Federal Agriculture Reform and Risk Management Act of 2013
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, my colleagues from California and New York are sincere, and like, I think, all 435 of us, they possess a deep sense of humanity and the necessity for America to reach out in our best spirit to help those in need.
This is the reality: this is a picture that my wife took in Eritrea a few years back. That's the American Food for Peace program. It is not broken. The American Food for Peace program is really about humanitarian, economic, and national security. It is extremely important. My wife and I have spent many years and many days in the famine camps around the world.
This is the statement of America. It's not a check and it's not cash, and it's not a credit card or a debit card. It's the delivery of food. The Food for Peace program really does work. It's not broken. It is not broken at all. Prepositioning food overseas does work. When the great flood occurred in Pakistan just a couple of years ago, it was this program--the delivery of American food in sacks--that actually arrived before there was any local food that was purchased.
The Food for Peace program is not broken.
I agree about the need for flexibility and we actually have it. We have the International Disaster Assistance program which is in place and can be used, and it can be cash purchases.
You don't need to change the Food for Peace program to deal with it. You preposition food. You send American products, American food overseas. It is the very best way that we can help. And it turns out that in the Pakistan disaster, this program, the Food for Peace program, delivered food faster and better than the local programs because the local programs had totally broken down. And that will happen over and over.
We don't need to destroy something that's worked for 50 years.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GARAMENDI. I thank my friend from New York.
I thought it so very unfair that the majority party would be fighting this out without somebody from the minority party jumping in in opposition to the proposal.
I am delighted that the FCC has provided $400-plus million for what is a very essential service. I am also very happy that the Department of Agriculture continues with the program in which they have a unique ability to reach out to these rural communities. The Department of Agriculture has the men, the women and the organizational structure to provide direct access and direct service. Perhaps--just perhaps--the Department of Agriculture program, together with the FCC program, might actually get the job done. It's very, very important.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
To the disappointment, I suppose, of everybody that is here, this isn't nearly as much fun as the last amendment. This is a rather simple amendment. It deals with a 1990 law, the Forest Legacy Act. It simply allows the Forest Legacy Act to be much more efficient and effective. It would allow those States that would like to participate in the Forest Legacy Act to also allow within that State a qualified trust, a land trust, to hold the easement.
The benefit of this is that it reduces the burden on the State government. The State government doesn't have to manage that easement. It would be managed by a qualified land trust, and it also allows for greater leverage of the money that would be available from the forest legacy projects from both the State and the Federal Government. It's a win all the way around. This program has been very, very successful in protecting forest lands all around the Nation, and this amendment simply would provide another opportunity to do even more to protect our forests.
Now, these forests are not going to be held as national parks or wilderness. These are operating forests. These are forests that would be operating with good, modern forest practices, providing wood and fiber into the community and the jobs that go with it.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Chairman, my colleague from Pennsylvania, I thought, was making a wonderful argument in support of this legislation, in that you talked about the success of the Forest Legacy Program, and it really has been eminently successful.
And you also talked about the demands on the program, and that's true. Many, many States want to implement this program.
But you didn't mention the fact that many States don't have the resources to manage additional properties, to manage additional trusts that they've taken. This would allow those States to make a decision. It's a State decision, it's not a Federal decision, it's not a decision by a private nonprofit qualified trust. This is a decision by the State to welcome into their program a private, nonprofit, qualified trust that does this kind of work that could then manage the trust without the State having to spend the money.
The State maintains oversight and, should something happen that the trust is unable to continue, it would then revert to the State. But this is a way of really expanding what, apparently, the three of us want to have happen.
You mentioned another program that does exist. Wonderful. Those programs could work in unison with the Federal Government participating, the State government participating, and the private.
But the problem here is that, under the Forest Legacy Program, the private, nonprofit qualified trust can't participate in that program.
I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GARAMENDI. I wish we had time to sit down and talk about this. It's really a shame that we're here on the floor at this moment. Really, I think, both of us are in support of protecting our forests, of enhancing their ability to continue to produce jobs, the food, the fiber and the wood that we need in our economy and in our society.
We're not very far apart. If there's something here that needs to be worked out between these two programs, I'm sure we could do it. But this really gives us an opportunity to really do what I think all of us want, and that is to preserve our forests, keep them in operating production, and allow the nonprofits to participate together with the States.
I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source