Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, I rise today to support the FY 2007 Agriculture Appropriations bill. I am especially pleased with the funding levels prescribed for the Domestic Food Assistance programs such as the Commodity Supplemental Food Program CSFP) and the Women, Infants and Children (WIC) nutritional programs.

This year, the President proposed eliminating CSFP as part of his plan to streamline government services. Participants in this program were supposed to move to either the Food Stamps program or the WIC program. I disagreed with this proposal, and that is why I am pleased that my colleagues on the House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee chose to ignore the elimination proposal and instead increased funding for this program by $11 million above last year's level.

Under the House-passed bill, CSFP will get $118.3 million in fiscal 2007. It is my understanding and hope that the Senate will include a similar amount in its appropriations bill and that future conferees will protect this valuable program from elimination.

More than 2,000 seniors in my district depend on this important supplemental food program, which provides them a box of food staples once a month to seniors who are at or below 130 percent of the poverty level. Pregnant, breast feeding and postpartum women, infants and children up to age six also are eligible for CSFP if they are at or below 185 percent of federal poverty guidelines. For young children, the program is used as a bridge between their eligibility for WIC and their eligibility for free school lunches, which generally happens around age 6.

There is no doubt that CSFP works. In Minnesota, about 15,000 participants--85 percent of them seniors--receive a box of food at the beginning of each month. The box is about the size of a banana box and weighs about 60 pounds. Each box contains about $55 worth of pantry staples such as canned vegetables, fruit and meat, as well as evaporated milk, juice, rice and pasta. The foods are nutritionally balanced and approved by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Minnesota receives about $3.2 million each year to purchase these foods and deliver them to four food banks throughout the state. Volunteers then deliver the boxes to centralized distribution sites and in some cases to the front doors of home-bound seniors.

In Southeastern Minnesota, the Channel One Food Distribution Center in Rochester, delivers CSFP food packages to 1,750 participants in a 13 county area. The average income for a senior receiving CSFP assistance in this area is a meager $8,846 a year or $737 a month. That's why CSFP is so vital for our nation's low-income seniors, particularly those in rural America.

Seniors like Harriet Salisbury from Ceylon, Minnesota; Elsa Suter of Fairmont, Minnesota, and Edward Levy of Brownsdale, Minnesota, need these vital food packages. When the Administration proposed eliminating CSFP, these seniors took pen and paper in hand and let me know exactly what they thought about that proposal. They told me CSFP was their ``lifeline,'' and some even begged me to save this vital program from elimination.

Today, I am here to tell these seniors and thousands more across our nation that I know how important CSFP is to them, and that I will fight to save this vital program from elimination.

In conclusion, I want to thank Chairman Bonilla for his continued support for CSFP.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, it is a very simple amendment, but I think it is very important and one that an awful lot of groups are paying attention to.

There is a program we have had in the farm bill for a very long time, the Wetland Reserve Program, that has become extremely important on a variety of fronts. It is important to wildlife, it is important to our water quality, it is important to flood control, and I think it is important to most Americans who care about the environment.

It is especially important to those of us in Minnesota. We have 10,000 lakes. We take water very seriously. And the Wetland Reserve Program is something that we want to do everything we can to preserve and keep at its current levels.

Currently, we authorize in the farm bill about 250,000 acres for the Wetland Reserve Program. And I understand how difficult it has been for the subcommittee and the chairman and the staff to squeeze all of the requests into the amount of money that they have been allocated in this appropriation bill, so I have a great deal of empathy for the problems that they have. But I wanted to come to the floor today to offer an amendment to restore to 250,000 acres the overall authorization for the Wetland Reserve Program.

Currently, under this bill that authorization drops to about 144,000 acres. I understand that the committee had to find $82 million. And by passing this amendment we create an $82 million hole in their bill, and I am empathetic to that. So what we have done, working with the Department, we take $65 million from the ARS Facilities area and $16.5 million from the CSREES Research and Education Activities fund.

No one likes to take money from those funds, but as we looked at all the potentials for offsets, those were the best we could find. So, Members, I think this is an important amendment. I think it is one that will be watched by the Ducks Unlimited, the Pheasants Forever, lots of the wildlife groups and sportsmen groups, and it is important as well to the folks who are really concerned about preserving our wetlands and improving our environment.

So this is a very important amendment, and I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting the Gutknecht amendment.

MR. BONILLA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment and claim the time in opposition.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I would be more than happy to work with the chairman on this. We worked with the professionals who draft these amendments. We told them what we wanted. We were willing to find offsets. We worked with the Department for those offsets. We understand those offsets do cause some heartburn for the Department, but it is my understanding they can work with those offsets.

I would appreciate it if we could at least adopt this amendment, and we will work with you through the conference committee process to perfect that language, if that is necessary. I hope that this body wants to send a clear message that the Wetlands Reserve Program is a high-priority program. And I would work with you on that, but I would like to have this amendment adopted, even if it is not perfect in your eyes.

MR. BONILLA. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, it is not a matter of my eyes; it is a matter of the professionals that have scrubbed this language; and again, the gentleman would not be accomplishing what he is hoping to accomplish.

I might say as an aside, too, there is an issue related to this. We understand that there may have been some unethical and perhaps even illegal activity by the Department involved directly with this issue, in terms of attempting to lobby Congress on it. And I want to say for the record that we are not done with this issue after we vote on this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 4200, the Forest Emergency Recovery and Research Act. We have heard so far this morning some people say that this bill is about somehow suspending the laws of science. But I would argue this bill is really about restoring some common sense, and we have heard some excellent testimony by Members of both sides of the aisle.

In Minnesota we have the Superior National Forest. It covers about 3 million acres in northeastern Minnesota. It is not in my district, but I have had the opportunity, as chairman of the Forestry Subcommittee of the Agriculture Committee, to go up there on several occasions. Now, the forest itself is beautiful. It is perhaps one of the most beautiful national forests in the entire galaxy. But you don't have to visit there very long to understand the sense of frustration among the locals in the way that we manage that forest.

In a State that is dominated by public timberland, the national forests in Minnesota have a reputation of being

too bureaucratic, slow moving, and unresponsive. When there is a catastrophic event, county and State foresters, and certainly private land owners, are far quicker to move to salvage and reforest than the National Forest Service is. H.R. 4200 is a step in the right direction. It would require the National Forest Service to rapidly evaluate the need for recovery projects and then allow the salvage to go forward if necessary.

Many of my colleagues today will give examples of catastrophic events in their districts or States, how the National Forest Service responds to them, and, therefore, why this legislation is needed.

For me, the example of a windstorm that swept northern Minnesota in July of 1999 is a great example. It damaged nearly 500,000 acres, over 600 square miles, in the Superior National Forest alone. This was one of the largest blowdowns ever recorded in North America. To date, only 50,000 trees have been cleaned up.

The Forest Service's attempts to deal with this blowdown illustrate the need for H.R. 4200.

The only legal or administrative tool at the agency's disposal to deal with an unprecedented event like this was alternative arrangements to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act, and those required approval of the White House Council on Environmental Quality. While the CEQ granted those agreements to the Forest Service, actual debris removal didn't occur until long after the windstorm hit. By this time the downed trees had deteriorated significantly, losing much of their value.

Unless we act today, the national forest will continue to face events like this blowdown without the authority to quickly analyze, propose and move forward with forest recovery projects. To me, it is clear the agency needs this new authority to act quickly to capture the value of damaged timber and restore our forest to a healthy and growing condition.

The goal of H.R. 4200 is to provide consistent and uniform procedures for the Forest Service to follow after catastrophic events. The bill does not open wilderness areas or other withdrawn from harvest to new timber cutting. It merely requires that the agency has to quickly evaluate whether expedited salvage is necessary, and then it allows it to cut through the red tape to make sure that the project gets done. The people of Minnesota care deeply about our national forests and so do the professionals who manage those forests. H.R. 4200 simply gives them the tools to demonstrate their commitment whenever Mother Nature throws our forest a curve ball.

I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan and important legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I don't know if I would be happier if Americans are watching this debate, or if they are not watching the debate. I am an auctioneer and it sounds almost like an auction: no matter how much we spend it is not enough. But here is something I think all Members need to be aware of. Next year the taxpayers are going to generously provide this Congress and this Federal Government with a 12 percent increase in revenue. Over the next 5 years, the estimate is it will be at least an increase averaging 5.4 percent per year. Now that is at a time when we expect the inflation rate will be somewhere less than 3 percent. In other words, revenue to the Federal Government will be almost double what we project the inflation rate to be.

And Americans watching at home are asking a simple question: Why can't you live within your means? And that is what this budget is about. That is what this debate is about. And I think Americans watching at home must be wondering, how in the world, why is it with a 12 percent increase next year and a 5\1/2\ percent increase averaging over the next 5 years, why can't you figure it out to live within your means?

Offered By: Mr. Gutknecht

Amendment No. 13: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following new section:

Sec. 7__. (a) Limitation on Use of Funds.--None of the

funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act

shall be used to implement the limitation in section 720 of

this Act.

(b) Corresponding Reduction in Funds.--The amounts

otherwise provided by this Act are revised by reducing the

amount made available for ``Agricultural Research Service--

buildings and facilities'' and the amount made available for

``Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension

Service--research and education activities'' by $65,319,000

and $16,681,000, respectively.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Republican Study Committee's amendment in the nature of a substitute.

On March 8, I joined with my colleagues from the Republican Study Committee to renew our commitment to the principles of the Contract With America. We must control government spending.

While I may not agree with every line of this substitute amendment, I do support its overall goal of balancing the budget in five years and saving taxpayers nearly $360 billion.

The attack of Sept. 11, the War on Terror and national emergencies like Katrina are largely to blame for our deficit . . . but not completely. Wasteful government spending also adds to the national debt, and we need to address it.

Our Nation's growing deficit amounts to a generational transfer of wealth. Today's youth will pay for the decisions we make today. For years, we have increased government spending, and now, we must work together to help rein it in and cut the deficit.

Here are some frightening statistics:

Since 2000, the amount the government spends on average per American household has grown 15.1 percent--the highest level since World War II.

In recent years, the federal budget growth has far outpaced the growth in the average American family budget.

This year's deficit may well exceed $400 billion.

Americans are saying enough is enough. The RSC budget will balance the budget in 5 years and eliminate more than 150 federal programs that are no longer making the grade.

Congress has some tough decisions to make during the 2007 budget process. This is no different than those Americans who establish their own annual budgets. Over the next five years, Americans will generously provide the federal government with an average increase of 5.3 percent in federal tax revenue. Congress must learn to live within that.

Think about it. When our constituents sit down to figure out their family budgets, they don't start by figuring out how much they want to spend. They start by figuring out how much they have to spend and then they work back from there.

We should do no less.

In the end, we must ask ourselves, what legacy do we want to leave our children? Will it be a massive government and crushing debt? Or the legacy of hope, prosperity and a lean and responsible government?

Mr. Chairman, budgeting is about making tough choices. Congress must return to the path of fiscal responsibility. We must balance the budget and rein in spending, and the RSC budget alternative is the best place to start.

Offered By: Mr. Gutknecht

Amendment No. 13: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following new section:

Sec. 7__. (a) Limitation on Use of Funds.--None of the

funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act

shall be used to implement the limitation in section 720 of

this Act.

(b) Corresponding Reduction in Funds.--The amounts

otherwise provided by this Act are revised by reducing the

amount made available for ``Agricultural Research Service--

buildings and facilities'' and the amount made available for

``Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension

Service--research and education activities'' by $65,319,000

and $16,681,000, respectively.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes.

Mr. Chairman, I will try to make this as simple as I can. We have one of the largest deployments right now of National Guardsmen from the State of Minnesota since World War II. It has created a disparity.

Back in January, members of the 1st Platoon Bravo Company asked my office to help with a pay problem. It just so happens that most of them were called up to serve in the Balkans back in 2003. Part of them were called up under a Presidential Reserve Call Up, and others were called up under a Partial Mobilization.

What this has led to is a discrepancy in how much they may be eligible for in terms of what we used to describe as combat pay. The bottom line is that about 400 members of the Minnesota National Guard, who will be doing the same duty as the other members of the National Guard in Iraq, will not be eligible for roughly $7,000 in incentive pay. This is an inequity. It is unfair, and it is something that we in Congress can and should do something about.

I want to thank the chairman of the committee and the ranking member and the staff as well. We have been working with them for several weeks and they have been extremely helpful on this matter. Hopefully tonight we can adopt this amendment and send a clear message to the Pentagon that this inequity needs to be resolved and it needs to be resolved soon.

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

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his comments.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Kline).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Simmons).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Kennedy).

Mr. Chairman, I will be very brief.

I want to thank my colleagues from Minnesota for helping to resolve this inequity. I want to thank the gentleman from Connecticut and my colleagues from Arkansas.

In the big picture, when we were talking about spending hundreds of billions of dollars, $7,000 for these families does not seem like a lot of money in the big picture. But to those families, $7,000 is extremely important. So I appreciate your support tonight to make certain that we have equity and create a solution for this problem that is fair to all of the folks who are proudly serving us in uniform wherever in the world, but particularly in Iraq.

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

Mr. Speaker, I request unanimous consent that I be allowed to claim the time of the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones).

Mr. Speaker, I rise on the House floor tonight to talk about something that I think is one of the big solutions that we need to pursue here in the United States. And I would like to, first of all, talk about this first chart; and hopefully, Members can see it back in their offices. But this is a chart of the imports of petroleum as we have seen it from 1984 until 2005.

Back in 1984, we were importing less than 5.5 million barrels of oil a day; today, that number is over 13.5. In fact, I should say in 2005 it was about 13.5 million barrels a day. This is a scary chart because the direction is heading in the wrong direction.

Let's put some numbers on this. I am told that by this summer with $70-a-barrel oil, we will be spending about a billion dollars a day to buy oil from countries, in many cases who are not particularly friendly to the United States. This is a serious problem. It is a challenge to our economic security and it is a challenge to our national security.

Now, renewable fuels are only part of the solution. I voted to increase the CAFE standards. I think conservation is an important part of solving our energy problems here in the United States. I believe in developing other kinds of energy. I voted consistently to develop the oil and the natural gas which we know is up in Alaska. I voted to expand the many uses of other energies.

But, Mr. Speaker, one of the things that we have not talked enough about, in my opinion, is our ability to grow more of our own energy. And so tonight I want to talk about renewable energy in general and ethanol in particular because I think there is huge misunderstanding, and it is not just among Members of Congress and the general public, it is among many of the policy-makers even in the Department of Energy.

Mr. Speaker, there is still a misunderstanding about how much it costs to produce ethanol. In fact, we had a hearing of the Science Committee about 6 months ago. We had three top energy experts who testified before the committee. I asked all of them, I said, How much does it cost to produce a gallon of ethanol? Well, they started to look at their watches and their shoes and it was clear they did not want to answer the question.

Well, I said, make a guess. And the low guess, and these are energy experts, the low guess among those three experts was $2 a gallon. The high estimate was $3 a gallon. And I said, Would it surprise you to know that we are actually producing ethanol in Minnesota for less than $1.20 a gallon? In fact, some of the plants at that time with lower natural gas prices were actually producing ethanol for about $1 a gallon.

Today, with corn at about $2 is a bushel and with oil at about $70 a barrel, the cost right now to produce a gallon of ethanol at an efficient plant in the upper Midwest is about $1.20 a gallon. Gasoline, on the other hand, right now costs about $2.10 a gallon for unleaded gas.

Now, I have to be clear, though, and we want to be fair in this discussion. You do not get as many Btus, British Thermal Units, out of a gallon of ethanol as you do a gallon of unleaded gasoline. In fact, it is about 20 to 25 percent less. So you get less energy out of a gallon, partly because ethanol is 35 percent oxygen. That is good, though, because it means it burns much cleaner than gasoline.

Ethanol is better for our environment. It is better for our economy because that billion dollars a day that we may be spending this summer we are sending to countries that in some respects do not like us, and in worst cases they may be using part of that oil revenue to actually fund the terrorists.

The beauty of producing energy here in the United States, clean- burning ethanol in the United States, is that all of that money stays here in America where it recycles through our own economy. A new plant, for example, recently opened just west of Mankato, Minnesota, in the little town of Lake Crystal, Minnesota, and they told us they will be employing, on average, 42 workers in that plant, and the average starting wage will be somewhere over $16 an hour plus benefits. These are good jobs that help our own economy right here in the United States.

But the point really needs to be made, not only is it better for our economy, it is better for our environment, but it is actually cheaper. So some people say, well, if it is better for the economy, if it is better for the environment and it is cheaper, why is more of it not available?

Well, the answer is simply this. The oil companies do not make any money on ethanol. I am not here to say that

the oil companies are evil, but right now they have a 98 percent market share, maybe a little less than 98 percent market share. They are not interested in giving away market share to ethanol, which is why I have introduced a bill called 10 By 10. And what it says, and I believe that success leaves clues, and what it says is that by 2010, 10 percent of our gasoline supply should be renewable energy. It is an idea whose time has come.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5037, the Respect for America's Fallen Heroes Act. I am a proud cosponsor of this act which will ban protests at military funerals at national cemeteries, including Arlington National Cemetery.

Burying a child, father, husband or wife is hard enough without having to see signs that say things like ``God Hates You'' or hearing hateful language shouted at your family during a funeral procession or graveside ceremony.

On February 23, 2006, the funeral of Army Corporal Andrew Kemple from Anoka, Minnesota, was disrupted by protestors who claimed that U.S. military deaths are divine retribution for the Nation's tolerance for homosexuality. The protestors even went so far as to taunt Andrew's mother as she entered the church for her son's funeral service.

It is hard to think of a more shameful act than taunting a woman who just gave her son in service to our Nation.

All Americans are proud of the sacrifices made by our Nation's brave Americans in uniform. We have seen their skill and their courage in the armored charges and midnight raids and in their lonely hours of faithful watch. We have seen the joy when they return home and felt the pain when one is lost.

No matter what one's position may be on U.S. policy matters, we should all agree that demonstrating at the funeral of one of our fallen heroes is disgraceful and unacceptable. We must stand behind our Nation's military families, especially on the day when caskets draped with the American flag are carried that last mile.

The Minnesota State legislature passed a bill on Monday, May 1, to ban all protests at military funerals, burials, and memorial services. I encourage other States to follow Minnesota's lead, and I urge the House of Representatives to pass the Respect For America's Fallen Heroes Act today. Our Nation's heroes deserve no less.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate CMSgt Jeffery D. Gustafson of Rochester, Minnesota, on his dedicated service in the United States Air Force.

In November of 1975, Chief Master Sergeant Gustafson enlisted in the United States Air Force at the 934th Airlift Wing, Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport Air Force Reserve Station in Minnesota. He retired from the same station on April 1, 2006, having achieved the highest attainable enlisted rank in the United States Military.

Chief Master Sergeant Gustafson has served the United States from across the world, including Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Honduras. He was given the distinct honor of being the first troop commander of a fully manned Aerospace Expeditionary Force for the United States Air Force. He was also the first recipient of the General Rawlings Air Force Sergeant Association and Air Force Association Chapter's Chief Master Sergeant of the Year. In addition, Chief Master Sergeant Gustafson has been thanked in person for his military service by President George W. Bush and First Lady Laura Bush.

Mr. Speaker, I offer my sincere gratitude to CMSgt Jeffery D. Gustafson for his service in the United States Air Force and his commitment to our nation. His distinguished accomplishments reflect to the highest degree upon himself and the United States Air Force.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend Ms. Nettie Paulson of New Ulm, Minnesota, for her service to the Gillette Children's Hospital and her dedication to making the patients more comfortable as a member of the Friends of Gillette group.

The Friends of Gillette are volunteers devoted to the children being treated at the Gillette Children's Hospital and their families. The Friends of Gillette have raised more than $2 million in medical assistance for families and they also donate items, such as knitted quilts and hats, to patients in an effort to bring comfort and warmth to the patient's hospital stay.

Ms. Nettie Paulson's dedication to the children and families of Gillette Children's Hospital has been felt for over 50 years. Through the Friends of Gillette program, Ms. Paulson has now donated 1,000 of her hand-made quilts to Gillette patients over the years. She has touched the lives and hearts of thousands of children and their families with her constant kindness.

Mr. Speaker, Ms. Paulson is a great example of one who is willing to share her talents to help those in need. I commend Ms. Nettie Paulson for her decades of service to the children and families of Gillette Children's Hospital.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Mr. Steven Benson of Owatonna, Minnesota on receiving the 2005 Presidential Award for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching.

This award was established in 1983 by an Act of Congress and is administered for the White House by the National Science Foundation. The award recognizes teachers who are both role models for colleagues and encourage talented individuals to become and remain teachers. Outstanding math and science educators are nominated each year from the United States and four other jurisdictions. Teachers may be nominated by faculty, students, parents or members of the community. After advancing through an intense selection process at both state and national levels, the final winners are announced by the President of the United States.

Mr. Steven Benson has proven himself as a dedicated and outstanding educator. Mr. Benson believes in making his math classes more relevant to everyday life to generate greater interest in his students and encourage their success. By creating a personal connection to the content, Mr. Benson shows students how math significantly affects and influences their hobbies, activities, and future plans. For this commitment to his profession and to his students, Mr. Benson will receive The Presidential Award for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching--the highest honor a teacher of mathematics or science can receive.

I extend my sincere congratulations to Mr. Steven Benson for receiving the 2005 Presidential Award for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching. Quality math teachers, like Mr. Benson, inspire our students' inquisitive nature to explore new challenges, innovative career paths, and the future of ideas. His steadfast professionalism and abilities in the classroom are a standard for which all educators should aim.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Ms. Debra Las of Rochester, Minnesota on receiving the 2005 Presidential Award for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching.

This award was established in 1983 by an Act of Congress and is administered for the White House by the National Science Foundation. The award recognizes teachers who are both role models for colleagues and encourage talented individuals to become and remain teachers. Outstanding math and science educators are nominated each year from the United States and four other jurisdictions. Teachers may be nominated by faculty, students, parents or members of the community. After advancing through an intense selection process at both state and national levels, the final winners are announced by the President of the United States.

Ms. Debra Las teaches eighth grade science at John Adams Middle School in Rochester, Minnesota where she utilizes the school's diversity to connect to her students. Viewing diversity as a strength rather than a weakness, Ms. Las believes that both staff and students alike need to spend the time and

the energy to learn about each other. For this commitment to her profession and to her students, Ms. Las will receive The Presidential Award for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching--the highest honor a teacher of mathematics or science can receive.

I extend my sincere congratulations to Ms. Debra Las for receiving the 2005 Presidential Award for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching. Quality science teachers, like Ms. Las, inspire our students' inquisitive nature to explore new challenges, innovative career paths, and the future of ideas. Her steadfast professionalism and abilities in the classroom are a standard for which all educators should aim.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Mr. Norm Sieling of Lake Crystal, Minnesota, on his induction into the Minnesota Future Farmers of America Hall of Fame.

The Minnesota Future Farmers of America strives to make a positive difference in the lives of students by developing their potential for premier leadership, personal growth and career success through agricultural education. By maintaining the ideals of the past and incorporating the ideas of the future, the Minnesota Future Farmers of America continually seeks new, innovative ways to join agriculture and education with today's world of technology. The Hall of Fame is an honor reserved for those alumni who are a living example of this mission.

For his commitment to these ideals, Mr. Norm Sieling was inducted into Minnesota FFA Hall of Fame. As an agriculture teacher for 39 years in Lake Crystal, Minnesota, and a mentor for new agriculture teachers at the University of Minnesota, Mr. Sieling has demonstrated his dedication to the future of agriculture. He has helped students to achieve their goals, while encouraging the expansion of the agricultural industry.

I extend my sincere congratulations to Mr. Sieling on receiving this achievement. His dedicated service to the young farmers of Minnesota and the agricultural community is greatly appreciated.