this article goes on, now the u.s. has given the same pakistan army another pass as it carries out the ethnic cleansing of the indigenous people from their homeland. in response they have taken up arms and are fighting their fifth war of independence since 1948 when the pakistani army invaded and captured the independent and sovereign state of kolate. . we have people in thised a a administration demanding that what they say are indigenous people, despite the fact that the children of israel occupied the promised land, 1,600 years or so -- 1,700 years at least, before a man named muhammad was born. yet there are people who say,

oh, but these palestinians, a name that arose as newt gingrich pointed out in the past 40 or so years, these palestinians are indigenous so you've got to give them their lanl. yet they're not saying it -- land. yet they're not saying it about the people that are being killed and persecuted by pakistan. oh, no. we're helping kill and prosecute the people by giving aid and assistance to a government that's killing and persecuting them. if there is a just god in the universe, would there not be a price for a country as powerful as the united states that continues to support those who , horrify torture innocent people, christians, an , secularists,

oftentimes they're even more brutal to moderate muslims that are not as radical as they think they should be. that'ses why in egypt -- that'ses why in egypt, for those who -- that's why in egypt, for those who really have eyes and ears to hear, we had an incredible event last summer. this was the real arab spring but it came in summer. this is when moderate muslims, christians, jews, secularists rose up, some reports of 30 million, 33 million people, larger than any demonstration in the history of the world, they rose up and said, we don't want radical islamists running egypt. and the radical islamists, the muslim brotherhood, that were controlling egypt, as we knew they would if they had an the ion too quickly, muslim brotherhood became

desperate because they knew to have a new ott monday empire, running -- ottoman empire running arm the mediterranean, that would be the worldwide could not they afford to lose egypt from under their iron fist. so what do they do? they immediately start burning down churches, killing christians particularly, and so many others. that's why i was so encouraged. over 90% of the people voting, which was a higher percentage than we have voting here in the united states, they came out and voted for the new constitution that has been afted under the chairmanship of amir musea. i was very pleased that the chairman was willing to come on the sean hanity radio show a few weeks ago when i was guest it ng for sean hanity and

is really encouraging what's who on in egypt by those want a democratic form of government and who do not want terrorists running egypt. who don't want a worldwide caliphate. who don't like the goal of the muslim brotherhood. who are not as blind to the goal of the muslim brotherhood as the leaders of this administration are. because if one would just go look at one of the symbols used by the muslim brotherhood these crossed find the swords, the signs and wording in their language, denoting the muslim brotherhood, and that is

fixed over a globe of the world . d it's not just egypt, iraq, iran, not just in the former ottoman empire. oh, no. this is fixed over a globe that is revolving and the united states of america passes under those swords of the muss brim brotherhood and -- muslim brotherhood and it is true that the muslim brotherhood here in the united states does not want to utilize violence right now because they've made so much progress into this administration that they're afraid violence right now might do damage. violence in egypt, the same muslim brotherhood feels was necessary because they had just been caught, they had been rejected by moderate muslims, the majority of egyptians.

and they became desperate. so there violence had to occur, christians, according to these radical islamist muslim . others, had to die and so once america starts iguring out that the goal is global caliphate, including the united states, then they will be participating in horrendous violence here as they have in other places in the world. some of our moderate muslim friends in the middle east asked some of us last september , what's wrong with you in america? don't you understand, you call it al qaeda but that's really just an offshoot of the muslim brotherhood, they are the ones that attacked you on 9/11/2001. these are moderate muslims asking these questions.

why do you not understand, yes, it was the taliban, but it's really the muslim brotherhood behind it, that you were at war with in afghanistan? they were the ones that did more killing of americans in iraq and yet you're helping the muslim brotherhood? you're running to their aid and assistance? and in egypt you're demanding that either they put the radical islamists back in charge of egypt or we're not going to provide them the apache helicopters, the tanks, the jets that we were going to provide to the muslim brother leaders of egypt. they asked, what's wrong with you people? what are you not getting? you're helping the people that want to destroy you. people can see that around the world. but here in washington, d.c., it's apparently one of the ardest things to find and see. and we hear people saying, well, we really need all the people's most private information about phone calls,

every phone call they make. we need to have that as part of the government because one time we believe it may have stopped a bombing. well, if this administration would do their homework, they wouldn't need the logs of every phone call of every american, we could go back to what the constitution does require and the courts should require and that is probable cause before you start giving out personal information, before you let the government start monitoring every email of every person in america. because we were promised my freshman term that if the patriot act were extended, specifically section 206 and 215, that that would only apply if someone were in contact with a foreign terrorist. but americans would never have to worry unless they were in

touch with foreign terrorists and then after edward snowden we find out that actually that what they promised was not true. and, yes, that was during the bush administration. i don't care. i don't care if it was a republican or democrat. i don't care where it started. when we find out it's still going on, it's got to stop. we're supposed to have some privacy in this country. and those democrats that were suspicious of the bush administration wanting that much power were right. so where have my friends gone now that it's a democrat administration? i certainly don't have a problem calling out a republican administration had they're not doing the right thing. and i wish my friends across the aisle would do the same thing and join me. what about the boston bombing?

the russians took a huge risk in giving this administration information and saying, look, this guy has been radicalized. and you're letting him back in america. you're headed for trouble. this is a bad guy. they took a risk in giving us that information because when any country gives intelligence to another country, then sometimes it allows that country that gets the information to figure out how that other country is getting intelligence. just by the information they get. and so now we have people here in this administration say, oh, the russians, shame on them, they didn't give us enough information. are you kidding me? they told you a person had been radicalized and when i asked the director of the f.b.i. in our hearing about not even going to the mosques to

vestigate, he says ultimately, yeah, we did go to those mosques and i didn't hear it at the hearing, i didn't hear it until the replay, under our outreach program. under the outreach program? well, that's the f.b.i.'s ridiculous former program where they have special outreach to muslim communities to try to be friends with them. that's not the f.b.i.'s job to be friends with people. it's the f.b.i.'s job to enforce the law and in so doing protect us. and when the older brother came back into this country from a place on the globe where we know radicalization is occurring, and as i understand it, he didn't even have his passport, he had his legal

permanent resident card, he wasn't even pulled aside for extra questions. when when there should have been bells and whistles going off everywhere. all they did basically was talk to him and his mother and they said, no, i'm not radicalized, no my son's not radicalized. they didn't go to the mosque and start requesting questions that would tell them, has he been reading the author, the muss brim brother from the 1960's that was involved in trying to commit assassinations and other terrorist activities, and he wrote a booklet called milestones that osama bin laden credits with helping turn him radical. if you know about the people that hate you and want to destroy you, then you can ask intelligent questions to find out if someone is your enemy. but because of the purge of training materials at the

f.b.i., the intelligence departments, at the state department, as one intelligence officer told me, we can't even -- we're blinded to our ability to see our enemy because there was a young man who wanted to kill innocent americans at a boston marathon and they got a heads up from the russians, they got all the information right before them that they could possibly need and we don't even stop him coming into this country after he's been radicalized? what more did you need? we didn't need -- we shouldn't have needed a heads up from the russians. all the signs were there. for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear. but we were so busy in our outreach program to a mosque that was founded by a -- the islamic society of boston, that's the founder of which is a man namedal amudey who is in

prison today for 24 years, i believe, for supporting terrorism. despite all the assistance he allegedly gave to the clinton administration, helping them find good muslims to help in that administration. after 9/11, a couple years or determined , it's that he's been supporting terrorism and now he's in federal prison. a man who this president ordered a drone strike on in yemen, though he was an american citizen, because his parents came over on a visa to study, had him, he's an american citizen, they take him back to gemen -- yemen, he learns to hate america, comes back and works on radicalizing americans, except of course when he led prayers of muslim staff members here on capitol this ut otherwise

president determined he needed to be killed without a trial because he radicalized americans and he was a threat to this country. he had attended the boston mosque where the boston bombers attended. . i mean, how many heads up notices do you need to figure out you have a problem and innocent americans are going to be killed and maimed as they were in boston? it's time to wake up. d yet we get this story from apuzzo, this is from the

associated press, january 15, the u.s. to expand use limiting use of profiling by federal agents. the attorney general who came here last night sat here for the state of the union address while he is in contempt of congress, while he's being lawless and not following the law and providing information while -- they wouldn't even give me all of the documents that they provided to convicted terrorists in the homeland -- holy land foundation trial in dallas. i've asked repeatedly. we finally got a letter many months after the request basically saying, we'll give you the 500 or so documents that were entered into evidence in the trial and we got some others you can come look at. i still don't understand, mr. speaker, if they will give

boxes and boxes of information to the terrorists who are convicted ultimately as terrorists, why can't you give that to members of congress? is it because the convictions occurred in 2008 under the bush administration? and then this justice department came in and stopped any further prosecutions from going forward even though there were a couple hundred or so named co-conspirators in that case that were unindicted, and my understanding from former justice department folks is the plan was if they could get the first convictions, then they would move forward with more and continue to follow up until they got this network that was allegedly supporting terrorism. we know five of them were supporting terrorism.

could it be that this justice department doesn't want us to see all the documents that they rovided to the terrorists that actually show they are terrorists, could that be the reason they don't want members f congress to see because then we might realize, wow, they convicted those five in 2008 under president bush, they could surely gotten a lot more convictions if they just used this same evidence? oh, sure, congressman gohmert, come over here and we'll show you some of the documents. we'll let you see some of the electronic versions. you gave them to terrorists, for heaven's sakes. you can't give them to me so i can look at them in my office? unbelievable what is going on ere.

kerry story from picket. it starts, dianne feinstein, chairman of the intelligence committee told breitbart, that a c.i.a. annex existed in benghazi, libya, before the september, 2012, attack which took the lives of four u.s. citizens. feinstein could not confirm if other members of congress knew about the c.i.a. annex prior to the attack. senator feinstein, we disagree on many things, but i know she wants best -- what's best for america even though we have staunch political disagreements on how we do that and what that is. of that nature, my

understanding, would have been -- it would have been required that the supereight, as it's sometimes referred to, the top republican and democrat on intelligence committee in the house and in the senate and the republican leader in the house, democratic leader in the house, democratic leader in the senate, republican leader in the senate, they are supposed to be briefed. and yet senator feinstein said, i didn't know -- i didn't know at the s a c.i.a. annex benghazi consulate. what else is this administration doing to help in ls that include al qaeda libya, what else is it doing that it's not following the law and briefing the people that

are required to be briefed in congress? i heard the president, standing here last night, get applause when he in essence says, if congress doesn't change the law , then i will do it. and he got applause. when the thinking people, you hearsay if congress doesn't do what's necessary, which is required by the constitution, i will do it, sounds like i'm going to chunk the constitution and do what i think is best. now, i've read about those situations, countries that had a fair and representative form of government, ancient greece, ancient rome had senates. they were somewhat representative. there have been types of representative governments, and

you'd always find that eventually people had that desire for one rock-solid leader. they get tired of the disagreements because one of the english leaders had said, may have been churchill, democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others. it isn't a pretty thing to watch, as has been said. it's like watching sausage being made. and yet when you strip away the checks and balances that the founders put in place to keep one executive officer from just ing whatever he wanted, then you don't have a democratic republic as we are supposed to have. you have one man making the rules or one woman making the rules. it's time america woke up and realize their constitutional , and are at severe risk

we're at risk as a result. i wanted to mention something happened here at the state of the union. got the ul young man longest best applause of the evening here as the president recognized cory sitting up here. but in addition to cory and the hero that that dear man is, i could see other uniformed people. in fact, there were some uniformed people up in that section up there, one of whom was not cory but was alonzo. the president didn't recognize

alonzo. alonzo was a staff sergeant at fort hood that nadal hassan, who people kept looking the other way, kept giving him good officer evaluation reports because they didn't want to be deemed to be profiling or doing something that was considered racist when the man made clear over and over that he was going to have to take action, violent action against his country if they tried to ship him over and order him to fight muslims overseas. i didn't get to meet alonzo last night. i looked up, waved a few times, but i have great respect for that man and he deserves so much better than he's been treated. was shot six times, and apparently, while he was lying

with six bullets in him, he realizes as the shooting continues by major hassan that he's not going to be able to pass off as dead because he's sweating protuesdayly and as he said, -- profusely and he said dead people don't sweat and he took off and that's when he got shot and lost one of his eyes and this administration has prevented alonzo from getting the benefits he deserved because of an act of war, an act of terrorism. he's not even considered at the .evel of the 9/11 victims akbar, and he knew it wasn't going to go well, and before they heard him

before it began knew it wasn't workplace violence. this wasn't a postal employee going postal. this was a radical islamist carrying out a war against what they consider to be infidels in america. and they deserve to be treated as victims of an act of war and an act against them as the uniformed military and get the benefits coming to them. that's what should have happened. we heard the references last night to the health care and it seemed like the applause started when he said they're helping reform health care and then it died so quickly they must have realized, ooh, i don't want to be clapping for the reform of health care when people are hurting across america who've lost their

americans. people like me that like their insurance but obamacare says your insurance policy's not good enough. so i lost it. thank you very much. there are people in really tough shape around america that deserve better health care than what obamacare is doing to them. well, there were so many things in the state of the union address. talking about raising the minimum wage with federal contractors with the stroke of a pen, i mean, how many other laws does the president want to pass with the stroke of a pen? it's not constitutional to make laws with one man's pen. that's not the democratic , ublic we're supposed to be

and there was even sounded like snickering when he said that. he didn't talk about the millions that had lost their insurance as a result of obamacare. if it was only about trying to ensure that 30 million people who reportedly didn't have health insurance, they had health care, they didn't have insurance, then let's direct it at those. let's don't take millions and millions of americans' insurance away in the process. and as far as illegal immigration, one of the newspapers in my district, longview, had an article, an op-ed were they were saying i was opposed to immigration reform. obviously they read the left-wing blogs and don't read and talk to me and understand what i've said repeatedly. we desperately need immigration reform in america, but every

time anybody here starts talking about legal status, amnesty as the i.c.e. agents and i.c.e. union representatives have told us repeatedly, more people try to rush into the united states, more people die trying to come across the desert, more people get -- fall in to human trafficking and a horrible life . my position has been clear for anyone who cares to see, hear, and it's supported by so many other republicans. mr. president has the money. he's got the wherewithal. he has the manpower to secure our border. as soon as it's secured, as verified by the border states, we will come to an immigration reform bill so fast people won't be able to believe it. but until the president enforces existing law, there is

no sense in talking about it and luring more people to their deaths, more people in here control the border. secure it. don't close it. we need more water flowing into this pond. but secure it so we know who is coming in. so when people are here without valid visas, we need to pick them up. we have nearly 40% to 50% empeople who came here -- who had are here illegally came here legally and overstayed their visas. don't let tsarnaev back in when he doesn't have a passport. and there are all kinds of indications he's now a terrorist. don't let him in. we could have done without that one. secure the border, we'll get an immigration reform bill done immediately after that. but before that, there's no

reason to expect the president will ever secure the border. and with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman have a motion? mr. gohmert: at this time i move that the house do now hereby adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly the house stands adjourned until 3:00 p.m. on friday, january 31, 2014.

for 2014. and coming up next, we'll show you some of the debate from the house floor on the farm bill, passing 254-156. this morning's debate is an hour and 10 minutes. ntleman is . mr. lucas: thank you, mr. speaker. my colleagues, this has been a long and seemingly epic journey that the house agriculture committee that is been upon. mr. peterson, myself, our colleagues literally three years -- actually four when you consider the beginning hearings under then chairman peterson, to start this process. we have all discussed the

details. we'll discuss the details more in greater length in just a moment on this final conference report that reflects the net result of both the senate and house work. but i would say this, whatever your feelings might be about the policy issues involved within the bill, understand this formal conference that's now come to a conclusion, soon i hope to be tified by the body, reflects at the committee level, at the floor level in the house, and i think in the conference level how legislation should be put together. many people criticize us and this body as dysfunctional. but if they look at all of the amendments we considered every time we took the farm bill up in the committee, all of the debate, all of the discussion, if they consider the amazing amount of amendments we considered on the floor of the

united states house and all the debate and discussion and votes, if they take note of how long and how much effort the principals and the conferees put in to putting this conference report together, they would understand that this bill, while everyone may not agree with every line, every word, every policy in it, this bill reflects , unlike almost any that have been done for years, how it should be done. good men and women of different opinion working to get to a final product. i hope this reflects a change in how we'll do our business here across the board. but i'm proud of what we have done and i'm proud of how we have done t i'm proud of the reforms and savings. i'm proud of my ranking member and all my colleagues who have been involved. reserve the balance of my time, mr. speaker.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oklahoma reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from minnesota is recognized. mr. peterson:thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. peterson:today as the chairman said after nearly four years of work the house is finally considering the 2014 farm bill conference report. it's been a challenging and frustrating process. i think everybody will agree. but through it the ag committee persevered and we do what we have always done, work together. the report before us today represents a compromise. i know this is rare in washington, but that's what needed to actually get something done around this place. i didn't get everything i wanted. the chairman didn't get everything he wanted. that's how the compromise works. for example, there's been a lot of discussion about dairy, but we are moving away from the olet dairy program to a new program that -- from the old dairy program to a new program that is much more sensible, that has market signals in it to deal

with overproduction. the only question i have is whether they are going to be strong enough. we'll find out as we go through the process. in the body title i'm still disappointed we didn't go to 500 acres t would have been the smart thing to dofment but wasn't to be. at the end of the day i believe my reservations are outweighed by the need to provide a long-term certainty for agriculture and nutrition programs and the many positive improvements and reforms included in the final bill. among other thention the conference report will protect and improve the crop insurance system, probable lith most important safety net, continues sugar polcy, streamlines conservation programs so that we can continue to preserve our natural resources, provides disaster assistance for livestock producers, applies conservation protections to crop insurance, and recognizes the growing consumer demand for fresh fruits, vegetables, local foods, and organics. in closing i want to thank the chairman for his work and

congrat him for -- congratulate him for getting to us work with us to get to final conclusion here. also for his members and our members for the -- their support in hanging in there to get to this point. i also want to thank the agriculture committee staff who have been working so hard over these last years night and day through all these different situations we have been in. and i would like to submit their names for the record, if that is ok. again, mr. speaker, this process has gone on too long. we need to conclude it today. i urge my colleagues to support the conference report. yield back. reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from minnesota reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: i yield myself two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minute. mr. mcgovern: i want to thank chairman lucas and ranking member peterson for all their hard work on this very difficult bill. i admire their tenacity and i admire their passion on issues dealing with agriculture. there are some good things in

this bill, to be sure. but there are some things that i simply cannot accept. i think as we discuss this farm bill that we should remind ourselves of a few simple facts. facts like this, hunger exists in the united states of america. not a single congressional district in this country is hunger free. our food banks, our food pantries, the people on the frontlines in the fight against hunger simply cannot do any more. they are stretched to the limits. one final fact, this bill will make hunger worse in america not better. if this bill passes, thousands and thousands of low-income americans will see their already meager food benefits shrink, for what? why? to meet some arbitrary deficit reduction goal? to pay the cost of the give aways and crop insurance program to pay for the sweetheart deals for the sushi rice growers and peanut farmers and god knows who else? i know many of my colleagues would just like this whole farm bill issue to go away. they want to pass a bill and

forget about and move on to something else. but, mr. speaker, the people who will hurt by this bill aren't going away. they can't forget about it and move on to something else because they'll suffer. they will have to do -- they'll have to make do with less food tomorrow than they have today. i have heard all the arguments trying to justify this $8.6 billion cut in snap. well, it's just a loophole or it could have been a lot worse. or the states should pick up the slack, or local governments or churches or food banks or the tooth fairy. those arguments are easy to make from the comfort of our own warm homes and full bellies, but they ring hollow to an elderly person who will have to take their medicine on an empty stomach, or child who will have to skip breakfast before going to scoo. i think it's wrong and cannot support it. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. r. lucas: mr. speaker, i yield to one of my outstanding

subcommittee chairmen, the gentleman from arkansas, mr. crawford, one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arkansas is recognized for one minute. mr. crawford: i want to thank chairman lucas and ranking member peterson for putting in so much hard work and dedication getting where we are today. and i echo ranking member's sentiments to the staff. thank you very much for everything that you have done. after more than three years of being involved in a farm bill process, i'm proud to support a final product that not only greatly benefits producers but deploys investments and jobs to rural america. despite our sharp regional differences we prevailed in crafting commodity programs that omote regional fairness by providing a strong safety net that protects all producers from market risk. we can finally provide relief to our cattlemen t. rural development funding will be critical. while conservation and forestry programs will preserve our natural resources for years to come. although i'm pleased with the farm bill today i'm disappointed we left important issues on the table like fixing country of

origin labeling for the meat industry. we could have gone further on relieving regulations on small farmers. even though i believe we could have done more, i'm proud of the conservative reforms we have made in stood stamp program by elimb -- food stamp program by eliminating waste. the agriculture committee accomplished tough goal by consolidating tozzes of programs. appreciate the patience of all our produces through this process. i strongly urge a yes vote on this report and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does -- the gentleman from oklahoma reserves. the gentleman from minnesota is recognized. mr. peterson: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from california, mr. costa. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. mr. costa: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i rise in support of this conference committee report. there are a lot of reasons why, first i'd like to commend the chairman and the ranking members of both the house and the senate ag committees and my fellow conferees and the staff for all the hard work that went into reaching this agreement. while this is not a perfect

bill, there never is, this agreement is a result of more than four years' of bipartisan negotiations. two marathon committee meeting markups, multiple floor debates. this bill almost reminds me of the movie "groundhog day" because it seems to come back and back again. for my home state of california, the leading agriculture state in the nation, this farm bill is a dramatic investment in many of the specialty crops for research, market production, and the development programs which benefit our vegetable and fruit producers of which we produce over half the nation's supply. these programs not only help my constituents produce the safest and most nutritious fruits and vegetables that we eat throughout the nation, but also throughout the world. just as important for my district are the disaster relief programs that help farmers, ranchers, and dairymen and producers through these difficult times. many may not be aware but california's facing the driest, driest year on record which

jeopardizes both food production and jobs in my district. this bill contains programs to provide help when disaster strikes, from drilling wells to direct assistance to growers or katelemen who have been hurt by this devastating drought. while i support conference committee report, i am disappointed they did not take the opportunity to resolve the meat labeling issue that threatens our beef and poultry producers and our important trading partners, canada and mexico, or deemed critical and are dealing with us and the world trade organization. i'm currently drafted legislation on a bipartisan basis to try to fix this labeling issue once and for all. this debate, though, has dragged on for way too long. let's give farmers and ranchers and dairy producers the certainty that they deserve through our five-year farm bill. now is the time to get this farm bill done by passing this conference committee report. i thank you, mr. speaker, and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from minnesota reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts

is recognized. mr. mcgovern: i'm happy to yield three minutes to the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. kind. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized for three minutes. mr. kind: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. kind: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i want to thank my good friend from massachusetts for yielding this time and for the leadership he's shown on the nutrition title and for the plight of hunger throughout our country. it's commendable. mr. speaker, i have been here for a few farm bills in the past. i used to be a member of the agriculture committee. i certainly appreciate how very difficult it is to put together a bipartisan farm bill with so many different moving parts. i have all the respect and admiration for the leadership in the committee, but i also sense that we have reached a point of fatigue and exhaustion. people just want this farm bill to go away after years of being worked on. i appreciate that, too. but we are only given one opportunity every five or in this case seven years to reform farm policy to make it better, make it bert for our family farms, make it more responsible for the american taxpayer, to make production agriculture work for all americans, and i'm

afraid this farm bill yet again pulls up short. i would beseech my colleagues to take additional time to work on some reform measures that do make sense. rather than looking at another $8.6 billion in cuts to the nutrition tight on top of previous cuts that have already been had, let's look at some of these subsidy programs. i am afraid the bill before us today maintains huge taxpayer subsidies that go to a few but very large agribusinesses at the expense of our family farmers around the country. it's going to lead to greater consolidation and production in agriculture, going to continue to drive up land values. going to make it harder for new beginning farmers to enter the occupation. it's not responsible to thee family farmers and not responsible to the american taxpayer. we've got historically high commodity target prices in this bill, so any slight dip going to mean huge payments going out in the future. we have the multiple entity rule now that we worked on in the previous farm bill being rolled back in one. we have payment limitation caps

being increased rather than brought down to where the will of this congress was last year when we had that debate on the floor. most of that money is being shifted now into the crop insurance program which what i feel is overly generous preemyuss -- crop insurance subsidies to producers which has the potential of taking risk out of production decisions, but we're telling the crop insurance companies, 're going to guarantee a 14% profit margin. we're going to pay your entirely administrative and operating expenses and by the way, you're going to have little risk. the american taxpayer will not bear that risk. there is not a business in the world that will sign up for that offer so why are we doing that in this farm bill? representative petri and i had a reform of the crop insurance program asking these crop insurance companies, put a little more skin in the game. we understand it's a valuable

risk management tool that needs to be there for producers but this goes overboard with it. and then finally, we got a domestic cotton program that's gotten us into trouble with brazil. in the average taxpayer knew that for the last four years we funneled out $150 million worth of taxpayer subsidies going to subsidize brazil cotton farmers, they'd be livid, and yet this bill does not fix that cotton problem and now it's up to brazil whether they want to level economic sanctions against us. more work needs to happen and unfortunately this bill pulls up short. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. lucas: thank you, mr. speaker. i would like to recognize for one minute one of our hardest working subcommittee chairmen, the gentleman from texas, mr. conaway. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. mr. conaway: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in strong support of the farm bill, legislation that provided much-needed reform, it's fiscally responsible, providing market-based solutions and streamlining more

than 100 programs. we eliminated direct payments that farmers received and replaced them with a safety net that provides help only when the farmers need it. the bill includes the most significant reform to food stamp programs since the welfare reform of 1996. while i personally am disappointed we didn't fix some issues, i do believe this bill provides a balanced opportunity and security and strengthens our agriculture safety net for years to come. i ask my colleagues to vote yes on the safety net, vote yes for these modest reforms to food stamp, pass this conference report, give our farmers and ranchers across this country the five years of stability and security they need to execute their business plans, to allow them to continue to provide the american people with the most affordable and abundant food and fiber supply in the most developed world. vote yes on the conference report. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from oklahoma reserves. the gentleman from minnesota is ecognized. mr. peterson: i yield two

minutes to mr. schrader. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. schrader. yeah, i guess for some people, you know, you just can't do enough. i'd argue respectfully to a lot of my colleagues that the work that's gone on on both sides of the aisle in the last two years has been pretty exemplary. the farm bill is always a difficult bill to pass. i think the last couple of times it was vetoed and had to be overridden. it could be better. i have not yet seen legislation that's exactly what i perfectly like to be voting on at the end of the day. we make huge strides in this bill that were draconian cuts to the snap and food stamp programs that are no longer in here. there were onerous incentives to get people off of food stamps that are in longer in here. for people saying people will be cut as a result of this, that's not up. if they put $20 towards the

heating assistance for the low-income folks that need that, they don't get a reduced benefit. yes, it's a reduced benefit. they still qualify for their base benefit in this bill. moreover if they bring their heating and cooling bills in they can still get the expanded benefit. it just requires a little more diligence, puts faith in america that the food stamp goes to those who need it. as far as the subsidies go, hey, you know, maybe we should change that. we should work on that some more. there will be another farm bill in four, five years, but we made huge strides. we get rid of the direct payments. we've been trying to do that for 20 years. the subsidies, the milk program are new. a margin insurance program. i think america understands that type of thing. we made huge strides here. there's so many good things. for so many friends on the democratic side of the aisle, at the end of the day, it's imperative we made huge strides, the or beganic provisions, we have done great with market access promotion

programs. we made it so american farmers continue to produce the best food and fiber with the safety net that makes sure that the people on this country -- in this country get the food they need and deserve and can do the best economically on the global trade scene. i think this is a great opportunity. people here should be voting yes on this bill after the hard bipartisan work. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from minnesota reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon is recognized for two minutes. well, i deeply respect my friend and colleague from oregon. i have a slightly different perspective on this because i think the bill before us today is the least that can be done and get the bill passed. it's got a number of items do i support like specialty crops. we've been working on for sometime. i'm pleased there will be or beganics have an opportunity -- organics have an opportunity to get crop insurance.

this bill, as i say, takes allegedly the savings from rect payments that have been opposed for years but takes the savings and plows them back in to an enriched crop insurance program. it cuts $6 billion for conservation. yes, there are some improvements in terms of administration, but at the end of the day cuts $6 billion when land and water is under pressure and needs it the most. this is short sided. it's very likely going to caught a lot more in the long run for reasons that my friend from wisconsin pointed out in terms of setting these targets higher. it is more generous in terms of rejecting a provision that was included in both the house and the senate version to limit payments to individual farms to $50,000. the conference committee increases the limit to $125,000 and reopens a loophole closed

in both the house and senate bills, allowing the payments to be collected by multiple people. it's just one more example of where the conference committee that i think had one meeting and sort of massaged these things to put the pieces together to secure a majority on the floor but is not by any stretch of the imagination in the best interest of most farmers, certainly not for the environment and for the american taxpayers. i respectfully urge its rejection. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. lucas: mr. speaker, i yield the gentleman from arkansas, who's been very focused on these critical issues, especially those involving livestock, mr. womack, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arkansas is recognized for two minutes. mr. womack: thank you, mr. speaker. i, too, want to congratulate the chairman and to his ranking member and my colleague from

arkansas, one of the committee members, mr. crawford, for their diligent work and coming up with this committee report. this was not easy, to say the least. that said, mr. speaker, because the senate's my way or the highway attitude, we're considering a conference report that does nothing to address an out-of-control agency, gipsa, from imposing on american companies regulations that go well beyond congressional intent. because of the senate's all or nothing approach, we're considering a conference report that will subject american industries and companies to retaliatory tariffs. for me it would be easy to vote against this conference report, but unlike my senate counterparts, i recognize that in divided government each side has to find common ground. ultimately, this report, like many of the other bipartisan agreements that had been signed into law, move the ball forward by making much-needed reforms to federal programs and

reducing spending. that's why in the end i will support it. i am hopeful, however, mr. speaker, that the house appropriations committee will do everything in its power to fix some of these mistakes. i, as a member of that committee, will fight to rein in gipsa, and i'll work to fix the country of origin labeling requirements. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arkansas yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from oklahoma reserves. the gentleman from minnesota is recognized. mr. peterson: mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentlelady from ohio. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for two minutes. maryland fudge: let me thank by leader pelosi by appointing me to the farm bill committee. i thank representatives peterson and lucas and senators stabenow and cochran for their leadership in negotiating this conference report. throughout this process, it was my goal to ensure a fair and

balanced farm bill. while i do not agree with some of the provisions of this conference bill, i firmly believe it is a good compromise. given how far apart we were when this conference began, i am pleased members on both sides of the aisle and across the chamber were able to reach a consensus and show the american people congress can work together. the agreement rejects categorycal eligibility, something we talk about for sometime. the $8.6 billion savings in snap over 10 years, over 10 years comes from a change in liheap policy that would shrink benefits for approximately 850,000 households in 16 states. it does not eliminate a qualified household from access to snap, which was an important consideration on the difficult road to reach a compromise that prevents devastating cuts and changes to this critically needed program. this agreement also expands

economic investment in low income, urban and rural communities. it provides certainty and sound agricultural policies for america's farmers and ranchers. passing the farm bill has always been a bipartisan endeavor. and this conference committee report proves it is still possible for congress to work through its differences and produce a balanced bill that meets the needs of the american people. we have negotiated the farm bill for the last two years. it is now time to move forward. i strongly encourage my colleagues to join me and vote yes on this bipartisan, bicameral conference agreement. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from ohio yields back. the gentleman from minnesota reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i'm delighted to yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from wisconsin, ms. moore. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from wisconsin is recognized for two minutes. thank you so very

much. i rise to oppose this compromised bill, although i congratulate people for working very hard on it. but the change of the heat and eat option is not just a little technical change, it's a change that has the freezing, chilling impact on every single snap recipient in wisconsin. it not only increases bureaucracy, it decreases snap benefits to wisconsin families whose benefits were cut already in november. i'm deeply concerned about the concrete, hurt, hunger and quite frankly the frigid cold that we impose today on thousands of low-income american households, including seniors, children and the disabled. as many as 255,000 snap cases in wisconsin will be affected by this change. how do i explain this to the women, children, seniors and

disabled in households that this technical change is minor when they stand to lose $90 a month in benefits when you consider what they lost in november? $90 a month to a poor family is not a technical change. it's a lot of money. it's more than $1,000 a year. the price of food is not going to go down. nor is the price of fuel. nor is the purchasing power of the poor going to go up. snap benefits already do not meet nutritional needs throughout the month. and this change will mean that real food will be off real tables and out of the stomaches of current recipients. it proposed cut on top of resulting in a drop to wisconsin is just too much.

in the heat and eat states, that's as much as 11% of all beneficiaries. in one step, we impose new administrative costs on those states and make it harder to keep snap more responsive. kids were off school two days, two days this week because of the frigid, dangerous cold. following these families back the heat or eat is the wrong thing to do. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. lucas: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield one minute to another one of my outstanding subcommittee chairmen, the gentleman from georgia, mr. austin scott. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for one minute. mr. scott: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to first say thank you to chairman lucas and ranking member peterson. the ag committee has some of the most conservative members in the house and some of the most liberal members in the house, and i'll tell you we've got a lot of different opinions about what could and what should be done, but we had respectful

discussion across the aisles and across the philosophical debates. i have said many times from this podium that the foundation of our economy in this country is based on two things, one being manufacturing, and the other based on agriculture. this bill does the things that it needs to do to ensure that foundation for our agricultural producers to help with that part of the economy. it also ensures that as those farmers go forward and dot things that they do in providing the food, nutrition, and fiber not only for america but the rest of the world, that americans, americans when they go to the grocery store, will get more for their dollar than any other country as they seek to feed their families. we found agreement to clean up waste and abuse within many of the systems, including the food stamp system. we have given more money to food banks, which i think that is an extremely important -- making sure the most needy of america's citizens have a place to go and make sure that they can get the nutrition that they need. we have put some new policies in

place and i'm confident that this bill is a move in the right direction where we've got those areas where we did not find the agreement, i'm confident we'll be able to come back an work on those. i'm proud to support this bill. mr. speaker, i yield the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from oklahoma reserves. the gentleman from minnesota is recognized. mr. peterson: mr. speaker, i'm pleased to yield two minutes to my colleague from minnesota, mr. walls -- walz. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from minnesota is recognized for two minutes. mr. walz: thank you, mr. speaker, thank you to the chairman and ranking member for your incredible hard work. the folks of oklahoma and minnesota should be proud of the representative that they have sent here. i'm proud of this piece of legislation. i stand in support of it. it's been two years. i feel like we have been at it most of our life. while i hear people pointing out problems, i'm certainly there. if we had each written this bill it would look different. i hear people say it's not perfect. we had a former colleague once who said, of course it's not perfect. if you want perfect, you'll get that in heaven. at times this place is closer to hell. this is a pretty good compromise we have come up with.

it certainly does things, and i am proud to say it makes bold new investments in clean renewable american made energy. this is a tough decision. tough budgeting times and the commitment of this committee to make that happen i could not be prouder. it also takes bold steps moving the country forward on conservation measures. one piece in here protecting our native prairies in the midwest is fabulous. i want to thank the gentlelady from south dakota, miss glome, for her unwavering effort on this -- mrs. noem for her this.ring effort on you can have all things, as the folks over at "ducks unlimited said" this is one of the best pieces of conservation legislation in decades to do that. we have struck balance. producing food, feeding the world, clothing the world, powering the world, at the same time providing that area to sportsmen and pristine beauty to our country. it can happen. as a veteran i'm proud we took a bold step in here to try to get

returning veterans back on the land. average age of a farmer in this country is 57 years old. we need new folks on the land. that comes with high land prices and access to capital. i worked on some beginning farmer legislation. the chairman made sure that happened in here. it's going to work, it provides some of that access and keeps our family farms continuing on. there's things to point out that you're frustrated with. i understand that. but there's a lot of good in this bill. it's a compromise. we came together. we tried to find and strike those balances. we continue to feed those folks who need the safety net. we continue to make sure there are producers -- have the certainty that they need and i have to till all across this country this morning producers woke up quietly, went about their business, feeding, fueling, powering america. we can say thank you by passing this bill. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from minnesota reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i'm happy now to yield to my colleague from connecticut for three minutes, ms. delauro.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from connecticut is recognized for three minutes. rather than producing a farm bill that meets our traditional responsibilities as a congress to support working families and farmers, this bill will do great damage to the nation's most vulnerable citizens. this bill slashes $8.6 billion from food stamps, our nation's most important anti-hunger program. this is in addition to the $11 billion already cut. and while it goes out of its way to reopen loopholes that benefit millionaires and billionaires. interestingly enough, this bill increases the deficit this year, and the congressional budget office has said that it doesn't save the $23 billion that it claims to save. this bill results in winners and losers.

winners, wealthy farmers, and agribusinesses who will be able to pocket crop insurance subsidies and other government handouts beyond the already generous limits passed earlier by both the house and the senate. congressional budget office again said that increases spending on crop insurance by $5.7 billion. the senate passed a bipartisan amendment to reduce the level of federal premium support for crop insurance participants who make over $750,000, but the conference raised it to $900,000. winners, against the express wishes of both houses, a loophole was opened which was closed in both the house and senate bills which allows farming enterprises to overcollect on commodity payments. winners. but who are the losers? and there are losers in the farm bill. the losers are the 850,000

low-income households all over america. 1.7 million americans who will lose 66 meals a month because of this cut to food stamps. who are we talking about? children who will go hungry and spend all the next day at school. they'll go to bed hungry, spend the next day at school, unable to concentrate because they are thinking about food. veterans, roughly 900,000 of whom receive food stamps and working families who will face an empty fridge, an annoying pain in their stomach for weeks and weeks. seniors have to choose between food or warmth. whose health will deteriorate for want of sustenance. these are our own people we are consigning to this fate. hardworking people in our district and in our communities. if you vote for this bill, you will have to look them in the eye and tell them to go without

food. that they have to endure hunger because we have to give more handouts to millionaires and billionaires. that is what this farm bill is about. make no mistake. it increases hunger rather than decreases hunger in america. it picks winners and losers rather than ensuring we are supporting those that grow and those that consume the food we produce in this nation of plenty . the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from is recognized for an additional minute. ms. delauro: it picks winners and losers rather than ensuring we are supporting those that grow and those that consume the food that we produce in this nation of plenty, which is what farm bills have been about in the past. and i have negotiated nutrition titles in farm bills. this is a farm bill that undermines the health and the

well-being of the most vulnerable in our society. i urge my colleagues to vote no and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the chair will receive a message. marc: mr. speaker, a message from the president of the united states. the secretary: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: madam secretary. the secretary: i am directed by the president of the united states to deliver to the house of representatives a message in writing. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. lucas: mr. speaker, i would like to yield one minute to the gentleman from illinois who has worked extremely diligently on this bill for its entire process , mr. davis. one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois is recognized for one minute. mr. davis: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you to chairman lucas for the leadership he's shown in getting this conference report to the floor. i rise in strong support of this conference committee report.

it is a commonsense piece of legislation p that deals with things such as overregulation. that is a silent job killer that this administration is implementing through our agricultural industry. i'm proud many of the provisions that i helped craft are in this final farm bill to reduce that opportunity for the -- for this administration to continue to kill jobs in this country. we see some commonsense reforms to the snap program. our goal should be to get people off of snap and into jobs. mr. speaker, this bill, this bill is a lesson in fiscal responsibility. it is one of the single most -- one of the single largest cuts in mandatory spending that this congress has done which is putting our country on a path to complete fiscal responsibility. these are some of the decision that is we need to make. most of those cuts are in the agricultural side. we need to understand that this

is a commonsense piece of legislation that's going to continue to reduce our deficit in this country, put us on a path to paying down our national debt, and, and putting excellent long-term farm policy in place for years to come. mr. speaker, i rise in strong support and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from oklahoma reserves. the gentleman from minnesota is recognized. mr. peterson: mr. speaker, i'm pleased to yield one minute to a former member of the committee, mr. walsh from vermont. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from vermont is recognized for one minute. mr. walsh: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to submit my full statement. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. the gentleman is recognized. mr. walsh: in some cases we spend far too much -- mr. welch: in some cases we spend far too much needlessly and some cases we spend far too little unwisely. but a five-year farm bill is absolutely crucial to america. it is crucial to vermont dairy farmers.

this bill takes three important steps for dairy farmers from vermont and throughout the country. it creates a modern day insurance program which protects farmers against the wild swings in feed prices which are totally out of their control. two, it protects taxpayers as well as farmers by limiting insurance to a farmer's base production. three, finally, it gives usda the tools to intervene if dairy prices drop dramatically. mr. speaker, with its false and imperfections, america does need a new farm bill. agriculture is changing all around us. local food is a growing sector in my state. the organic sector is booming and people are much more aware of their food and farms. this farm bill invests in local foods, provides insurance to small farmers, and puts organic farming on a strong footing for the future. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from minnesota reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: i yield myself one minute.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized for one minute. mr. mcgovern: i want my colleagues to understand why those of us who are opposing this bill because of the snap cuts are so concerned. on november 1 when the moneys ran out, all 47 million people on snap received a cut. for an average family of three that was about a $30 reduction per month which is a lot of money when you're struggling to put food on the table. quite frankly the snap benefit in and of itself is nod at quit. people end up going to food banks anyway. if this bill passes, for over 800,000 families, well over a million people, for the average family of three, an additional $90 cut will go into effect. that's $120. i don't know where they are going to make that up. i don't know where they are going to get help. we can say let the states pick it up. well, the states aren't rushing to pick anything up. let the charities pick it up. read the newspaper last week, "new york times," all of our food banks are at capacity. they can't do it. so what's going to happen to

these people? in the united states of america the richest country in the history of the world, we ought to all pledge that nobody, and i mean nobody, ought to go hungry. that's when this fight is about. i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. lucas: might i inquire how much time the three of us have? it the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from minnesota has 8 1/2 minutes. the gentleman -- 6 1/2 minutes. mr. lucas: how much time? the speaker pro tempore: 11 1/2 minutes. mr. lucas: i wish to yield to the gentlelady from the da coatas who understands the diversity of weather, understands the challenges that producers half for a minute and a half, the gentlelady mrs. noem. the speaker pro tempore: the the gentlewoman from south dakota is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mrs. noem: i thank the chairman for yielding and leadership on the farm bill and also ranking member peterson for all of his hard work and diligence in finding some common ground on a

bill that's under -- been under negotiations for far too long. i'm so happy to be standing here with all of our members and colleagues to -- from the farm bill conference committee, which was honored to be a part of, an also everyone else who is supporting this bill, it is extremely bipartisan. it's taken a lot of hard work to get to this point, but i'm proud of the fact we have a product in front of us that's not only good for producers, it's good for consumers, it secures our food supply into the future which is one of the safest in the world. we make reforms, we save billions of tax dollars, it's accountable to the taxpayer in this country. we conserve wildlife had been tafment we provide a valuable safety net for those who grow our food and for those who rely on food assistance as well. while congress was writing this bill, my home state got hit with droughts and blizzards that cost us tens of thousands of livestock. the livestock disaster programs that i authorrd in this bill and will provide much needed relief to those who are struggling so hard during this difficult time. our black hills national forest is going to gain some regulatory

relief. and additional tools to combat the pine beatle that's destroying our -- beetle that's destroying our black hills. a permanent office of tribal relations a. real victory for alt tribes who need to have better communication within usda. thousands of hunters acrossed is and every year will be glad to know they have a provision in place that will help protect grasslands. whether you grow corn, wheat, soybeans, or cotton, producers will have more choices which at the end of the day is going to help them cover their risk that they take every year. i'm proud of the bill, i'm proud of our work. i urge our colleagues to support the bill. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. without objection, the gentleman from oklahoma reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from minnesota is recognized. mr. peterson: mr. speaker, i'm now pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from north carolina, mr. mcintyre. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina is recognized for two minutes. mr. mcintyre: i ask unanimous

consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from north carolina is recognized for two minutes. mr. mcintyre: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in support of this farm bill. this is a strong, reform-minded bill with bipartisan support. it will grow our economy, create jobs, provide certainty, reduce our deficit and save the american taxpayers $16 billion. the bill reforms the farm safety net, strengthening crop insurance and commodity programs. these risk management tools assure farmers that help is there when they need it. the bill also encourages conservation and develops export markets to help our farmers sell their products worldwide. rural communities depend on the farm bill too. through critical programs, small towns can build hospitals, schools, fire departments and police departments. this bill helps create jobs and economic development. water and waste water programs, the most basic of public services that allow industries to come to rural areas, give access to healthy drinking water and sanitary sewers are part of this as well.

this bill has important tools for new farmers, and i can tell you as one in a state of north carolina, we're -- where one out of every five jobs are depended on agriculture or agri related business, this bill is about jobs and our economy in a way that helps states throughout our economy. there's still some work to do, like bringing country of origin labeling in compliance with w.t.o. and reducing the gipsa rules. farmers in small towns across america have waited too long for a farm bill. our rural citizens are taxpayers, just like those who live in urban and suburban areas. they deserve the respect of this congress. ey deserve a farm bill who live in rural -- for those that live in rural areas. we as americans enjoy our wonderful supply of food and fiber that the good lord has blessed us with and our farmers worked hard to supply. we ought to work with our farmers and with agriculture

and have a strong farm bill that our citizens in all of america deserve to have passed. with that i yield the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from minnesota reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i reserve our time at this time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. lucas: mr. speaker, i would now like to yield to another one of our outstanding subcommittee chairmen, the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. thompson, one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized for one minute. mr. thompson: mr. speaker, i rise in support of this farm bill and also to thank chairman lucas and congressman peterson for your leadership for agriculture. as many of my house colleagues have already said this morning, this legislation is long overdue. this bill is truly worthy of its name. the federal agriculture reform and risk management act because of the historic reforms it ledge slates. overall the bills repeals or consolidates about 100 programs. along with sequestration

reduction that cuts mandatory spending by nearly $23 billion. and the conservation title alone reduces it from $23 billion to $13 billion. this bill saves $6 billion and does so without affecting the programs. we reform food stamps and we do so through thoughtful changes making sure that truly needs the assistance gets it. farmers providing milk for this nation, we help them. with the 2008 farm bill expiring nearly a year and a half ago, i urge my colleagues to vote for this legislation and finally give our farmers and rural constituents the support they deserve, ensuring all americans -- mr. lucas: i yield the gentleman an additional minute. mr. thompson: thank you, mr. chairman. i won't take that much. overall this farm bill ensures all americans have access to affordable, high-quality and safe food and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the

balance of his time. the gentleman from oklahoma reserves. the gentleman from minnesota is recognized. mr. peterson: mr. speaker, i'm now pleased to yield one minute to the gentlelady from washington, ms. delbene. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from washington is recognized for one minute. ms. delbene: thank you, mr. speaker. this farm bill is bipartisan legislation that's good for our farmers and families. it's an accomplishment in a will create jobs, help our farmers and preserve access to healthy food. this bill includes unprecedented funding for specialty crops and organic farms. it's no understatement to say that this is the best farm bill yet for specialty crop farmers. i'm proud the farm bill includes $200 million to fund my proposal to expand job training programs for snap recipients to find self-sustaining jobs. make no mistake, no one got everything they wanted. i'm disappointed that nutrition assistance is reduced at a time it's needed high, however it will not reduce snap

eligibility for those in need. in addition, the reduction of the a entennial family

farms. meaning they have been in the family for over 100 years. farms like the barredonhagens where they grow asparagus, apples and potatoes. a short drive down the road is another farm. they grow corn, wheat, soybeans, and raise beef calt for their

neighbors. these -- cattle for their neighbors. these family operations are a vitalal and growing part of northern michigan's economy and it's been an honor to get to know them. they work hard to produce quality products that feed northern michigan and families around the world. this bill represents the hard work and input of stakeholders from northern michigan and across the country. while not perfect, it reflects the needs of our rural agriculture economy that is vital to michigan's first congressional district. i urge my colleagues to support the passage of this bill and yield the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from oklahoma reserves. the gentleman from minnesota is recognized. mr. peterson: i'm now pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from georgia, mr. scott. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for two minute. mr. scott: thank you very much, chairman. ranking member. agriculture, ladies and gentlemen, is the heart and soul

of our nation. it provides the food we eat. it provides the clothes we wear. it provides the material to build our homes and our shelters. no committee is engaged in the entire crook and nannies of the fabric of this nation as the agriculture committee. this farm bill is the product of what makes america great. what makes america great is our democratic republic. the anchor of which is compromise. i want to commend mr. peterson, our ranking member, for his job, mr. lucas, the chairman of our committee for his job. it's been five years that we have been on this. and i particularly want to thank mr. peterson and it was a pleasure working with mr. peterson on an issue very dear to him which is dairy, as we worked out the fabric of that. i commend our leadership on our

committee. oufer, there is yet work to be done. mess delauro from connecticut was right. mr. mcgovern was ry. -- ms. delauro from connecticut was right. mr. mcgovern was right. ladies and gentlemen of the committee in this house and this nation, we have a serious problem with hunger in this country. and it's not going away until we realize the graphity -- gravity of it. our veterans, our seniors, the most vulnerable. we must address this issue. my position on this bill is that i will vote for it. we have worked on it. is it a perfect bill? no, it is not. are we a perfect nation? no, we are not. but we are constantly striving, striving for that. and we will get closer to this

perfect position as we bring all americans involved and let no american go hungry in this country. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. scott: i urge everyone to please vote for the bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from minnesota reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i'm thrited to yield two minutes to the gentleman from new york, mr. crowley. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for two minutes. mr. crowley: i thank my friend and colleague from massachusetts for yielding me this time. this legislation is commonly referred to as the farm bill, but it's also a food bill. on that note it falls short. to be clear this is miles ahead of where we started with what i consider a truly heartless republican proposal, and i know that our conferees worked hard to make improvements to this bill, in particular i want to thank collin peterson and the members of the democratic side of the aisle who worked -- who

are dedicated to work to improve this bill. but it still leaves too many families behind. the snap cut in this bill may seem on paper -- small on paper, but it's not to the families that it will affect. it's not to the food banks that are already stretched well beyond their means. in new york city, 280,000 households are expected to see their benefits drop under this bill. the benefits that don't go anywhere near far enough to begin with. we see every day in new york city how deep the need for food assistance is. how food banks and community hunger organizations are doing everything they can to provide food to hungry families. and they are joined by citizen heroes like jorge who i was honored to host last night as my guest to the state of the union. jorge has been called an angel in queens for his work in

feeding the hungry. he saw a need on the streets of queens and he jumped in to fill it. serving home cooked meals out of his truck to what started as a small group of homeless and unemployed new yorkers. as word grew of his generosity, so did the crowds eager just for something to get through that night. since 2004, jorge has served over 225,000 meals on the streets of queens new york. he and i know there are more people out there who are hungry or cold or need of every bit of assistance that they get. could i have an additional minute? mr. mcgovern: i yield 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. crowley: we should be doing more not less. it's really trouble there are some on the other side of the aisle who think this doesn't cut food assistance enough. imagine that, there is $8 billion, $8 billion worth of cuts in this bill and still

that's far less than i wanted to cut. the fact that in some ways this bill can be considered a compromise option just shows how unreasonable the cuts proposed by the other side were. what did we come to when we argue about how much of a cut to hungry children and family is reasonable? yes, this bill is not as bad as it could be, but it's not as good as it should be. that's why i'll be voting no against this bill today. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. lucas: mr. speaker, i would like to yield to the gentleman from oklahoma who has some of the most productive agricultural land and some of the most amazing farmers an ranchers, the gentleman, mr. cole, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized tore two minutes. mr. cole: i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. speaker, it's a great personal privilege and pleasure for me to come down here on behalf of 14,000 farmers and ranchers in my district and

75,000 farmers and ranchers in the state of oklahoma. goodness knows how many tens of thousands of people beyond that in various phases of agriculture and ag industry. and thank my good friend, chairman lucas, for what he's accomplished. i think it's easy to be the critic, but i think all of us on this house floor know how long and how arduous this struggle has been to bring all the competing interests together, to bring both sides of the aisle together. to bring both chambers together, and to bring the administration together in support of this legislation. it's easy to see why the support, if you actually step back and take a look at what it does. first it does save $23 billion. and frankly those cuts largely don't come out of the safety net programs where actually there's simply -- relatively modest but important reforms, they actually come out of the production end of this business. changes need to be made there, but we ought to recognize those are tough changes in and of

themselves. second, it preserves the capability of this country to continue to produce more food and fiber than anybody else in the world, not just for our people, but for all over the world, and deliver that at a cheaper price than anybody else in the world. it's worth reflecting that americans pay a lower percentage of their income for food than any other country in the world. guess what? with the additional income, they are able to do other things, invest in other things, and go on. finally, particularly pleased that the safety net has been preserved. important programs are in place. we ought to recognize that. it wouldn't have been possible without my friend, chairman lucas. all he's done to bring us together, how hard he's worked. this bill, frankly, deserves the support of every democrat, every republican on this floor. i urge my colleagues to be supportive when the time to vote comes. with that i yield back the balance of my time.

. mr. lucas: mr. speaker, i have no additional speakers. i believe i have the right to close and i'll reserve my time unless we're ready to close or when we're ready to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oklahoma reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts will be recognized first to close. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i'm prepared to close if there are no other speakers. my understanding is that mr. other n may have one speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from minnesota is recognized. mr. peterson: mr. speaker, we have one member that wanted to speak and we're trying to ascertain his whereabouts at

his point. the speaker pro tempore: let me give an update on times remaining. the gentleman from oklahoma has 5 1/4 minutes remaining. the gentleman from minnesota has 3 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman from massachusetts has two minutes remaining. the gentleman from minnesota is ecognized. mr. peterson: mr. speaker, i know that members want to get out of here and get on planes and so forth so we'll yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time? mr. peterson: well, mr. speaker -- go ahead. you going to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized for two minutes to close. mr. mcgovern: mau, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, first of all let me say that -- thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, first of all let me say that i'm grateful to mr. peterson and chairman lucas. i appreciate their dedication

on these issues. it's good to be on the agriculture committee and proud to serve with them as well as with other members on each side of the aisle. unfortunately, i cannot support this bill. mr. speaker, let me speak to my fellow democrats. last night we sat in this chamber and we listened to the president give his state of the union address. and when he talked about raising the minimum wage, we all stood up and cheered. when he talked about the need to address income inequality, we all applauded, but cheers and applause are not enough. and i ask my colleagues to think back, to remember listening to their parents and grandparents talk about how franklin roosevelt always stood up for the little guy. remember those pictures of bobby kennedy touring through appalachian and touching the cheeks of hungry children. that's why we became democrats in the first place. those are the people that got us into politics. those are our people. don't throw that away just to be able to say you voted for a farm bill. don't turn your backs on our heritage and our history by

giving bipartisan cover to what i believe is a flawed bill. we don't have to do this. the price of admission to pass a farm bill should not be more cuts to snap. and make no mistake about it. my friends on the republican side are not through when it comes to snap. they're going to come back after this program again and again and again. we need to push back. we need to say enough. you know, some -- you know, some have rationalized these cuts. some have tried to explain them away as being nothing but closing a loophole. they are wrong. people are going to be hurt. people all over this country, 1.7 million people are going to be impacted by this. there should be nobody in this country, the richest country in the history of the world, who should ever go hungry. that should be a nonparticipate issue. but to -- nonpartisan issue. but to my democrat colleagues, this is something we've championed over and over again

during the existence of this country. so i urge my colleagues to vote no on this conference report. vote your conscience, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from minnesota is recognized. mr. peterson: mr. speaker, mr. airman, i'll close, i guess, as well. i again want to thank the chairman and all of the members on both sides of the aisle for their work and hanging in there all these months and years to get to this point and congratulate the chairman on what i expect to be a successful outcome in a little bit of time here and with that i'd ask everybody to support this conference report and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from minnesota yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. lucas: mr. speaker, i yield myself -- the speaker pro tempore: 5 1/4 minutes. the gentleman is recognized. mr. lucas: thank you, mr. speaker. i'd like to join my colleague by adding to the congressional record a majority of the -- a

list of the majority staff members. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. lucas: i say with the cooperation of the members of the committee itself, the cooperation among of house and senate members was exemplary. i'd also note that the work of our staff, those good men and omen, house and senate, over the course of these years cannot be underestimated or underappreciated. e hours, the spirit of comity, the focus on accomplishing, trying to do good policy, it cannot be understated how important those ood folks have been. mr. speaker, let me close by saying this. no one cares more about agriculture policy, farmers and ranchers, consumers and everyone in the process that

takes it from the seed to the plate or the bowl than i do. but i think in good faith i can say my colleague, mr. peterson, cares just as much as i do. members of our committee care just as much as we do. this bill, done in what i would like to define as regular order, through the committee process and the floor and the conference, may not have exactly everything my friends on the right would want or my friends on the left would want, but it represents making the process work, achieving consensus, putting into place policies that are better than what were there before to drive this effort forward. i know that we sincerely disagree on many things, and i know some of my friends don't

sometimes act like they care about what happens out on the farm or the ranch. i know that's not the case. they do care, but i would simply say this. no matter how much money we spend on supplemental programs to make sure our fellow citizens have enough to eat -- and that's important -- never forget, if there's not a product on the shelf, if there's not meat in the case, if there's not vegetables or fruit available, it doesn't matter how much you subsidize. the food has to be there. and that's why i've said all along, a farm bill still has to have farm in it. this agricultural act of 2014 lives up to that. it makes a commitment to our fellow citizens who are in tough times. but it will also assure that the food will be there. don't take us down the path

that many other countries have gone through in the last century of people lined up at empty shelves, people hording particular ag products because it's available that day because they'll trade it the next day when something might be available. let's continue to do this miracle called american agriculture. and oh, by the way, depending on how you define miracles in the environment we work together in, this farm bill might not be quite >> the house passed that farm bill with a vote of 251-166. it 2340u goes -- now goes to the

senate. speaker boehner said after the vote, quote, i hope the senate acts in short order. >> the house is done for the week. the house g.o.p. retreat is happening thursday and friday on the eastern shore of maryland. as the members gather to develop their action plans for 2014. "new york times" jonathan weissman tweets ahead of that house republican retreat senator jeff sessions has circulated a 30-page critique of immigration reform to every house republican member. they'll hear from a number of people, including football coach lou hollingts, and conservative journalist meeting on the eastern shore there tomorrow and friday. >> this is where the clintons lived when they were professors in fayetteville. after hillary's first year of teaching here, bill was driving her down this road to go to the airport, and they saw the house and it was for sale and hillary pointed at the house and said

that's a cute house. and bill took her to the airport and picked her up from the airport about a month later and says, i bought your dream house, you have to marry me and live with me in it because i can't live there alone. that was the fourth time he proposed. >> there were nine people at the wedding. very small and intimate. their wedding announcement made notable mention that hillary was retaining her own name. bill didn't seem bothered. when they told hillary's mother she cried. fayetteville was a place where they settled in. they thought they arrived. they got married. bought a house, they had successful jobs as law professors and they finished law school. they reached a plateau where they achieved a lot of the things they set goals for in life. >> watch the program on first lady hillary clinton at our website c-span.org/firstlady or saturday and 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. live monday or series continues with first lady laura bush.

here on c-span, we are live at the u.s. steel corporation, irvine plant in west miff lynn, pennsylvania. president obama will be speaking to the employees and others shortly following up on his state of the union. the white house says that the president at this event will sign a presidential memorandum directing the department of treasury to create a so-called my r.a., a simple safe affordable starter savings that will be offered through employers, and says the white house, will ultimately help millions of americans begin to save for retirement. something the president mentioned last night in his state of the union address. we'll have his comments live once they get under way. in the meantime some republican reaction to the state of the union from this morning's "washington journal." >> we'll continue to get your thoughts on the state of the union. but we will also go up to capitol hill where congressman tom price is joining us from the cannon rotunda, republican of georgia.

he's also the vice chairman of the budget committee and sits on the ways and means committee. mr. price, what did you think of the speech? guest: i was really disappointed. it seems that the president instead of understanding that we have divided government, we've got to work together, we've got to come together to solve the remarkable challenges that we have as a country, decided no. he's going to double down on his policies and he's going to use his pen, as he says. that's not the way our system works. so it's troubling to me that we have an executive, chief executive officer of the land, who refuses to utilize the appropriate processes of governance. i think it's disappointing. i'm not sure where it will lead, but hopefully what he'll do is wake up and have his advisors say you got to work with congress. it's an important thing to do. common ground we can find. host: what can republicans do in response to a president that uses executive orders? >> there are multiple areas of

checks and balance in our system. the first check is the attorney general. the attorney general ought to be saying to the president when he's doing things that are a, constitutional or unconstitutional or out of the norm, mr. president that's not an appropriate thing to do. that's the executive check. we haven't had attorney general holder do that. he hasn't fulfilled his responsibility. on the legislative side, our responsibility here in congress is to provide oversight. we do that through committees. but to also put forward positive pieces of legislation that are contrasting and demonstrate to the president, look, there are other ways to solve this and we can find a solution. then the third way in our system is through the courts. and there are many, many cases that the american people are going to hear about over the next year or two that are challenging the president's authority in what he has done already. and if he continues down this road of, it's my way or heightway and i'm going to use my pen and phone and get out of the way, there will be huge challenges in the courts and the courts, i believe, as they already have done at lower

courts, decided, mr. president, that's a step too far. you can't do that. you've got to work within the system and the constitution. host: "the new york times" editorial board it agrees with the president on this strategy. saying that the diminished state of the union would congress a dead end for good polcy, mr. obama is forced to govern by executive order. >> doesn't surprise me coming from "the new york times" because they haven't been the objective arbiter. many in the press have not been objective about their assessment of this administration. that's not a prerogative. there's nothing in the constitution that says if the president and congress, if the legislative branch and executive branch don't get along, then the executive branch can just do what it wants. that's not part of our system. it never has been. there are wonderful ways we can solve the challenges if we sit down together and work together and find that common ground, find that commonsense solution. the problem is the president refuses to do that. >> one of the issues coming up

for the congress to work with the president on is this issue of raising the debt ceiling. what will republicans want from the president in exchange for raising the debt ceiling? guest: it's important to step back and recognize where we are right now. we are $17 trillion in debt as a nation. over $100% of our gross domestic product now is held as debt. that's a situation where when nations get into they have to solve that problem in order to make it so that there's economic vitality and opportunity for their citizens. so we believe that in the process of recognizing that debts need to be paid, no doubt about it, but if we are going to move forward, the policies that we have, then we need positive reform, we need to save and strengthen and secure medicare, not let it go broke, which is under current law. we need to save and strengthen and secure medicaid, not let it go broke which is going to happen under current law. we need to save, strengthen, and secure social security, which is what -- let it go broke which is what's going to occur under

current law. there are solutions we ought to be working together on, the president refuses to negotiate. again he says it's my way or the high way. -- highway. that's not our system of governance. host: congressman, the president addressed this last night saying that the differences between the two sides shouldn't be used to not govern this contry. here's what he had to say. we'll get that ready here in just a second and get your response to it. in the meantime let me go to a phone call, howard's been waiting to talk to you in los angeles, independent caller. hi, howard. caller: how's it going? i have a few things. i listen to your show. i have never seen your show until recently. there's a caller said something about college, people not going to school. i have four degrees and i had the worst time finding a job or even getting a job, and i got a degree from a state university. i have to leave my country now

to get even decent pay because i heard somebody talk about minimum wage. that's garbage. obviously you don't live in california and gas here is expensive. rent is out of control. and you're never going to get people to come back here and build any businesses when you have to pay people $15 to $16 when i can go to china, buy a factory, and get something for $1 or $2 and not even care about health benefits. that's a joke. host: congressman? guest: greta, howard. listen to the concern in his voice and the angst in his voice. this is really troubling because the kinds of issue that howard raises there are exactly kinds of things we ought to be correcting. we ought to be working together. there's no reason that we can't work together and figure out how to make certain we create jobs in this contry. we have economic vitality. we decrease the vegtory oppression going on. instead the president says, look, economic mobility is decreasing. income inequality is increasing. and he's been in charge now for

over five years and he wonders, wonders why the american people now at rate of 6 p% -- 63% don't trust him to do the right thing. that's because he refuses to make the right diagnosis. policies have been put in place that make it impossible for the howards of this country to find a job that fits with their expertise and area of study. host: back to what we were talking about, congressman, about this issue of raising the debt ceiling. the next debate here for congress. here's what the president had to say. >> for several years now this town has consumed by a rancorous argument over the proper size of the federal government. it's an important debate. one that dates back to our very founding. when that debate prevents us from carrying out even the most basic functions of our democracy , when our differences shut down government, or threaten the full faith and credit of the united states, then we are not doing right by the american people.

host: congressman tom price, your reaction. guest: i couldn't agree more. so often this president says exactly the right thing but does exactly the wrong thing. the house has passed a bill that would provide, make certain that we always, always fulfill the full faith and credit of the united states. makes certain that we always paid our debts. the president has refused to sign it. i think he's issued a veto threat on that piece of legislation. instead of doing the right thing, he says the right thing. and that's why this is so very, very troubling for the american people. the challenge that happened last october with the shutdown of the government, the president actually wanted that. he wanted it because he thought it would inure to his political benefit. for a short period of time it did. i tell you why he wanted it and why i believe that so strongly is because what was ultimately agreed to was essentially what was offered to him two days before the government shutdown. so this president needs to listen to his own message and needs to make certain that he follows his own message and does the right thing as opposed to

talk about the right thing. host: congressman price, are you saying republicans did not want the shutdown? guest: absolutely not. absolutely not. we went over and over and over on the policies that we thought needed to be addressed, and make certain that the government didn't shut down. in fact, we passed bill after bill after bill to make certain that the government didn't shut down. with the kinds of changes that this president is now already put in place on obamacare. the things that he's pushed aside, done with his pen instead of the appropriate way through the legislative process. that's where we ought to be able to come together f we just talk, we just talk together and find that common ground and commonsense solution, we would be able to get much more done. >> here's a tweet from one of our viewers, congressman, who wants to know, what did you agree with from last night's speech? guest: i think what i agreed with, again, the president said many, many right things, but the problem is that his policies don't follow up. is income equality a challenge? you bet. economic mobility being threatened in this country?

you bet it is. but the solutions aren't to have the president double down on the policies that actually put those things in place. what we need to do is to decrease taxes. the president talked about decreasing taxes at the business level. so we are competitive in the international environment and the global economy. he's absolutely right. we also need to make certain that the american people can keep more of their hard-earned money so we can get this economy rolling. so there are common ground and commonsense solutions that we can come forward with, but in order to have that happen, you've got to have communication. you've got to sit down and talk. again the president refuses to do that. host: a tweet about tax reform and ties it to debt saying we cannot reduce the debt without tax reform. g.o.p. and dems claim they want to do that. why not start there? guest: she's absolutely right. on the ways and means committee we are working through a process of fundamental tax reform that would make certain that we are the most competitive in the industrialized world from the business standpoint. that allow individuals to keep more of their hard-earned money

and that allow american companies that are domiciled here but do business overseas who make a profit overseas right now, we punish them if they bring their profits back home. from a tax standpoint. what do they do? they leave their profits over there so they can't be used back here for research and development and creating new jobs and expanding businesses. she's right. tax reform is vital. we hope and pray that the president listens to his words and then engages, not just picks up his pen, but engages and talks to republicans and democrats in congress to come forward with that positive solution. host: congressman tom price, do you think any sort of legislation on taxes could include an expansion of the child tax credit? could both sides agree to that? guest: it's absolutely what's on the table. everything is on the table from a tax reform standpoint. the important things about tax reform is when you begin tinkering in one place, you got to make certain in other places it's not having an adverse effect. it's an overall discussion that

has to be had. we'd love to have that conversation with the president. we haven't been able to because the president won't engage. and that's, again, why the american people are 63% at this point don't trust the president to do the right thing because he's down in that house on pennsylvania avenue just doing his own thing. not participating in the process, the normal process of governance in this country which means to engage with the legislative branch. host: joe in fort worth, texas, democratic caller. you're on the air with congressman tom price, republican of georgia. caller: good morning to you greta and tom. listen, i agree with everything that tom is saying about the president, he made a good speech. he always makes good speeches. and following up on what he needs to do, and that is to connect with the businessmen in this contry, business runs this country. and anything you do to affect them and obamacare will affect way in a very disadvantage

because when the businessmen who run this country have to pay their insurance, and you come at them with something that's crippling them, really, if you look at it it's crippling business in this contry, and you won't communicate with them, and our president has this -- he just doesn't communicate with the people that he needs to communicate with. he's surrounded by the wrong people that's giving him the wrong advice. host: congressman? guest: i couldn't agree more, greta. joe, i tell you you're spot on. the fact of the matter is, especially in the area of health care, my job before i came to congress was a physician. i spent over 20 years taking care of patients on the north side of atlanta. and i know as my former colleagues do that this law that's in place right now is harmful to health care for the american people. and the president got up there last night and doubled down on a bill that the majority of the american people do not support and they don't support because it's increasing prices, increasing costs for the

american people, decreasing access, and decreasing quality. and instead of saying -- a throw away line to work with others, but instead of saying we have to fix the things that are wrong in this, the fact of the matter is he's increasing the challenge for the american people, especially in the area of health care. we have asked now for -- >> mario longe. . >> good morning, everyone. , . president, mr. secretary distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, it's my great pleasure to welcome you here today at the u.s. steel reserve and plant.