mrs. lummis: i will yield. >> thank you. if the gentlelady from wyoming would recall the years past she would recall what's known as the senate filibuster. mr. garamendi: the graveyard of legislation that the democrats put forth many, many times, died in the senate as a result of the filibuster. with regard to the issues of entitlements and this particular bill, we're talking here about the issue of how we care for those who have little. i'd be happy to debate with you on this floor or any other place the import of the stimulus program and in fact most every economist argues that without the stimulus program we would have fallen into a great depression, not just a very serious recession. mrs. lummis: reclaiming my time. reclaiming my time from the gentleman, the crisis is worse than the people realize. . in some respects, the people are way ahead of us and that's why the people of this country chose to elect fiscal conservatives during the current congress. and we presented to the american people what we intended to do, which

mrs. lummis: mr. chairman, the chairman of the subcommittee informs me that he will accept the amendment and call for a voice vote. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new york. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. and the amendment is agreed to. for what purpose does the gentleman from iowa rise? mr. king: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. king of iowa. at the end of the bill, before the short title, insert the following, section, none of the funds made available by this act may be used for ru-486 for any purpose. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. king: thank you, mr. chairman. this is an amendment that comes -- it's really -- there's an iowa focus on this that affects the whole country. but we have had a practice that began experimentally in iowa by planned parenthood of issuing telemed abortions by di

mrs. lummis: thank you, mr. chairman. or mr. speaker, rather. i would like to focus on what this bill does and what it does not do. first of all, it increases spending because mandatory programs are growing. the mandatory programs like snap and child nutrition are growing so rapidly that they exceed the cuts in the discretionary programs in this bill. so while my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are talking about the dreadful calamity associated with the cuts in this bill, the fact of the matter is, food programs get more money under this bill. and that's because they are mandatory programs. the committee has no control over them. the only thing we have control over are the discretionary programs. snap is projected to grow almost $6 billion and child nutrition is projected to cost an additional $1.45 billion. now, those and other mandatory spending add up to an additional $282 million over the cost of if fiscal year 2012. -- cost of fiscal year 2012. so to call this a cut is not acknowle

mrs. lummis: mr. chairman, the gentleman from virginia inadvertently misrepresented the terms of this amendment. they only apply to the fee-for-service component. with that, mr. -- mr. dicks: the gentlelady has already spoken on her amendment. mrs. lummis: i'm asking unanimous consent to withdraw. mr. dicks: i didn't hear that and i object. if you withdraw the amendment, i won't object. she hasn't withdrawn it. mrs. lummis: now i'm not going to withdraw the amendment. i ask for a vote. i'll ask for a vote. the chair: is there anyone seeking recognition? for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? mr. burton: let me just say to the gentlelady -- i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. burton: let me say to the gentlelady, this is an emotional issue, and those of us that do not agree with you feel strongly about it. now, i believe if you put that amendment in it could very well jeopardize the ag bill. and i don't think you want

mrs. lummis: i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. lummis: i rise to oppose the amendment not because it is unworthy but because i believe that there are funds elsewhere in the bill that could be used to cover the services and research that the gentleman requests. i refer the gentleman to page 10, the national institute of food and agricultural research and education activities. those activities include for ag experiment station, $600 million , for grants payable to eligible institutions, $48 million, provided that each institution receives no less than $1 million . for special grants, $1.2 million. for competitive grants, for integrated pest management and biological control, $14 million. for competitive grants, $229.5 million. to remain available until expended. there's so much -- this is sloshing with research dollars. sloshing. i think there's plenty in this bill to cover the worthy research that the gentleman has requested. so i urge my colleagues to defeat the amendment. and i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman yields back th

mrs. lummis: i would skeent. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized. mrs. lummis: i would like to discuss the issue of the stock yards and the gipsa rule and i yield to my colleague from ohio. ms. kaptur: while i will not offer an amendment to section 721, a legislative legislation that prevents the u.s. department of agriculture of doing is job as instructed in the farm bill relative to fair come pgs, i rise in strong opposition to the language that is in the bill and when the authorizing committee wrote the farm bill, usda used the packers and stock yards act to restore fairness to the markets but instead allowing the agency to do its job, congress in an unevened handed way has allowed itself to be captured by the meet industry. while they are being squeezed out of the markets, large consolidated players manipulate the rules to favor their operations and congress can't stand by silent. on behalf of the farmers, ranchers and who struggle every day as they face the task, i oppose the base language in 721 and i would like to place two statements in the record

mrs. lummis: to reserve a point of order on the gentleman from new mexico's amendment. the chair: the point of order is reserved. the gentleman from new mexico is recognized. mr. lujan: lately we've seen a disturbing trend where marketers and retailers falsely use the unique brand of new mexico chili to misleading misadvertise their product. we take pride in our agricultural products. in particular, we take pride in our chili. we even spell it differently, madam, we spell it crmbing -- c-h-i-l-e. around new mexico i heard the plight of new mexico farmers. there's concerns with the importation of peppers, of chili powders from out of state and even from other countries that are hurting our producers in new mexico. it's a concern that may put them out of business and it's a concern that attacking the authentic new mexico chili brand. this unfair practice has led to decreased revenues for new mexico chili farmers who work all summer and to raise their crops for harvest in the fall months and when pr

mrs. lummis: i rise to oppose the amendment. and -- the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for five minutes. mrs. lummis: thank you, madam chairman. the gentleman from california would be correct that ranchers and farmers should be able to pay to deal with the predator situation. the problem is they are not allowed to. the federal government doesn't allow people to kill predators that are attacking their livestock. . so consequently here's another situation we discussed yesterday where the federal government puts restrictions on ranchers and farmers where they can't protect their own live stock so -- livestock so the taxpayers can't protect their own livestock that the federal government steps in. in addition, though, wildlife strikes costs -- excuse me -- wildlife strikes on airplanes costs u.s. commercial aviation $700 million a year. one part of wildlife services is when usda works with 822 domestic airports as well as department of defense airbases in the u.s. and in iraq and in afghanistan.

mrs. lummis: thank you. i yield my time to the gentleman from utah. the chair: the gentleman from utah is recognized. mr. chaffetz: thank you, i'll be brief, madam chair. i recognize the spirit in which you do this and i appreciate the process and the back and forth. i did want to say for the record, i would join with the gentlewoman from texas in -- i have advocated for a long time that we pull out of afghanistan and that we put that toward deficit reduction but i also think we have to bring back discretionary spending even further. and i would like to mention to this body that really what happens with the so-called ryan budget, the budget that this house passed, is that sets ceilings but it doesn't set floors. and i believe that one of the greatest threats in security to our future is the out-of-control debt and deficit that this country is encompassing. let's also remember that we spend in the neighborhood of $40 billion on u.s. aid. we haven't been able to take care of our own pocketbooks in our own country. and so it's very difficult to justify no

the clerk: amendment offered by mrs. lummis of wyoming. the chair: those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is again a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the chair: on this vote the yeas are 238, the noes are 177, the amendment is agreed to. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment offered by the gentleman from texas, mr. carter, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 1 printed in the congressional record offered by mr. carter of texas. the chair: a recorded

an amendment by mrs. lummis of wyoming. an amendment by mr. carter of texas. an amendment by mr. price of north carolina. an amendment by mr. sherman of california. an amendment by mr. gosar of arizona. the chair will reduce to two minutes the time for any electronic vote after the first vote in this series. the unfinished business is the request for recorded vote on an amendment offered by the gentleman from michigan, mr. clarke, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. clarke of michigan. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings f

section of the chairman's report so everyone knows how noncontroversial this provision is that mrs. lummis seeks to strike. i'm quoting. in order for them to strike agreements, the committee includes a general provision, section 547 in the bill, permitting the transfer of previously appropriated environmental mitigation funds under bizfit to the u.s. department of interior to carry out this purpose. the authority is narrowly tailored and controled to ensure that funds will only be transferred in accordance with the a written agreement between the secretaries of homeland security and interior, where the secretary of the interior submitted an expenditure plan 15 days in advance, detailing the actions proposed to be taken with amounts transferred, where the secretary of homeland security testifies that the actions outlined can in the be legally executed under the authorities of c.p.b. or any other component of the department of homeland security and the actions are determined to be necessary for the mitigation of construction operation and maintenance activity related to border security, end