 chickens for every person in delaware, so i think i have that in my memory now. i want to commend him for his work. we are yielding back time and we have agreed to a voice vote. the presiding officer: if there is no further debate, all those in favor say kwraoeufplt

all those opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. and the amendment is agreed to. a senator: madam president, i have a motion at the desk. the presiding officer: the senator from wisconsin is recognized. the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: the senator from wisconsin mr. johnson, moves to recommit the bill s. 3240 to the committee on agriculture, nutrition and forestry of the senate with instructions to report the same back to the senate after removing the title relating to nutrition and to report to the senate as a separate bill the title related to nutrition. the presiding officer: there will now be two minutes of debate equally divided. the senator from wisconsin. mr. johnson: madam president, this is a pretty straightforward motion. it recommits the bill and would send it back to the committee to have that committee report back

to the full senate two separate bills. it recognizes the reality that what we really have in front of us is not really a farm bill but a food stamp bill. the history here is that in 1964 we made food stamps permanent. in 1973 we combined the food stamp portion with the farm bill to ease passage of both votes. to make it easier to spend money. and that's worked pretty well because when the food stamp bill was first passed it cost $375 million. million dollars per year. and really 500,000 people are eligible. since that point in time it is now going to cost $772 billion over ten years, and it is now 78% the size of this entire package. so again, i think it's more than appropriate to split these bills in two so that both bills -- the food stamp bill and the farm bill -- would get more scrutiny

and be more debate. thank you. the presiding officer: who yields time? is there a sufficient second? the senator from michigan. ms. stabenow: excuse me, madam president. i rise to oppose the motion to recommit. i think after all of the hard work that we've been doing, i'm not sure we want to do it twice this year on a farm bill. but on a more serious note, let me just indicate that again this is major reforms, $23 billion-plus in deficit reduction. it addresses the diversity of agriculture. 16 million jobs in this country are connected to agriculture in every corner of our country, and all of us have a stake in food security. we have the safest, most affordable food supply in the work thanks to a lot of hardworking folks all across this country, and we believe

what we have put forward is something worthy of support. we appreciate all the hard work that everyone's doing, the changes that are being made. but i would urge that we not recommit this bill. mr. johnson: madam president, i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be a sufficient second. the clerk will call the roll. vote: