Waiving Points of Order Against Conference Report on H.R. 2744, Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies...

WAIVING POINTS OF ORDER AGAINST CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 2744, AGRICULTURE, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2006 -- (House of Representatives - October 28, 2005)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.

Mr. Speaker, if I can briefly address the just prior conversation, I will commend my colleague from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) in terms of trying to make some clarification on the issue of food assistance.

I also will commend my colleague from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) in this regard: I know where his heart is on food assistance; it is where we all need to be. I will tell you that we can discuss the nature of the problem in terms of the distribution, but I think what was particularly important in this committee was when we first had the money presented for food assistance, it was less, less, in the President's budget than we had in the prior year, and it was split between our committee and sending money to AID, thereby lowering the dollar amount by about $265 million.

We were adamant about trying to maintain a higher level of assistance, and, I tell you, without having the benefit of getting back that $265 million from AID, we were able to bring the dollar amount on food assistance up to $1.1 billion, which we are proud of, and that is part of the admonition in the conference report.

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, will the gentlewoman yield?

Ms. DeLAURO. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding and for what she says. I know she is very much on the side of doing this in the right way, and confronted with particular facts, you have to deal with things. So I do believe that a rational food aid policy will include some flexibility on buying the food in an emergency, time and everything else, but I certainly agree it should not come at the expense of the overall program.

Ms. DeLAURO. I thank the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, I want to say thank you again to my colleague for yielding to me. I want to say thank you to Chairman BONILLA for working to deliver this bill to the floor and for working across the aisle. I have enjoyed working with him, even when we differ on issues and priorities. I know that he takes the responsibilities as Chair very, very seriously, and I have a deep respect for him for that.

In addition, I want to say thank you to his staff and the gentleman from Wisconsin's staff and my staff, all of whom have worked so diligently this year and for long hours. These are good public servants, all of them.

I am particularly pleased that after several years we had the opportunity to participate in a conference meeting to resolve several outstanding issues in a public capacity. Indeed, we had an open conversation and a discussion about matters including conflict of interest waivers on FDA advisory boards, the integrity of the food stamp program and our national animal identification system, to name but a few.

I only wish that the same spirit of openness and transparency with which we discussed those issues had guided the conference efforts to resolve them, because I believe what we are doing is important here.

The programs funded through this bill directly impact the everyday lives of Americans, from public health to the FDA, to rural development, infrastructure maintenance, environmental conservation and preservation, nutrition assistance at home and abroad. Failure to adequately invest in these programs will have a serious long-term consequence for our Nation.

Unfortunately, in some of these areas, the bill falls short. I believe the President's budget failed to meet the needs of rural America, decimating rural development programs. This bill makes some headway in reversing cuts made by the President, providing $80 million more than the President's request for rural water and waste grants, for example. However, I am concerned that this number remains below the level in last year's House bill and well below the 2004 level.

Rural America faces serious economic development challenges, from affordable housing and clean drinking water, to sewage systems and access to remote educational and medical resources; and I am afraid that this funding shortfall will lead to long-term deficiencies in rural infrastructure.

In addition, this bill covers the funding of the most important agency in the entire government: the Food and Drug Administration. FDA oversees the safety of products that Americans use every day, the vast majority of our processed and fresh foods, our prescription drugs, our medical devices, and our blood supply. And this agency has had many problems over the last year, from abrupt resignations of key staff, to the recalls of Bextra and Vioxx, to hearings that have exposed the fissures that have developed between drug safety scientists and the senior management at FDA.

Along those lines, I want to say thank you again to Chairman BONILLA for working with me to include funding to double the annual funding for review of direct-to-consumer ads by FDA, as well as another $5 million for drug safety at the FDA.

In 2001, the drug industry spent $2.7 billion on direct-to-consumer advertising; but the FDA office, charged with ensuring that those ads are accurate, was funded at less than $1 million. Doubling that amount is a small start toward remedying the problem. The $5 million will be devoted to the most critical aspects of drug safety.

There are other issues, of course, that I look forward to discussing later on today, but I believe there are areas in which we have made real progress and others which I hope that we can revisit in the next budget cycle.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://thomas.loc.gov