Honoring the people of Shanksville, Pennsylvania, and the Flight 93 Ambassadors for their efforts in creating the Flight 93 temporary memorial and encouraging the completion of the National Park Service Flight 93 National Memorial by the 10th anniversary of September 11, 2001.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 799, I call up the conference report on the bill (H.R. 2997) making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include tabular and extraneous material on the conference report to accompany H.R. 2997.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I am delighted to present the 2010 Agriculture-Food and Drug Administration appropriations conference report. I want to note for my colleagues that this is the earliest that an Agriculture appropriations conference report has come to the House floor since 1999.

This report represents a culmination of many months of hard work in both Houses of Congress. I want to offer my thanks to the ranking member, Congressman Jack Kingston, for his collaboration and input over these months, and I also want to say ``thank you'' to the minority and majority staff for all of their tireless work in this effort, a ``thank you'' to our ranking member, Mr. Lewis, and a special ``thank you'' to Chairman Obey for his counsel on this effort.

We have been busy all year. The subcommittee has held seven hearings so far, including two hearings with the Secretary of Agriculture, a hearing with the Acting Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration and another with the Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services. We had a hearing on domestic nutrition programs, a hearing on the equivalency process for imported meat and poultry. We also had a hearing in which members discussed their priorities.

The fiscal year 2010 conference report before us, the culmination of the process, focuses on several key areas such as: supporting agricultural research, investing in rural communities, protecting public health, bolstering food nutrition programs and food aid, and conserving our natural resources. The final bill invests in these priorities and the agencies that can help us to meet them while making specific and sensible budget cuts where feasible.

The 2010 Agriculture-FDA appropriations conference report provides for $23.3 billion in funding, a 13 percent increase over 2009 levels, with major and responsible investments across the board.

In terms of protecting public health, the bill provides a substantial increase for the Food and Drug Administration--$306 million--to conduct more inspections of domestic and foreign food and medical products.

In addition, the bill fully funds the administration's request for the Food Safety and Inspection Service at the United States Department of Agriculture, providing over $1 billion for FSIS for the first time in history.

The appropriate funding of FDA and FSIS is not only a matter of public health and consumer safety, it is a matter of national and economic security. Not all of the dangers that threaten the health and safety of American families can be found in airports, border checkpoints or harbor containers.

Sometimes they lurk in our refrigerators and on our kitchen tables. We cannot afford to neglect our food safety system any longer, and I am pleased that we fund the FDA and the FSIS adequately in this bill.

With regards to nutrition, the bill provides $7.25 billion for WIC, the women, infants and children program, to serve our Nation's vulnerable populations and help those hit hardest by the economic crisis.

Our fundamental responsibility as legislators and as leaders, to say nothing of basic morality and fairness, demands that we do everything that we can to help Americans suffering right now from poverty and malnutrition. Each dollar we spend on nutrition here in this bill means food on the table for hungry families who are struggling.

The bill also includes $171 million for the Commodity Supplemental Food Program, or CSFP, and expands assistance to seven new States: Arkansas, Oklahoma, Delaware, Utah, New Jersey, Georgia and Maine.

In addition, conferees agreed to extend the school lunch program for 1 year at the request of the Education and Labor Committee to ensure that the school lunch program remains operational and that schoolchildren will not go hungry.

The bill makes significant investments in agricultural research: $1.2 billion for the Agricultural Research Service, over $1.3 billion for the National Institute for Food and Agriculture, and among the key programs funded is $262.5 million for the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative, a competitive research program.

In addition, the report seeks to create new opportunities for growth in the Nation's small-town economies with rural development and conservation. The agreement provides $12 billion for the section 502 Guaranteed Single-Family Housing Loans and $164 million for the Rural Energy for America Program, just two of the important programs funded here to encourage rural development.

The bill addresses concerns raised on a bipartisan basis about the need to modernize the Farm Service Agency's information technology networks and databases in order to provide more effective and secure service for the agency's customers. It fully funds the request of $67.3 million for this work.

The conference report increases funding for key safety nets for our farmers, $257 million more in farm ownership loans and $676 million more in farm operating loans than the President's request.

This agreement includes $350 million for dairy assistance, $290 million to the Secretary of Agriculture to supplement producers' income and $60 million for purchasing surplus cheese and other dairy products to distribute to food banks.

The conference agreement also works to conserve America's natural resources and thus sustain our national prosperity. It includes approximately $1 billion for the Natural Resources Conservation Service to improve service in the field, conserve and protect the environment and upgrade aging dams at risk of catastrophic failure. It restores funding eliminated in the budget for the Resource Conservation and Development program and maintains the House position of keeping it in a separate account.

It funds the Commodity Futures Trading Commission above the President's request to better secure the markets from improper speculation. And it continues to protect our Nation's families and farmers from the dangers posed by unsafe processed poultry imports from overseas. Some of you may be familiar with the long debate we've had over processed poultry from China. From the very beginning, I have insisted that the question of processed Chinese poultry imports be taken as a public health issue that must not be entangled in trade discussions. This conference report language provides meaningful assurances that the public health will be protected and that adequate preventive measures will be taken to ensure poultry products from China are safe.

The final conference language firmly establishes that Chinese poultry imports must live up to American sanitary conditions before being shipped to the United States. This includes requiring new onsite audits, new onsite inspections and an increased level of port-of-entry reinspections. The language also requires USDA to report frequently to the Congress on the implementation of any rule authorizing China to export poultry products to the U.S. This will allow the Congress to monitor USDA's work in this area on a frequent basis.

In short, the new language ensures the USDA will perform the necessary inspection and monitoring functions to minimize possible food safety threats from Chinese processed poultry imports. I look forward to working with the Secretary as this process moves forward.

Finally, for all the important investments in this bill, we have also made responsible cuts where warranted. This report includes $194 million in cuts below 2009, more than $1 billion in cuts below the 2010 budget request, and $346 million in cuts below the 2010 House-passed bill.

Taken as a whole, I believe we have crafted responsible agriculture legislation that alleviates short-term suffering, encourages long-term growth, invests in our future and reflects our priorities as a Nation.

In closing, let me take a moment to thank the staff who have worked diligently to help to put this bill together. Subcommittee majority staff--Martha Foley, our clerk, Leslie Barrack, Matthew Smith, Jason Weller, Cliff Isenberg and Kerstin Millius have worked closely with David Gibbons on the minority staff. In addition, Brian Ronholm and Letty Mederos on my staff, and Merritt Myers and Meg Gilley from Mr. Kingston's staff have been of tremendous help to this subcommittee.

I urge you to support this bill.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH07OC09.102

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH07OC09.103

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH07OC09.104

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH07OC09.105

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH07OC09.106

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH07OC09.107

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH07OC09.108

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH07OC09.109

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH07OC09.110

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, just to set the record straight on one or two

items, as the gentleman from Georgia knows, the difference between a little over 11 percent and a little over 13 percent comes from the $350 million allocation for U.S. dairy farmers. Now, I don't know if the gentleman has dairy farmers in his district, but North, South, East and West, the dairy industry is collapsing.

Now, it may be that you and your side of the aisle would like to see the dairy industry collapse. We pay for it. It's within the allocation, in addition to which we thought it was the right thing to do in order to deal with small farmers, people who are on their knees with regard to the dairy industry, and essentially because of what happened in China. If the truth be known, it is that given the tainted product in China, we were exporting--we were doing a voluminous export business to China. Because the product was tainted, the Chinese were not buying their product because it killed their kids. So they are not buying milk, and our dairy farmers are suffering as a result of that.

Now, I happen to believe it is an appropriate responsibility for our government to look at what was happening to the U.S. dairy farmers and to provide them with assistance, and the gentleman knows what that is.

In addition to this, one additional point. We keep hearing about air- dropping. You know, it sounds good, and maybe the view is that if you continue to repeat it often enough, it will somehow in some way catch on. There was no such thing as air-dropping anything into this bill. As a matter of fact, as far as I know, Education and Labor is an authorizing committee. This went through the authorizing committee, and essentially, as I said in my opening remarks, conferees--House, Senate, Democrat, Republican--agreed to extend for 1 year the child nutrition program because it isn't ready to move to reauthorization yet. And what would that cut off if we did not, if we did not extend it under this bill? It would mean the school breakfast program, the school lunch program.

I know several years ago folks on the other side of the aisle thought it was a good idea to end the school lunch program. I think probably on a bipartisan basis these days no one believes that we should end these nutrition programs. So nothing was air-dropped. It was vetted by the committee, supported by Chairs and ranking members, both sides of the aisle, House and Senate, and essentially what we did, at no cost within this allocation, was to extend this program for a year.

With that, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa).

I am happy to yield 3 minutes to a member of the committee and former member of the committee, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur).

I am delighted to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).

I would be happy to accept an invitation for breakfast. I love grits with butter and salt. What do you put first, the butter or the salt? I'll take your advice on that.

I'd be happy to yield.

Amen.

With that, let me yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Davis).

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield the gentleman an additional 1 minute.

First of all, let me just say thank you to the ranking member, Mr. Kingston; and, in fact, it is a pleasure to work with Mr. Kingston. We always say that we may have philosophical differences, but we are good-natured about it and understand that and work in a very collaborative effort. And I, too, thank you for all of your help and your input with regard to the issue of Chinese poultry. It was a long discussion, but one in which I think we came to a conclusion as our colleague, Mr. Davis, said being able to strike that balance where we are able to protect the public health and at the same time to protect an industry. And I feel good about that.

And I, too, look forward to our continued efforts together as we approach problems--as you know and I do--that really face people with the jurisdiction that we have that comes under this portfolio. It really touches people's lives in so, so many ways. And I know that you have a deep and abiding concern for what happens to our farmers and our ranchers, what's happening to our industries and to making sure that we have the wherewithal and provide the resources people need to succeed.

I would like to, if I might, just make one further comment, and then we'll yield back whatever time is remaining.

I wanted to bring the attention of my colleagues to an important matter of health and safety. And when we talked about the child nutrition program and its extension, our Nation's schoolchildren and the people who work with them on a daily basis are faced with a growing public health concern. Awareness of vaccine for H1N1 flu, annual flu has made the front pages of our communities these days.

You've got school food service workers who face a very difficult dilemma in trying to do their jobs. They don't have any paid sick leave. These are people without any leave. So there's thousands of food service workers who pose a real risk to the health and safety of our Nation's kids. And the comment is ``show up for work or do not get paid.''

So rather than exacerbating the problems, these workers can and should be part of the solution to ensuring the health and safety of our children. I look forward to working in the months ahead as Education and Labor looks to reauthorize their legislation, and I pledge to work with my colleagues to see if we can provide a minimum and a reasonable standard for paid sick leave for school service workers.

In the meantime, I am also encouraging the administration to examine this issue because I think it is a health problem and the Nation's well-being depends on it.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

I want to tell a story about Kika de la Garza who at one time was chairman of the Ag Committee. Chairman de la Garza came down to Georgia and visited the Kings Bay nuclear submarine plant. At that time, as it still is, our nuclear submarine plant was a marvel of technology and was really a floating and submerged fortress that was one of the most powerful weapons on the globe today.

He asked the captain, Tell me about this nuclear generator. Well, the generator goes on and on, and of course nuclear is a very powerful source of fuel. He said, Well, what would make you turn the submarine around? If the nuclear generation can make this submarine go all over the globe without stopping, without ever having to stop to refuel, what makes you go back to port? And the captain of the nuclear submarine looked at the chairman of the Agriculture Committee with some amazement and amusement and said, Well, Mr. Chairman, we turn around when we run out of food. That's a very profound statement. It's something that as we debate this bill, I think we should be aware of.

Our agricultural policies can be a little peculiar, can be a little bit difficult to follow, and can be open to a lot of criticism, but our food policy works. We have a large food supply, an abundant food supply at very low prices. Indeed, when you go into a grocery store, you complain if you can't get fruit 12 months a year or if the milk isn't at a good price or whatever it is. We have a good food policy in America and, as a result, we spend more time talking about obesity than we do hunger. So I think all Members should be very appreciative of the Ag appropriations conference report. We all support it in some fashion, sometimes not necessarily casting a vote ``yes,'' but the vote, nonetheless, isn't indicative of how we feel about the importance of agriculture.

I have some concerns about this bill. We have worked very closely as a subcommittee. We've had a lot of hearings. The chairwoman is a very vigorous, energized member and has a lot of passion on lots of different issues. We have a lot of great agreements and a lot of disagreements on some things that she feels passionately about and some things I feel passionately about. As she has mentioned, we both have very strong staffs on the majority and on the minority side. We're very appreciative of that, and I think we have got a good ag family. My concerns about this bill though, Mr. Speaker, focus on the spending levels.

This bill was higher than last year when it left the House, and now it's again higher, now that it's come back to the House from the Senate. The bill is nearly 14 percent higher than it was last year. The discretionary spending level is $23.3 billion, and it's about $2.8 billion over last year's level. The mandatory spending is 11 percent higher than 2009. Combined, the mandatory and the discretionary spending levels are about 12 percent higher than last year. I'm concerned about that because, you know, food prices haven't gone up that much.

Think about Social Security. Our seniors will not be receiving a COLA this year because, among other things, Social Security is based on inflation, which has a reflection of food. So they are scheduled not to receive a COLA, and yet people on food stamps are going to get a huge increase. I find that bothersome. If we look at some of the individual accounts, I could tick them off. But I would just say, if you look at some things, why is the spending up so high?

Well, take broadband. Broadband has about $4 million in it this year, yet in the stimulus package which was passed--the stimulus package which was financed not on tax dollars but on borrowed dollars and printed dollars. It's a package that our children's children will be paying for. In that package, the Rural Utility Service received $2.5 billion, not to mention another $2.5 billion--actually, about $3 billion--that was in another account that the Department of Commerce will be funding. None of that has been spent yet. So we've got $6 billion to $7 billion in broadband that came out of the stimulus bill that has not been used, yet this bill gives them another $4.5 billion. That defies common sense.

Food stamps, this bill has $4.3 billion more than 2009. Half of the mandatory spending is in food stamps, $58.3 billion. But in the stimulus bill, food stamps received a $19 billion slug of money. It wasn't because of an increase in food prices. It was allegedly because of new enrollment or anticipated new enrollment. But this bill still gives food stamps an increase. It's ironic, because one of the things this bill also does in reaction to falling milk prices is it gives the dairy farmers more money. So we're giving people who get food stamps an increase.

This bill does not fund Social Security, but just to think about this in a sequence, Social Security recipients do not get an increase; food stamp recipients do get an increase because of a rise in food costs and dairy farmers get money because of falling dairy prices. That's not consistent. I think we could do better than that.

Food for Peace gets $1.69 billion. That's an increase of $462 million on top of what they just got in the stimulus bill of $700 million. I don't think that is justified at this point in time. So I have some real concerns about our spending. Keep in mind that the Obama administration will have the historical record of the highest deficit in the history of the United States Congress, three times as high as the highest deficit in the history of the United States. I want to repeat that. The Obama-Pelosi deficit will be $1.5 trillion this year. That's three times as high as the highest deficit in the history of the United States of America.

Now, we had an opportunity to save some money. We had an opportunity to save $150 million, but instead, what we did in the conference report was air-drop five new pilot programs: a summer food program for $85 million; equipment assistance program, $25 million; WIC breast-feeding outreach at about $5 million; nutrition outreach for day care, $8 million; and direct certification expansion of $25 million. These programs may have some merit. Perhaps we can easily get these programs passed by Members of the House and Members of the Senate, but they did not come through the authorizing committee. They did not come through the Ag Committee. They were not debated. There were not hearings on it. They were air-dropped in this committee, and I'm not convinced that the administration formally asked for them.

There was a lot of discussion about these so-called pilot programs. But why not give the money back to the taxpayers? Why not say, Okay, we have got $150 million. Let's not go out and create new programs because we know what happens to new programs. Ronald Reagan said it best. He said, If you don't believe in eternal life, try killing a Federal program. It's impossible. You find out how many people have a brother- in-law who works for the particular agency anytime you try to kill any program whatsoever.

So I'm very concerned about the spending of the Obama-Pelosi team, and it has less to do with the Ag appropriations bill but much more to do with the direction of Congress. So my worry about this bill was really tied into a bigger picture of spending.

As I said, I think we've done a good job this year. We've worked hard on a lot of things. Many of these accounts are things that I would fight for and I would certainly support 100 percent of what we're doing with them. But I am concerned about the big picture, because when I talk about that big Pelosi-Obama deficit of $1.5 trillion, that doesn't even talk about the $1.29 trillion health care bill that we will be facing soon, which I would say that even if you think a public option is great, if you think that the government who brought us Cash for Clunkers can run health care, you've still got to step back and say, But can you afford it?

So as we look at these appropriations bills, I think more and more people in America are saying, You know what? You Republicans spent too much money, but doggone it if it's not on supercharge right now. You've got to do something about it.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I'll reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to make the point that an earmark that has not been vetted by the subcommittee, not been voted on by the full committee and appears in a conference report is an air- dropped earmark. In this case, the Education and Labor Committee debated these, but they never voted on it. And if they did vote on it, we could have had the vote on the House floor on suspension.

Maybe we could say it's an unauthorized earmark, but it did not come through the House, did not come through the Senate. It appeared in conference committee. And as my friend knows, I have been very steadfast and maybe the only Republican to constantly compliment the majority on a very good job of reducing the number of earmarks. In fact, I have said that at the subcommittee level, at the full committee level, and at the conference committee level. So credit where credit is due. But I really think on this one these things have been air dropped because they did not come through our committee and they did not come through the Senate. Maybe there's a better word than ``air dropped,'' but they were not voted on by the committee.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about some of the great research that we have done in agriculture which I think is important.

A few years ago I was talking to an ag researcher down in south Georgia, and he's an entomologist and has been doing some work with wasps, and he found out that wasps react differently around gunpowder. And it was a fascinating study because they thought maybe there would be an application in the war on terrorism with wasps, and they might be cheaper than using these very expensive canine dogs to sniff cars. I thought that's pretty interesting. I don't know how they're going to do it. I don't want wasps let loose in my car the way these dogs are. But that's just one example of some of the research that's being done that could potentially save us money.

Another example of some of the great research is, take a city like New Orleans. They have a huge problem with subterranean termites. Termites are a fascinating animal. The more you learn about it, the more you appreciate them. They actually can change sexes. They can live underground in colonies for years and years. But when they run out of wood, they start burrowing holes in all directions trying to find another piece of wood, and when they can't find one, they start coming up to our foundation. Now, that is millions of dollars a year, millions of dollars a year that we have in termite damage that this bill seeks to study.

Another thing, and it doesn't affect my friend up in Connecticut, but everybody in the South who has ever eaten a proper breakfast with grits knows that if you leave the grits in the cabinet too long, it doesn't matter how good your bug spray is. There are grubs coming up. I know I shouldn't be telling you this before I invite you over to eat at my house. But a problem in any household that has flour or something is that after a while, if you leave it on the shelf, you start getting these bugs that get in it. And you wonder how do they get in there? They actually come as part of the meal, and that's not the meal you eat but the meal from the meal. And the question is, how do you stop that problem? Ag research is doing that kind of work, and it's an example of some of the things that we're looking at in this bill.

So while we do have some disagreements on the funding, we both believe passionately, as Mr. Farr said, let the smart guys with the white coats in the back room study these things and come up with new inventions and new technologies.

At the University of Georgia one of the labs is studying getting fuel from algae. And, of course, we know algae can be a problem. If they can figure out how to make fuel out of it, it would be a wonderful thing. Kudzu, a plant that we actually imported from China maybe 60 or 70 years ago to stop erosion in the South, has grown wild, and yet the University of Tennessee is trying to figure out can you get fuel from kudzu?

They're doing the same thing with pine trees. Can you make cellulosic ethanol out of pine trees and, if so, a State like Georgia, which is about 66 percent in trees, we would become the Saudi Arabia of cellulosic ethanol. So it would be a great thing.

We're excited about this. There are so many great mysteries that we have yet to solve in our plants and animal world that this bill does study.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

If my friend will yield.

The great thing about really great grits is you put cheese in them.

But the invitation is open.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I just wanted to thank the Chair and the majority staff for all of the good

work. We have had a very good process. I congratulate you on passing this bill as among the very first--and let the record show that if it was up to Agriculture, we would adjourn on time, whenever that may be.

And also I want to thank you for working with us on poultry, as Mr. Davis said. It's very, very important to particular States especially. And having a Chinese market is important but at the same time--you know, what Ms. Kaptur said is very interesting. She said we don't need to be importing food; we need to produce our own food and then exporting that which is left. And yet as important as that is economically, you have always focused on the food safety as you should as the number one value. And I think that's important because if you are importing or exporting food that is not inspected and it is not at the highest quality and standard of food safety, then we're not doing our job.

So I certainly commend you for keeping that bar very high, and yet we were able to work something out. I've enjoyed the whole process.

My concern with the bill--as you know I've been very open about it-- has something to do beyond this room, if you will, in terms of the spending picture. But having been in the majority, I know that your job is to come together with lots of different factions and philosophies, and I think you have done a great job on it. I am proud to be your ranking member and look forward to a long relationship, and you are going to love my grits.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I thank the chairwoman for yielding time to me.

I rise in strong support of the Agriculture appropriations conference report. I'm really proud that I think I'm the only member of the committee who sits in the Western United States, where an awful lot of our agriculture in this country comes from. And one of the things I've learned about being on this committee, in the regular authorization committee, is that there is probably no other subject matter that touches every part of the United States as much as the Department of Agriculture. One of the oldest departments in government, essentially touching all the cultures and all of the qualities of rural America.

And in a very urbanized country right now, it's important that we think about rural America because that's the part of America that feeds us and in many cases feeds much of the world. The food and fiber produced in this country is the lifeblood of our Nation. This bill continues the focus on the needs of all Americans, both rural and urban.

Just a few of the things I am very keen on is that I don't think we can stay ahead of the rest of the world in any field unless we commit our best brains and talent to it. The best resources of America are intellectual resources. So you apply those intellectual resources to research, staying ahead of the curve. I am fortunate to represent ``the salad bowl of the United States,'' the Salinas Valley in Monterey County. The production of agriculture there in just one county is about $4 billion, and it's about 85 different crops. And those crops are what we call fresh crops. That means they go from the field to your fork. And we need to make sure we have all the research that's necessary to make those things fresh and safe for you.

I am also keen on this committee because this is the committee that's in charge of putting the funds in for school nutrition programs and all the other kinds of nutrition programs, food stamps and the WIC program, Women, Infants, and Children. And these are the nutrition programs that are so essential to getting the right start and a healthy start not only in the beginning of life but for every day in our schools. And we have a lot of work to do in that area.

I'd also like to thank the chairwoman because she has been very involved in plusing-up the Buildings and Facilities Account in order to advance some of these important construction projects that would allow research to continue. I have a very active agriculture research station in Salinas, and it's leading the way on crop improvement protection.

So I appreciate what both Mr. Kingston and Ms. DeLauro have done in bringing this bill and the conference report to us today, and I would strongly urge that all our Members support this. This is going to appropriate money to keep the Department of Agriculture and Food and Drug and safety going for another year with conditions that I think are very meaningful for this year in the United States.

It's a good bill and it deserves support. A lot of hard work went into it, and I thank them for their leadership.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Agriculture Appropriations Conference Report for fiscal year 2010.

Chairwoman DeLauro and Ranking Member Kingston are to be commended for the product they helped craft. As a member of the Subcommittee I know that there are differences in ideas and I appreciate the Chairwoman's efforts to have open debate.

Mr. Speaker--the food and fiber produced in this country is the lifeblood of our nation. This bill continues to focus on the needs of all Americans, both rural and urban.

It is imperative that we continue to fund priority areas such and research, food safety, nutrition programs and pest detection--just to name a few--that are important to the nation as well as my constituents on California's Central Coast.

I am fortunate to represent the Salad Bowl of the World, the Salinas Valley in Monterey County, that has a production value for agriculture of almost $4 billion last year, according to Eric Lauritzen, our County Agriculture Commissioner.

We grow primarily for a fresh market, and the investments made in this bill for research, pest detection and food safety are paramount to the growers because without them they couldn't do business.

Agricultural research is an everyday job for many in the Salinas Valley, and the Agriculture Research Service's Research Station in Salinas is leading the way in crop improvement and protection.

Every day, the station's researchers are making agriculture better for all of us. From organics, verticillium wilt and vine mealy bug research to methyl bromide alternatives and treatments for postharvest pest control on perishable commodities, Salinas is leading the charge to keep our food supplies healthy and safe.

The Chairwoman and I have discussed at length many times the need to plus-up the Buildings and Facilities Account in order to advance some of these important construction projects.

I appreciate the gentlewoman's efforts to increase the B&F this year and look forward to working with you in the future to find a solution so we can get shovels in the ground for many of these vital research facilities.

Having the largest fresh production capacity in the world, my growers know how important food safety is. They have already invested millions of dollars in their own resources to provide safe and wholesome food to the nation and the world.

I also appreciate the gentlewoman's efforts to help FDA improve the safety of domestic and imported food by adding $306 million above the investment we made 2009.

It is time that FDA receives necessary resources to perform time- critical inspections when dealing with the fresh market.

No less important than food safety is pest detection. I am especially glad this conference agreement bolstered the APHIS account in this area. We have in recent outbreaks that strong pest detection program that prevent outbreaks of invasive species in the first place is the most cost-effective way to deal with pests and diseases that are not native to our country.

Finally I would be remiss not to mention the investment made in this conference report for nutrition. In a country as bountiful as ours, it is unacceptable that so many still go to bed hungry.

This conference report includes a one-year extension for the child nutrition program authorities and has reinvested $150 million in savings back into the child nutrition programs to fund select administration and committee priorities for reducing childhood hunger and improving child nutrition, building program capacity and improving program access and program performance.

Thank you Chairwoman DeLauro for crafting another outstanding bill, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this conference report.

I thank the chairman and ranking member for their work in bringing before the floor the conference agreement between the House and the Senate.

I rise in support of the conference agreement for H.R. 2997, the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2010. I believe this is a robust investment in America's farming and rural development needs, and it ensures a brighter economic future for all Americans.

I am particularly pleased with the investment in America's farmers, both through funding for agriculture research and for farm production. As a long-time farmer, and also a former employee of the United States Department of Agriculture, I understand firsthand how focused investments make concrete differences in America's food production as well as the folks that work tirelessly to provide it.

Contained in this conference agreement, the Agriculture Research receives a 5 percent increase from the current level of funding. This vital service provides research in a variety of areas, including bio- based products, bioenergy, floriculture, and nurseries. Included in the approximate 100 research locations nationwide that are funded by ARS is the University of Tennessee; the Institute of Agriculture, which is conducting bioenergy research on converting switchgrass into cellulosic ethanol. Research on clean bioenergy is vital to America's quest to become energy independent.

Also included is increased funding for research to provide early warning technologies for the detection of crop disease to prevent crop failure from natural causes or a terrorist event. The research addresses needs to produce such a system that could take advantage of biotech advances to develop a precision agriculture tool for guarding America's crops.

Further, I am pleased by the increase in funding for the Farm Service Agency. The FSA administers major commodity programs and farm loan programs such as the Farm Ownership and Farm Operating loan programs. Farm Ownership loans, which received a 47 percent increase through fiscal year 2009 funding levels, often provided the initial investments to help farmers acquire and expand land ownership. Farm operating loans, which receive a 43 percent increase from fiscal year 2009 funding levels, allow farmers to purchase equipment, livestock, and seed. This funding is critical to ensure the continued role of America as the world's greatest agriculture producer.

As a lifelong farmer representing the district with the fourth largest percentage of rural residents, I am proud to support these investments and urge passage of the conference agreement for H.R. 2997. Saying that is the fourth largest congressional district, as far as rural residents that I represent, means we have a variety and probably one of the most diverse agriculture districts in America: cotton, soybeans, corn, nursery stock. We have timber; both beef cattle and dairy cattle.

We also have a large poultry, the broiler industry, across the Cumberland Plateau, in the southern part of the plateau and the northern part of the plateau.

I am pleased that in this legislation it at least addresses import and reimportation of poultry that may be produced here in America. There are some guards and some guidelines that I think we must have.

I have been a poultry producer of broilers as a youngster growing up on a farm in Fentress County, Tennessee; and I know if we allow the poultry industry to be run out of business, it will destroy many of the farms in the Fourth Congressional District that I represent.

So I am pleased that our chairman was willing to work an agreement that would at least require certain inspection to be sure that safe food was imported into America from poultry and to also help protect our poultry industry in America and certainly in the Fourth Congressional District.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the H. Res. 795. The legacy of the events of September 11, 2001 still resonates today. We will never forget the harrowing experience of the loss of more than 3,000 lives that marked this national tragedy. We will never forget the events of that day, nor those who paid the ultimate price. We will forever remember how the country suffered profound sadness, the likes of which we as a nation hope to never experience again.

Madam Speaker, I recall vividly the intense emotions evoked as the attacks unfolded. The Nation watched in horror as two airliners crashed into the Twin Towers and brought down the World Trade Center. That horror intensified as we witnessed an attack on the Pentagon--and a crashed airplane in Pennsylvania. Horror turned to anger as it came to light that the attacks were the actions of hate-filled cowards who had no respect for human life. I remember too, that in the aftermath of these senseless attacks, we came together as a nation and with friends from around the world united in grief and sadness. That moment transformed our country and the world, as the resolve of our Nation strengthened and our principles hardened.

We remember the heroes from that day; those who ran into the danger, sacrificing themselves to save strangers. We remember the heroes from United Flight 93 who overpowered the terrorists and gave their own lives to prevent the deaths of countless others. We hope that their families can take some small measure of comfort knowing that Americans have made a permanent place for those heroes in our hearts.

As a Senior Member of the Foreign Affairs and Homeland Security Committees, I believe that we must continue to honor the fallen by working to prevent needless deaths. In the years since September 11, 2001, Congress has worked hard to make sure that such a tragedy will never happen again. In large part, we have taken heed of the advice of the 9/11 Commission and built a strong system to prevent future attacks.

Madam Speaker, I rise before this body to say that our work is not yet done. Our Nation's rail and mass transit lines continue to be vulnerable. Millions of Americans rely on our rail and mass transit for transportation. Terrorist attacks in Madrid in 2004 and London in 2006 indicate that transportation routes continue to be potential security threats. We must not let another tragedy occur.

Preventing terrorism at home begins with addressing terrorism abroad. We must engage nations that are susceptible to the influence of extremists and arm them with the tools to fight radicalism. That means not only providing weapons of war but also increasing education, improving living conditions, and increasing the capacity to govern. The struggle against terrorism will be won in the hearts and minds of people around the world.

Madam Speaker, I urge all members to join me in supporting H. Res. 722. Let us remember this day and the tragedy that befell the Nation by properly honoring the victims with our renewed commitment to America's security.