Student Apprenticeship Act of 2020

Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 28, I call up the bill (H.R. 265) making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2019, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

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

Madam Speaker, today marks the 20th day of the partial government shutdown. Each day pushes many of our government's vital services to the breaking point, further jeopardizing the 800,000 Federal employees who are furloughed and the countless other Americans feeling the shutdown's impact.

The Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act is a critically important piece of legislation for our Nation. From the food we eat to the medications we depend on, this bill touches the lives of every American.

It must be passed now, and the furloughed employees at these vital Federal agencies, our farmers, our agribusinesses, and the other Americans who are depending on their livelihoods must be brought back to work.

Because of the shutdown, USDA has stopped making loans and grants for rural development programs such as housing, water and wastewater facilities, and community facilities. New grants to our universities for agriculture research can't be made.

Across the Nation, Farm Service Agency county offices have been closed since December 28. Farmers applying for relief from retaliatory tariffs are in limbo, waiting for the shutdown to end. Nearly 33,000 USDA employees who are funded by this bill are currently furloughed.

At the Food and Drug Administration, more than 10,000 employees are working without pay, while another 7,000 have been furloughed, which is impacting everything from user fee collections to the reduction of food safety inspections, jeopardizing the food we eat. According to USDA, nearly 9,000 people are working without pay to inspect our meat, poultry, and egg products.

This bill would fund the Food Safety and Inspection Service at over $1 billion and restore our safety.

I will be the first person to admit that this bill is not perfect, but no bill ever is. However, this is about opening the government and putting it back to work for the American people.

This bill has passed the Senate by a vote of 92-6. There is no reason why we should not pass this bill since it has already been adopted by the leadership of the Senate and the Members of the Senate overwhelmingly, so that we can put American workers back on the job.

Specifically, this legislation provides over $23 billion in discretionary funding for USDA and FDA. That is $225 million above the 2018 enacted level.

It provides $2.73 billion for agriculture research conducted by the Agricultural Research Service and NIFA, an increase of $114 million from fiscal year 2018. These increases will help to ensure American agriculture remains competitive with other nations.

The Farm Service Agency, whose county offices were shuttered on December 28, is funded at $1.6 billion. In my district, all the county offices are now closed. These offices are the primary line of communication for our farmers and our ranchers, providing critical data, processing loans, and answering questions. Without this assistance and information, they are left in the dark when it comes to planning for next year's harvest.

Peanut sellers and cotton growers, who suffered from Hurricane Michael recently, are at a loss. They have product that is stored in warehouses that they need to sell in order to get income, but they can't get those sales accomplished without an okay from the Farm Service Agency. Those offices are closed. Nobody is there.

This legislation also makes significant investments in rural development by providing $3.8 billion. It takes a balanced approach with investments in water and wastewater facilities, broadband, housing, and rural businesses.

Again, right now, as a result of the shutdown, loans and grants that help small towns and rural communities all across the country are not being made.

This legislation rejects the President's proposed elimination of the Food for Peace program and instead funds it at $1.716 billion, which is $216 million above the House bill. The McGovern-Dole program, which was also proposed for elimination by the President, is funded at $210 million, slightly above the House level. I might note that the House funded both of these, contrary to the President's wishes.

Finally, this legislation funds the Food and Drug Administration at $2.97 billion, which is $159 million above the fiscal year 2018 enacted level, a 6 percent increase.

I would also like to point out that this bill does better than the House in addressing the opioid crisis that is hitting every single district in the country.

It also provides more funding for food safety than the House bill.

After nearly 3 weeks of uncertainty, it looks like the nearly 40 million people who are receiving Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits will be able to keep their benefits at least through February. However, the funds for SNAP beneficiaries, for a single mother or a small shopkeeper, will run dry in March.

This bill, which provides $73.2 billion in mandatory funding for SNAP, will end any doubt about this, and it will give these recipients the peace of mind that they deserve.

Through a diverse urban-rural coalition, this legislation includes our farmer safety net, our food and nutrition programs.

Families, farmers, ranchers, and producers go to work every morning; so should their government.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), who is the first female chair of the United States House Committee on Appropriations.

Madam Speaker, I am delighted to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), a member of the Committee on Appropriations and chair of the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies, and is the former chair of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Subcommittee of Appropriations.

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

Let me just say that, as we said before, this bill is not perfect, but we should not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Chief among the funding in this bill is funding that is included to combat one of the biggest public health risks today which is opioids. The bill provides strong support for the FDA to combat this opioid epidemic.

In addition to funds provided last year, it provides $59 million to continue the activities involved in inspecting, investigating, and screening of opioids. As the agency that oversees these drugs, the FDA has a vital responsibility, I agree, to make sure that the public health impacts of opioid abuse is mitigated, but this funding is just one part of a broad strategy to address opioids.

The committee strongly supports the FDA's role in intergovernmental efforts to confront the crisis, but since we must move forward and open the government, we urge adoption of this bill.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee), a member of the Committee on Appropriations, co-chair of the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee, and a long-time advocate for the elimination of persistent poverty in America and across the world.

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

It has been said many times that we shouldn't pass this bill which has previously been adopted by the Senate because the President will not sign it.

Well, I believe that we have three branches of government, and it is our obligation as the legislative branch to pass the laws. If we do our job, then we will let the President be held responsible for his failure to do his. We must keep this government open for the American people.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Maine (Ms. Pingree), a member of the Committee on Appropriations and a member of the Subcommittee for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies.

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

Madam Speaker, at this point I would just like to say that it is unconscionable that we will hold the American people hostage in denying them the services and the protections of their government, the much- needed paychecks for the workers employed by these agencies, simply to satisfy the ego of someone at the end of Pennsylvania Avenue.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), who is the chairman of the authorizing Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to just say that the gentleman from Washington makes some salient points. I agree with the gentleman that the Freedom of Information Act and the SNAP retail sales language is something that we would love to have and should be in this legislation.

Also, I look forward to working with the gentleman to take care of that as we move forward in the 116th Congress, as well as our work on the H-2A program, which is in bad need of repair. And persistent poverty, the 10-20-30 program, we are happy that the gentleman is supportive and that the committee has been supportive. We look forward to making sure that that is implemented fully as we move forward.

But, right now, we have to open the government. We cannot afford to let this government remain closed to continue to hurt the American people.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott), who is my classmate and the chair of the Committee on Education and Labor.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Costa), who is a member of the authorizing House Committee on Agriculture. He represents an area in California that is called the salad bowl of our country.

Madam Speaker, I yield the gentleman from California an additional 20 seconds.

Madam Speaker, may I inquire how much time remains.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee), who is a member of the House Committee on Ways and Means and who is also the chief deputy whip.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz), the chair-designate of Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Panetta), as I prepare to close and urge my colleagues to open the Department of Agriculture, the Food and Drug Administration, and all the agencies. He is a member of the House Committee on Agriculture and Committee on Ways and Means. He also represents the salad bowl of this country.

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

Mr. Speaker, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's motion.

Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of a point of order.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, as many know, I have been and will continue to be an advocate and a supporter of rural broadband expansion. I view it as an obligation to provide adequate service for everyone, as it is vital to health, safety, the economy, and the welfare of all of our rural communities.

The $425 million that is provided in this bill will complement the $600 million that was provided in the FY 2018 bill, which has not yet been spent.

USDA recently completed the program design, and it can now begin implementing and, if this bill is enacted, awarding over $1 billion in broadband expansion funding to the communities that need it the most.

This funding is in addition to the other programs that assist communities in getting broadband services, including the Community Connect Program, the Broadband Loan Program, and the Distance Learning and Telecommunication Program.

We have funding in the works to accomplish the needs for rural broadband. We need to pass this bill because we need to open the government. We need to make sure that USDA and the Food and Drug Administration and all of the agencies that are shut down will open, and open quickly, to support the needs of the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I urge that this motion to recommit be rejected, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the bill that is before us. I not only oppose the bill that is before us, but I also have to oppose the process by which the remaining fiscal year 2019 bills are being dealt with by the new majority.

Anything but a full open rule on appropriations bills was absolutely condemned by the Democrats for the past 8 years. However, the new majority, as one of their first actions, has proposed a closed rule for all four appropriations bills this week.

I, along with my colleagues, am dismayed at the prospect of adopting the Senate-passed Agriculture appropriations bill to represent the House's position on funding and policy matters for our farmers, ranchers, producers, consumers, and nearly all the citizens impacted by the great work that has been done by USDA, FDA, and the CFTC.

The priorities of literally hundreds of Members were part of the original FY19 Republican-led legislation.

Around 10 months ago, we began the process of developing a House bill with House priorities. We drafted H.R. 5961 after holding five oversight hearings, after receiving and reviewing nearly 6,000 bills and report requests that were submitted by over 350 Members of Congress, after we incorporated bipartisan House Member requests covering House priorities from every corner of the Nation and from all demographics, after we held a subcommittee markup with full participation by the Agriculture Subcommittee members, and after we held a full committee markup that lasted several hours and was an open process by which all the members of the committee, Democrats and Republicans, could offer amendments.

The House Members invested hundreds of hours to produce a spending bill that is best for the needs and the priorities of the constituents back home, whether they came from rural, whether they came from suburban, or whether they come from urban communities.

Starting this past summer, we started the process of negotiating the House and Senate bills and reports to arrive at a four-corner agreement between the House and the Senate. The House and the Senate majority and minority parties made tremendous progress in coming along with a negotiated agreement.

After all of that time and effort that was invested in the process, why would we throw it all away today?

I want to point out that over the course of the past 10 months and during my 6 years that I have served as chairman of the Appropriations Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Subcommittee, it has been an honor to work beside my friend and my colleague and now the incoming chairman, Mr. Bishop of Georgia, as we develop the bills to meet the needs of our fellow citizens.

But now we have an Agriculture appropriations bill in front of us today which totals $23.1 billion and $101 million below the Senate- passed Agriculture appropriations bill. And I will point out that the $101 million represents a change to the Senate bill made by the House majority to reduce funding for the Special Supplemental Feeding Program for Women, Infants, and Children.

Let me provide this Chamber with a few of the examples where this current bill fails to fund House Member priorities:

Regarding public health, the House Republican bill included $3.1 billion for the Food and Drug Administration, while the new Democratic proposal that is before us includes only $2.9 billion for the Food and Drug Administration. The higher levels in the Republican bill are critical to helping industry advance their medical product innovations to the marketplace sooner, safer, and with greater efficiency. The ultimate beneficiary is the American consumer or the patient.

Also, compared to the House Republican bill, the Democratic bill fails to include two provisions that place limits on chicken imported from China. The Republican bill includes an outright ban on Chinese chicken in school meals, while the Democratic bill fails to include this protection for our children.

Regarding rural broadband, in FY 2018, we established a pilot program to expand broadband infrastructure to rural communities. One of the greatest needs that I have heard when talking to my constituents in rural Alabama--and I know this is the same from other Members whom I have talked to across the Nation--this bill provides $125 million less than what we provided in the House bill.

When it comes to agriculture research, our Republican bill included nearly $30 million more for National Institute of Food and Agriculture for research priorities of House Members who are not included in the Democratic proposal.

When it comes to rural infrastructure, the Republican bill included language to secure set-aside funds for persistent poverty counties in rural areas. This provision is vital to rural communities across the country that face challenges escaping poverty. This language is not included in the Democratic bill, and so the new majority chose to dismiss this protection for the rural poor.

These are just a few examples of why the new House majority's adoption of a Senate-passed bill is not going in the right direction.

The other side wants to claim that these bills are bipartisan, but they are clearly not bicameral, and they have no input from the 435 House Members.

Some of the great House appropriators of our time on both sides of the aisle would probably be rolling over in their graves right now if they knew of such a move to take up Senate spending bills without any House input.

So I urge my fellow Members to stand up for the House priorities for public health and for rural development and reject a strategy of passing the Senate bills, which at the end of the day is not going to bring us any closer to resolving the partial government shutdown.

To paraphrase the President's remarks two nights ago: In order for us to resolve this funding dispute, we need to invest in border security not because we hate the people on the outside of our borders, but because we love the people within our borders. The only thing that is immoral is for politicians to stand by and do nothing.

So I would encourage my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Yoho), who serves on the authorizing committee, the Agriculture Committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Palazzo), who serves on the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee. He has been a vital part of that subcommittee.

Madam Speaker, at this time I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Granger), the new ranking member of the Appropriations Committee.

Madam Speaker, at this time I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Mitchell), who serves on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and also the Armed Services Committee.

Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Michigan.

Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from the State of Washington (Mr. Newhouse), who serves on the Appropriations Committee.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

As I noted earlier, the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee received over 350 Members who came before our subcommittee and submitted requests. Many of those requests included support for animal disease and for plant pests destroying agriculture products. Let me just give an example of some that we heard.

The House bill included $15 million to fight the pest from China called the spotted lanternfly. This pest is destroying fruits, vegetables, and ornamentals in the mid-Atlantic States.

The House bill included $5 million more for the oriental fruit fly that ravaged south Florida.

The House bill and also the House report included higher amounts for the citrus greening disease killing the orange groves across Florida.

I can give numerous examples of other House priorities and directives included in the House bill and report by the majority that have been dismissed by the Senate bill. Like I said, these are just some examples that our Members have requested. It has been important to their districts. They thought it was very important for agriculture in their regions.

Again, by us adopting the bill today, we would be doing this for nothing.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart), who is another member of the Appropriations Committee. He, of course, chaired the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Subcommittee in the 115th Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman from Florida an additional 30 seconds.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to say, as it has already been said by many of my colleagues here on the Republican side, that this bill serves only to give a false impression that the new majority is trying to resolve our funding differences.

The American people want and need both enhanced border security and funding of remaining government agencies that are operating on limited staff currently, as we speak. This bill is really an affront to the House of Representatives and to the citizens who elected them to serve them because, as has been said over and over this afternoon, there has been no input from any of the 435 House Members into this legislation.

Therefore, in closing, Mr. Speaker, I would urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this legislation that is before us this afternoon, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

I am, in its current form.

Mr. Speaker, this motion to recommit restores a House priority that had overwhelming support when we put together the FY 2019 Agriculture bill during the last Congress.

As I mentioned in my opening statement, our House bill last year placed a high priority on delivery of broadband to the unserved and underserved populations in rural America. Eighty percent of the 24 million American households that do not have reliable, affordable, high-speed internet, are in rural areas.

That is according to the most recent report by the Federal Communications Commission. Again, 80 percent are in rural areas.

Reliable and affordable internet connectivity is fundamental for economic activity throughout the United States. It is also a fundamental need for rural American households, for schools, and for healthcare centers.

The National Agriculture and Rural Prosperity Task Force recommended connectivity for all rural Americans because it has become a modern-day necessity. It is not simply an amenity anymore. In today's information age and where we live today, it is driving our global economy.

Our House appropriation bill last year included $550 million for this new pilot program. This motion that is now before us will simply add an additional $125 million to the $440 million in the bill before us today.

This higher level will not fully address the multi-billion-dollar requirement to address rural broadband internet needs, but it is a wise and necessary investment.

The new rural broadband program that was designed by USDA this year takes into account lessons learned from prior-year broadband initiatives.

The new pilot program is a good balance between grants to the neediest communities and low-cost loans to those communities and citizens that can afford the loans.

Mr. Speaker, you might not find a great deal of agreement between the priorities of President Trump and former President Obama, but the vital need for rural broadband is one of those things. This motion is a modest proposal that all of us feel obligated to support, regardless of your politics.

Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the motion, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this special order to speak against the devastating cuts being proposed for the Farm Bill's Supplemental Nutrition Assistant Program (SNAP).

The $20.5 billion cuts would remove 2 million Americans from the food assistance program, and 210,000 children would lose access to free school meals.

The House Democrats' bill, is virtually identical to legislation that has already passed the Senate on a 92-6 vote, will reopen these agencies and stop some the worst impacts of the Trump Shutdown on families, businesses, and communities.

It provides $23.235 billion in discretionary funding, $225 million above the FY2018 enacted level. In addition, it provides the latest estimates for mandatory programs required by law--including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and Child Nutrition Programs. It will ensure that the Department of Agriculture and the FDA are both able to operate through September 30.

This bill rejects President Trump's proposed budget cuts to agriculture, rural development, and conservation programs. It includes funding for rural broadband that President Trump had proposed eliminating.

Finally, the bill rejects President Trump's proposed elimination of Food for Peace and the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program, both which provide lifesaving food assistance overseas.

For one in six Americans hunger is real and far too many people assume that problems with hunger are isolated in small pockets of the country. That is not the case--hunger is persistent and the impacts real for millions of people who struggle to find enough to eat.

According to Feeding America:

In 2016, 46.2 million people were in poverty, 1.1 million people are food insecure in the Houston area, 2.4 million rural households face hunger;

Three-quarters of the counties with the highest rates of food insecurity are in rural areas;

86% of the counties with the highest rates of child food insecurity are rural;

In 2017, there were 39.7 million people in poverty.

There are 3.7 million Texans at risk of losing Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits if the Trump Shutdown does not end.

The more important statistic is how many other Americans will have their local grocery store put at risk of closing or having reduced supplies of groceries to serve their customers because of the economic chaos that will ensue if SNAP benefits across the nation are ended due to the shutdown.

Most Americans have no idea how SNAP, Women, Infants and Children's (WIC) Food and Nutrition Service and other federal food subsidy programs contribute to the affordability of food found in grocery stores.

For grocers, convenience stores and other food retailers, the suspension of funding for the food-stamp program, or SNAP, comes at a time when they cannot afford to lose sales.

Over 3,500 grocery and convenience stores operate on a 1% profit margin, with the proposed cuts to the SNAP program, these stores will experience a large decrease in profit.

There is no feasible way to absorb any kind of decrease in sales.

The abrupt end of SNAP, WIC and other Federal food subsidy program funding that is spent at local grocers would be devastating to all large grocery store chains.

In 2016, more than 52% of SNAP dollars, or $33 billion, were redeemed at big-box stores such as Walmart Inc. and Target Corp., up from 47% in 2015, U.S. Department of Agriculture data show.

Big retailers routinely notice a bump in sales around the time states disperse SNAP money to recipients each month.

Walmart generates roughly $13 billion in annual sales from SNAP transactions, accounting for around 18% of the money spent through the program nationwide.

Some retailers serve regions where more than one-third of shoppers buy groceries with food stamps, without this money most of these stores will not be able to maintain the diverse food choices that are usually available to their consumers.

The retailer with the highest risk of lost sales is Walmart which receives roughly 56% of its food sales.

Dollar General, gets about 5 percent of its sales from SNAP benefits and their traffic slowed tremendously during the last government shutdown, they can't afford the same outcome this year.

President Trump has previously demonstrated a hostility towards the SNAP program in his proposal that retailers pay a fee for authorization to accept food stamps.

The government's overall SNAP spending declines when the economy improves and fewer people rely on the program and this means that grocery store customers are instead using funds from employment or other sources instead.

A government shutdown will have a depressing effect on grocery store sales and compounding this will be a cut in SNAP and WIC funds.

Government low wage workers will be seeking SNAP and WIC assistance as they work to cope with not being paid.

Dean said cutting benefits when people's financial situations are not improving could mean they use money they otherwise would have spent on needs like clothing or even medicine to make up for the gaps in their food budget. So there's still an impact to the overall economy, she said.

A report by the USDA in 2010 also said that boosting SNAP benefits during economic downturns starts a ``multiplier process'' in transactions and consumption. It found that boosting SNAP expenditures by $1 billion was estimated to increase economic activity by $1.79 billion.

Unfortunately, benefits cannot be increased as a direct consequence of the shutdown.

SNAP offers nutrition assistance to millions of low income individuals and families. SNAP is the largest program in the American domestic hunger safety net.

If the Trump Shutdown extends for weeks or months, the damage to the food economy may not be easily repaired.

The Child Nutrition Programs, including School Lunch, School Breakfast, Child and Adult Care Feeding, Summer Food Service and Special Milk will continue operations into February according to the Department of Agriculture.

We cannot afford to create food deserts and greater hunger in our country.

While prices for agricultural products are not expected to be significantly altered in the short term, an extended shutdown coupled with ongoing trade tensions could impact the ability for farmers to operate in the domestic and international marketplace.

The following USDA activities have been shut down during the government funding lapse:

Provision of new rural development loans and grants for housing, community facilities, utilities and businesses.

All recreation sites across the U.S. National Forest System, unless they are operated by external parties under a recreational special use permit.

New timber sales.

Most forest fuels reduction activities in and around communities.

National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) statistics, World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates report, and other agricultural economic and statistical reports and projections. Investigation of packers and stockyards related to fraudulent and anti-competitive activities.

Assistance for the control of most plant and animal pests and diseases unless funded by cooperators or other non-appropriated sources.

Research facilities except for the care for animals, plants and associated infrastructure to preserve agricultural research. Provision of new grants or processing of payments for existing grants to support research, education, and extension.

ERS Commodity Outlook Reports, Data Products, research reports, staff analysis, and projections. The ERS public website has been taken offline.

Most departmental management, administrative and oversight functions, including civil rights, human resources, financial management, audit, investigative, legal and information technology activities.

Mandatory Audits (Financial Statements, FISMA, and potentially Improper Payments) will be suspended and may not be completed and released on the date mandated by law.

Farm loans and some farm payments (including direct payments, market assistance loans, market facilitation payments for those producers who have not certified production, and disaster assistance programs).

The Agriculture Industry has been harmed by the tariff battles that President Trump started and continues to wage.

Funding was put in the Farm Bill that passed in December to offer some relief that will not come until the shutdown ends.

I ask my Colleagues to join me in voting for the passage of this bill.

President Trump needs to end this shutdown now.

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the ranking member on the House Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Subcommittee, Mr. Aderholt, for yielding, as well as for his strong leadership on behalf of our agricultural community.

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the bill before us today. Throughout last year, the House Appropriations Committee worked on a bipartisan basis to find common ground for fiscal year 2019 appropriations bills, including the vitally important Agriculture appropriations legislation.

Unfortunately, the bill before us today does not reflect those bipartisan efforts. As I have been sharing with my constituents, the bill before us has never had a hearing in this body, has never had a markup in this body, and now has no opportunity for amendments to be offered.

By taking up this bill, unfortunately, House Democrats are effectively writing off the people's House and shirking our responsibilities by deferring to the U.S. Senate. My constituents' priorities--and I would submit those of constituents of my colleagues across the aisle--deserve to be heard.

I offered two important amendments to the Agriculture appropriations bill in the Rules Committee this week. Both amendments previously passed unanimously in the Appropriations Committee and, rightfully, should be in the bill before us.

The first was a bipartisan amendment I offered with my colleague, Sanford Bishop, who was the then-ranking member of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Subcommittee. The amendment would have upheld the longstanding prohibition of releasing proprietary SNAP sales data of food retailers.

Due to a decision last year in the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, USDA will be required to release the SNAP redemption data of all retail stores across the United States. The result will be irreparable harm to competition in the food retail marketplace. My amendment sought to prevent the closure of grocery stores in both rural and urban areas by upholding this longstanding USDA practice.

The second bipartisan amendment passed unanimously in the Appropriations Committee directed USDA to work with H-2A agency partners to modernize, develop, and implement an online application system for the H-2A program.

I constantly hear from farmers in central Washington about how inefficient the H-2A program operates due to the continued use of paper-only applications. Many farmers have had to deal with lost applications and other logistical inefficiencies, making the H-2A program inconsistent and all too often an unreliable program for farmers.

This amendment supported the administration's regulatory task force reform efforts to modernize that program with technological advancements that would make the program more user-friendly. It demonstrated an important step to providing relief for farmers facing a broken bureaucratic maze when trying to access a reliable workforce.

Madam Speaker, these are just two of the many reasons that I am not supporting the bill before us. But there are other issues that must be pointed out, like the fact that the House bill made a major investment in the new broadband pilot program for rural America by adding an additional $550 million in infrastructure for the unserved and underserved. This bill undercuts that by $125 million.

In regard to the important matter of food and drug safety, our House bill included higher levels of funding for the FDA, which is critical to helping industry advance their medical products to the marketplace sooner, safer, and with greater efficiency.

The House bill included language to secure set-aside funds for persistent poverty counties in rural areas. This provision was vital to rural communities across the country that face challenges escaping poverty. Unfortunately, that is not included in this bill.

Lastly, the House bill included nearly $30 million more for the National Institute of Food and Agriculture for research that is vital to our Nation's food security priorities. Again, that is not included in this bill.

Madam Speaker, as a proud member of the Appropriations Committee, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this legislation. The bipartisan work conducted by House appropriators must be honored. We should not abdicate our responsibility and the voices of our constituents to the Senate.

Mr. Speaker, I join with my colleagues in supporting House passage today of the long overdue FY 2019 Department of Agriculture, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies funding bill which will help bring an end to the reckless shutdown for the agencies, programs, and federal employees that are covered by this measure.

We need to pass this bill today, and the Senate needs to follow suit, to help stave off some of the worst consequences that face some of the most vulnerable as a result of the President's reckless decision.

If the partial government shutdown, which the President is so proud to have caused, continues there may not be sufficient appropriations for food assistance under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to provide full benefits or any benefits. USDA recently announced it was making moves to try and delay the inevitable for these programs. But that is just a stall--one of the many desperate actions by an Administration

apparently just now starting to realize the damage it is inflicting across America.

To make his case, the President held a national press conference earlier this week to sell his made up ``crisis'' along the Southern border. A ``crisis'' that experts say is not happening. Border apprehensions are at lows not seen in nearly two decades. The ``crisis,'' if any exists, is his policy of denying asylum seekers their legal right to make their claims.

President Trump inflicted this chaotic shutdown on the American people to try and bully the nation into building his vanity wall.

Well, let me tell you about the real crisis that he is creating in millions of households across the country from the dedicated federal employees who have been sent home without pay or those working without pay who are wondering how they will pay rent or their mortgage and their bills now that the federal government has broken faith with them.

Or the real crisis this Administration is creating for the millions of families and individuals who depend on SNAP and WIC to help keep food on the table. In my home state, that includes hundreds of thousands of women, children, seniors, low-income military veterans, and the disabled who are already struggling. These harms aren't hypothetical, folks. Hunger is real in our country and millions of Americans are struggling to put food on the table. And the Trump Shutdown is only making it harder to do.

One estimate is that if USDA does not have enough funding on hand to pay full benefits and provide partial funding spread evenly across all SNAP households, it would result in an average benefit cut per household of at least $90 or close to 40 percent.

Similarly, benefits available through the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) are at risk. WIC is such an important program that helps provide targeted nutrition and other services to at-risk women. This program has helped improve breastfeeding rates among its target population and saves lives and money for the taxpayer. Over 7 million mothers, pregnant women, and children rely on WIC.

WIC clinics are currently open and operating normally but that funding will run out if the shutdown continues. If the shutdown continues as long as the President wants it to, WIC agencies may be forced to start waiting lists for benefits, freeze new applications, furlough staff, or close clinics in the face of declining or no funding.

And even with doors open, the uncertainty created by the shutdown may be discouraging eligible individuals from reaching out to WIC for support, undermining the program's purpose.

And we will all pay in the end if taxpayers have to bear health care expenses and other costs for individuals that could have been avoided.

The bill before us, that the Senate Appropriations Committee unanimously approved last year, will ensure that these critical benefits continue to be paid and that families can continue to put food on the table.

I urge my colleagues to support this bill.