Federal Agriculture Reform And Risk Management Act Of 2013
Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise this evening to urge my colleagues to support my commonsense amendment to H.R. 1947, the FARRM Act of 2013. My amendment is very…
Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise this evening to urge my colleagues to support my commonsense amendment to H.R. 1947, the FARRM Act of 2013. My amendment is very straightforward in that it would simply strike section 6105 from the underlying bill. This is the section of the FARRM Bill that reauthorizes the Rural Broadband Access Loan and Loan Guarantee Program at RUS, Rural Utilities Services, at USDA at a cost of $25 million each fiscal year over the next 5, subject to appropriations.
Mr. Chairman, this program was first authorized by the 2002 farm bill with the goal of deploying broadband to rural and unserved areas. Despite this goal, the rural broadband loan program has been riddled-- riddled--with numerous problems.
In the 112th Congress, I was a member of the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Communications and Technology. During a hearing held in the subcommittee in February of 2011, I first learned of problems within this program. USDA Inspector General Phyllis Fong testified on a variety of issues at RUS that prevented it from being effective. She testified that in the 2005 OIG audit of the program, of the 159 of the 240 communities associated with loans in 2004, 66 percent of the loans already had preexisting broadband service in contravention of the statutory intention of these funds.
Unfortunately, Mr. Chairman, the problems were only exacerbated in the 2009 OIG audit. Of the 14 recommendations made by OIG in 2005, RUS only took action on six of them. Between 2005 and 2009, RUS made loans to broadband providers serving 148 communities within 30 miles of urban areas with 200,000 or more residents. Furthermore, RUS approved 34 of 37 applications for providers with service lines already existing.
Mr. Chairman, although there were reforms made in the 2008 farm bill that were finally enacted earlier this year, I am still very skeptical of the need for this program when it has consistently demonstrated its inability to achieve its objective.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, at this time, I would like to yield myself such time as I may consume.
I remind my good friend from New York that Solyndra was a loan program, too, that was supposed to be paid back with interest. I offer this amendment because there is something better--there is something better.
I certainly understand and I appreciate the efforts taken by the chairman of the Agriculture Committee for creating further transparency with the RUS Rural Broadband Loan Program. However, despite these improvements, I am still incredibly skeptical of this program.
Mr. Chairman, since its inception, Congress has appropriated nearly $130 million in taxpayer dollars towards this program, and I feel that RUS has consistently missed the mark. On the other hand--and this is the alternative--in 2011, the FCC, the Federal Communications Commission, under existing statutory authority, fundamentally changed the nature of the Universal Service Fund and created the Connect America Fund with essentially the same goal as the Rural Broadband Loan Program. The Connect America Fund is a different entity, and the FCC announced last month that $485 million of that fund, which is rooted not in increased taxes but in user fees, will be dedicated to unserved areas for broadband deployment.
Mr. Chairman, I do believe that the FCC is in a better position than the USDA to implement telecommunications policy, and over the life of the Rural Broadband Loan Program, USDA has only confirmed my cynicism.
Might I ask the gentleman to yield 15 seconds to me for closing?
I ask the gentleman again if he would yield 15 seconds.
I thank the gentleman from New York for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I will go ahead and do that.
I believe that it is critically important to eliminate duplicative programs. It was just mentioned from the other side of the aisle that, with both programs, duplication is unnecessary with the changes in the Connect America Fund. I believe that the Rural Broadband Loan Program will only become more obsolete. Therefore, I believe that we must act now to eliminate the authorization of this program, and I do urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment.