Cybersecurity Act of 2012--Motion to Proceed

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, the Senate passed a farm bill a few weeks ago--a pretty good farm bill. The House Agriculture Committee has reported out of its committee a farm bill, and now the discussion of whether we have a farm bill is a decision to be made by the leadership of the House, of whether a farm bill should come up. So I wish to speak about the necessity of a farm and nutrition bill being passed.

It is called a farm and nutrition bill because about 80 percent of a farm bill's expenditures are related to the food stamp program. If we can get this bill completed and to the President's desk, it will be the eighth farm bill I have had a chance to participate in.

Every 5 years or so, Congress debates, changes, argues over, and ultimately passes a farm and nutrition bill--not always of that title but pretty much of that content. This time should be no different. We need to get the job done. I understand there are folks who want to see more cuts here or there, and there are folks who want to spend more here or there. Those are very important discussions to have. We should have a healthy debate on how to tweak, reform, and reshape the policies in the bill, whether it is in regard to programs affecting farmers or the portion of the bill that receives the overwhelming share of the dollars, as I said, the nutrition title.

We had those debates in the Senate Agriculture Committee. We had those debates on the Senate floor. The House Agriculture Committee has had those debates. Now I hope their product can be brought up on the Senate floor. In fact, I am more than happy to debate these various issues with some of my friends on the House Agriculture Committee--why setting high target prices, as they did, is the wrong direction for Congress to take and how the House should adopt the payment limit reforms the Senate has embraced, provisions of the farm bill in the Senate that I got included. I am sure many on the House Agriculture Committee would be more than happy to debate with me the merits of having a more balanced approach to where we find savings in the bill by taking an equal portion from the nutrition title and the farm-related titles. We should find more savings for sure than what is contained in the Senate-passed farm bill, including saving more out of the nutrition title, as the House Agriculture Committee has been able to do.

But the fact is we have to keep moving the ball forward, regardless of how we feel about all these separate parts of a farm bill. We need to get to finality. We have a drought gripping this Nation and that is going to be tough on Americans. It is going to affect every American, not just the 2 percent of the people who are farmers, because it is going to cause food prices to go up. But the drought has drawn into focus just how important our farmers are to our food supply.

Americans enjoy a safe and abundant food supply. That is because of the hard work and dedication of so many farming families throughout our country. Sometimes weather conditions or other events outside farmers' control can make it difficult to keep farming. Farmers aren't looking for a handout, but when faced with conditions such as a near-historic drought, many farmers may need assistance to get through. Men and women go into farming for all sorts of reasons, but at the heart of farming is the desire to be successful at producing an abundant crop to feed the Nation and the world.

Farmers have many tools to manage their risks so they can keep producing food. They have adopted advanced technology such as drought-resistant crops. Farmers buy crop insurance. In my State of Iowa, about 92 percent of the farmers have crop insurance. Livestock farmers help animals manage heat by building climate-controlled buildings. But when faced with weather conditions such as we are currently dealing with, even the best laid plans may not keep the farming operation afloat. That is where the Federal Government comes in. We help provide a safety net.

Let me say just how that drought affects crops. I just read in the newspaper something put out by some government agency that said about 55 percent of the landmass of the United States is in a drought condition right now. In my State of Iowa and many other Midwestern States, on an average of about 22 years, we face drought situations that are catastrophic for crops. Actually, the last one was in 1988, so now we are having one in my State of Iowa and that is 24 years. But, on average, it happens about that long. So we see the need for something that is beyond farmers' control. We can't do anything if it doesn't rain when it is supposed to rain, and right now is one of those most important times when crops need rain. So why do we provide the safety net? Because the American people understand how important the production of food is to our food supply and farmers doing that production.

It is a matter of national security. It has been said we are only nine meals away from a revolution. If people were without food, this argument goes, they would do whatever it takes to get food for themselves and their families. It has only been 3 years, I believe, in some places in the world where they had riots that were national problems--not just local problems but national problems--because of a shortage of rice. That is a staple in many countries; I suppose particularly of Asia. So we have to have a stable food supply if we are not going to have social upheaval.

The need for food can also be illustrated by looking at military history. In other words, a food supply is very important for our national security. It may be a joke, but Napoleon supposedly said ``an army marches on its stomachs.'' But we also know from modern history, if we consider World War II on this very day, 60 or 70 years after World War II, why the Japanese and the Germans protect their farmers so much with safety nets of various sorts. Because they know what it was like during wartime not to have adequate food as a part of national security. A well-fed military is one ready to fight and to defend.

There is nothing more basic than making sure the Nation's food supply is secure, whether it is to prevent social upheaval or for our national security or maybe for a lot of other reasons. In order to have stability in our food system, we need to have the safety net available to assist farmers through the tough times so they can keep producing food.

I have not always agreed with the policies set in each and every farm bill Congress has passed--of the eight I have been involved in. In fact, there have been times in

which I voted against individual farm bills because I didn't agree with the policy being set. However, I support, to a large extent, what we accomplished in the Senate-passed farm bill last month. Obviously, I didn't agree with everything, particularly with the lack of savings we captured from the nutrition title. But, for the most part, we passed a bill that embraced real reform in the farm program that still provides an effective safety net.

Whether it is the Senate bill that cut back $23 billion from the present farm program or whether it is the House bill that seems to cut back $35 billion, I will bet this is the only piece of legislation that can possibly get to the President's desk this year that is going to save money rather than if it had just been simply extended. I would think people who want to set a record of fiscal conservatism for the upcoming election would be very anxious to take up a bill the Congressional Budget Office says saves either $23 billion or $35 billion.

So I say mostly to the other body, because right now that is where the action is and where we hope it will take place, we should not delay any longer. The farm bill is too important to all Americans to leave it in limbo. We need to get a farm bill to the President. The farm bill is approximately 80 percent nutrition programs. Most of the people who benefit are not farmers. Then, the other 20 percent is a safety net for farmers but also for all the programs the Department of Agriculture administers.

I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source