FARM SECURITY ACT OF 2001
(House of Representatives - October 03, 2001)

Text available as:

Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.

[Pages H6167-H6237]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       FARM SECURITY ACT OF 2001

  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the 
Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 248 and ask for its 
immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 248

       Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule 
     XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 2646) to provide for the continuation of 
     agricultural programs through fiscal year 2011. The first 
     reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of 
     order against consideration of the bill are waived. General 
     debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed two 
     hours equally divided and controlled by the chairman and 
     ranking minority member of the Committee on Agriculture. 
     After general debate the bill shall be considered for 
     amendment under the five-minute rule. In lieu of the 
     amendments recommended by the Committees on Agriculture and 
     International Relations now printed in the bill, it shall be 
     in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of 
     amendment under the five-minute rule an amendment in the 
     nature of a substitute consisting of the text printed in part 
     A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 
     resolution, modified by the amendment printed in part B of 
     the report. That amendment in the nature of a substitute 
     shall be considered as read. All points of order against that 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived. No 
     amendment to that amendment in the nature of a substitute 
     shall be in order except those printed before October 3, 
     2001, in the portion of the Congressional Record designated 
     for that purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII and except pro 
     forma amendments for the purpose of debate. Each amendment so 
     printed may be offered only by the Member who caused it to be 
     printed or his designee and shall be considered as read. At 
     the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the 
     Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with 
     such amendments as may have been adopted. Any Member may 
     demand a separate vote in the House on any amendment adopted 
     in the Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the amendment 
     in the nature of a substitute made in order as original text. 
     The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the 
     bill and amendments thereto to final passage without 
     intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or 
     without instructions.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The gentleman from Washington 
(Mr. Hastings) is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate 
only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
Hall), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During 
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose 
of debate only.
  (Mr. HASTINGS of Washington asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 248 is a modified 
open rule providing for the consideration of H.R. 2646, the Farm 
Security Act of 2001. The rule provides two hours of general debate 
equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Agriculture. The rule waives all points of 
order against consideration of the bill.
  The rule further provides that in lieu of the amendments recommended 
by the chairman of the Committee on Agriculture and the Committee on 
International Relations now printed in the bill, it shall be in order 
to consider, as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the 
5-minute rule, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of 
the printed text in part A of the Committee on Rules report 
accompanying the resolution, modified by the amendment printed in part 
B of the report. The rule waives all points of order against the 
amendment in the nature of a substitute and provides that it be shall 
be considered as read.
  The rule further makes in order only those amendments that have been 
preprinted in the Congressional Record before October 3, 2001, and 
provides that each such amendment may be offered only by the amendment 
who caused it to be printed or a designee and shall be considered as 
read. Finally, the rules provides one motion to recommit with or 
without instructions.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2646 provides $73.5 billion over the next 10 years 
to overhaul the 1996 farm bill. It reauthorizes a Food for Progress 
Program, which finances food grants to developing countries that are 
committed to democracy and free market system at $100 million per year 
through 2001. I am especially pleased that this bill reauthorizes the 
Market Access program, which helps producers, including many tree fruit 
growers in Central Washington, in my district, promote exports abroad 
and increases that funding by $110 million per year to $200 million 
annually.
  The MAP funds have proven to be an effective means of assisting 
producers not normally provided for the federal farm legislation. 
Cherries, apples, grapes, dry peas, hops and lentils are just a few of 
the commodities in my district that benefit from this important 
program.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2646 is a balanced bill providing support for 
American agricultural through commodity assistance, conservation 
programs, nutrition programs, enhanced international trade, rural 
development, forestry initiatives, and a host of other important 
provisions.
  The bill was reported by the Committee on Agriculture by a voice vote 
and is broadly supported by members of that Committee and our 
colleagues in the whole House. In order to permit Members seeking to 
improve the bill to the fullest extent possible, an opportunity was 
given to offer amendments. The Committee on Rules is pleased to report 
the modified open rule requested by the chairman and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Agriculture.
  Accordingly, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support both the 
rule and the underlying bill, H.R. 2646.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Washington 
(Mr. Hastings) for yielding me the time.
  This is a modified open rule. It will allow for the consideration of 
a bill which funds farm price supports, conservation programs, domestic 
nutrition programs, and international food assistance over the next 10 
years.
  As my colleague from Washington has described, this rule provides 2 
hours of general debate to be equally divided and controlled by the 
chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Agriculture.
  This allows germane amendments under the 5-minute rule. This is the 
normal amending process in the House. The rule requires that all 
amendments must be preprinted in the Congressional Record.
  Mr. Speaker, there is no human need more basic than food. Ensuring 
that our citizens are fed is one of the most important duties of 
government. This bill establishes the basic framework of government 
support for farmers to maintain a stable, affordable source of good 
food for Americans. The bill also

[[Page H6168]]

authorizes programs providing food for needy people in the United 
States and around the world.
  I want to thank the Committee on Agriculture, the gentleman from 
Texas (Chairman Combest) and his staff for their diligent work in 
putting together this farm bill, as well as ranking minority member, 
the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm). Members of the committee put a 
lot of energy and effort into this bill, including attending field 
hearings around the country. The result is a fair process and a 
bipartisan bill with support on both sides of the aisle.
  The bill includes many compromises. The committee has done a good job 
in striking a balance between the different interests represented in 
this country and in this House.
  I am glad that the bill includes necessary improvements to the Food 
Stamp Program and the Emergency Food Assistance Program, which is our 
Nation's first line of defense against hunger. These programs are 
especially important in times of increasing unemployment.
  Additionally, the legislation includes the Bill Emerson-Mickey Leland 
Hunger Fellows Program, and this is a fitting tribute for our two late 
colleagues, and it honors their legacy by training leaders in the fight 
against hunger.
  Thanks to the gentleman from Texas (Chairman Combest) and the 
Committee on International Relations, the gentleman from Illinois 
(Chairman Hyde), the bill authorizes the George McGovern-Robert Dole 
International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program, sometimes 
called the Global Schools Lunch program, and this will be a vital 
weapon in our arsenal in the worldwide fight against ignorance and 
disease.
  However, I am concerned about the potential gap in funding between 
the current Global School Lunch program and the authorized program 
created under this bill. Later, I am hoping to engage Chairman Combest 
in a colloquy on this matter.
  I also plan to offer an uncontroversial amendment which will give 
more flexibility in the management of the Food for Peace program. This 
was requested by the U.S. AID and the World Food Programme.
  Mr. Speaker, our world has changed since September 11, and it is 
necessary to look at major legislation such as this in light of our new 
security concerns, and among those concerns are the hunger and the 
poverty and the misery around the world that, if ignored, can become 
breeding grounds for violence and hatred.
  I have seen the effect of our food aid in dozens of countries, but 
nowhere more clearly than in North Korea. Five years ago, people would 
run when they saw Americans. That was before bags of American grain 
began reaching schools and orphanages there, helping to alleviate the 
crushing famine.
  Today, there are 15 million of those U.S. AID ``handshake'' bags 
being used over and over, delivering the message that the American 
people are not the enemies of the Korean people, and that message is 
getting through, and the evidence is the way ordinary North Koreans now 
break into smiles at the sight of Americans.
  As my colleagues know, I think we should send a lot more food aid to 
the more than 800 million hungry people in our world, and we should do 
it because it saves their lives and gives them hope. We should do it 
because it helps our farmers and instills goodwill towards Americans, 
and we should do it because we should not let terrible conditions 
fester and become even bigger problems for our Nation.
  The food assistance programs authorized by this bill give the 
President additional tools in showing our allies, new and old, that we 
are in a war with terrorists and not the downtrodden people of any 
Nation.
  Mr. Speaker, I support the rule on the underlying bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 
minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest), the distinguished 
chairman of the Committee on Agriculture.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding the 
time, and I just want to rise in support of this rule.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings), the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hall) and others on the Committee on Rules for 
a very open process there in granting this rule.
  As mentioned, the rule does provide the opportunity for Members to 
offer a wide variety of amendments. Some of those, I am sure, will 
create some extended discussion. That is, however, part of the process.
  It is a good rule, and I particularly would again like to thank the 
Committee on Rules for granting the rule that was requested by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) and myself.
  Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  As I mentioned, I am pleased that the Committee on Agriculture and 
the Committee on International Relations have included provisions in 
the bill that would establish what is commonly known as the Global 
School Lunch program. This exports some of the best we have to offer, 
American food and compassion to developing countries around the world. 
The global food for education initiative currently operated by the 
Agriculture Department has worthy goals of feeding hungry children, 
promoting education, especially among girls, and assisting American 
farmers.
  It was inspired by former Senators George McGovern and Bob Dole. It 
was announced at the G-8 summit last July, and it has broad bipartisan 
support. Authorization of the program is now part of the farm bill due 
to the exemplary work of the gentleman from Texas (Chairman Combest), 
the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde) and the ranking minority 
members, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) and the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Lantos).
  I am concerned, however, that there is a possible gap between the end 
of the existing funding and the beginning of the appropriated funding 
for this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I will yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest) 
for the purpose of engaging in a colloquy about this concern. I have 
also a note that the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) wanted to be 
here to discuss this matter but is chairing an important hearing on 
terrorism.
  So, is it the hope and understanding of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Combest) that the Secretary of Agriculture should continue to operate 
the Global Food for Education initiative until such time as the 
International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program is 
established?
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HALL of Ohio. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and want 
to assure him that I support the provisions of the McGovern-Dole 
International Food for Education Program contained in the bill in hopes 
that they and the rest of the bill will be enacted quickly.

                              {time}  1030

  I want to state that I agree that the current program should be 
continued so that there will not be a gap in the important work that is 
being done. The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) and I have 
requested that the General Accounting Office review the current Global 
Food for Education Initiative, and we expect that review to be 
completed in a few months. I will be happy to work with the gentleman 
to examine that GAO recommendation.
  Mr. HALL of Ohio. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the 
gentleman's assurances and hope we can work together to ensure that the 
recommendations to improve the program will be implemented.
  Mr. COMBEST. If the gentleman will continue to yield, I would 
certainly agree and again look forward to receiving the report. While I 
am concerned that this and any other new program achieve the goal set 
out for it, I share the concern of my colleague from Ohio that the 
needs of hungry children should not go unmet, especially when the 
United States is able to produce food in such abundance. I appreciate 
his intent and look forward to working with him on this program in the 
future.
  Mr. HALL of Ohio. Reclaiming my time once again, I want to thank the

[[Page H6169]]

chairman, and I also want to thank my colleagues, the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) and the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. 
Emerson), who have worked tirelessly on this important piece of 
legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may 
consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), the 
distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules.
  (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding me this time.
  At the beginning of this Congress, the Speaker of the House, the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert), said that he believed it 
important that on most of the issues we face we proceed under what he 
calls regular order, and that is exactly what we are doing here. We 
have basically an open amendment process. We call this a modified open 
rule because it offers just the slightest restriction, but under the 
structure that we have, every germane amendment will be able to be made 
in order.
  I know there are some who have demonstrated some concern about that 
as we proceed with consideration of this farm bill. I believe that it 
is the most appropriate way for us to proceed. So I hope that my 
colleagues, Mr. Speaker, will join in strong support of this rule and 
allow us to move ahead with consideration of a wide range of issues.
  I know there are some issues that they would like to have brought up 
under this structure that we have, but that would have required a 
waiver. We chose not to provide that waiver, and there are other 
mechanisms that exist in the institution where they will be able to 
address those concerns.
  So I would simply like to say that I urge my colleagues to support 
this rule, and I thank the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings) and 
the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hall) for their management of this effort. 
We are going to proceed in a bipartisan way with what will be a free 
and rigorous and interesting open debate on consideration of the farm 
bill.
  Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Stenholm), who is the ranking member on the Committee 
on Agriculture.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the rule. As we have 
heard, it is essentially a fair rule; and I am grateful to my chairman, 
the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest), for requesting such a fair 
rule. I hope the entire House appreciates the fairness of the action of 
the request of the House Committee on Agriculture.
  This rule restores a tradition of full and fair debate that always 
used to take place when farm bills came to the floor. While I feel the 
committee bill is a reasonable consensus product, I know that many of 
my colleagues believe it can be improved, and I very much look forward 
to the discussion before us. As a participant in its development, I 
believe that our debate will provide an excellent opportunity for all 
of our colleagues and for the American people to see the wisdom of the 
committee's work.
  The open rule has become too rare in the debates we have had in the 
House in recent years. In the Committee on Agriculture we never 
considered having this bill considered on the floor in a restrictive 
way. Anticipating an open rule, we knew that every decision we made, 
every effort designed to set budgetary priorities would be subject to 
the full scrutiny of every Member of the House.
  I fully believe that anticipation of an open floor debate helped us 
to build a better bill in committee. As a result, it has the support of 
a broad diversity of interests. And while the support of the 
agricultural community for our bill is gratifying, the validation of 
others is particularly rewarding.
  Mr. Speaker, I very much look forward to our debate in the days ahead 
and I hope my colleagues will observe the benefits from this open and 
fair process.
  Mr. Speaker, the bill reforms our foreign programs in a way that will 
prevent any future need for the billions of dollars of emergency 
spending that have been required in recent years. It greatly expands 
USDA's conservation programs. And I reemphasize that: an 80 percent 
increase in the conservation title in this bill. It reauthorizes and 
improves the food stamp program, and I am gratified for the support of 
the hunger community on this bill and in recognizing the significance 
of those things that we did in the nutrition component. It renews our 
emphasis on the importance of rural economic development, particularly 
water and agricultural research.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill has been scored by the Congressional Budget 
Office, and its 10-year score is within the limit of the funds that 
were included within the budget resolution. Congress anticipated the 
need for farm policy reform; and its passage, I believe, is the 
fiscally responsible thing to do.
  Though I strongly support this rule, Mr. Speaker, I wish to make 
moment of the state of affairs that has become apparent since budgetary 
reestimates were released in August. Although it is the case that the 
budget anticipated farm bill spending, the availability of the funds 
was made on a contingent basis. For fiscal years 2003 through 2011, 
funds are made available to provide for a bill from the Committee on 
Agriculture if the chairman of the Committee on the Budget makes an 
allocation subject to the condition.
  Mr. Speaker, as my colleagues are well aware, and as my friend from 
South Carolina has clearly shown to all Members, only in the most 
technical sense can it be regarded that the conditions of the money in 
this bill has been met. Our budget is busted. The budget resolution is 
irrelevant. There is no on budget surplus. We are into Social Security 
and Medicare spending and we are on our way to a unified budget 
deficit, all as a result of the economy and of September 11.
  Mr. Speaker, as we debate this rule and the farm bill, we must be 
thinking clearly about our budget responsibilities. Passage of this 
bill was anticipated in the budget and is crucial to forestall the need 
for Congress to continually provide emergency spending. However, we 
cannot avoid the fact that its passage and all other spending bills we 
have recently considered and that will remain to be considered take us 
deeper and deeper into Social Security revenue.
  Mr. Speaker, I take this opportunity to appeal to my colleagues in a 
bipartisan way and to the administration to now develop a new budget. 
We need to unite on our budget now so that we do not make those 
mistakes today, with all good intentions, that will not be in the best 
interest of our country 10 years from today.
  I believe the bill that we bring before the House today from the 
agriculture perspective meets all of that criteria; and therefore, I 
urge the support of the rule and of the bill.
  Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from New York (Mr. Hinchey).
  Mr. HINCHEY. Mr. Speaker, I want to express my appreciation to the 
chairman for producing this bill. I think the bill contains many good 
things. It reauthorizes the food stamp program, does a very good job on 
that; it provides a great deal of authorization for appropriate 
research in agriculture; and does many good things for the agricultural 
community across the country.
  However, there is one glaring problem with the underlying bill and 
the rule that governs it. The underlying bill makes inadequate 
provision for the dairy industry. Specifically, the inadequate 
provision is the failure of the bill to recognize the need for dairy 
compacts, particularly in the East and Southeastern parts of the United 
States where the dairy industry is in great peril. This rule does not 
provide the opportunity for a debate on that issue, and that is a major 
defect in the rule.
  Over and over again the leadership of this House has promised that 
there would be an opportunity to debate the issue of dairy compacts and 
that there would be an opportunity to have a vote one way or the other 
and allow the House to express its will on the issue of dairy compacts. 
This bill fails to do that and the rule fails to make in order such an 
amendment. This is a glaring deficiency.
  Why are we concerned about that? We are concerned about it because 
the dairy industry is an important part of the agricultural industry in 
this country. Without the opportunity for dairy

[[Page H6170]]

compacts, a major portion of that dairy industry, that which exists 
principally in the eastern part of the country, both north and south, 
is in grave danger of perishing. If we lose the dairy industry, we lose 
an important part of our communities all across New England and the 
middle Atlantic States.
  So the rule should be corrected. A debate on the dairy compacts ought 
to be authorized. We ought to have an opportunity to discuss this very 
critical issue. Without that, the rule is grossly deficient.
  Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Davis).
  Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, while I do not have much problem 
with the rule, and I actually compliment the committee, I am concerned 
that this bill continues to provide protection for some of our 
antiquated, outmoded, and unneeded subsidies, especially in the sugar 
program, where 1 percent of 17 farms will receive 58 percent of the 
subsidy. That is one reason why I am asking people and urging support 
for the Miller-Miller amendment when it comes to the floor.
  Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of 
my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hastings of Washington). Pursuant to 
House Resolution 248 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in 
the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the 
consideration of the bill, H.R. 2646.

                              {time}  1041


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 2646) to provide for the continuation of agricultural programs 
through fiscal year 2011, with Mr. LaHood in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as having 
been read the first time.
  Under the rule, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest) and the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) each will control 1 hour.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest).
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Mr. COMBEST asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I want to begin by thanking my colleague, 
the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm), for his great efforts in 
arriving at a very bipartisan, very well-thought-out bill.
  I also want to thank the 51 members of the House Committee on 
Agriculture for the dedication and the time that they have put in to 
see us arrive today at the product that we bring before the House. This 
has been long in coming. And I would be remiss if I did not thank the 
staff, minority and majority staff, for the tireless, long, long 
nights, weeks, and months, that they have put into this process. We 
could not have done it without them.
  Mr. Chairman, it is with great pride that I rise today to bring 
before the House H.R. 2646, the Farm Security Act of 2001. This bill 
represents comprehensive agricultural legislation, making important 
changes to all segments of our food and agricultural industries; and I 
look forward to today's debate. Most importantly, this bill provides a 
proactive market-oriented solution to the critical economic crisis that 
has been eroding the financial footing of our Nation's farmers and 
rural communities for the past 4 years. Just as important, this bill 
will prevent the need for further ad hoc assistance for farmers in the 
future.
  Mr. Chairman, our committee has taken a very deliberate approach to 
crafting this farm bill. Over the past 2 years, the House Committee on 
Agriculture held some 47 hearings. We have traveled to all regions of 
the country to listen to the needs and the concerns of hardworking 
people from the farming and agri-business community. We have asked all 
farm and interest groups to provide very specific ideas on how they 
would improve current agricultural policy, which we received from them. 
And, most importantly, we have worked in a very open and bipartisan way 
to craft this bill, which enjoys an unprecedented level of support 
among the agricultural sector.

                              {time}  1045

  Mr. Chairman, the key factor of this bill's success in committee, and 
its outcome today, is balance. In addition to addressing just about 
every issue under the jurisdiction of the Committee on Agriculture, 
H.R. 2646 represents a bipartisan balance between several important 
issues, including: a safety net for America's farmers; unmet soil and 
water conservation needs; foreign trade and promotion program 
requirements; agricultural credit programs for America's farmers, 
ranchers and rural areas; important agricultural research initiatives; 
rural development programs that affect thousands of rural communities 
across the country; and the list goes on and on.
  I mention this in order to make the point that there is not a single 
program or issue addressed by this farm bill that could not be further 
improved with additional resources.
  However, as I stated, the bill represents balance and it represents a 
bipartisan balance that the Committee on Agriculture crafted based on 
the input that we received from America's farmers and ranchers, soil 
and water conservationists, agribusiness, private food aid 
organizations, and many others.
  The economic crisis that farmers have been facing since 1998 is not 
of their own making. Rather, it is a result of large macroeconomic 
factors like increased supply resulting from favorable world-wide 
weather trends, tightening demand resulting from slow economic growth 
rates, and a strong U.S. dollar pushing our products out of competition 
and driving prices down on the world market. What is more, in the last 
2 years farmers have been further squeezed by high energy prices which 
have dramatically increased their input costs.
  All of these are just reasons why Congress has acted to provide 
relief in the last 4 years; but more importantly, these are reasons why 
we need to act today and establish a more stable farmer policy for the 
future.
  H.R. 2646 establishes the critical safety net that our farmers and 
the entire agricultural sector need to help this important sector of 
our economy grow and prosper and create wealth for the future.
  H.R. 2646 also represents a fiscally responsible approach to 
providing the assistance farmers need. The $73.5 billion in additional 
spending in H.R. 2646 was fully contemplated by the budget resolution. 
The average $12 billion per year that would be spent on commodity 
supports in this bill pales in comparison to the average $23.3 billion 
that has been spent over the last 4 years.
  H.R. 2646 will provide our Nation's farmers with the footing they 
need to compete in the world marketplace. It is fully consistent with 
our obligations under the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture as 
enforced by the WTO. In fact, there is a specific provision in this 
bill which authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to make adjustments 
in expenditure levels in order to ensure compliance with our trade 
treaty obligations. Therefore, it is not only consistent, but 
complementary, to a proactive trade policy that will seek to level the 
international playing field and open new markets to our products for 
the future.
  H.R. 2646 also has an unprecedented level of support among the 
agricultural community. The bill is supported by virtually all farm 
groups, agribusiness and industry groups, many conservation groups, 
rural advocates, towns and communities.
  H.R. 2646 is a bipartisan and balanced way to address the needs of 
America's agriculture sector. I look forward to completing action on 
this very important legislation.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this bill, and I want to 
begin by expressing my appreciation to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Combest) for

[[Page H6171]]

his leadership in bringing us to this point today, and to our 
colleagues on both sides of the aisle who have participated in the many 
hours, weeks, months, yes, years in the development of this 
recommendation that we bring to the full House today.
  The policies contained in the bill represent a truly balanced 
consensus approach that reflects well on the process by which it was 
designed. While there remain amendments to be considered, the product 
before us represents a true bipartisan consensus, and I believe it has 
broad support.
  Mr. Chairman, the process for developing this bill and the one in 
which the 1996 farm bill was enacted are as different as night and day. 
The 1996 farm bill was a philosophical document written by the House 
leadership. There were no public hearings, no process for the Committee 
on Agriculture to build a consensus, and little optimism for its 
success. Many of us who voted for it did so because we had no other 
choice.
  Mr. Chairman, I will not be the first to say that the 1996 farm bill 
is an utter failure. It has failed our farmers. This failure was so 
obvious to everyone involved that Congress and the White House have 
repeatedly in this and each of the previous 3 years poured out billions 
of unbudgeted additional dollars in the form of direct payments to 
farmers.
  Mr. Chairman, much has been said about how difficult times have been 
for producers in those years. This point cannot be overstated, but it 
was the taxpayers of America who were most widely disserved as the 
emergency payments were spent without any repair being made to the 
underlying program. These payments were clear evidence that the 1996 
farm bill was not working. Today's farm bill gives the House an 
opportunity to meet its responsibility to farmers, ranchers, and to the 
American taxpayers.
  Congress included sufficient funds in this year's budget to ensure 
the Committee on Agriculture had the tools to develop a farm policy 
that helps farmers when crop revenues are low, while providing the 
predictability for government expenditures that taxpayers deserve, and 
the predictability that our bankers are demanding.
  With all of its strength, Mr. Chairman, this bill is being considered 
under fiscal conditions that all of us had hoped to avoid. If there 
were any consensus in the Congress about budgetary matters as this year 
began, it was that we wanted to leave behind the era of deficit 
spending. To further that effort, many of us asked to be included in 
the process of developing our government's budget for fiscal year 2002 
and beyond. The rhetoric that prevailed led us to believe that the 
budget was going to be developed in an inclusive, bipartisan manner.
  The Blue Dogs, in particular, were prepared to bring to the table a 
plan that would have allowed for a tax cut, for an increase in defense 
spending, for solutions for Social Security and Medicare problems, and 
for increases in programs for agriculture, education, veterans, and 
health care.
  At the same time, our proposal would have led to reduction in the 
Government's debt, and it provided a cushion sufficient to guard 
against unforeseen circumstances pushing us back into deficit spending.
  Mr. Chairman, our expectations for bipartisanship were not met; and 
whatever its other flaws, the Congressional budget clearly failed to 
prepare for the circumstances we now face. As a result, we are moving 
forward today with essentially no budget. Once again we will be adding 
to our Nation's debt.
  Mr. Chairman, for all practical purposes, we have no budget. We are 
approaching major spending decisions without a plan. In the confusion, 
however, there is an opportunity to develop this unity budget; and if 
my colleagues need a model for the development of a new budget, they 
need to look no further than the process used for developing the bill 
which we present today.
  The American people are asking us to be unified, and now more than 
ever we have a clear obligation to the taxpayers of this Nation to make 
the best of our resources. In that spirit, I urge our leadership and 
the administration to begin the process of developing a new budget so 
that discipline and some kind of rationale can guide our fiscal 
decision-making.
  Mr. Chairman, H.R. 2646 is a good bill. It is good for America's 
farmers while providing predictability for our taxpayers. It would fit 
within the budget I have just described. It greatly expands USDA's 
conservation programs while extending and improving the food stamp 
program. In addition, it renews our emphasis on the importance of rural 
development and agricultural research.
  In closing, I would like to once again thank the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Combest) for his leadership and skill in developing a consensus 
product. I urge all of my colleagues to vote for passage of this bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from 
Oklahoma (Mr. Lucas), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Conservation, 
Credit, Rural Development and Research.
  Mr. LUCAS of Oklahoma. Mr. Chairman, I rise to urge my colleagues to 
support H.R. 2646 and its conservation title, what might accurately be 
described by some as the greenest ever.
  American farmers and ranchers are the original conservationists of 
this country. We are the people the farm bill is intended to help. The 
farm bill's purpose is to assist in providing us with the tools to 
competitively produce food and fiber in the domestic and world markets.
  Furthermore, Congress encourages producers to do so in an 
environmentally friendly manner, while continuing to provide the 
American consumer with the cheapest, safest and most reliable food 
supply in the history of the world.
  After listening to 23 organizations and coalitions testify at three 
subcommittee hearings, and in an effort to accommodate the American 
producer and the environment, I laid out a plan in my own conservation 
bill to help producers and the American public by providing sound 
assistance to U.S. producers.
  It is critical to remember that not just one time but many times 
numerous groups asked us to place more money than we were able to place 
in every single existing program, and in most new programs.
  On the committee, both Republican and Democrat members worked to find 
a balanced bill so we would not have to come back to Congress and ask 
for ad hoc disaster bills year after year. We have found that balance 
in the manager's amendment to H.R. 2646.
  The centerpiece of the conservation title is the Environmental 
Quality Incentives Program, EQIP. Farmers and ranchers have to deal 
with a number of State and Federal environmental rules, regulations and 
laws; and many just want to be even better stewards of the land.
  The current program is only $200 million per year. The livestock 
coalition testified before us this year and asked for $2.5 billion per 
year. H.R. 2646 provides producers with $1.285 billion per year. Fifty 
percent of the money goes to crop producers and 50 percent goes to 
livestock producers. This is the exact requirement under current laws. 
This is the most important working-lands provision in the conservation 
title. Crop and fruit and vegetable producers are counting on this 
program to help them with all types of conservation efforts.
  The problem with EQIP was that there were priority areas that 
determined how and where the money was to be spent. If a producer was 
in an area that fell outside of these priority areas, chances were slim 
to none that they could receive Federal help. By reforming priority 
areas and allowing each contract to be considered on its own merit, I 
believe that we provided more money in the program that will help 
Congress assist all producers fairly and not penalize someone simply 
because their county is outside a designated priority area.
  The bill provides a maximum of $50,000 per year or $200,000 total 
over 10 years for all EQIP contracts. Some people want to ignore large 
animal feeding operations and contract growers. It would be hard for 
Congress to reach a desired environmental result if we ignore the needs 
of some producers. The payment limitation will ensure that the money is 
spread out fairly between small, medium, and large operations. As a 
matter of fact, the bill even changes EQIP contracts so that smaller 
producers can sign up for 1- to 10-

[[Page H6172]]

year contracts. Plus, they can be paid in the same year in which they 
sign the contract. Both of these provisions were taken from my bill to 
help small producers.
  The Conservation Reserve Program is another important program. Many 
groups wanted to leave the program at its current level, while others 
wanted CRP to increase to as high as 45 million acres. H.R. 2646 
reaches a balance by allowing nearly 40 million acres, or 39.2 million 
acres, to be exact, into the CRP.
  The new Grasslands Reserve Program is another important program based 
on my idea that allows 10- and 15- and 20-year contracts. To build 
consensus, the full committee added 30-year contracts and permanent 
easements. The committee supports permanent easements in GRP because it 
is a true working-lands program, not a land-idling program.
  The Committee on Agriculture followed the subcommittee's 
recommendation by including 150,000 acres per year of Wetland Reserve 
Program acreage, a million and a half over the life of the bill. And 
yes, it comes with a price tag of $1.84 billion. This is the largest 
increase of all of the major programs.
  H.R. 2646 provides $500 million worth of funding for the Farmland 
Protection Program. Since States must match 50 percent of its funding, 
it is hard to gauge whether all of this money will be used or simply go 
to the wealthiest States.

                              {time}  1100

  Finally, H.R. 2646 provides $25 million per year, ramping up to $50 
million per year for the wildlife habitat incentives program.
  My goal as the Conservation Subcommittee chairman was to secure a 
large sum of money for the conservation title in the new farm bill. I 
am thrilled to stand here today and say that we have an increase of 
over 75 percent in funding. The current programs spend $2.1 billion per 
year. H.R. 2646 will spend nearly $3.7 billion per year. Yes, $37 
billion on conservation over the life of this farm bill.
  I heard concerns regarding some of the changes the committee made in 
its draft. I worked diligently to address the problems presented to me 
by various groups and am happy to say that we found compromise on 
issues such as swampbuster regulation and many wildlife concerns. 
Furthermore, I worked with the National Association of Conservation 
Districts and the committee to reach an agreement on technical 
assistance funding.
  In closing, I would simply say that this is a zero sum game. If we 
need more money in one area of the farm bill, it must come out of one 
of the other areas or programs or our own conservation funding.
  Simply, Mr. Chairman, support America's producers and the 
environment. Support H.R. 2646.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Arkansas (Mr. Berry).
  Mr. BERRY. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the ranking member and the 
chairman of this committee for the wonderful work that they have done 
in crafting a bill that is the best that we could do given the 
resources at our disposal. I think they did an outstanding job, along 
with the staff of the Committee on Agriculture on both sides of the 
aisle. I want to compliment them for the great work that they have 
done.
  Mr. Chairman, the United States of America has the safest, most 
abundant, and the most reasonably priced food and fiber supply of any 
nation in the world by more than half. We do twice as well in that 
respect as any other nation. It is something that we can be very proud 
of and very thankful for.
  The Farm Security Act of 2001 ensures our ability to continue to 
produce our own supply of affordable food and fiber. Without this 
assistance to our farmers, production will move offshore, forcing the 
U.S. to depend on other nations for our food. This is, in fact, a 
national security issue.
  I believe, I have not read it, but I am told that there is a story in 
a national newspaper today criticizing and ridiculing that idea. If we 
did not have the ability to feed ourselves and produce that food right 
here in this country, our national security would indeed be threatened.
  Nearly every farm organization in the country has endorsed this bill. 
They support the 80 percent increase in conservation spending to help 
make this the greenest farm bill ever and to make sure that we continue 
the effort to improve our water quality, to improve the protection of 
our soil, and the air quality in this country.
  This will benefit not only rural, but urban communities. It helps 
support the rural economy by helping farmers break even. I have heard 
many stories in the last few months, and particularly in the last 
couple of weeks, and especially just yesterday about this bill just 
goes to subsidize farmers and inefficient producers and so-called fat 
cat producers.
  Mr. Chairman, today no one is getting into farming. If this is such a 
lucrative idea and a lucrative piece of legislation, we would have 
people lined up trying to get in this business instead of lined up 
trying to get out of it. If we do not pass this farm bill this week, or 
before this Congress goes out of session, I can tell you that it is a 
threat to our ability to continue to feed and clothe this country in an 
efficient manner.
  I want to be on record as being supportive of this bill, the way it 
came out of committee with almost no amendments. There will be an 
amendment offered that will attempt to totally reorganize food policy 
in this country, and I think we should oppose it.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Nebraska (Mr. Osborne), one of the most active members of our 
committee.
  Mr. OSBORNE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support H.R. 2646, and really 
for several reasons.
  One is I have been very impressed by the process that the committee 
has gone through. This bill has been in development for 2 years. We 
have had hearings all across the country. We have had roughly 50 
different agriculture, environmental, conservation groups appear before 
the committee. They have been asked to write the bill as they see it 
ought to be. So everyone has had input. It has not been done in a 
closet. I think that the chairman has been very fair in the way he has 
approached it.
  This is the only comprehensive farm bill in existence in this 
Congress or in the Senate as well. It deals with commodities; it 
increases conservation expenditures by 80 percent; it deals with rural 
development; research increased by 20 percent; and trade.
  There are some questions that have been raised already, and I am sure 
they will come up later today. Why do we have payments to wealthy 
farmers? In Nebraska, there are 54,000 farms. We have roughly nine 
entities that receive payments of $500,000 or more. These are multiple 
entities where you have aunts and uncles and brothers and sisters, so 
they are not single farmers that are receiving this amount of money.
  This is one out of every 6,000 farms that receives a large payment. 
The return on equity is roughly 4 percent. If you take the government 
subsidies out of farming, you go to a zero balance, or below zero. 
Three-fourths of our farms in the United States currently rely on off-
the-farm income for survival, so we have both the farmer and the farm 
wife often working off farm and most of the time the farm wife, too.
  Some have said this is too expensive. Over the last 4 years, we have 
averaged $22 billion a year on agriculture. Much of that has been in 
emergency payments. In this bill, we will average $17 billion a year 
which is $5 billion less, and obviously we have to get away from 
emergency payments.
  Some have also said why do we provide a safety net for agriculture? 
In Europe, the average subsidy is $300 to $500 per acre because they 
have experienced what hunger is like at one point or another. In South 
America land is $300. The idea is that in the United States our 
subsidies are very reasonable, very cheap.
  I certainly urge the passage of this bill.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy 
in giving me some time to speak on this issue.
  One might ask why a city boy is on the floor dealing with the 
agriculture bill. Well, in my State, agriculture is the third largest 
industry. In my district, agriculture has a prominent role.

[[Page H6173]]

I deeply care about food and water supply and its price. And, most 
important, we are all influenced by agriculture, whether we live in 
cities, suburban or rural areas, particularly as it impacts the 
environment, as it deals with water, land use and the environment for 
us all.
  This is an opportunity for us to enter into a new era for 
agriculture. The United States launched an unprecedented effort during 
the Depression to rescue our agricultural system, and it was a dramatic 
success. It has developed the most productive agricultural system in 
the world. There is no disputing that. But the problem is that today, 
two-thirds of a century later, the system drives decisions to the 
detriment of many farmers, consumers, our trade position and the 
environment.
  The 1996 Freedom to Farm Act was a bad solution to this admitted 
problem. We can, in fact, do better. I have met with the agricultural 
producers and the people on the board of agriculture in my State. This 
summer they were unanimous in saying that the system misses the mark 
for them. They do not benefit; the wrong people, by and large, do; they 
do not need what we have now, but they do need assistance. I agree with 
the Bush administration that this current bill does not hit the mark.
  I look forward to a series of amendments that we are going to be 
discussing in the course of the day, particularly the Boehlert-Kind-
Dingell-Gilchrest bill that will help us make a modest shift towards 
giving what Americans and the agricultural community really need. It is 
an opportunity to provide benefit for all farmers, not a chosen few. It 
is an opportunity for us to do a far better job of protecting the 
environment.
  It is true, the underlying bill has an 80 percent improvement or 
whatever. But that speaks to the point that we are not adequately 
funding the provisions that we have now. We run out of money. There are 
people that are standing in line to use it.
  I commend the leadership of the committee for the consensus effort 
that they have attempted, reaching out. There are some things in this 
bill that I appreciate. I urge my colleagues, however, to not settle 
for this incremental step. We can take another important step to create 
a new direction for agriculture for this new century.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Alabama (Mr. Everett), chairman of the Subcommittee on Specialty 
Crops and Foreign Agriculture Programs.
  Mr. EVERETT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman and the ranking 
member for the outstanding work they have done to produce this bill 
that had to compete with a lot of interests.
  The U.S. farm economy is experiencing one of the worst cycles of 
depressed prices since the Great Depression, while the costs for major 
inputs such as fuel and fertilizer are up 25 percent over the last 4 
years. This has resulted in a growing crisis in much of rural America. 
Without the disaster assistance funds Congress has provided to farmers 
over the last 4 years, thousands of U.S. farmers and ranchers would 
have no doubt been put out of business and seen their livelihoods 
disappear.
  Our producers are some of the most efficient in the world, but they 
cannot possibly be expected to compete with their counterparts in other 
countries when those countries subsidize their producers at levels much 
higher than our own and the tariffs on agricultural products in other 
countries are five times higher than those in the U.S.
  These represent only a few of the obstacles faced by the Committee on 
Agriculture when trying to develop farm bill legislation that would 
ensure America's producers are given a proper safety net to allow them 
to remain viable, while providing us with the safest, most affordable 
food and fiber supply in the entire world. The food and fiber supply 
constitutes a major component of our national defense, our national 
security, and I do not really care who says otherwise. If you cannot 
feed your people, then you cannot defend your people. It is that 
simple.
  This bill, H.R. 2646, the Farm Security Act of 2001, is the product 
of almost 2 years of work by the Committee on Agriculture which held 
dozens of hearings throughout the country and here in Washington with 
most major farm and commodity groups represented. Over 300 witnesses 
presented testimony before the committee.
  In the subcommittee I chair on specialty crops and foreign 
agriculture programs, we saw the necessity to reform the peanut program 
to ensure the survival of the peanut industry in this country and 
restore profitability for our peanut producers. We heard from peanut 
producers, shellers and manufacturers alike, and critics of the 
program, and they all realized it was time for a new program that moved 
away from the two-tiered pricing system, which would be impossible to 
maintain in the future.
  The need for change was real, with tariffs on Mexican peanuts 
decreasing each year until they completely disappear in 2008. Also, 
Argentina is seeking NAFTA-like access to our market for their peanuts. 
Without a change to the current program, increasing imports would 
continue to put pressure on domestic production to the point where the 
Secretary would be required to lower quotas, which would decrease the 
safety net for producers.
  We looked to make the peanut program much like other program crops, 
combining proven and successful components like the marketing loan and 
fixed-decoupled payments with the new counter-cyclical component, while 
also providing a quota compensation payment to quota holders. This new 
program will provide producers with a safety net that gives some price 
protection while also helping to regain our market share that has been 
lost to imports. It will also save the industry in this country.
  The bill not only contains a strong program for peanut producers, but 
strong and balanced programs for all producers of all commodities, in 
addition to an improved conservation title, which does indeed receive 
an 80 percent increase in funding. The bill also contains strong and 
improved trade, nutrition, credit, research, rural development, and 
forestry titles.

                              {time}  1115

  The Committee on Agriculture had a lot of hard decisions to make 
among many competing interests. What we have developed is a very 
balanced bill which works to address the needs that are facing rural 
America today.
  Again, I say I appreciate the strong leadership that we received from 
our full committee chairman and from our ranking member.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 6 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
North Carolina (Mrs. Clayton).
  Mrs. CLAYTON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Texas for 
yielding me time.
  Mr. Chairman, I was reminded when we called our farm bill the Farm 
Security Act of 2001, which I think is appropriate, I remember Chairman 
Kika de la Garza, when I first came to Congress, gave this analogy of 
what it meant to secure the Nation by making this analogous story about 
going into the bowels of a submarine and how the submarine had secured 
the safety of our country. They wanted to know what was the magic of 
the submarine being able to sustain so long. They said, as long as the 
food lasted. I am reminded that a Nation that cannot feed itself, 
indeed, cannot secure its food, cannot secure its population.
  In his book The Third Freedom, former Senator and the 1972 nominee 
for President candidate was George McGovern. He reflects on the shame 
he felt watching a 1968 CBS documentary, Hunger in the USA.
  Senator McGovern remembers a young hungry boy silently watching as 
his classmate ate his lunch. When the reporter asked the boy what he 
was thinking as he stood and watched his classmate eat, the boy 
replied, ``I am ashamed.'' He said, ``I am ashamed, because I ain't got 
no money.''
  Senator McGovern writes that he was ashamed. He, the powerful Senator 
who was in authority to do much, he was ashamed. He said, ``I felt 
ashamed, because I had not known more about hunger in my own land. I 
was ashamed that a Federal program, that I was supposed to know about 
and allowed, permitted youngsters to go hungry; and as they watched 
their paying classmate eat before their eyes they felt ashamed that 
they had no money.''
  Well, I rise today to tell my colleagues that while the problem of 
hunger, both in the United States and

[[Page H6174]]

 abroad, continues to plague us, this bill takes significant steps to 
alleviate and to mitigate the suffering of millions, millions, of 
people. I hope no one feels ashamed that they have voted for this, but 
feel empowered as human beings that they have allowed people to eat.
  I want to thank the Chair and the ranking member of the committee for 
working to ensure that this farm bill, like past farm bills, includes a 
nutritional title. Once again we can see the powerful connection 
between American agricultural producers and working families who 
struggle to put food on the table.
  We also can see the connection between a large segment of this 
Congress, who have no farmers in their area, in fact, the vast majority 
of our Members have no farmers in their area, but they do have hungry 
people in their area, and this farm bill makes the connection between 
those who are struggling to put food on their table and the producers 
who produce the food for them to eat.
  H.R. 2646 makes several significant changes to the food stamp 
program. In fact, this bill provides one of the most significant and 
sensible investments in the program in recent years. The improvements 
are bipartisan and they are supported by nutritional groups throughout 
the Nation, as well as State administrators alike. As in the past, we 
can see today that hungry people transcend partisan divide. There is 
not a Republican nor a Democratic view on this.
  I am especially happy to know that this bill provides transitional 
benefits to families leaving welfare for work, thus supporting the aims 
of welfare reform and ensuring that we support those families who make 
a good faith effort even to enter the workplace. The bill updates the 
standard and the deduction and simplifies the operation of the program, 
much to the delight of those who administer the program.
  All in all, while the nutrition title does not by any means include 
everything that some of us, including myself, would have wanted, it is 
a good compromise, a sensible compromise, a bipartisan compromise, and, 
most importantly, a compromise that will benefit millions of Americans 
who live under the spector of hunger day in and day out.
  I would like to also briefly note that this bill includes another 
important authorization in combination with the Committee on 
International Relations, the Global Food for Education Initiative, also 
known as the McGovern-Dole International School Lunch Program. This 
important program exports to developing countries what we have already 
learned here, that good nutrition is a foundation of learning. This 
provides millions and millions of young children in developing 
countries, whether it is India, Africa, or China, to have the 
opportunity of having nutrition be a part of their learning experience. 
I look forward to continued work to see the implementation of this 
important program.
  Once again, I would like to thank the chairman and ranking member for 
their effort, and the committee. They have been fair and they have 
worked hard with me to ensure that the farm bill does not leave behind 
millions of Americans and also have offered the opportunity that both 
our commodities and our compassion will be seen in foreign countries.
  I urge my colleagues, those who support hungry and working families, 
to also support the Farm Security Act of 2001.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Chambliss), the chairman of the Subcommittee on General 
Farm Commodities and Risk Management.
  Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2646, 
the Farm Security Act of 2001.
  The Farm Security Act is the result of the undying passion of the 
gentleman from Texas (Chairman Combest) for the betterment of American 
agriculture. The comprehensive bipartisan process that was participated 
in by my good friend the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) gave us 
Committee on Agriculture members the opportunity to listen to producers 
all across the country. The open door process gave us the ability to 
craft a balanced bill that is good for all.
  The Farm Security Act is a culmination of 2 years work. The House 
Committee on Agriculture has held 47 field hearings and one forum 
between March of 2000 and July of 2001 in preparation for this farm 
bill.
  In the full committee, field hearings held across the committee this 
year, and the hearings held by the Subcommittee on General Farm 
Commodities and Risk Management this year, producers expressed to us 
their desires to continue planting flexibility and also to establish a 
safety net. The commodity title of H.R. 2646 does just that. It 
preserves the planting flexibility from the current law; it provides a 
safety net for commodity prices; it significantly reforms the peanut 
program and puts it on par with traditional commodity programs.
  The safety net provided in the bill is a more responsible way of 
providing assistance to producers. Rather than sending off-budget, ad 
hoc assistance to farm country, which we have done over the last 
several years because it has been absolutely needed, a countercyclical 
mechanism will provide economic assistance when triggered.
  The commodity title is a plan that is ideal, not only for Texas, not 
only for Georgia, but good for the whole country. And in the words of 
Dean Gale Buchanan of the College of Agriculture at the University of 
Georgia, ``It is important to realize that while farmers are directly 
impacted, the magnitude and importance of agriculture ultimately 
touches every single American.'' Over 80 national and regional 
producer, processor, banking, and environmental groups have voiced 
their support for the Farm Security Act.
  Some groups which are unfamiliar with agriculture and farming, will 
try to make you believe that big farms are bad farms; that these big 
farms are corporate farms rather than family farms. Well, I want to 
give you an actual example of what is sometimes referred to by the 
opponents of agriculture of a corporate farm that is actually a family 
farm.
  This is a farm that exists in the State of Alabama. I have titled it 
the Walker Farm. There are three brothers who are the primary farmers 
in this operation. This operation this year tills 7,000 acres, and it 
is comprised of these three brothers and their children, a total of 
seven individuals who are actually engaged in farming under the FSA 
regulations. Each one of those thus is responsible basically for a 
1,000-acre operation, but this in and of itself is looked to as a 
corporate farm.
  What we have here is we have Mike Walker, who is the primary operator 
of the farm. His wife, Michelle, is actively engaged in the operation 
because she keeps all the books, and she has for years. His brother, 
Jack, is part of the farming operation, is actually one of the guys who 
drives a tractor on a regular basis; and, again, his wife Jill 
participates in the bookkeeping and management operations of the farm. 
They have another brother, Paul, who is an active participant. Then 
each of them have children and wives of those children that are 
actively engaged in farming.
  This particular operation this year had 7,000 tillable acres, and 
they grew peanuts, cotton, hay, and corn. These individuals 
participated in the crop insurance program, which was of benefit to the 
local community, provided funds in the local economy through the 
insurance industry. They participate in all types of conservation 
practices, like no till farming, like terracing their land. They are 
good stewards of the land.
  They, in addition, participate in the Boll Weevil Eradication 
Program, which is a program that is creative and innovative that the 
government put in place several years ago, that has allowed cotton 
farmers all across the country to eradicate the boll weevil, which has 
been a significant problem for years.
  At the same time, these farmers have challenges. They have challenges 
that the ordinary businessman does not have, challenges like drought. 
For the last several years in our part of the country, we have had 
significant drought, and that has been one of the reasons why we had to 
come forward with disaster programs in this town to send out to ag 
country.
  In addition to drought, on the opposite end of that, at the end of 
the year we have been subject to having hurricanes. Once we had the 
drought, then it came time to harvest the crop, and

[[Page H6175]]

hurricanes blew in from the Gulf of Mexico and did not allow the 
farmers to get into the field to harvest what crops they did make. 
These are the everyday challenges that farmers all across America have 
to face.
  Land acquisition is another problem. Land that our folks have rented 
in past years is now being developed. They simply are having to pay too 
high a price for land when they buy it, and they are having to pay too 
high a price when they rent it, because it is now being developed from 
a commercial standpoint because farmers cannot make a living.
  The other issue that is critically important in agriculture today is 
low commodity prices. Commodity prices are currently at the lowest 
point they have been in the last 30 years.
  I asked some of these Walker folks about some particular issues they 
deal with. I asked Mr. Walker about cotton prices, for example, which 
today are the lowest they have been in the last 16 years. He said, 
``Most farmers are going to have to make extraordinary yields this year 
on cotton production just to break even.''
  I said, ``Well, what about the size of your operation? Why are you a 
7,000-acre operation?''
  He said to us, ``Staying in business required getting bigger. Our 
margins per acre are so small that in order for our family to make a 
living, we had to keep growing.''
  I asked him about surviving. What about survival of the family farm?
  He said, ``We don't indulge in extravagancies. When it is possible, 
we reinvest in the business. We are still here today because we work 
together, we have continued to adapt to change, and we have reinvested 
in our business.''

                              {time}  1130

  Now, I come from a State where agriculture is the number one 
industry. My home county is the most diversified agriculture county 
east of the Mississippi, and I know firsthand what the problems are. 
The problems are real. This bill addresses the problems that farmers 
all across America have by providing a safety net; and, Mr. Chairman, I 
urge its passage.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Kind).
  Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding 
me this time.
  Mr. Chairman, I am a proud member of the Committee on Agriculture, 
and I am a representative from the State of Wisconsin. In Wisconsin, 
the dairy industry is still the number one industry in the entire 
State. The district I represent, the Third Congressional District of 
western Wisconsin, has approximately 10,500 family farms still 
existing, still operating, today, all of which are producing some 
commodity crops. Therefore, I have had a strong interest, and all of 
the members of the committee have had a strong interest, in putting 
together a farm bill that is going to provide the assistance that our 
family farmers need across the country and not just in one particular 
region.
  In Wisconsin, over the last couple of years, we have been losing 
between four and five family farms a day, because of the low prices, 
because of the low milk prices, because of low commodity prices. So 
obviously, the farm bill that we have been operating under over the 
last 5 years has not inured to the benefit of most family farmers 
across the country. That is why I feel that it is time for a new 
approach with farm policy.
  I certainly appreciate the hard work of the chairman, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Combest); and the ranking member, the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Stenholm); and all the members on the committee throughout 
the course of the last couple of years in putting together a 
comprehensive farm bill approach for the next 10 years. It has got to 
be one of the most difficult jobs in this place to do, to deal with all 
of the competing interests and all of the competing ideas and the 
policy proposals, and how do we weave that into a workable document to 
reach consensus. I commend them for their work, and I commend them for 
agreeing to an open rule, so that we can have an honest discussion and 
policy debate on some points of difference that some of us might have 
in regards to the direction that the base bill would take us in over 
the next 10 years.
  That is why I am going to be offering an amendment, along with the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert) and the gentleman from Maryland 
(Mr. Gilchrest) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) that 
would take a little bit of the money that would go to an increase in 
the commodity subsidies to the largest producers in this country and 
move those resources into the voluntary and incentive-based land and 
water conservation programs. We do that to help more family farmers in 
all regions of the country, especially those regions and farmers who 
are currently excluded under the current farm bill and would continue 
to be excluded under the direction of this new farm bill. We think that 
is the fair thing to do. We think the equitable thing to do is to 
include more regions and more farmers in supporting them in their time 
of need.
  Why is this important? Well, we can provide economic assistance to 
more farmers, including large commodity producers, through these 
conservation programs. They would still qualify under these programs, 
but we would also derive a certain societal benefit through better 
watershed management, quality drinking supplies, the protection of 
wildlife and fish habitat and, ultimately, the protection of valuable 
cropland itself through the farmland protection program that would 
receive more resources under our amendment. We are hoping that the next 
crop that is planted on these family farms is not a shopping mall, 
because we see the unbridled sprawl and the loss of productive farmland 
occurring throughout the country today.
  So I would encourage my colleagues to listen to the debate on this 
amendment and I ask for their support; and I again commend the 
leadership, given the work that they have put in thus far on the farm 
bill.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
Iowa (Mr. Nussle), who has a tremendous interest in agriculture, as 
well as being the chairman of the House Committee on the Budget.
  (Mr. NUSSLE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this legislation, the Farm 
Security Act of 2001. This is important to meet the needs of our 
changing national agricultural community, and it is within the 
framework of the budget resolution that we passed earlier this year.
  The fiscal year 2002 budget provided for this important bill $7.3 
billion in fiscal year 2002, and $40 billion over the first 5 years and 
$73 billion over 10 years. This is on top of the $5 billion it provided 
for agriculture emergencies in 2001. The budget resolution accommodated 
these amounts by establishing a 302(a) allocation for the Committee on 
Agriculture for fiscal year 2002 that could be used at the committee's 
discretion for emergency relief and could also be used to authorize 
this farm bill.
  This is the context in which we find ourselves here today. The 
Committee on Agriculture, under the leadership of Chairman Combest and 
Ranking Member Stenholm, have done yeoman work over the last 10 months 
and beyond to bring us to this particular point.
  For those people, including the administration, who wandered up here 
to Capitol Hill today and said, why are we doing a farm bill: they have 
not been paying attention. I was shocked moments ago to get a statement 
of administration policy that makes it sound like they do not know why 
we are doing this.
  When the Agriculture Secretary came before my Committee on the Budget 
earlier this year, we put her on notice that we were going to write the 
farm bill this year; we were going to budget for it this year; that 
farmers were tired of ad hoc emergencies on top of ad hoc emergencies; 
that we were tired of administrations in the past who got new farm bill 
legislation and then did not implement it; we are tired of the fact 
that we are writing farm bills during a time of contracting markets 
overseas and thinking that a farm bill, in and of itself, will solve 
the problem, because we are not expanding our trade, the farm bill does 
not work. When we do not implement the farm

[[Page H6176]]

bill, how can we expect farmers to survive under this kind of a 
situation?
  I know that there are people around the country that are waking up 
today finding out for the first time, maybe in quite a few years, that 
their 401(k) has collapsed. This is not news that the economy is in 
trouble in farm country. It has been that way for over 4 years. So for 
the administration or anybody else to wander to this floor today and 
express disbelief and wonderment, why are you writing a farm bill, 
because it is time to react to a very serious situation in farm 
country.
  Now, I will tell my colleagues that there is no farm bill that these 
two gentlemen and their committee could have created that would solve 
all of the problems. First of all, one size does not fit all. We all 
know that. Every farm is different, every ranch is different, every 
producer is different. They have different needs. There is not one farm 
bill we could create, particularly by a committee or by a Congress that 
could address it, but they have tried. They have addressed the trouble 
from the last few years. The countercyclical nature of agriculture, 
they have addressed it in this bill. Is it perfect? Of course not. Of 
course it is not perfect.
  But for people to say after 10 months of work to all of a sudden wake 
up today and say, oh, my gosh, you mean to tell me they are writing a 
farm bill up there on Capitol Hill? You mean to tell me that we are 
actually budgeting for these things instead of just shelling out money 
on an emergency basis? For people to wake up and assume that is a 
mistake, and it is a pattern that troubles me that this administration 
may be, in fact, falling into a similar trap of previous 
administrations.
  If this administration fails to implement, fails to expand these 
markets, and fails to react to the changing economics in farm country, 
we will not be able to compete in the global markets.
  Pass this bill. It fits within the budget. It deserves our careful 
attention during this economic situation across the country.


                              introduction

  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2646, the Farm 
Security Act of 2001. This important legislation meets the needs of our 
Nation's agricultural community within the framework established by the 
budget resolution.
  I take special interest in this bill, not only as a representative of 
an agricultural district, but also as the chairman of a committee that 
worked very hard to establish a fiscal framework under which this bill 
could be considered.


           assumptions in the budget resolution on farm bill

  This fiscal year 2002 budget provided for this important bill $7.3 
billion in fiscal year 2002, $40.2 over five years, and $73.5 billion 
over ten years. This is on top of the $5.5 billion it provided for 
agricultural emergencies in fiscal year 2001.
  The budget resolution accommodated these amounts by establishing a 
302(a) allocation for the Committee on Agriculture for fiscal years 
2002 that could be used at the committee's discretion for emergency 
relief or reauthorization of the farm bill. It set aside the rest in a 
reserve fund that can only used for a reauthorization of the farm bill.
  In providing the necessary funds for this bill, the Budget 
Committee's interest was both in meeting the immediate needs of our 
Nation's farmers for the fiscal year just concluded and in facilitating 
efforts to overhaul or Nation's agricultural support system.
  While the budget resolution left the details of the farm bill to the 
Agriculture Committee, it was carefully crafted to encourage efforts to 
address the underlying weaknesses in existing farm programs instead of 
resorting to the ad hoc emergency assistance of recent years.


                             policy issues

  As you know, the Committee on Agriculture already availed itself of 
$5.5 billion of the resources provided in the budget resolution when it 
reported legislation providing additional farm income support payments 
in fiscal year 2001, which was enacted in August of this year.
  The committee now brings before the House a bill that addresses some 
of the longer term problems confronted by the agricultural community.
  It does so by combining fixed crop payments with counter cyclical 
assistance. This affords our Nation's farmers a more stable source of 
income, given the wide market fluctuations we've seen in the past few 
years. I believe that this approach provides both the planting 
flexibility of the Freedom To Farm Act and the income stability of 
traditional agricultural programs.
  At the same time, the bill addresses some of the broader needs of 
rural America by reauthorizing key conservation programs.
  Obviously everyone can find something to disagree with in a bill as 
comprehensive as this. I for one will encourage any future conferees on 
this bill to fine tune some of its policies. Nevertheless, this bill 
represents huge progress over the ad hoc emergency assistance of the 
last four years.


                          budget implications

  As the Chairman of the Budget Committee, I am especially pleased that 
Chairman Combest, Ranking Member Stenholm and the entire Agriculture 
Committee have succeeded in developing these reforms within the 
appropriate levels established by the budget resolution.
  As modified by the manager's amendment, the bill would increase new 
budget authority by $3 billion in fiscal year 2002, $35.8 billion 
through fiscal year 2006 and $73.1 billion through fiscal year 2011.
  As permitted under sections 213 and 221 of the budget resolution (H. 
Con. Res. 83), I am exercising my authority to increase the Agriculture 
Committee's 302(a) allocation to the levels necessary to permit the 
consideration of this bill. The letter making the adjustment has 
already been submitted for printing in the Congressional Record.


                   compliance with budget resolution

  According to estimates provided by the Congressional Budget Office, 
this bill comes in under the Agriculture Committee's adjusted 
allocation by fully $4.3 billion in fiscal year 2002 and $4.4 billion 
over five years.
  Accordingly, the bill fully complies with section 302(f) of the 
Congressional Budget Act, which prohibits the consideration of measures 
that exceed the reporting committee's 302(a) allocation.
  Although bills such as this are only required to meet the first and 
five-year limits imposed by the budget resolution in the House, I would 
observe that over 10 years the bill comes in almost $367 million under 
the levels assumed in the resolution. Clearly the Agriculture Committee 
went to considerable pains to comply with both the letter and spirit of 
the budget resolution.
  While I would observe that this bill exceeds the budget resolution's 
$66 billion threshold cited in section 313 for the cost of the farm 
bill over the period of fiscal years 2003 and 2011 by around $3 
billion. This overage is more than offset in fiscal year 2002, when the 
bill uses up only $3 billion of a $7 billion allocation.


                               conclusion

  Once again, the Farm Security Act is a unique measure that manages to 
address many of the needs of our Nation's farm community within the 
fiscally responsible framework of the fiscal year 2002 budget 
resolution. I strongly urge all my colleagues to support this important 
legislation.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Puerto Rico (Mr. Acevedo-Vila).
  Mr. ACEVEDO-VILA. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the chairman 
and the ranking member for their commitment to bring about a complete 
farm bill with all titles. This bill is the fruit of dedication and 
commitment that committee members have for the people that this House 
represents. I applaud the committee's work to increase funds to titles 
such as conservation, rural development and trade, all of which are 
extremely important areas for the Nation and for the people of Puerto 
Rico that I represent, especially our farmers and growers.
  I would like to emphasize the importance the nutrition title 
contained in this bill has for the 430,000 Puerto Rican families that 
depend on nutrition assistance to keep their children fed and healthy. 
Title IV reauthorizes the Nutritional Assistance Program, better known 
in Puerto Rico as PAN, for the next 10 years, with increases in funding 
for each year. The Puerto Rican nutritional assistance program serves 
the same purpose in Puerto Rico as the food stamps program serves in 
the States: to reduce hunger, to improve the health of our children, 
and ensure our Nation a brighter future. We cannot afford hungry 
children in our school rooms. Nutrition assistance is an essential 
foundation for building a better future for all of us. Especially in 
today's changing world, ensuring that every family has food on their 
table no matter what financial circumstances beset them is of utmost 
importance.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge all Members of this House to vote in favor of 
this bill, and especially support the efforts to guarantee a decent 
meal to every family in Puerto Rico and across the Nation. I am very 
thankful that this farm bill assures this for every American.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
South

[[Page H6177]]

Dakota (Mr. Thune), a very active member of the committee.
  Mr. THUNE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  Let me just say what has already been said and that is that America's 
farmers need a new farm bill. I appreciate the work that the chairman 
and the ranking member on this committee have done in a bipartisan 
fashion to put together a bill that is written by producers and for 
producers. I appreciate the fact that there have been hours upon hours 
and pages upon pages of testimony from producers all across this 
country; and I want to thank the chairman and ranking member for coming 
to Sioux Falls, South Dakota, to my home State, to hear from my 
constituents. They have listened to producers.
  I would also like to thank the chairman and the ranking member for 
many of the good provisions that are in this bill. We increase 
substantially our commitment to conservation, which is something that I 
had wanted made a priority in this bill. Other increases in the area of 
value-added agriculture, which is something that people in my State are 
very interested in, what can we do to revitalize rural economies. And 
value-added agriculture is an important component part of that, and 
this bill addresses that. Another concern that my producers had is a 
countercyclical payment program and that is also a part of this piece 
of legislation. My farmers have expressed support for planting 
flexibility, something that is retained in this bill.
  Now, granted, there are issues that were not addressed in this bill, 
things that farmers have expressed concerns about in my State: updating 
yield bases, addressing the issue of competition in the marketplace, a 
farmable wetlands pilot program that was not made a permanent part of 
the CRP program. These are all issues that I hope to address in the 
form of amendments as this bill moves forward.
  The chairman has kept this committee on a very strict time line and 
the farmers of South Dakota thank him for his diligence.
  This is a small step in what will be a very long process, we know 
that. While this is not a perfect bill, someone around here once said 
that we should not let the perfect become the enemy of the good in a 
place where we are lucky if the adequate even survives. This is a good 
start. The farmers across this country need a predictable and stable 
farm policy. It is important that we help them secure America's food 
security as we move into the future. So it is important that we move 
this process along.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Mississippi (Mr. Shows).
  Mr. SHOWS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
  Mr. Chairman, today I rise in strong support of the Farm Security 
Act, farm policy that is balanced, bipartisan, and in the best 
interests of our Nation with its rural and urban families.
  The Farm Security Act assures that communities, farmers, and families 
across America's heartland that farm policy, which encourages 
conservation, supports our farmers, and feeds every family, must remain 
a domestic priority, even under the international threats we face 
today. Heartland security and homeland defense walk hand in hand. This 
partnership will remain intact when the House passes H.R. 2646.
  Our strength and power is due in a large part to having the most 
abundant and the most affordable food supply in the world. America's 
farm families have been doing this for years.
  The Farm Security Act makes substantial increases to conservation 
programs. The well-crafted conservation title increases the number of 
acres eligible for the CRP from 35.4 million to 39.2 million acres. 
H.R. 2646 increases eligible WRP acreage by 133 percent, or 1.5 million 
acres. Under the conservation title of the farm bill, sufficient funds 
are available to expand the Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program and 
finally end the program backlog.
  The Farm Security Act supports America's forests as well as its 
croplands. H.R. 2646 increases the ability of the Forest Service to 
protect our forests and communities from wildfire devastation through 
the National Fire Plan. In Mississippi's Homochitto National Forest, 
this is a real threat to the safety and security of the surrounding 
areas.
  Heartland security and homeland defense walk hand in hand. H.R. 2646 
fulfills our promise to America's communities that consumers' food 
should be available and affordable. Our land and our farmers should be 
protected.

                              {time}  1145

  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
North Carolina (Mr. Hayes), a very able member of the Committee.
  Mr. HAYES. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of this bill. We 
have taken our time and done it right. H.R. 2646 is a product of more 
than 2 years' work by the Committee on Agriculture.
  In March 2000, the committee held field hearings in my home State and 
many others. Many producers and agricultural groups testified as to 
what they wanted to see in the next farm bill. They said they wanted to 
keep their planning flexibility that was part of the 1996 bill. This 
bill does that.
  They said they wanted an economic safety net that provided 
countercyclical assistance through times of low prices that farmers 
have faced during these past 4 years. This bill does that.
  They said they wanted a bill that will help them export their 
products to overseas, open new markets for North Carolina's valuable 
agricultural products. Again, this bill does just that.
  Finally, they asked for increased spending in conservation programs. 
Many producers in North Carolina have taken advantage of the successful 
conservation programs in past farm bills. I am proud to say that this 
bill provides more spending in conservation than any other farm bill in 
history, 80 percent more, to be exact. These programs will go far in 
achieving cleaner water, cleaner air, cleaner soil for our farmers and 
our communities.
  I want to thank the chairman and the ranking member for their efforts 
coming to all the counties in our district, and also for lending the 
support that our farm community needs. This is a good bill. I strongly 
urge its support.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Phelps).
  (Mr. PHELPS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. PHELPS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to 
me.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 2646, the Farm Security 
Act of 2001. I want to thank the chairman and the ranking member for 
their hard work on this balanced farm bill; and as a member of the 
Committee on Agriculture, I was pleased to have been a part of crafting 
this new farm bill.
  This important piece of legislation will govern the funding and 
reauthorization of programs administered by the Department of 
Agriculture. This bill is a product of 2 years of bipartisan work that 
included extensive input from a wide spectrum of agriculture and 
conservation groups.
  This farm bill will benefit farmers in my congressional district of 
central and southern Illinois, as well as across the country. This bill 
provides a continuation of agriculture programs, presents a balanced 
approach to addressing the issues that face producers of crops, 
livestock, fruits and vegetables, and provides a needed $73 billion in 
additional funding for agriculture, which has been facing historic low 
prices, low income, and increased costs.
  As vice-chairman of the Sportsmen's Caucus, I feel this legislation 
is a balanced approach to meeting conservation needs. This legislation 
provides an unprecedented 80 percent increase in soil and water 
conservation programs above current spending levels.
  The 2001 farm bill provides producers with more options to implement 
progressive, conserving practices on their land, with a bank of 
increased technical assistance to producers using any private or 
government contractors.
  Several conservation programs were increased in this bill, such as 
the Conservation Reserve Program, Wetlands Reserve Program, Wildlife 
Habitat Incentive Program, and Grasslands Reserve Program. These 
increased levels firmly meet the needs of America's family farms.
  While this is not a perfect bill, I am pleased with the balance that 
was

[[Page H6178]]

struck between the commodity title and the conservation title. I feel 
this bill will work in the best interests of the agriculture community 
and that producers will have an adequate safety net to rely on when 
times are hard.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge Members to join me in support of H.R. 2646, the 
Farm Security Act of 2001.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to a good hand, the 
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Gutknecht).
  Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time 
to me.
  Mr. Chairman, I am privileged to rise in support of this bill. Today 
we are going to have a debate about farm policy. Many of the people who 
are going to get involved in the debate have not been involved in the 
hearings and listening sessions we have had around the world in the 
last couple of years.
  Let me compare what is happening to American farmers to what is 
happening in the world market. Many people are saying, why do we 
subsidize agriculture here in the United States?
  The truth of the matter is, most farmers do not like subsidies, 
either. They want to make their living from the market; but it is not a 
level playing field, Mr. Chairman. We need to understand that. The 
latest numbers that we have here in the United States, we subsidize 
agriculture to the tune of about $43 an acre. In Europe, they subsidize 
agriculture $342 an acre. That is not a level playing field.
  Our trade negotiators in the last round of the Uruguay trade talks 
agreed to limit the United States' export enhancement funding to about 
$200 million. In Europe, it is $6.5 billion. That is not a level 
playing field.
  In the area of currency, right now we are at a disadvantage to the 
Canadians of about 23 percent; the Brazilian real, it is 55 percent. If 
there were a level playing field out there, we probably would not need 
to do as much as we are doing.
  This bill is about predictability. I want to congratulate the 
chairman and the ranking member. It is about predictability for our 
farmers; but most importantly, it is about predictability for us on the 
Committee on the Budget and here in Congress.
  With a countercyclical payment program, when prices are high, it will 
be less expensive to us. When prices are low, then we are going to have 
to subsidize a bit more. But at the end of the day, it will provide 
predictability for the Committee on the Budget, for the Congress, and 
most importantly, for our farm producers.
  This is a good farm bill, just as it is. Some people are going to 
say, we do not spend enough money on conservation. Mr. Chairman, this 
bill will increase conservation programs by 78 percent. Some will say 
that that is not enough. I disagree. There will be negotiations between 
the House, the Senate, and the White House as this bill goes forward; 
but I hope we can move it off the floor today just as it is written. 
This is a good bill. It ought to pass today as written.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Minnesota (Mr. Peterson).
  Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong 
support of this bill. I want to thank the chairman and the ranking 
member and all the members of the Committee on Agriculture for the hard 
work and the tremendous leadership they have provided in coming up with 
the final bill here.
  As has been said before, we have spent 2 years working on this bill, 
and it is not perfect. If any of us that are from farm country wrote 
this bill, we would probably write it a little differently; but it is 
what is possible.
  The farmers in my district not only support this bill, they need this 
bill if they are going to survive. We have had a lot of problems up in 
my country, and this is one of the things that we really need to make 
it out to the long term.
  One of the most important things this bill provides is stability. We 
have been through a period where we have had a lot of problems, and 
every year we respond; but it is after the crop year, and it causes 
problems because people at the beginning of the year are not really 
sure what we are going to do.
  One of the most important parts of this bill is that they are going 
to know before they plant their crop what the Government involvement is 
going to be and what the safety net is going to be. That is a very 
important feature of this bill.
  Another thing that this bill includes is a dairy provision, the only 
dairy provision that all dairy farmers support, and that is, the 
extension of the $9.90 price-support system for the next 10 years.
  There has been a lot of discussion already about conservation. I want 
to talk a little bit about that. There is a big increase in this bill 
for conservation. Over the last 2 years, the Sportsmen's Caucus, which 
I have had the privilege to co-chair the last 2 years, has worked with 
the wildlife groups on these conservation measures.
  I want to say that the Sportsmen's Caucus and most of the wildlife 
groups are supporting this bill and the conservation provisions that 
are in this bill because what we are doing is we are putting money into 
the programs that are already there, that we know work, and that there 
is a backlog for.
  For example, the Conservation Reserve Program, this bill increases 
the cap there 3 million acres. That means we are going to have another 
four or five sign-ups of CRP, which has been arguably the most 
successful conservation and wildlife program in this country's history.
  We increase the WRP almost 50,000 acres a year, which will allow us 
to catch up the backlog that is in the pipeline for WRP.
  We increase the WHEP program, the Wildlife Habitat Enhancement 
Program, by $385 million, to work on the 3,087 applications that are 
waiting in that program.
  We also establish a Grasslands Reserve Program, which is a new 
program that will allow grasslands that have never been broken to be 
put into long-term contracts to be preserved, and also to take some of 
the grasslands that were broken up, put into production, and then put 
into CRP, really in a way that should not have happened, allow them to 
get back into the grassland program and restore that land to 
grasslands.
  Lastly, we put significant new money into the EQIP program, which has 
a backlog of 196,000 applications.
  This bill is a good bill, Mr. Chairman. I ask my colleagues to 
support it.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Putnam), a very active member of the Committee.
  Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Chairman, I commend the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Combest) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) on their work on 
crafting a bipartisan solution to a number of agricultural problems.
  There is an old proverb that when there is food, there are many 
problems. When there is no food, there is only one problem. We have the 
luxury of having this debate on the floor today. We in America grow the 
safest, cheapest, most bountiful, healthful, and abundant food supply 
the world has ever known. If Members do not believe me, the next time 
they sit down to a big meal, look at each of the items on our plate and 
think about what it took to go through all of the processes to get it 
there.
  We have been so far removed from the land in our country that we have 
forgotten what it takes to produce the food and fiber that this economy 
depends on. Where tillage goes, civilization follows, Mr. Chairman.
  As we have moved away from the land, we have an entire generation of 
young people who think that milk comes from the grocery store, that the 
hamburger committed suicide. Beyond even agriculture, they think that 
electricity comes from a switch, that gasoline comes from a pump. There 
is little or no concept that men and women get up before the sun comes 
up all across this Nation to make agriculture happen; that young people 
grow up and go to school and get science degrees to be better farmers, 
to be more efficient users of the inputs, to be more gentle on the 
environment as we produce that safe and abundant food supply.
  It is a dangerous precedent, but we have the luxury of having this 
debate about the future of agriculture because those farmers are so 
efficient. There are people all around the world, even our enemies who 
we are about to drop hundreds of millions of dollars of food

[[Page H6179]]

upon, who would kill to have the luxury to argue over whether or not to 
spend more on cotton or soybeans or sugar or peanuts or wheat. We have 
that luxury because we have a generation of Americans who get up every 
day to produce that food and to make it happen.
  It is important for us to keep in mind, when we talk about 
commitments to conservation and commitments to the environment, that 
those water recharge areas are on farms, that those wildlife habitats 
are on ranches; that the original stewards of the land are landowners 
and farmers; that the reason why we have debates about government 
ownership of land is because some private person, some farmer, some 
rancher for generations has taken care of the land such that it is 
worth buying and preserving forever.
  This is the farm bill, not the environmental bill, not the 
conservation bill. This is the farm bill. It is about making sure that 
America's food security is sound, so that we do not become dependent on 
food and fresh fruits and vegetables and meat and dairy the way that we 
are for oil and gas, lest we ever forget the lessons of history about 
being dependent upon a foreign Nation for our food.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Dooley).
  Mr. DOOLEY of California. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding time to me. I also want to commend the gentleman from Texas 
(Chairman Combest) and the ranking member, the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Stenholm), for their work on crafting this proposal.
  I am going to vote for this measure today on the floor, or when we 
vote on final passage; but I also want to assure Members that there is 
more work that we need to do on this bill before it is going to be 
drafted in a responsible manner that can, I think, give us great 
confidence that it is the best policy for agriculture when it is signed 
into law.
  This bill does take the appropriate direction in terms of moving 
forward with an increased investment in conservation, nutrition, as 
well as rural development; that those are important components of our 
rural economy and the fabric of our communities in rural America. I 
commend the chairman and the ranking member for moving in that 
direction.
  I also understand, as a farmer as well as a Member of Congress, that 
we are facing as tough times in the agriculture sector as we have faced 
in a century. We have the lowest sustained commodity prices that we 
have ever seen. Farmers are on the ropes. The additional financial 
assistance we are providing through the fixed payments, as well as the 
countercyclical programs, are important to these farmers.
  However, I hope as we move this legislation through the House in the 
next day, and move hopefully into a conference committee with the 
Senate this year, that we will be open to making some modifications 
that will ensure that this significant increase in investment of 
taxpayer dollars will in fact go to the farmers.
  I am very concerned that a lot of our programs, and even some of the 
programs that are in this bill today, are designed in a way where too 
much of that financial benefit is being derived by landowners and has 
resulted in increased property values and land grants.

                              {time}  1200

  We are going to be paying $90 billion in fixed payments and 
countercyclical payments to farmers over the next 10 years. 
Unfortunately, a lot of that money is not going to go to the actual 
producers of the crops. In my area is a good example. We have some 
farmers who have not farmed an acre of cotton in the last 10 years 
that, under this program, could get as much as $125,000 a year for a 
cotton payment without ever growing an acre of cotton. I think that is 
a problem and I think we need to make some reforms.
  Later in the consideration of this bill, I will be offering an 
amendment that will provide for a different approach on a 
countercyclical program that will ensure that payments go directly to 
the farmers, which I think is very, very important.
  I am also a little concerned about the special consideration that we 
are giving to the peanut program. We will be spending $3.2 billion 
additional taxpayer dollars for peanuts, a crop I consider a specialty 
crop. A crop that is going to result in having taxpayer payments of 
$320 million a year in a commodity that only has a gross annual product 
value of $1 billion.
  I represent the Central Valley of California that is home to a lot of 
specialty crops. I have the almond industry in my district, which is a 
$1.8 billion industry. In this bill, they get absolutely no support. I 
think that we need to find a way that we can assure greater equity and 
that we are providing support to all of our commodities that are 
specialty crops in an equitable manner.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Kansas (Mr. Moran).
  Mr. MORAN of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding 
me time. I appreciate the leadership of both gentlemen from Texas (Mr. 
Combest, Mr. Stenholm) on this very important issue.
  I am here today in part because I care about farmers and ranchers. 
But the reason I care about farmers and ranchers is because I care 
about America and I care especially about rural America. What we do 
today will affect the outcome of whether or not those farmers and 
ranchers are in business next week, next month, next year and for the 
next generation.
  If Members care about America, they have to care about rural America 
as well. The average age of a farmer in Kansas is 58 years old. I have 
talked to many young farmers, sons of farmers who want to come back to 
the family farm, but because of the economy, it is simply not possible. 
There has not been profitability in agriculture for so long that we do 
not have anyone stepping forward to replace this generation of farmers 
and ranchers in our country.
  What that means, in much of America is there are fewer kids in 
school, there are fewer shoppers on main street and our rural 
communities continue to see a demise in their way of life.
  It is that way of life, it is farming and ranching and that rural way 
of life throughout our history that has enabled us to pass character 
and values from one generation to the next. In very few places in 
America today do sons and daughters work side by side with moms and 
dads and with their grandparents.
  The history of our country, the heritage of our Nation, was built 
around the opportunity for that family farming operation, not only to 
provide food and fiber to the world, but to provide character and 
judgment and values to children and grandchildren.
  So when I talk about the importance of agriculture and farming and 
ranching in this country, it is important to me that farmers and 
ranchers have an economic viability, but it is important to me that 
that way of life that they represent, that they exhibit, is preserved 
for another generation.
  Economic times in agriculture are tough. It is the fourth year in 
which the economy has declined. The headline in one of my local papers 
this week, ``Kansas Farm Income Falls 38.9 Percent.''
  Net farm income in Kansas last year without government assistance 
would have been a loss of $6,417. These issues matter to whether or not 
our farmers and ranchers can survive with low commodity prices and 
terribly high input costs, fuel and fertilizer. It is about farms and 
family farms and it is about the communities that they live, shop and 
send their kids to school in. This issue is one of many that is 
important to rural America.
  We care about health care and its delivery in rural America. We care 
about access to technology. We care about small business. Certainly we 
care about education. Those issues are important, but we have to have 
the economic base in our part of the world, in our part of the country 
that can support those services. It seems to me in agriculture it is 
important to talk about a farm bill and farm policy, but we also have 
issues before us related to trade and exports.
  Grain and agriculture commodities must be consumed. We can have low 
prices and high prices for farm commodities in every farm bill. The 
ultimate goal must be to export and to consume grain around the world 
and domestically in a way that provides profitability to agriculture. 
But we

[[Page H6180]]

face tremendous obstacles as we compete in the world.
  One of the realizations that I have come to over the last several 
years is that the rest of the world does not play by the same rules we 
do. So when we talk about assistance to agriculture and, yes, it is 
lots of dollars, it is a lot fewer dollars than what the other 
countries, what the European community, what Japan, what Korea, what 
other countries in the world provide in assistance to their farmers, 
because they understand the importance of agriculture, they understand 
the importance of providing food and fiber not only to their own 
citizens but exporting around the world.
  Look at the charts. When you look at export assistance, we provide a 
very small sliver in support of agriculture and exports around the 
world. The rest of the countries, in fact, the European community is 
83, 84 percent. Ours is 2\1/2\ percent, and yet we tell our farmers to 
compete in the world, to farm the markets.
  So we need to not only address farm policy, but we have to come back 
and address issues of trade, of exports, of sanctions, of our inability 
to export agricultural products around the world, and to make certain 
that we find new and better uses of agriculture products at home.
  Finally, we need to make certain that we do the things necessary to 
make certain that agriculture has competition. I am all for the free 
enterprise system, but we need to make certain that our farmers are not 
caught in the squeeze, as everybody they buy from and everybody they 
sell to gets larger and larger.
  Mr. Chairman, I support the bill. I urge my colleagues to pass it. I 
thank the chairman for the opportunity to address this important issue 
today.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Arkansas (Mr. Ross).
  Mr. ROSS. Mr. Chairman, I fought hard for an appointment to the 
Committee on Agriculture when I got here in January, and I did so 
because, one, I understand agriculture. I grew up on my grandfather's 
farm. Secondly, agriculture is critical to the economy of my district 
in South Arkansas.
  This new farm bill was written after months of testimony. It was 
written in a bipartisan spirit and it is fair. It is fair to our farm 
families. It is fair for conservation. In fact, we increase baseline 
spending for conservation by 75 percent. This bill addresses the needs 
of our farm families.
  We all know that the 1996 farm bill did not work. We might as well 
have called it ``Freedom to Fail.''
  I will lose farm families and perhaps a few banks in the delta 
without this new farm bill. We are already too dependent on foreign 
oil. The last thing we need to do is to lose our farm families and 
become dependent on Third World countries for our food and fiber. My 
farmers do not want to be welfare farmers. They do not want to be 
insurance farmers. They simply want to feed America.
  This bill ensures America will be there for our farm families when 
market prices are down, just as our farm families have been there for 
America for many, many generations.
  I rise in support of this bill.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Pence), a very able member of the committee.
  Mr. PENCE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Combest) for yielding me the time.
  I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest) and the ranking 
member, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm), for their aggressive 
yet prudent approach to writing a bill that Hoosier farmers need, and 
if I may say so, with clarity, Hoosier farmers need this farm bill now 
and need this Congress to act now in support of this bill.
  The House Committee on Agriculture has drafted a bill that is 
globally competitive, market responsive and environmentally 
responsible. I want our colleagues to know the Farm Security Act is a 
product of years of hard work. We listened to farmers and ranchers 
during field hearings in my District. We met with hundreds of farmers 
in 10 separate town hall meetings alone. This bill was truly written by 
America's farmers and ranchers.
  My colleagues know that I have always called this body to maintain 
fiscal discipline and this Farm Security Act, as we heard the gentleman 
from Iowa (Mr. Nussle) describe, fits into the guidelines of the budget 
that has been adopted by this Congress and supported by the leadership.
  Also, the Farm Security Act is environmentally sensitive. It 
increases conservation funding by 80 percent overall, despite some 
criticism by certain environmental groups. An 80 percent increase in 
conservation spending is a hard number to argue with.
  Finally, Mr. Chairman, I think it is important to know that United 
States farm policy is not only about standing up for ranchers and 
farmers, despite the sneering from some in the national media in the 
left column of The Wall Street Journal this morning.
  I believe that farm security is about national security. As we 
consider ways and diverse means to strengthen America by strengthening 
our economy, we must not only remember Wall Street, but we must 
remember rural main street U.S.A. A strong farm economy means a strong 
American economy, and a strong American economy means a strong America.
  The Good Book tells us, Mr. Chairman, that without a vision the 
people perish. I would paraphrase that without a vision for farm policy 
over the next decade, many farmers and ranchers will lose their 
economic lives, and I stand in strong support of the Farm Security Act 
accordingly.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Hinojosa).
  (Mr. HINOJOSA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2646, 
the Farm Security Act of 2001.
  First, I would like to thank the gentleman from Texas (Chairman 
Combest) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm), the ranking 
member, for their hard work and dedication in bringing this legislation 
to the floor today. This bill not only benefits farmers and ranchers 
across the country, but the American consumers as well. It is the most 
balanced and fair farm bill that could be produced for all of the 
agricultural interests involved.
  My congressional District, the lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas has 
been in a stressed economic situation due to droughts for the past 6 
years. Farm families have squeezed budgets to the limit to keep from 
being pushed to failure. Farm incomes have declined because of 
plummeting commodity prices while production costs continue to rise, 
and the rural economy has suffered.
  The support in my District for H.R. 2646 comes from all sectors of 
the agricultural community including the producers of commodity crops, 
livestock, fruits and vegetables, as well as their lenders, equipment 
dealers, manufacturers and service companies.
  It is imperative that we pass H.R. 2646 today in order for the 
legislative process to continue. This bipartisan bill provides the 
structure for U.S. agriculture to provide the safest, most reliable 
food and fiber supply in the world. It will ensure that U.S. ag remains 
competitive in foreign markets. The 2002 farm bill delivers a 
comprehensive package that will propel U.S. agriculture into a 
dependable and productive future.
  I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Minnesota (Mr. Kennedy), one of the most interested members of our 
committee.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I am very impressed by the 
process that we have used in bringing this bill to the floor. It has 
been very bipartisan. We passed it by, in essence, a unanimous voice 
vote in our committee. We sought input from every organization that 
could have any interest in this bill, whether they be agriculture 
conservation or otherwise. It is a very balanced bill that maintains 
the freedom to plant, not making the farmers turn off the last two rows 
of the corn plan as they go around the field the last time, maintains 
the market price, gives a better safety net.
  In the past, we have had to have emergency payments. This tries to 
come up with a more efficient, effective way of doing that, and I think 
it does, and we need to make sure that we are not unilaterally 
disarming when our other competitors in Europe and Japan are providing 
far more support than we are.

[[Page H6181]]

  It has an 80 percent increase in conservation program investments 
with good programs like the conservation reserve program, our wildlife 
habitat and others. We also have efforts in there to get our price 
ultimately from the market so we do not have to depend on government 
programs by expending our sales overseas and investing in research, and 
it does have good investments in there for rural development with high 
speed telecommunications and others.
  Many people asked why do we have to do this, but unfortunately, too 
many of our people around the country think that bread comes from the 
bakery, that meat comes from the meat counter, that milk comes from the 
cooler, and that sugar comes in a candy bar, and they have a hard time 
understanding this and really wonder why.
  I encourage them to think about who they listen to. When your sink is 
leaking, you do not call a dentist, and when you have a tooth ache, you 
do not call the plumber. Listen to those who have listened to their 
farmers. Many Members of the Committee on Agriculture, like me, have 
talked to hundreds of farmers since we passed this out of committee. 
They support this bill. This Congress should as well.
  I support the farm bill and encourage the Members to do the same.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Maine, Mr. Baldacci.
  Mr. BALDACCI. Mr. Chairman, I want to compliment both the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Combest) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) 
for doing a wonderful job in working this piece of legislation. As a 
Member of the committee these last four terms and working on two farm 
bills, I have to say I felt the collegiality and productivity of the 
committee in this 10-year reauthorization has been something we can all 
be very proud about.

                              {time}  1215

  Like anything that we deal with that is this large and covering this 
expansive an area, there will be areas of concern.
  I first want to compliment the conservation title in the manager's 
amendment. I want to compliment the nutrition and WIC provisions that 
are here. I want to compliment the export enhancement and market 
assessment programs, research, the monies that are going to be 
available for colleges and university and land grant facilities, and 
especially improving fruits and vegetables and specialty crops.
  The areas of concern for me are the dairy and the dairy compact 
issues that we are unable to address, recognizing that it was not 
necessarily the jurisdiction of our committee, but also recognizing it 
is pretty hard to separate agriculture and dairy from each other in 
terms of the procedural issues that lie before both committees. Having 
only an opportunity between now and the end of the month to be able to 
address these issues, I felt it was imperative to work with our 
colleagues in a bipartisan fashion to get this issue addressed. So 
later today and tomorrow, and as long as it takes, we are going to make 
sure that the dairy compact and the issues surrounding it are brought 
foursquare in front of this Congress so that we will have an 
opportunity to vote up or down on this compact.
  I would like to inform the Members that in terms of the compact we 
are not talking about forcing anything down anybody's throat. This is 
something that has been approved by the State legislatures. Twenty-five 
States want this kind of opportunity to provide a floor for dairy 
farmers. It is not there if they are doing well, and they are doing 
well now; but it is a floor for them so that it maintains their farm 
income and their farm viability.
  In Maine and in the Northeast, we have seen less reduction in farm 
families with the compact, we have seen less production in the compact 
area, and we have actually seen less price increases in those compact 
areas versus the national average. So it has actually worked in terms 
of production, supply and demand, and having the countercyclical 
features that our committee has advocated with all of agriculture as we 
have tried to develop a 10-year farm reauthorization program.
  This is a program that States want, that governors want, and they 
have asked us to give them the approval to be able to maintain 
something that has been working for 4 years. This program has been 
working for 4 years. I ask the Members on both sides of the aisle and 
in leadership in Congress to allow us an opportunity to vote up and 
down. We were not able to get the amendment protected in terms of the 
germaneness issue in the Committee on Rules.
  I know the concern of the committee and the membership, where there 
is over 160 Members that are cosponsoring this legislation. It is a 
very important piece of legislation. It provides a floor for dairy 
farms, for small dairy farms, which there are many of. And not just in 
New England but in the Northeast and in the Southeast, which also wants 
this to be part of their program. So I look forward to that discussion.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Missouri (Mr. Graves), who understands the difficulties firsthand of 
agriculture.
  Mr. GRAVES. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 2646, the 
Farm Security Act. This is important legislation, critical to our 
Nation's farm families. And on behalf of the thousands of farm families 
across northwest Missouri, I want to thank Chairman Combest and Ranking 
Member Stenholm for their leadership and their efforts in crafting this 
bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I raise corn and soybeans in northwest Missouri, and I 
understand all too well the challenges facing farmers today. Every 
weekend, when I return to Missouri, I hear from farmers all across my 
district who are struggling just to stay in business. Not only are 
farmers faced with the 4th consecutive year of record low commodity 
prices, costs for inputs, including fuel, fertilizer and seed, have 
skyrocketed during the last year further reducing the bottom line.
  While the previous farm bill provided flexibility and opportunities 
that farmers desperately needed, its provisions for emergency aid were 
inadequate. Our Nation's farmers should not have to rely on a 
supplemental bailout every year. Producers need support that provides 
stability and predictability, and that is exactly what this bill does.
  In preparation for today, the Committee on Agriculture heard 
testimony from dozens of farm groups representing thousands of 
producers all across America. All of them agreed that this bill should 
include a mechanism that would kick in automatically when prices fall 
below equitable levels. With this bill, and with the countercyclical 
program, it eliminates the need for that annual agriculture bailout and 
replaces it with a reliable program we can depend on.
  In 1996, Congress gave farmers a good bill. However, that bill's 
success depended on new and expanding overseas markets. Those markets 
never materialized. This bill combines the flexibility and market 
stability that farmers need while renewing our efforts to promote 
American agriculture abroad without abandoning our previous trade 
agreements.
  Additionally, this bill strengthens our commitment to the 
environment, providing greater resources to ensure that our land, air, 
and water remain fertile and clean.
  Mr. Chairman, in America we have the safest, most abundant and 
cheapest food supply in the world. No other Nation, absolutely no other 
Nation in this world today, has the luxury of taking its food supply 
for granted.
  Again, I want to urge my colleagues to support this legislation and 
protect our Nation's food supply, our natural resources, and our family 
farmers.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
North Dakota (Mr. Pomeroy).
  Mr. POMEROY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time, and I want to begin by commending Chairman Combest and Ranking 
Member Stenholm of the Committee on Agriculture for their work in 
bringing this bill to the House floor.
  This has been a tandem that has persevered when others said it could 
not be done; persevered in holding hearings, persevered in crafting a 
bill, and even in the wake of tragic events thereafter hit our Nation, 
persevered in bringing this bill to the House floor, the first major 
nonattack bill considered since that morning 3 weeks ago, September 11.

[[Page H6182]]

  Since that time, without flinching, we were all proud to stand 
together and vote $15 billion worth of relief to the airline industry, 
to be spent this year, shoring up the critical component of our economy 
that they represent. This bill represents $73 billion over 10 years, 
shoring up the family farmer base of our food supply and investing in 
our Nation's food supply, every bit as critical a component to our 
economy as anything else one can think of.
  The way we achieve security, abundant production, highest quality, 
and affordability in food supply is with diversified production. And 
the way to achieve diversified production is to keep family farmers 
right at the heart of who grows the food for this Nation.
  Now, worldwide commodity prices have collapsed, collapsed to the 
point where what the farmer has been getting at the elevator after 
harvest is actually lower than what it costs to grow that crop. Nobody 
can stay in business under circumstances like that. And that is why we 
see the wholesale departure of families from the land, families that 
have been there for generations. Depopulation, meaning we lose so many 
people we cannot even support basic infrastructure in critical regions 
of the State, is a major issue that North Dakota is dealing with and 
other issues through the Great Plains. The way we attack it head on is 
to preserve profitability in farming, and that means farmers need some 
help.
  Let me give my colleagues a little Economics 101 on family farming. 
It does not matter how good a farmer someone is, you cannot control the 
price of your product. And if you cannot recover even costs, much less 
make a little money to put shoes on your kids and pay the light bill, 
you cannot stay in business. We are going to continue to drive out the 
smaller producer and drive production to larger and larger corporate 
enterprises, the enterprises that have the deep pockets to go through 
this kind of price trough, unless we have a farm bill that helps our 
families stay in the business. And that is what this bill is all about.
  I'd have constructed this bill somewhat differently. I hope it is 
changed in the Senate and continues to improve as the process goes 
forward. But make no mistake about it, the heart of this bill is price 
support for family farmers. We have for most of the last 4 years had 
price support as part of the farm program. We removed it with the 
Freedom to Farm bill, because we hoped that with improving markets that 
was not going to be necessary any more. Well, sadly, in a bipartisan 
way, we have recognized that support is needed. And that is why over 
the last 4 years we have passed $30 billion in disaster payments 
helping farmers through these tough times.
  There is a better way to go than ad hoc year-to-year disaster bills 
that leave the farmer and their lenders and their creditors not knowing 
where they stand. The better way is to put it in the farm bill, just 
like this bill does, with price supports so the farmers know where they 
stand. That is what this bill is all about.
  But the bill is about more than helping those who grow the food, 
there is a very important component to this bill that helps those who 
struggle to afford the food to feed their families. We have made cuts 
in the nutrition programs, WIC, food stamps, that have, I believe, been 
too severe, that have actually hindered families from obtaining the 
critical nutrition they need. We address that in this legislation with 
$3.5 billion in additional funding for the food programs to help those 
who need to eat to be able to get the food they need to feed their 
families. I sure do not want that funding jeopardized, and it is a 
critical part of this bill.
  As I mentioned, the bill is not perfect, but we are not at a point in 
time, colleagues, where perfection can be the enemy of the good when it 
comes to moving this farm bill forward. Thanks to the leadership of 
Chairman Combest and Ranking Member Stenholm, we have new momentum, 
represented by having this bill on the floor today, new momentum to 
getting farmers the protection they need to stay in business. We have 
got to keep this momentum going by moving this bill along and 
continuing it down the legislative process.
  I urge my colleagues to vote for the bill. I am proud to stand with 
this bill and commend the Committee on Agriculture for their good work.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Forbes).
  Mr. FORBES. Mr. Chairman, I wish to engage in a colloquy with the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest), the chairman of the Committee on 
Agriculture; but I would first like to thank the gentleman from Texas 
and his colleague, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Everett), the 
distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on Specialty Crops and 
Foreign Agriculture Programs, for working with me to improve the 
provisions of this bill relating to Federal peanut programs.
  The fourth district of Virginia is home to one of the largest peanut 
producing populations in the Nation. Though I have not been a member of 
this august body for long, I have worked hard since being sworn in to 
make the views of this community known to the House Committee on 
Agriculture during their consideration of this legislation. I have been 
very grateful for the cooperation and attention that their concerns 
have gotten from the committee.
  As reported from the committee, I have very serious concerns that 
this bill would severely strain the financial resources of Virginia's 
peanut farmers, particularly the small family farmers. While I 
recognize that times have changed and that the Federal programs must 
adapt as to the farmers that I represent, I remain apprehensive about 
the effect that these dramatic changes may hold for the future of 
peanut farming in my State.
  I appreciate the difficult balance that the chairman and his panel 
had to reach in addressing the needs of America's taxpayers at the same 
time as meeting the needs of America's agriculture community, and I am 
hopeful that I will be able to continue to work with the chairman as 
this bill goes to conference with the Senate.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. FORBES. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. COMBEST. Like the gentleman from Virginia, I recognize and 
respect the role that the farmers have played in our Nation's history 
and the importance of their work to our national economy. The 
development of this bill represents the best package we could achieve 
in balancing critical needs for commodity, conservation, trade, 
nutrition, credit, rural development, and research programs, while 
fitting into the fiscal restraints given to us by the budget 
resolution.
  I appreciate the gentleman's concern about the peanut provisions of 
the bill, and I am pleased that we have been able to work with him to 
accommodate some of those concerns. Specifically, we have proposed a 
change in the manager's amendment that would allow a producer to 
establish a base, at which point the producer would have a one time 
ability to set the base on any land that he chooses. This would give 
the producer the ability to put the base on land he owns or will give 
the producer a better bargaining position if he sets down this base on 
the land he rents.
  I thank the gentleman for his work and concern on this issue and I 
look forward to working with him to continue to address the problems 
and concerns that he has of the producers of Virginia as this bill goes 
forward to conference with the Senate.
  Mr. FORBES. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I wish to thank the 
gentleman from Texas for his comments.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Farm Security Act of 2001. 
Though I have some serious concerns with provisions of the bill that 
dramatically alter the peanut program, I realize how important this 
bill is to farmers across America and that this legislation must still 
go through a conference committee. I thank the Chairman for his hard 
work.
  Our farmers are the heart of our nation, and Virginia's peanut 
farmers are the heart of the Commonwealth. Peanut farming is important 
to the economic livelihood of Virginia, bringing $55 million in cash-
receipts to the state. Virginia peanuts are in high demand for gourmet-
style fried peanuts and roasted in-the-shell ballpark peanuts that we 
all have enjoyed at baseball games. It is important to remember the 
peanut program does not just impact farmers who exclusively grow 
peanuts but it also dramatically impacts other farmers who depend on 
peanut production to keep them alive and all those who insure, supply, 
or assist peanut production in any capacity, including

[[Page H6183]]

local governments who depend on taxes from these farms for survival.
  There are four specific concerns that I have had with the Committee-
passed bill, and I worked hard with the Chairman to accommodate each of 
them.
  The first was that the new program would begin with the 2002 crop. My 
concern was that there would not be enough time for the farmer to 
adjust to these changes, with contracts that have already been made 
based on the assumption that the current program would run through 
2002.
  Second, I was concerned that the bill focused on the farm and not the 
farmer. My goal was to see that the base be tied to the producer.
  Third, I was concerned that the financial return for the producers 
was so low that there would be no incentive for young farmers to enter 
the farming business, and that those retiring would not be replaced.
  Last but not least, I was concerned that the Peanut Administrative 
Committee was being phased out and replaced with a board without the 
means to ensure higher quality standards.
  Since my swearing in, Mr. Chairman, in late June, I have been working 
hard to represent these views to the Committee on behalf of Virginia's 
peanut farmers. I have greatly appreciated the full and subcommittee 
chairmen's attention to these concerns. I am particularly thankful for 
their determination that some of these points warranted changes in the 
Committee-passed bill.
  Specifically, the manager's amendment includes a provision, which 
should improve the overall income that a producer can earn by allowing 
the producer to establish the base on any land he chooses. Virginia's 
peanut farmers have been farming the land for generations because they 
love it. But we must be mindful of the fact that they must be able to 
make a living in order to continue doing what they love.
  Del Cotton, manager of the Franklin-based peanut marketing 
cooperative, said some producers will be happy and others will not with 
the proposed quota buyout. I hope Congress will continue to take the 
necessary steps to keep the peanut program viable.
  Mr. Chairman, I recognize, as do the farmers I represent, that times 
have changed and that our federal farm programs must change as well. 
But, we must never forget that our farmers have always been the 
backbone of this nation.
  That was true at our country's founding, and it is true today as we 
prepare to wage a long, hard war against terrorism. Food security is 
just as vital to our national defense as a strong military and strong 
economy. Our farmers are our partners in this endeavor.
  I look forward to continuing to work with the Chairman on this 
legislation as it goes through conference negotiations with the Senate.
  That said, Mr. Chairman, I encourage my colleagues to support this 
bill and to support the Chairman during conference deliberations.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Bishop).
  Mr. BISHOP. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  I would like to commend the chairman and the ranking member for the 
hard work that they and the committee staff have put into this very 
important bill. We in Congress have joined the President in urging 
America to get back to business, and our job today is a monumental one: 
to enact a farm bill that enables farmers and agri-businesses to 
survive during this economically challenging decade.
  After 4 years of depressed commodity prices and inflationary 
production costs, droughts and disasters, our whole agricultural system 
is at risk. This is not just rhetoric, it is simple math. Farm income 
has not been sufficient to sustain most producers, even though they 
adhere to sound farming practices. If it were not for a Federal farm 
safety net, the country would have experienced a catastrophic loss of 
farm operations and agri-businesses that serve them. Like oil, we would 
have become much more dependent on foreign producers for our food and 
fiber, the necessities of life.

                              {time}  1230

  Mr. Chairman, the farm bill enacted in 1996 was a visionary bill that 
gave farmers greater flexibility, but which failed to provide the help 
needed when prices slumped and costs increased.
  The farm bill that we consider today continues that same flexibility, 
but with a stronger safety net that should eliminate the need for 
billions of dollars of ad hoc appropriations. It includes a more 
market-oriented peanut program which makes it possible for our growers 
to compete as tariff rates decline and that phases out the quota 
system.
  The bill provides a significant level of compensation to quota 
holders within the budget restraints that we face; but I believe the 
funding level should be higher, and I will continue to work for that.
  It includes a 75 percent increase for soil, water and wildlife 
conservation, a food stamp program that includes new transitional 
assistance for families moving from welfare to work, $785 million for 
rural development, including funds to improve drinking water, expand 
telecommunications and promote value-added market development, a 100 
percent increase in funding for the market access program helping 
producers and exporters finance promotional initiatives abroad.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote for the Farm Security Act 
of 2001 and to help ensure a brighter future for America, for rural 
America, for our farmers, our agribusinesses, and especially for our 
consumers across the country.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Smith).
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, first let me say that I am a 
farmer. I have been involved in farm programs since the 1960s, and 
never has there been such a complete effort to get the input of 
American producers and those associated with agriculture into this 
final result, into this piece of legislation.
  The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest) and the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Stenholm) held 47 field hearings across the United States, 10 of 
those were full committee hearings, in addition to the dozens of 
hearings held in Washington. We tried to come up with legislation that 
faces a predicament which is now confronting American agriculture. That 
predicament is: Do we let other countries subsidize their farmers to 
the extent that it puts our farmers out of business?
  Right now we are in competition, if you will, with countries like 
Europe, who subsidize their farmers five times as much as we subsidize 
our farmers. To project what happens with that kind of subsidy, their 
additional production goes into what would otherwise be our markets. It 
is not a good way to do business.
  The taxpayer, one way or the other, is going to end up paying more 
for their food supplies to keep farmers producing agricultural 
products. One way is through farm subsidies. That is what is happening 
in the United States. I mentioned Europe, five times the subsidies as 
the U.S. Members can compare that to countries like Japan, which goes 
up to almost 12 times in subsidies as we pay our farmers.
  Eventually there has to be a more market-oriented solution in all 
countries to let the buyers of those products pay for them at the 
marketplace rather than through tax dollars distributed through 
government programs that are ultimately going to be unfair.
  Mr. Chairman, look at this bill carefully and let us move ahead. For 
the time being, we have to keep American agriculture in place.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Simpson).
  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Combest), the chairman; and I thank the ranking member, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Stenholm), and staff for all of the hard work that they 
have put into this legislation.
  Mr. Chairman, I traveled the Nation with my colleagues on the House 
Committee on Agriculture last year and heard first hand from farmers in 
numerous States about the challenges facing them and the way in which 
they felt those challenges could best be addressed.
  I can state unequivocally that this bill meets the needs of the 
farmers we have heard from and provides dramatic new investment in 
areas like trade promotion and conservation funding. As has been 
mentioned, there is a 78 percent increase in conservation funding.
  I spent the summer talking to farmers and ranchers across Idaho; and 
with rare exception, they have told me that they want this bill passed 
in its current form. They believe that this bill provides them the 
flexibility that they need to operate their farms the way

[[Page H6184]]

that they want to; and it provides the predictability they need to keep 
their family farms operating for themselves, their children, and great 
grandchildren.
  Mr. Chairman, it is not without some regret that I say that I wish 
the administration had been with me as I talked to Idaho farmers and as 
we held field hearings across this great country. I listened as I read 
the statement of administration policy this morning, the first 
statement that I have heard from the administration on their position 
on this farm bill. I was dismayed and disappointed. I would like to 
talk for just a minute about the points that they make in their 
concerns in this agriculture bill. They make four bullet points.
  First, that this bill encourages overproduction while prices are low. 
With price supports, we are trying to keep farmers in business when 
prices are low. I guess the answer that they have, and they give no 
specific answer in their statement of policy, is to let those farmers 
go out of business. I certainly hope that is not their policy; but if 
they have a different idea, they ought to share it with us.
  Their second bullet point is that it fails to help farmers most in 
need. They state in their statement of policy, and I quote: ``Nearly 
half of all recent government payments have gone to the largest 8 
percent of farmers, usually very large producers, while more than half 
all of U.S. farms share only 13 percent of the payments.''
  Mr. Chairman, the USDA considers large farms those farmers that have 
$250,000 or more gross sales. Those farms account for 15 percent of 
farms reporting government payments, and produce 54 percent of the 
value of program crops eligible for payments. They are 15 percent of 
the farms; they produce 54 percent of the value of program crops. Only 
0.5 percent of the large farms were nonfamily farms. The average 
transition payments in 1998 for these large farms was $21,870.
  These farms received 47 percent of the payments, while producing 54 
percent of the value of program crop production. Small farms, those 
that produce less than $250,000, on the other hand, produced 46 percent 
of the value of program crop production, but received 53 percent of the 
payments.
  Mr. Chairman, I think we have been going in the right direction 
trying to help the small family farms, those under $250,000 in gross 
sales. They have gotten a larger percentage of the actual payments. 
Also consider that over 77 percent of all large family farms operate 
with debt, 80 percent greater than average for all family farms. These 
farms carry debt liabilities equal to 47 percent of their maximum 
feasible debt load, 54 percent greater than the average for all family 
farms.
  Mr. Chairman, 12.2 percent of all large family farms have negative 
household incomes, 91 percent greater than the average for all family 
farms.
  Mr. Chairman, this bill is a farm bill. Payments are based on 
production. Large producers are obviously going to get a larger share 
of the payments. They also put more at risk. I think we have been going 
in the right direction trying to address this and making sure that we 
address the needs of small family farms and all farmers.
  The third bullet point from the statement of administration policy is 
that it jeopardizes critical markets abroad.
  Mr. Chairman, one of the real problems we have in agriculture today 
is that we have not been able to level the playing field between us and 
our competitors around the world. American farmers are at a competitive 
disadvantage to producers in other countries. We all know that. They 
get subsidized more in other countries than we support our farmers in 
this country. That puts us at a competitive disadvantage.
  This bill enhances our Export Enhancement Program, funds it further; 
and we need to create a level playing field. We cannot have a free 
market and fair trade when there is not a level playing field. It is a 
myth to think that there is a level playing field right now.
  I hope that the administration is serious, and I believe they are 
serious, when they say that agriculture will be a top priority in trade 
negotiations as they try to negotiate new trade agreements in the WTO.
  Lastly, they say that this boosts Federal spending at a time of 
uncertainty. As the chairman of the Committee on the Budget has stated, 
we reached an agreement on the budget resolution. This piece of 
legislation is crafted to stay within that budget resolution. It does 
exactly what the Committee on the Budget requested that we do, and I 
compliment the chairman and the ranking member for keeping this bill 
within the budget restraints that were imposed upon us.
  Mr. Chairman, this bill is the result of over 2 years of listening, 
learning, and hard work. It is the result of intense commitment, 
meaningful debate, and constructive compromise.
  Today we have a chance to endorse not only the legislation language 
in this bill, but the fair and open process that fostered its 
development. We also have a chance to bring new hope to rural 
communities and to bring real stability to our Nation's producers.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the Farm Security Act 
for America's farmers.
  The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest) has 
expired.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Combest) for his utilization.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Combest) will control 5 additional minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Norwood).
  Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Farm Security Act of 
2001. I cannot say enough good things. I cannot commend the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Combest) enough for his leadership and for the very 
thorough and deliberate manner the gentleman has followed in crafting 
this important farm bill.
  This bill answers a question, a vital question to this country, a 
very important question to the people of this country: Do we want the 
American people fed and clothed by the American farmer? That is a 
question that is before us because it is possible if something does not 
change, that we will not be fed and clothed by the American farmer. We 
will have to depend on other nations.
  When Congress passes this bill, the Farm Security Act, we are saying 
in a very loud voice, yes, we do intend for the American farmer to be 
the backbone of our industry in this country, and we will depend on 
them for our food and fiber.
  Recently American farmers have struggled through increasing 
difficulties. It is no secret. Talking to farmers while traveling 
through the 10th Congressional District of Georgia, I have listened to 
their concerns. The farmers in this country need our help if we want 
them to stay in business.
  Earlier this year Congress made a firm commitment of support. My 
colleagues all remember setting aside $73.5 billion over the next 10 
years. We have the opportunity, we should take the opportunity today to 
take the next important step.
  As evidenced by annual emergency agriculture spending, many policies 
in the 1996 farm bill have not been effective. This farm bill is well 
balanced and remedies these inequities, addressing critical farm 
program needs while also increasing conservation program dollars by 
approximately 80 percent.
  Within the commodity title, farmers are provided a three-piece safety 
net and the option to update base acreage. What that safety net really 
is, it is a safety net for the American citizen, a safety net for the 
American consumer, not just the farmer, but for all of us who are fed 
and clothed by the American farmer. While maintaining the fixed 
decoupled payments and the marketing loan payment, this farm bill adds 
a countercyclical payment, too.

                              {time}  1245

  This allows the farmer flexibility and security in planning for the 
future, a prescriptive answer to many of their concerns that I have 
heard since 1996.
  Finally, I want to talk about the peanut program just a minute. It is 
a critically important issue to Georgians. Recognizing the new 
challenges within the program and the need for reform, I am pleased 
with what this great committee has done. While it may not be

[[Page H6185]]

 perfect in the eyes of everyone, I believe this historic reform is an 
equitable one and is well crafted to ensure the viability of the 
American peanut farmer.
  Mr. Chairman, U.S. farmers have been asking for our help. I am happy 
to tell my friends in Georgia that help is on the way. I hope all my 
colleagues will vote for this bill.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I would just want to say in closing, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank 
all of the members of the committee and all of the Members not on the 
committee who have come over and taken such an active role in this. As 
we can see, the interest of agriculture spans well beyond just those 
members on the Committee on Agriculture. I thank the gentleman for the 
courtesy with his time.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time on this side. I 
would just use a portion of the remaining part of my time to emphasize 
a few points.
  To say I am rather disappointed in the statement of administration 
policy today would be the understatement of the day. I believe I am 
correct that we have had 47 subcommittee hearings, I know we have had 
10 full committee hearings in which at each time we were considering 
the various parts of what always ends up being a very controversial 
bill, the agricultural bill, I asked what the administration's position 
was. We wanted to consider that.
  I remember 1995 and 1996 when the committee and the House leadership 
refused to allow the administration witnesses in the room when we were 
conferencing. We made some mistakes when we did that. We usually do 
better legislative work when we have due and proper consideration by 
the legislative body with administrative input. I suspect and I hope 
and I really believe that we will get that when we get to a conference 
on the bill. But to come in the day before, actually a few minutes 
after we had passed the rule, by stating your position is not helpful, 
especially when you make some specific allegations that this bill 
encourages overproduction when prices are low. You have not read the 
bill, whoever wrote this. I am sure it was OMB. You have not read our 
bill. We deliberately made changes in the loan rates in order that we 
might accomplish some of the criticisms of the current bill.
  It fails to help farmers most in need. Where were you when we were 
asking for recommendations of how we do a better job of that? As we 
asked over and over as to farm witnesses and farm groups, how do we 
attack this particular problem? Where were you when we asked?
  Jeopardizes critical markets abroad. I have been around here now for 
almost 23 years. I have seen trade negotiators and trade negotiations 
begin and I have listened to administrations in which they have always 
emphasized the importance of agriculture when we go into the 
negotiations. But I have also noted when they complete that work, that 
somewhere over the Atlantic, agriculture is dumped out with a 
parachute.
  This time around, I said, and it was one of my prevailing judgments 
into our bill that we present to you today, I wanted to be sure that 
our government was standing shoulder to shoulder with our producers in 
these upcoming negotiations, and in the manager's amendment, we 
specifically say that if there is anything in this bill that makes us 
illegal under WTO agreements, we give the Secretary of Agriculture the 
authority to make those changes so that it reconforms, because no one 
on the House Committee on Agriculture wants to be part of any law that 
causes us to break a law or an agreement that we have agreed to in the 
good faith of the United States of America.
  Boosts Federal spending at a time of uncertainty. They have got us 
there. But let me point out we are boosting it by $2 billion next year. 
That is the total. $2 billion. Of which a portion of that, as we heard 
the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Clayton) speak a moment ago, 
is designed to do some of the things that both sides of the aisle have 
already agreed we need to do, and, that is, to recognize unemployed 
people, people who have lost their jobs and need some additional help 
in the transition into a new job. That is in this bill. Is it enough? 
You can probably say no, it is not. In fact, I predict when we get to 
the stimulus package, that you are going to have the administration 
agreeing to many more billions of dollars than 2. Why pick on the 2 at 
this stage of the game?
  We are going to hear a little bit about the sugar program and prices. 
Here again, we have the lowest prices for our producers since the Great 
Depression, in the last 30 years. I am going to be asking the question 
over and over to those that seem to believe that the only thing we can 
do to stay competitive is lower our prices, this bill that we bring 
forward that is being criticized by those that believe we are doing too 
much for the commodities is guaranteeing our farmers 1990 prices. Now, 
I ask anyone in this Chamber, anyone listening, anyone downtown, anyone 
at any of the newspaper editorials that have criticized us, if you and 
your employees are going to be guaranteed 1990 wage levels, how happy 
would you be and how exorbitant would your company be? That is what we 
do in this bill. Would we like to do more? Absolutely. But we operated 
under the good faith restraint of a budget that was passed by this 
House. I did not agree with it, but it became the law of the land and, 
therefore, I do as I try to do quite often, and, that is, work 
together. On the Committee on Agriculture, we do a darn good job at 
that.
  I commend again the chairman, the subcommittee chairmen, all of the 
folks on that side of the aisle and my own colleagues for the spirit in 
which we bring this bill to the House today.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. STENHOLM. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, just so the record is clear and for those 
people who have not followed this quite as carefully as we have on this 
committee, this process started well before the decision about who the 
current administration was, I think before either nominee actually even 
was nominated. This year, we started very early on in this calendar 
year having hearings all throughout the process, asking people what it 
was that they wanted.
  Let me ask the gentleman from Texas, how many times did the Secretary 
of Agriculture or anyone from the Department of Agriculture come before 
our committee and give us any suggestions?
  Mr. STENHOLM. To the best of my recollection, Mr. Chairman, zero.
  Mr. COMBEST. The gentleman's recollection is correct.
  Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 
2646, the 2001 Farm Bill, but also to express my support for several 
amendments that will be offered, specifically the Boehlert/Kind/
Gilchrest/Dingell amendment that would provide a more equitable 
distribution of government resources to farms and farmers throughout 
the United States, and the Sherwood/Etheridge/McHugh amendment to 
permanently authorize the Northeast Dairy Compact.
  For most people in this country, talking about farming does not 
conjure up images of my home state of Connecticut. For most people, 
Connecticut likely generates images of insurance companies, or 
submarine and aerospace manufacturers, rather than farms. But farming 
is a critical part of the Connecticut economy and our traditions. In 
fact, the Connecticut Department of Agriculture estimates that 
Connecticut receives a $900 million income from agriculture production, 
and adds about $2.1 billion to the state's economy. There are 
approximately 4,000 farms holding approximately 370,000 acres of land 
in Connecticut. In a state that is only 4,872 square miles, that 
represents over 11 percent of our land devoted directly to farming.
  In the 370,000 acres committed to farming, Connecticut ranks first in 
the nation in the density of egg laying poultry and the density of 
horses. We are fifth in mushroom production, seventh in pear 
production, eighth in the density of dairy cows and tenth in milk 
production per dairy cow. Aquaculture in Connecticut is an $18 million 
industry, and the value of oyster farming ranks Connecticut among the 
top five in the nation. In addition, nursery and greenhouse production 
was valued at $168 million, and bedding and garden plant production was 
valued at $50 million in 1999.
  Exacting so much agricultural production within such a small 
geographic area has meant seamlessly integrating our farms within our 
communities and as well as working to

[[Page H6186]]

harvest the resources of natural environment in ways not duplicated in 
other places in the United States. But Connecticut is the home of 
``Yankee Ingenuity'', and our farmers carry this tradition proudly, 
pursuing a dynamic range of enterprises and farming practices that 
leave the ``traditional farming'' label far behind. Innovative methods 
and creative planning, combined with one of the nation's best and 
original agriculture land grant universities at the University of 
Connecticut, put Connecticut farms at the forefront of exploring new 
ways of agriculture production.
  One of the issues that is raised repeatedly in my district and 
throughout Connecticut is the increasing ``multifunctionality'' of our 
farms. In New England, our farms are not just producing commodities for 
direct consumption, they interact with the foundation of our 
communities and economy in subtle ways often overlooked by most people. 
The open space and rolling hills protected by Connecticut farms are 
critical areas of open space in an increasingly urbanized environment. 
They provide a continuous source of local community income through a 
thriving agritourism industry.
  So for all of these reasons, we in Connecticut and the Northeast need 
a farm bill that recognizes the needs of our farmers and the region. 
The underlying bill has many important programs that our farmers need, 
but the Boehlert/Kind/Gilchrest/Dingell amendment greatly improves it, 
paying more attention to the diverse and unique needs of farmers in the 
Northeast.
  I also strongly support the Sherwood/Etheridge/McHugh amendment to 
permanently authorize the Northeast Dairy Compact. The Compact, as many 
of you know, was authorized in the 1996 Farm Bill, but was designated 
to sunset in 1999 pending reform of the federal milk marketing order 
program, a program that still fails to take into account the needs of 
dairy production at small family farms. Therefore the compact is still 
needed and Congress has twice extended its authority, the last time 
through September 30, 2001. But today is October 3, 2001 and this 
Congress, under pressure from special interests, has still not acted to 
address this critical issue for the people of my State and instead has 
allowed the compact to expire.
  Now I understand that opponents are moving to block consideration by 
attempting to rule the amendment out of order because it is not germane 
to debate in the context of the Farm Bill. Action on the Dairy Compact 
is the number one priority for the Connecticut agriculture community. 
Legislation to permanently authorize the Compact has been introduced by 
Congressman Hutchinson and carried forward by Congressman Sherwood and 
Congressman Etheridge that has the support of over 160 cosponsors. 
There is strong local support for this bill and this amendment. All of 
the state legislatures included in the Northeast Dairy Compact have 
approved it, as have the state legislatures in numerous states around 
the country who are waiting for this Congress to act so that they can 
join and form additional regional compacts.

  The compact is necessary because the federal minimum farm milk price 
is not sufficient to cover the cost of producing milk in the small 
family farms throughout New England, forcing the region's dairy farmers 
out of business. Simply put, dairy farming is the lifeblood of the 
Connecticut agricultural economy. As dairy farms are forced to close, 
demand for feed and other support crops, farm machinery, open space and 
agri-tourism all follow suit, creating a devastating and unrecoverable 
fallout of the local economy for those reliant on the business created 
by dairy farming. The loss of these resources and farms is unacceptable 
and irrecoverable, and in my opinion speaking now as a Member of the 
Armed Services Committee, a weakening of our domestic national 
security.
  Despite arguments by opponents, the compact does not cost the federal 
government or the taxpayers of the United States anything. This is not 
a subsidy program. In fact, the compact specifically, requires the 
Compact compensate USDA for the amount of federal price support 
purchases it makes a result of potential overproduction of milk, and 
for an technical assistance it receives from USDA's Agricultural 
Marketing Service. Additionally, the Compact reimburses participants in 
the Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Supplemental Food Program to 
offset any increase cost of fluid milk caused by premiums within the 
Compact. The Compact is also expressly prohibited from discriminating 
in any way against the marketing of milk produced anywhere else in the 
United States. As for arguments that the Compact artificially increases 
prices, the record has shown that price increases have been negligible 
to consumers, who in general have also strongly support the Compact.
  The Congress produces a major Farm Bill only once every five years. 
Debate and consideration of the amendment is critical at this time and 
germane. There is no other more germane legislation within which to 
address this issue, and our farmers cannot wait another five years for 
the next Farm Bill. It is time for us to have this debate and proceed 
with an up or down vote on this issue, and I urge my colleagues to 
support the Sherwood/Etheridge/McHugh amendment, or at least support 
its fair consideration.
  Finally, Mr. Chairman, I would like to bring to the House's attention 
an important provision in the bill, aimed at rural development. Section 
615 of the bill establishes a National Rural Development Partnership 
composed of the Coordinating Committee and the state rural development 
councils.
  State Rural Development Councils, like the Connecticut Rural 
Development Council, were established to promote interagency 
coordination among federal departments and agencies that administer 
policies and programs that impact rural areas and to promote 
intergovernmental collaboration among federal agencies and state, 
local, and tribal governments and the private and non-profit sectors.
  These local councils have done tremendous work and are an important 
local resource for our communities. They continue to prove extremely 
successful at local levels, and have worked at the local level to 
leverage the roughly $35 million annually appropriated by Congress in 
the past into more than $1 billion annually for conservation, as well 
as rural and urban development projects. For every dollar appropriated 
by Congress, local Councils have leveraged an average of $14 from non-
federal sources.
  The Rural Development Councils are an example of how local 
governments and the federal government should work together, and I am 
pleased to see that this bill recognizes their importance by 
establishing this partnership. This is a step in the right direction, 
and as much as could be accomplished in the Farm Bill at this time. 
However, Congressional Rural Caucus Agricultural Task Force Co-Chairs 
Congressman Pickering and Congressman Turner are working to introduce a 
more comprehensive proposal in the near future, and I would urge my 
colleagues to support their legislation to further this important 
initiative.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, despite this Member's very strong 
reservations about the fundamental lack of necessary policy reforms in 
the overall bill, he rises in strong support of Title III of H.R. 2646, 
the Farm Security Act of 2001. Since Nebraska's 1st Congressional 
District's economy relies heavily on agriculture-related trade, the 
export and humanitarian programs authorized in Title III impact this 
Member's district more directly than perhaps any other provisions 
passed in this body. Also, this Member would remind his colleagues that 
these programs impact many Americans as the United States Department of 
Agriculture (USDA) estimates that for every $1 generated by agriculture 
exports, an additional $1.30 is generated through export-related 
activities.
  Therefore, this Member would like to thank the distinguished Chairmen 
and Ranking Minority Members of the House Agriculture and International 
Relations Committee (Mr. Combest, Mr. Stenholm, Mr. Hyde, and Mr. 
Lantos). In addition, this Member would like to thank the distinguished 
gentlelady from Missouri (Mrs. Emerson) for her unwavering support for 
the George McGovern-Robert Dole International Food for Education and 
Child Nutrition Program. Furthermore, this Member also especially would 
commend the distinguished gentlelady from North Carolina (Mrs. 
Clayton), for her dedication to the Farmers for Africa and Carribean 
Basin Program which builds on the current Farmer-to-Farmer Program, 
previously established by this Member, by linking African-American 
volunteers engaged in farming and agribusiness with their counterparts 
in Africa and the Carribean Basin to provide technical assistance. 
Their efforts are much appreciated.
  Mr. Chairman, for the United States to remain competitive in the 
world agriculture markets it is crucial to support market development 
activities which encourage the sale of U.S. commodities and value-added 
ag products overseas. Our European, Asian, and South American 
competitors have funneled significant government monies into market 
development. Indeed, our competitors individually outspend the U.S. at 
a rate of at least 4 to 1.
  In the competitive arena of ag trade, it is critical to provide U.S. 
ag-industry components with appropriately funded market development 
tools for effectively fostering new overseas markets, entering existing 
overseas markets, and maintaining overseas markets. Title III more than 
doubles funding levels for the Market Access Program (MAP) from $90 
million to $200 million and increase funding levels for the Foreign 
Market Development Program (FMDP) from $28 million to $37 million a 
year.
  On a related note, this Member is pleased that the current version of 
Title III of H.R. 2646 includes language supporting a study on fees for 
services provided by the Foreign Agriculture Service (FAS) rather 
authorizing the

[[Page H6187]]

USDA collect such. This Member has previously expressed his concerns 
about the collection of fees for commercial services provided overseas 
by the FAS. For small and medium businesses attempting to broaden their 
operations overseas, assessing fees for FAS services and impressive 
expertise could prove to hinder such businesses' expansion.
  In addition to authorizing ag trade and export programs, Title III of 
H.R. 2646 authorizes what are among our strongest foreign policy 
tools--U.S. food aid programs. In this regard, Mr. Chairman, this 
Member is pleased to note that he has on several occasions toured Crete 
Mills in Crete, Nebraska, a milling facility in his own district which 
produces much of the fortified grain and soy products used in food aid 
programs. This Member would like to convey to his colleagues that the 
company and its employees are enthused about continuing to play a role 
in meeting the needs of their hungry neighbors around the world. 
Additionally, of course, it has noticeably raised the market prices for 
farmers' grain in a wide radius around Crete.
  In supporting the George McGovern-Robert Dole International Food for 
Education and Child Nutrition Program, this Member hopes that the U.S. 
attain its frequently articulated goal of stability in sub-Saharan 
Africa, Central America, South America, and Asia. Indeed, following the 
horrific terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, it is increasingly 
important that the U.S. make investments in the health and education of 
the children in particularly unstable regions. Upon the foundation of a 
healthy, educated population, the U.S. can continue to work toward 
other foreign policy goals--building democratic institutions, 
addressing human rights concerns, developing economic stability, and 
countering terrorism.
  Finally, as the author of the original Farmer-to-Farmer Program as 
earlier noted, this Member is pleased to support the Farmers for Africa 
and Carribean Basin Program, an initiative introduced as freestanding 
legislation by the distinguished gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. 
Clayton). The Farmers for Africa and Carribean Basin Program builds 
upon the current Farmer-to-Farmer Program, which is reauthorized in 
this bill, by linking African-American volunteers engaged in farming 
and agribusiness with their counterparts in Africa and the Carribean 
Basin to provide technical assistance. This approach has worked in 
Asia, South America, and the Newly Independent States of the former 
Soviet Union; therefore, the renewed emphasis and extension of this 
program to Africa and the Carribean Basin certainly is appropriate.
  Mr. Chairman this Member urges his colleagues to strongly support 
Title III of H.R. 2646.
  Mr. ACEVEDO-VILA. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank Chairman 
Combest and Ranking Member Stenholm for their commitment to bring about 
a complete Farm Bill with all titles. This bill is the fruit of 
dedication and commitment that Committee Members have for the people 
this House represents. I applaud the Committee's work to increase funds 
to titles such as Conservation, Rural Development and Trade, all of 
which are extremely important areas for the Nation and people of Puerto 
Rico and especially, to our farmers and growers.
  I would like to emphasize the importance the Nutrition Title 
contained in this bill has for the 430,000 Puerto Rican families that 
depend on nutrition assistance to keep their children fed and healthy. 
Title IV reauthorizes the Nutritional Assistance Program, better known 
in Puerto Rico as PAN for the next ten years, with increases in funding 
for each year. The Puerto Rican Nutritional Assistance Program serves 
the same purpose in Puerto Rico as the Food Stamps program serves in 
the states: to reduce hunger, to improve the health of our children, 
and ensure our nation a brighter future. We cannot afford hungry 
children in our schoolrooms. Nutrition Assistance is an essential 
foundation for building a better future for all of us. Especially in 
today's changing world, ensuring that every family has food on their 
table, no matter what financial circumstances beset them, is of utmost 
importance. I urge all Members of this House to vote in favor of this 
bill and especially support the efforts to guarantee a decent meal to 
every family in Puerto Rico and in the Nation. I am very thankful that 
this Farm Bill assures this for every American.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the amendment in the nature of a substitute 
printed in part A of House Report 107-226, modified by the amendment 
printed in part B of that report, is considered as an original bill for 
the purpose of amendment and is considered read.
  The text of the amendment in the nature of a substitute, as modified, 
is as follows:

       Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the 
     following:

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Farm 
     Security Act of 2001''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

                      TITLE I--COMMODITY PROGRAMS

Sec. 100. Definitions.

   Subtitle A--Fixed Decoupled Payments and Counter-Cyclical Payments

Sec. 101. Payments to eligible producers.
Sec. 102. Establishment of payment yield.
Sec. 103. Establishment of base acres and payment acres for a farm.
Sec. 104. Availability of fixed, decoupled payments.
Sec. 105. Availability of counter-cyclical payments.
Sec. 106. Producer agreement required as condition on provision of 
              fixed, decoupled payments and counter-cyclical payments.
Sec. 107. Planting flexibility.
Sec. 108. Relation to remaining payment authority under production 
              flexibility contracts.
Sec. 109. Payment limitations.
Sec. 110. Period of effectiveness.

  Subtitle B--Marketing Assistance Loans and Loan Deficiency Payments

Sec. 121. Availability of nonrecourse marketing assistance loans for 
              covered commodities.
Sec. 122. Loan rates for nonrecourse marketing assistance loans.
Sec. 123. Term of loans.
Sec. 124. Repayment of loans.
Sec. 125. Loan deficiency payments.
Sec. 126. Payments in lieu of loan deficiency payments for grazed 
              acreage.
Sec. 127. Special marketing loan provisions for upland cotton.
Sec. 128. Special competitive provisions for extra long staple cotton.
Sec. 129. Availability of recourse loans for high moisture feed grains 
              and seed cotton and other fibers.
Sec. 130. Availability of nonrecourse marketing assistance loans for 
              wool and mohair.
Sec. 131. Availability of nonrecourse marketing assistance loans for 
              honey.

                     Subtitle C--Other Commodities

                            Chapter 1--Dairy

Sec. 141. Milk price support program.
Sec. 142. Repeal of recourse loan program for processors.
Sec. 143. Extension of dairy export incentive and dairy indemnity 
              programs.
Sec. 144. Fluid milk promotion.
Sec. 145. Dairy product mandatory reporting.
Sec. 146. Funding of dairy promotion and research program.

                            Chapter 2--Sugar

Sec. 151. Sugar program.
Sec. 152. Reauthorize provisions of Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 
              regarding sugar.
Sec. 153. Storage facility loans.

                           Chapter 3--Peanuts

Sec. 161. Definitions.
Sec. 162. Establishment of payment yield, peanut acres, and payment 
              acres for a farm.
Sec. 163. Availability of fixed, decoupled payments for peanuts.
Sec. 164. Availability of counter-cyclical payments for peanuts.
Sec. 165. Producer agreement required as condition on provision of 
              fixed, decoupled payments and counter-cyclical payments.
Sec. 166. Planting flexibility.
Sec. 167. Marketing assistance loans and loan deficiency payments for 
              peanuts.
Sec. 168. Quality improvement.
Sec. 169. Payment limitations.
Sec. 170. Termination of marketing quota programs for peanuts and 
              compensation to peanut quota holders for loss of quota 
              asset value.

                       Subtitle D--Administration

Sec. 181. Administration generally.
Sec. 182. Extension of suspension of permanent price support authority.
Sec. 183. Limitations.
Sec. 184. Adjustments of loans.
Sec. 185. Personal liability of producers for deficiencies.
Sec. 186. Extension of existing administrative authority regarding 
              loans.
Sec. 187. Assignment of payments.

                         TITLE II--CONSERVATION

     Subtitle A--Environmental Conservation Acreage Reserve Program

Sec. 201. General provisions.

                Subtitle B--Conservation Reserve Program

Sec. 211. Reauthorization.
Sec. 212. Enrollment.
Sec. 213. Duties of owners and operators.
Sec. 214. Reference to conservation reserve payments.

                  Subtitle C--Wetlands Reserve Program

Sec. 221. Enrollment.
Sec. 222. Easements and agreements.
Sec. 223. Duties of the Secretary.
Sec. 224. Changes in ownership; agreement modification; termination.

          Subtitle D--Environmental Quality Incentives Program

Sec. 231. Purposes.
Sec. 232. Definitions.

[[Page H6188]]

Sec. 233. Establishment and administration.
Sec. 234. Evaluation of offers and payments.
Sec. 235. Environmental Quality Incentives Program plan.
Sec. 236. Duties of the Secretary.
Sec. 237. Limitation on payments.
Sec. 238. Ground and surface water conservation.

                 Subtitle E--Funding and Administration

Sec. 241. Reauthorization.
Sec. 242. Funding.
Sec. 243. Allocation for livestock production.
Sec. 244. Administration and technical assistance.

                       Subtitle F--Other Programs

Sec. 251. Private grazing land and conservation assistance.
Sec. 252. Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program.
Sec. 253. Farmland Protection Program.
Sec. 254. Resource Conservation and Development Program.
Sec. 255. Grassland Reserve Program.
Sec. 256. Farmland Stewardship Program.
Sec. 257. Small Watershed Rehabilitation Program.

                          Subtitle G--Repeals

Sec. 261. Provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985.
Sec. 262. National Natural Resources Conservation Foundation Act.

                            TITLE III--TRADE

Sec. 301. Market Access Program.
Sec. 302. Food for Progress.
Sec. 303. Surplus commodities for developing or friendly countries.
Sec. 304. Export Enhancement Program.
Sec. 305. Foreign Market Development Cooperator Program.
Sec. 306. Export Credit Guarantee Program.
Sec. 307. Food for Peace (PL 480).
Sec. 308. Emerging markets.
Sec. 309. Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust.
Sec. 310. Technical assistance for specialty crops.
Sec. 311. Farmers to Africa and the Caribbean Basin.
Sec. 312. George McGovern-Robert Dole International Food for Education 
              and Child Nutrition Program.
Sec. 313. Study on fee for services.
Sec. 314. National export strategy report.

                      TITLE IV--NUTRITION PROGRAMS

                     Subtitle A--Food Stamp Program

Sec. 401. Simplified definition of income.
Sec. 402. Standard deduction.
Sec. 403. Transitional food stamps for families moving from welfare.
Sec. 404. Quality control systems.
Sec. 405. Simplified application and eligibility determination systems.
Sec. 406. Authorization of appropriations.

                   Subtitle B--Commodity Distribution

Sec. 441. Distribution of surplus commodities to special nutrition 
              projects.
Sec. 442. Commodity supplemental food program.
Sec. 443. Emergency food assistance.

                  Subtitle C--Miscellaneous Provisions

Sec. 461. Hunger fellowship program.
Sec. 462. General effective date.

                            TITLE V--CREDIT

Sec. 501. Eligibility of limited liability companies for farm ownership 
              loans, farm operating loans, and emergency loans.
Sec. 502. Suspension of limitation on period for which borrowers are 
              eligible for guaranteed assistance.
Sec. 503. Administration of Certified Lenders and Preferred Certified 
              Lenders programs.
Sec. 504. Simplified loan guarantee application available for loans of 
              greater amounts.
Sec. 505. Elimination of requirement that Secretary require county 
              committees to certify in writing that certain loan 
              reviews have been conducted.
Sec. 506. Authority to reduce percentage of loan guaranteed if borrower 
              income is insufficient to service debt.
Sec. 507. Timing of loan assessments.
Sec. 508. Making and servicing of loans by personnel of State, county, 
              or area committees.
Sec. 509. Eligibility of employees of State, county, or area committee 
              for loans and loan guarantees.
Sec. 510. Emergency loans in response to an economic emergency 
              resulting from quarantines and sharply increasing energy 
              costs.
Sec. 511. Extension of authority to contract for servicing of farmer 
              program loans.
Sec. 512. Authorization for loans.
Sec. 513. Reservation of funds for direct operating loans for beginning 
              farmers and ranchers.
Sec. 514. Extension of interest rate reduction program.
Sec. 515. Increase in duration of loans under down payment loan 
              program.
Sec. 516. Horse breeder loans.
Sec. 517. Sunset of direct loan programs under the Consolidated Farm 
              and Rural Development Act.
Sec. 518. Definition of debt forgiveness.
Sec. 519. Loan eligibility for borrowers with prior debt forgiveness.
Sec. 520. Allocation of certain funds for socially disadvantaged 
              farmers and ranchers.
Sec. 521. Horses considered to be livestock under the Consolidated Farm 
              and Rural Development Act.

                      TITLE VI--RURAL DEVELOPMENT

Sec. 601. Funding for rural local television broadcast signal loan 
              guarantees.
Sec. 602. Expanded eligibility for value-added agricultural product 
              market development grants.
Sec. 603. Agriculture innovation center demonstration program.
Sec. 604. Funding of community water assistance grant program.
Sec. 605. Loan guarantees for the financing of the purchase of 
              renewable energy systems.
Sec. 606. Loans and loan guarantees for renewable energy systems.
Sec. 607. Rural business opportunity grants.
Sec. 608. Grants for water systems for rural and native villages in 
              Alaska.
Sec. 609. Rural cooperative development grants.
Sec. 610. National reserve account of Rural Development Trust Fund.
Sec. 611. Rural venture capital demonstration program.
Sec. 612. Increase in limit on certain loans for rural development.
Sec. 613. Pilot program for development and implementation of strategic 
              regional development plans.
Sec. 614. Grants to nonprofit organizations to finance the 
              construction, refurbishing, and servicing of 
              individually-owned household water well systems in rural 
              areas for individuals with low or moderate incomes.
Sec. 615. National Rural Development Partnership.
Sec. 616. Eligibility of rural empowerment zones, rural enterprise 
              communities, and champion communities for direct and 
              guaranteed loans for essential community facilities.
Sec. 617. Grants to train farm workers in new technologies and to train 
              farm workers in specialized skills necessary for higher 
              value crops.
Sec. 618. Loan guarantees for the purchase of stock in a farmer 
              cooperative seeking to modernize or expand.
Sec. 619. Intangible assets and subordinated unsecured debt required to 
              be considered in determining eligibility of farmer-owned 
              cooperative for business and industry guaranteed loan.
Sec. 620. Ban on limiting eligibility of farmer cooperative for 
              business and industry loan guarantee based on population 
              of area in which cooperative is located.
Sec. 621. Rural water and waste facility grants.
Sec. 622. Rural water circuit rider program.
Sec. 623. Rural water grassroots source water protection program.

                TITLE VII--RESEARCH AND RELATED MATTERS

                         Subtitle A--Extensions

Sec. 700. Market expansion research.
Sec. 701. National Rural Information Center Clearinghouse.
Sec. 702. Grants and fellowships for food and agricultural sciences 
              education.
Sec. 703. Policy research centers.
Sec. 704. Human nutrition intervention and health promotion research 
              program.
Sec. 705. Pilot research program to combine medical and agricultural 
              research.
Sec. 706. Nutrition education program.
Sec. 707. Continuing animal health and disease research programs.
Sec. 708. Appropriations for research on national or regional problems.
Sec. 709. Grants to upgrade agricultural and food sciences facilities 
              at 1890 land-grant colleges, including Tuskegee 
              University.
Sec. 710. National research and training centennial centers at 1890 
              land-grant institutions.
Sec. 711. Hispanic-serving institutions.
Sec. 712. Competitive grants for international agricultural science and 
              education programs.
Sec. 713. University research.
Sec. 714. Extension service.
Sec. 715. Supplemental and alternative crops.
Sec. 716. Aquaculture research facilities.
Sec. 717. Rangeland research.
Sec. 718. National genetics resources program.
Sec. 719. High-priority research and extension initiatives.
Sec. 720. Nutrient management research and extension initiative.
Sec. 721. Agricultural telecommunications program.
Sec. 722. Alternative agricultural research and commercialization 
              revolving fund.
Sec. 723. Assistive technology program for farmers with disabilities.
Sec. 724. Partnerships for high-value agricultural product quality 
              research.
Sec. 725. Biobased products.
Sec. 726. Integrated research, education, and extension competitive 
              grants program.

[[Page H6189]]

Sec. 727. Institutional capacity building grants.
Sec. 728. 1994 Institution research grants.
Sec. 729. Endowment for 1994 Institutions.
Sec. 730. Precision agriculture.
Sec. 731. Thomas Jefferson initiative for crop diversification.
Sec. 732. Support for research regarding diseases of wheat, triticale, 
              and barley caused by Fusarium Graminearum or by Tilletia 
              Indica.
Sec. 733. Office of Pest Management Policy.
Sec. 734. National Agricultural Research, Extension, Education, and 
              Economics Advisory Board.
Sec. 735. Grants for research on production and marketing of alcohols 
              and industrial hydrocarbons from agricultural commodities 
              and forest products.
Sec. 736. Biomass research and development.
Sec. 737. Agricultural experiment stations research facilities.
Sec. 738. Competitive, special, and facilities research grants national 
              research initiative.
Sec. 739. Federal agricultural research facilities authorization of 
              appropriations.
Sec. 740. Cotton classification services.
Sec. 740A. Critical agricultural materials research.

                       Subtitle B--Modifications

Sec. 741. Equity in Educational Land-Grant Status Act of 1994.
Sec. 742. National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching 
              Policy Act of 1977.
Sec. 743. Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 
              1998.
Sec. 744. Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990.
Sec. 745. National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching 
              Policy Act of 1977.
Sec. 746. Biomass research and development.
Sec. 747. Biotechnology risk assessment research.
Sec. 748. Competitive, special, and facilities research grants.
Sec. 749. Matching funds requirement for research and extension 
              activities of 1890 institutions.
Sec. 749A. Matching funds requirement for research and extension 
              activities for the United States territories.
Sec. 750. Initiative for future agriculture and food systems.
Sec. 751. Carbon cycle research.
Sec. 752. Definition of food and agricultural sciences.
Sec. 753. Federal extension service.
Sec. 754. Policy research centers.

                      Subtitle C--Related Matters

Sec. 761. Resident instruction at land-grant colleges in United States 
              territories.
Sec. 762. Declaration of extraordinary emergency and resulting 
              authorities.

        Subtitle D--Repeal of Certain Activities and Authorities

Sec. 771. Food Safety Research Information Office and National 
              Conference.
Sec. 772. Reimbursement of expenses under Sheep Promotion, Research, 
              and Information Act of 1994.
Sec. 773. National genetic resources program.
Sec. 774. National Advisory Board on Agricultural Weather.
Sec. 775. Agricultural information exchange with Ireland.
Sec. 776. Pesticide resistance study.
Sec. 777. Expansion of education study.
Sec. 778. Support for advisory board.
Sec. 779. Task force on 10-year strategic plan for agricultural 
              research facilities.

              Subtitle E--Agriculture Facility Protection

Sec. 790. Additional protections for animal or agricultural 
              enterprises, research facilities, and other entities.

                    TITLE VIII--FORESTRY INITIATIVES

Sec. 801. Repeal of forestry incentives program and Stewardship 
              Incentive Program.
Sec. 802. Establishment of Forest Land Enhancement Program.
Sec. 803. Renewable resources extension activities.
Sec. 804. Enhanced community fire protection.
Sec. 805. International forestry program.
Sec. 806. Long-term forest stewardship contracts for hazardous fuels 
              removal and implementation of National Fire Plan.
Sec. 807. McIntire-Stennis cooperative forestry research program.

                   TITLE IX--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

                  Subtitle A--Tree Assistance Program

Sec. 901. Eligibility.
Sec. 902. Assistance.
Sec. 903. Limitation on assistance.
Sec. 904. Definitions.

                       Subtitle B--Other Matters

Sec. 921. Hazardous fuel reduction grants to prevent wildfire disasters 
              and transform hazardous fuels to electric energy, useful 
              heat, or transportation fuels.
Sec. 922. Bioenergy program.
Sec. 923. Availability of section 32 funds.
Sec. 924. Seniors farmers' market nutrition program.
Sec. 925. Department of Agriculture authorities regarding caneberries.
Sec. 926. National Appeals Division.
Sec. 927. Outreach and assistance for socially disadvantaged farmers 
              and ranchers.
Sec. 928. Equal treatment of potatoes and sweet potatoes.
Sec. 929. Reference to sea grass and sea oats as crops covered by 
              noninsured crop disaster assistance program.
Sec. 930. Operation of Graduate School of Department of Agriculture.
Sec. 931. Assistance for livestock producers.

                      TITLE I--COMMODITY PROGRAMS

     SEC. 100. DEFINITIONS.

       In this title (other than chapter 3 of subtitle C):
       (1) Agricultural act of 1949.--The term ``Agricultural Act 
     of 1949'' means the Agricultural Act of 1949 (7 U.S.C. 1421 
     et seq.), as in effect prior to the suspensions under section 
     171 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 
     1996 (7 U.S.C. 7301).
       (2) Base acres.--The term ``base acres'', with respect to a 
     covered commodity on a farm, means the number of acres 
     established under section 103 with respect to the commodity 
     upon the election made by the producers on the farm under 
     subsection (a) of such section.
       (3) Counter-cyclical payment.--The term ``counter-cyclical 
     payment'' means a payment made to producers under section 
     105.
       (4) Covered commodity.--The term ``covered commodity'' 
     means wheat, corn, grain sorghum, barley, oats, upland 
     cotton, rice, soybeans, and other oilseeds.
       (5) Effective price.--The term ``effective price'', with 
     respect to a covered commodity for a crop year, means the 
     price calculated by the Secretary under section 105 to 
     determine whether counter-cyclical payments are required to 
     be made for that crop year.
       (6) Eligible producer.--The term ``eligible producer'' 
     means a producer described in section 101(a).
       (7) Fixed, decoupled payment.--The term ``fixed, decoupled 
     payment'' means a payment made to producers under section 
     104.
       (8) Other oilseed.--The term ``other oilseed'' means a crop 
     of sunflower seed, rapeseed, canola, safflower, flaxseed, 
     mustard seed, or, if designated by the Secretary, another 
     oilseed.
       (9) Payment acres.--The term ``payment acres'' means 85 
     percent of the base acres of a covered commodity on a farm, 
     as established under section 103, upon which fixed, decoupled 
     payments and counter-cyclical payments are to be made.
       (10) Payment yield.--The term ``payment yield'' means the 
     yield established under section 102 for a farm for a covered 
     commodity.
       (11) Producer.--The term ``producer'' means an owner, 
     operator, landlord, tenant, or sharecropper who shares in the 
     risk of producing a crop and who is entitled to share in the 
     crop available for marketing from the farm, or would have 
     shared had the crop been produced. In determining whether a 
     grower of hybrid seed is a producer, the Secretary shall not 
     take into consideration the existence of a hybrid seed 
     contract and shall ensure that program requirements do not 
     adversely affect the ability of the grower to receive a 
     payment under this title.
       (12) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Agriculture.
       (13) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the several 
     States of the United States, the District of Columbia, the 
     Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any other territory or 
     possession of the United States.
       (14) Target price.--The term ``target price'' means the 
     price per bushel (or other appropriate unit in the case of 
     upland cotton, rice, and other oilseeds) of a covered 
     commodity used to determine the payment rate for counter-
     cyclical payments.
       (15) United states.--The term ``United States'', when used 
     in a geographical sense, means all of the States.

   Subtitle A--Fixed Decoupled Payments and Counter-Cyclical Payments

     SEC. 101. PAYMENTS TO ELIGIBLE PRODUCERS.

       (a) Payments Required.--Beginning with the 2002 crop of 
     covered commodities, the Secretary shall make fixed decoupled 
     payments and counter-cyclical payments under this subtitle--
       (1) to producers on a farm that were parties to a 
     production flexibility contract under section 111 of the 
     Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (7 
     U.S.C. 7211) for fiscal year 2002; and
       (2) to other producers on farms in the United States as 
     described in section 103(a).
       (b) Tenants and Sharecroppers.--In carrying out this title, 
     the Secretary shall provide adequate safeguards to protect 
     the interests of tenants and sharecroppers.
       (c) Sharing of Payments.--The Secretary shall provide for 
     the sharing of fixed, decoupled payments and counter-cyclical 
     payments among the eligible producers on a farm on a fair and 
     equitable basis.

     SEC. 102. ESTABLISHMENT OF PAYMENT YIELD.

       (a) Establishment and Purpose.--For the purpose of making 
     fixed decoupled payments and counter-cyclical payments under 
     this subtitle, the Secretary shall provide for the 
     establishment of a payment yield for each farm for each 
     covered commodity in accordance with this section.
       (b) Use of Farm Program Payment Yield.--Except as otherwise 
     provided in this

[[Page H6190]]

     section, the payment yield for each of the 2002 through 2011 
     crops of a covered commodity for a farm shall be the farm 
     program payment yield in effect for the 2002 crop of the 
     covered commodity under section 505 of the Agricultural Act 
     of 1949 (7 U.S.C. 1465).
       (c) Farms Without Farm Program Payment Yield.--In the case 
     of a farm for which a farm program payment yield is 
     unavailable for a covered commodity (other than soybeans or 
     other oilseeds), the Secretary shall establish an appropriate 
     payment yield for the covered commodity on the farm taking in 
     consideration the farm program payment yields applicable to 
     the commodity under subsection (b) for similar farms in the 
     area.
       (d) Payment Yields for Oilseeds.--
       (1) Determination of average yield.--In the case of 
     soybeans and each other oilseed, the Secretary shall 
     determine the average yield for the oilseed on a farm for the 
     1998 through 2001 crop years, excluding any crop year in 
     which the acreage planted to the oilseed was zero. If, for 
     any of these four crop years in which the oilseed was 
     planted, the farm would have satisfied the eligibility 
     criteria established to carry out section 1102 of the 
     Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, 
     and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999 (Public Law 
     105-277; 7 U.S.C. 1421 note), the Secretary shall assign a 
     yield for that year equal to 65 percent of the county yield.
       (2) Adjustment for payment yield.--The payment yield for a 
     farm for an oilseed shall be equal to the product of the 
     following:
       (A) The average yield for the oilseed determined under 
     paragraph (1).
       (B) The ratio resulting from dividing the national average 
     yield for the oilseed for the 1981 through 1985 crops by the 
     national average yield for the oilseed for the 1998 through 
     2001 crops.

     SEC. 103. ESTABLISHMENT OF BASE ACRES AND PAYMENT ACRES FOR A 
                   FARM.

       (a) Election by Producers of Base Acre Calculation 
     Method.--For the purpose of making fixed decoupled payments 
     and counter-cyclical payments with respect to a farm, the 
     Secretary shall give producers on the farm an opportunity to 
     elect one of the following as the method by which the base 
     acres of all covered commodities on the farm are to be 
     determined:
       (1) The four-year average of acreage actually planted on 
     the farm to a covered commodity for harvest, grazing, haying, 
     silage, or other similar purposes during crop years 1998, 
     1999, 2000, and 2001 and any acreage on the farm that the 
     producers were prevented from planting during such crop years 
     to the covered commodity because of drought, flood, or other 
     natural disaster, or other condition beyond the control of 
     the producer, as determined by the Secretary.
       (2) The contract acreage (as defined in section 102 of the 
     Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (7 
     U.S.C. 7202)) used by the Secretary to calculate the fiscal 
     year 2002 payment that, subject to section 109, would be made 
     under section 114 of such Act (7 U.S.C. 7214) for the covered 
     commodity on the farm.
       (b) Single Election; Time for Election.--The opportunity to 
     make the election described in subsection (a) shall be 
     available to producers on a farm only once. The producers 
     shall notify the Secretary of the election made by the 
     producers under such subsection not later than 180 days after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (c) Effect of Failure To Make Election.--If the producers 
     on a farm fail to make the election under subsection (a), or 
     fail to timely notify the Secretary of the selected option as 
     required by subsection (b), the producers shall be deemed to 
     have made the election described in subsection (a)(2) to 
     determine base acres for all covered commodities on the farm.
       (d) Application of Election to All Covered Commodities.--
     The election made under subsection (a) or deemed to be made 
     under subsection (c) with respect to a farm shall apply to 
     all of the covered commodities on the farm. Producers may not 
     make the election described in subsection (a)(1) for one 
     covered commodity and the election described in subsection 
     (a)(2) for other covered commodities on the farm.
       (e) Treatment of Conservation Reserve Contract Acreage.--
       (1) In general.--In the case of producers on a farm that 
     make the election described in subsection (a)(2), the 
     Secretary shall provide for an adjustment in the base acres 
     for the farm whenever either of the following circumstances 
     occur:
       (A) A conservation reserve contract entered into under 
     section 1231 of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 
     3831) with respect to the farm expires or is voluntarily 
     terminated.
       (B) Cropland is released from coverage under a conservation 
     reserve contract by the Secretary.
       (2) Special payment rules.--For the fiscal year and crop 
     year in which a base acre adjustment under paragraph (1) is 
     first made, the producers on the farm shall elect to receive 
     either fixed decoupled payments and counter-cyclical payments 
     with respect to the acreage added to the farm under this 
     subsection or a prorated payment under the conservation 
     reserve contract, but not both.
       (f) Payment Acres.--The payment acres for a covered 
     commodity on a farm shall be equal to 85 percent of the base 
     acres for the commodity.
       (g) Prevention of Excess Base Acres.--
       (1) Required reduction.--If the sum of the base acres for a 
     farm, together with the acreage described in paragraph (2), 
     exceeds the actual cropland acreage of the farm, the 
     Secretary shall reduce the quantity of base acres for one or 
     more covered commodities for the farm or peanut acres for the 
     farm as necessary so that the sum of the base acres and 
     acreage described in paragraph (2) does not exceed the actual 
     cropland acreage of the farm. The Secretary shall give the 
     producers on the farm the opportunity to select the base 
     acres or peanut acres against which the reduction will be 
     made.
       (2) Other acreage.--For purposes of paragraph (1), the 
     Secretary shall include the following:
       (A) Any peanut acres for the farm under chapter 3 of 
     subtitle C.
       (B) Any acreage on the farm enrolled in the conservation 
     reserve program or wetlands reserve program under chapter 1 
     of subtitle D of title XII of the Food Security Act of 1985 
     (16 U.S.C. 3830 et seq.).
       (C) Any other acreage on the farm enrolled in a 
     conservation program for which payments are made in exchange 
     for not producing an agricultural commodity on the acreage.
       (3) Exception for double-cropped acreage.--In applying 
     paragraph (1), the Secretary shall make an exception in the 
     case of double cropping, as determined by the Secretary.

     SEC. 104. AVAILABILITY OF FIXED, DECOUPLED PAYMENTS.

       (a) Payment Required.--For each of the 2002 through 2011 
     crop years of each covered commodity, the Secretary shall 
     make fixed, decoupled payments to eligible producers.
       (b) Payment Rate.--The payment rates used to make fixed, 
     decoupled payments with respect to covered commodities for a 
     crop year are as follows:
       (1) Wheat, $0.53 per bushel.
       (2) Corn, $0.30 per bushel.
       (3) Grain sorghum, $0.36 per bushel.
       (4) Barley, $0.25 per bushel.
       (5) Oats, $0.025 per bushel.
       (6) Upland cotton, $0.0667 per pound.
       (7) Rice, $2.35 per hundredweight.
       (8) Soybeans, $0.42 per bushel.
       (9) Other oilseeds, $0.0074 per pound.
       (c) Payment Amount.--The amount of the fixed, decoupled 
     payment to be paid to the eligible producers on a farm for a 
     covered commodity for a crop year shall be equal to the 
     product of the following:
       (1) The payment rate specified in subsection (b).
       (2) The payment acres of the covered commodity on the farm.
       (3) The payment yield for the covered commodity for the 
     farm.
       (d) Time for Payment.--
       (1) General rule.--Fixed, decoupled payments shall be paid 
     not later than September 30 of each of fiscal years 2002 
     through 2011. In the case of the 2002 crop, payments may 
     begin to be made on or after December 1, 2001.
       (2) Advance payments.--At the option of an eligible 
     producer, 50 percent of the fixed, decoupled payment for a 
     fiscal year shall be paid on a date selected by the producer. 
     The selected date shall be on or after December 1 of that 
     fiscal year, and the producer may change the selected date 
     for a subsequent fiscal year by providing advance notice to 
     the Secretary.
       (3) Repayment of advance payments.--If a producer that 
     receives an advance fixed, decoupled payment for a fiscal 
     year ceases to be an eligible producer before the date the 
     fixed, decoupled payment would otherwise have been made by 
     the Secretary under paragraph (1), the producer shall be 
     responsible for repaying the Secretary the full amount of the 
     advance payment.

     SEC. 105. AVAILABILITY OF COUNTER-CYCLICAL PAYMENTS.

       (a) Payment Required.--The Secretary shall make counter-
     cyclical payments with respect to a covered commodity 
     whenever the Secretary determines that the effective price 
     for the commodity is less than the target price for the 
     commodity.
       (b) Effective Price.--For purposes of subsection (a), the 
     effective price for a covered commodity is equal to the sum 
     of the following:
       (1) The higher of the following:
       (A) The national average market price received by producers 
     during the 12-month marketing year for the commodity, as 
     determined by the Secretary.
       (B) The national average loan rate for a marketing 
     assistance loan for the covered commodity in effect for the 
     same period under subtitle B.
       (2) The payment rate in effect for the covered commodity 
     under section 104 for the purpose of making fixed, decoupled 
     payments with respect to the commodity.
       (c) Target Price.--For purposes of subsection (a), the 
     target prices for covered commodities are as follows:
       (1) Wheat, $4.04 per bushel.
       (2) Corn, $2.78 per bushel.
       (3) Grain sorghum, $2.64 per bushel.
       (4) Barley, $2.39 per bushel.
       (5) Oats, $1.47 per bushel.
       (6) Upland cotton, $0.736 per pound.
       (7) Rice, $10.82 per hundredweight.
       (8) Soybeans, $5.86 per bushel.
       (9) Other oilseeds, $0.1036 per pound.
       (d) Payment Rate.--The payment rate used to make counter-
     cyclical payments with respect to a covered commodity for a 
     crop year shall be equal to the difference between--
       (1) the target price for the commodity; and
       (2) the effective price determined under subsection (b) for 
     the commodity.

[[Page H6191]]

       (e) Payment Amount.--The amount of the counter-cyclical 
     payment to be paid to the eligible producers on a farm for a 
     covered commodity for a crop year shall be equal to the 
     product of the following:
       (1) The payment rate specified in subsection (d).
       (2) The payment acres of the covered commodity on the farm.
       (3) The payment yield for the covered commodity for the 
     farm.
       (f) Time for Payments.--
       (1) General rule.--The Secretary shall make counter-
     cyclical payments under this section for a crop of a covered 
     commodity as soon as possible after determining under 
     subsection (a) that such payments are required for that crop 
     year.
       (2) Partial payment.--The Secretary may permit, and, if so 
     permitted, an eligible producer may elect to receive, up to 
     40 percent of the projected counter-cyclical payment, as 
     determined by the Secretary, to be made under this section 
     for a crop of a covered commodity upon completion of the 
     first six months of the marketing year for that crop. The 
     producer shall repay to the Secretary the amount, if any, by 
     which the partial payment exceeds the actual counter-cyclical 
     payment to be made for that marketing year.
       (g) Special Rule for Currently Undesignated Oilseed.--If 
     the Secretary uses the authority under section 100(8) to 
     designate another oilseed as an oilseed for which counter-
     cyclical payments may be made, the Secretary may modify the 
     target price specified in subsection (c)(9) that would 
     otherwise apply to that oilseed as the Secretary considers 
     appropriate.
       (h) Special Rule for Barley Used Only for Feed Purposes.--
     For purposes of calculating the effective price for barley 
     under subsection (b), the Secretary shall use the loan rate 
     in effect for barley under section 122(b)(3), except, in the 
     case of producers who received the higher loan rate provided 
     under such section for barley used only for feed purposes, 
     the Secretary shall use that higher loan rate.

     SEC. 106. PRODUCER AGREEMENT REQUIRED AS CONDITION ON 
                   PROVISION OF FIXED, DECOUPLED PAYMENTS AND 
                   COUNTER-CYCLICAL PAYMENTS.

       (a) Compliance With Certain Requirements.--
       (1) Requirements.--Before the producers on a farm may 
     receive fixed, decoupled payments or counter-cyclical 
     payments with respect to the farm, the producers shall agree, 
     in exchange for the payments--
       (A) to comply with applicable conservation requirements 
     under subtitle B of title XII of the Food Security Act of 
     1985 (16 U.S.C. 3811 et seq.);
       (B) to comply with applicable wetland protection 
     requirements under subtitle C of title XII of the Act (16 
     U.S.C. 3821 et seq.);
       (C) to comply with the planting flexibility requirements of 
     section 107; and
       (D) to use the land on the farm, in an amount equal to the 
     base acres, for an agricultural or conserving use, and not 
     for a nonagricultural commercial or industrial use, as 
     determined by the Secretary.
       (2) Compliance.--The Secretary may issue such rules as the 
     Secretary considers necessary to ensure producer compliance 
     with the requirements of paragraph (1).
       (b) Effect of Foreclosure.--A producer may not be required 
     to make repayments to the Secretary of fixed, decoupled 
     payments and counter-cyclical payments if the farm has been 
     foreclosed on and the Secretary determines that forgiving the 
     repayments is appropriate to provide fair and equitable 
     treatment. This subsection shall not void the 
     responsibilities of the producer under subsection (a) if the 
     producer continues or resumes operation, or control, of the 
     farm. On the resumption of operation or control over the farm 
     by the producer, the requirements of subsection (a) in effect 
     on the date of the foreclosure shall apply.
       (c) Transfer or Change of Interest in Farm.--
       (1) Termination.--Except as provided in paragraph (4), a 
     transfer of (or change in) the interest of a producer in base 
     acres for which fixed, decoupled payments or counter-cyclical 
     payments are made shall result in the termination of the 
     payments with respect to the base acres, unless the 
     transferee or owner of the acreage agrees to assume all 
     obligations under subsection (a). The termination shall be 
     effective on the date of the transfer or change.
       (2) Transfer of payment base.--There is no restriction on 
     the transfer of a farm's base acres or payment yield as part 
     of a change in the producers on the farm.
       (3) Modification.--At the request of the transferee or 
     owner, the Secretary may modify the requirements of 
     subsection (a) if the modifications are consistent with the 
     objectives of such subsection, as determined by the 
     Secretary.
       (4) Exception.--If a producer entitled to a fixed, 
     decoupled payment or counter-cyclical payment dies, becomes 
     incompetent, or is otherwise unable to receive the payment, 
     the Secretary shall make the payment, in accordance with 
     regulations prescribed by the Secretary.
       (d) Acreage Reports.--
       (1) In general.--As a condition on the receipt of any 
     benefits under this subtitle or subtitle B, the Secretary 
     shall require producers to submit to the Secretary acreage 
     reports.
       (2) Conforming Amendment.--Section 15 of the Agricultural 
     Marketing Act (12 U.S.C. 1141j) is amended by striking 
     subsection (d).
       (e) Review.--A determination of the Secretary under this 
     section shall be considered to be an adverse decision for 
     purposes of the availability of administrative review of the 
     determination.

     SEC. 107. PLANTING FLEXIBILITY.

       (a) Permitted Crops.--Subject to subsection (b), any 
     commodity or crop may be planted on base acres on a farm.
       (b) Limitations and Exceptions Regarding Certain 
     Commodities.--
       (1) Limitations.--The planting of the following 
     agricultural commodities shall be prohibited on base acres:
       (A) Fruits.
       (B) Vegetables (other than lentils, mung beans, and dry 
     peas).
       (C) Wild rice.
       (2) Exceptions.--Paragraph (1) shall not limit the planting 
     of an agricultural commodity specified in such paragraph--
       (A) in any region in which there is a history of double-
     cropping of covered commodities with agricultural commodities 
     specified in paragraph (1), as determined by the Secretary, 
     in which case the double-cropping shall be permitted;
       (B) on a farm that the Secretary determines has a history 
     of planting agricultural commodities specified in paragraph 
     (1) on base acres, except that fixed, decoupled payments and 
     counter-cyclical payments shall be reduced by an acre for 
     each acre planted to such an agricultural commodity; or
       (C) by a producer who the Secretary determines has an 
     established planting history of a specific agricultural 
     commodity specified in paragraph (1), except that--
       (i) the quantity planted may not exceed the producer's 
     average annual planting history of such agricultural 
     commodity in the 1991 through 1995 crop years (excluding any 
     crop year in which no plantings were made), as determined by 
     the Secretary; and
       (ii) fixed, decoupled payments and counter-cyclical 
     payments shall be reduced by an acre for each acre planted to 
     such agricultural commodity.

     SEC. 108. RELATION TO REMAINING PAYMENT AUTHORITY UNDER 
                   PRODUCTION FLEXIBILITY CONTRACTS.

       (a) Termination of Superseded Payment Authority.--
     Notwithstanding section 113(a)(7) of the Federal Agriculture 
     Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7213(a)(7)) or 
     any other provision of law, the Secretary shall not make 
     payments for fiscal year 2002 after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act under production flexibility contracts entered 
     into under section 111 of such Act (7 U.S.C. 7211).
       (b) Contract Payments Made Before Enactment.--If, on or 
     before the date of the enactment of this Act, a producer 
     receives all or any portion of the payment authorized for 
     fiscal year 2002 under a production flexibility contract, the 
     Secretary shall reduce the amount of the fixed, decoupled 
     payment otherwise due the producer for that same fiscal year 
     by the amount of the fiscal year 2002 payment previously 
     received by the producer.

     SEC. 109. PAYMENT LIMITATIONS.

       Sections 1001 through 1001C of the Food Security Act of 
     1985 (7 U.S.C. 1308 through 1308-3) shall apply to fixed, 
     decoupled payments and counter-cyclical payments.

     SEC. 110. PERIOD OF EFFECTIVENESS.

       This subtitle shall be effective beginning with the 2002 
     crop year of each covered commodity through the 2011 crop 
     year.

  Subtitle B--Marketing Assistance Loans and Loan Deficiency Payments

     SEC. 121. AVAILABILITY OF NONRECOURSE MARKETING ASSISTANCE 
                   LOANS FOR COVERED COMMODITIES.

       (a) Nonrecourse Loans Available.--
       (1) Availability.--For each of the 2002 through 2011 crops 
     of each covered commodity, the Secretary shall make available 
     to producers on a farm nonrecourse marketing assistance loans 
     for covered commodities produced on the farm. The loans shall 
     be made under terms and conditions that are prescribed by the 
     Secretary and at the loan rate established under section 122 
     for the covered commodity.
       (2) Inclusion of extra long staple cotton.--In this 
     subtitle, the term ``covered commodity'' includes extra long 
     staple cotton.
       (b) Eligible Production.--Any production of a covered 
     commodity on a farm shall be eligible for a marketing 
     assistance loan under subsection (a).
       (c) Treatment of Certain Commingled Commodities.--In 
     carrying out this subtitle, the Secretary shall make loans to 
     a producer that is otherwise eligible to obtain a marketing 
     assistance loan, but for the fact the covered commodity owned 
     by the producer is commingled with covered commodities of 
     other producers in facilities unlicensed for the storage of 
     agricultural commodities by the Secretary or a State 
     licensing authority, if the producer obtaining the loan 
     agrees to immediately redeem the loan collateral in 
     accordance with section 166 of the Federal Agriculture 
     Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7286).
       (d) Compliance With Conservation and Wetlands 
     Requirements.--As a condition of the receipt of a marketing 
     assistance loan under subsection (a), the producer shall 
     comply with applicable conservation requirements under 
     subtitle B of title XII of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 
     U.S.C. 3811 et seq.) and applicable wetland protection 
     requirements under subtitle C of title XII of

[[Page H6192]]

     the Act (16 U.S.C. 3821 et seq.) during the term of the loan.
       (e) Definition of Extra Long Staple Cotton.--In this 
     subtitle, the term ``extra long staple cotton'' means cotton 
     that--
       (1) is produced from pure strain varieties of the 
     Barbadense species or any hybrid thereof, or other similar 
     types of extra long staple cotton, designated by the 
     Secretary, having characteristics needed for various end uses 
     for which United States upland cotton is not suitable and 
     grown in irrigated cotton-growing regions of the United 
     States designated by the Secretary or other areas designated 
     by the Secretary as suitable for the production of the 
     varieties or types; and
       (2) is ginned on a roller-type gin or, if authorized by the 
     Secretary, ginned on another type gin for experimental 
     purposes.
       (f) Termination of Superseded Loan Authority.--
     Notwithstanding section 131 of the Federal Agriculture 
     Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7231), 
     nonrecourse marketing assistance loans shall not be made for 
     the 2002 crop of covered commodities under subtitle C of 
     title I of such Act.

     SEC. 122. LOAN RATES FOR NONRECOURSE MARKETING ASSISTANCE 
                   LOANS.

       (a) Wheat.--
       (1) Loan rate.--Subject to paragraph (2), the loan rate for 
     a marketing assistance loan under section 121 for wheat shall 
     be--
       (A) not less than 85 percent of the simple average price 
     received by producers of wheat, as determined by the 
     Secretary, during the marketing years for the immediately 
     preceding five crops of wheat, excluding the year in which 
     the average price was the highest and the year in which the 
     average price was the lowest in the period; but
       (B) not more than $2.58 per bushel.
       (2) Stocks to use ratio adjustment.--If the Secretary 
     estimates for any marketing year that the ratio of ending 
     stocks of wheat to total use for the marketing year will be--
       (A) equal to or greater than 30 percent, the Secretary may 
     reduce the loan rate for wheat for the corresponding crop by 
     an amount not to exceed 10 percent in any year;
       (B) less than 30 percent but not less than 15 percent, the 
     Secretary may reduce the loan rate for wheat for the 
     corresponding crop by an amount not to exceed 5 percent in 
     any year; or
       (C) less than 15 percent, the Secretary may not reduce the 
     loan rate for wheat for the corresponding crop.
       (b) Feed Grains.--
       (1) Loan rate for corn and grain sorghum.--Subject to 
     paragraph (2), the loan rate for a marketing assistance loan 
     under section 121 for corn and grain sorghum shall be--
       (A) not less than 85 percent of the simple average price 
     received by producers of corn or grain sorghum, respectively, 
     as determined by the Secretary, during the marketing years 
     for the immediately preceding five crops of the covered 
     commodity, excluding the year in which the average price was 
     the highest and the year in which the average price was the 
     lowest in the period; but
       (B) not more than $1.89 per bushel.
       (2) Stocks to use ratio adjustment.--If the Secretary 
     estimates for any marketing year that the ratio of ending 
     stocks of corn or grain sorghum to total use for the 
     marketing year will be--
       (A) equal to or greater than 25 percent, the Secretary may 
     reduce the loan rate for the covered commodity for the 
     corresponding crop by an amount not to exceed 10 percent in 
     any year;
       (B) less than 25 percent but not less than 12.5 percent, 
     the Secretary may reduce the loan rate for the covered 
     commodity for the corresponding crop by an amount not to 
     exceed 5 percent in any year; or
       (C) less than 12.5 percent, the Secretary may not reduce 
     the loan rate for the covered commodity for the corresponding 
     crop.
       (3) Other feed grains.--The loan rate for a marketing 
     assistance loan under section 121 for barley and oats shall 
     be--
       (A) established at such level as the Secretary determines 
     is fair and reasonable in relation to the rate that loans are 
     made available for corn, taking into consideration the 
     feeding value of the commodity in relation to corn; but
       (B) not more than--
       (i) $1.65 per bushel for barley, except not more than $1.70 
     per bushel for barley used only for feed purposes, as 
     determined by the Secretary; and
       (ii) $1.21 per bushel for oats.
       (c) Upland Cotton.--
       (1) Loan rate.--Subject to paragraph (2), the loan rate for 
     a marketing assistance loan under section 121 for upland 
     cotton shall be established by the Secretary at such loan 
     rate, per pound, as will reflect for the base quality of 
     upland cotton, as determined by the Secretary, at average 
     locations in the United States a rate that is not less than 
     the smaller of--
       (A) 85 percent of the average price (weighted by market and 
     month) of the base quality of cotton as quoted in the 
     designated United States spot markets during three years of 
     the five-year period ending July 31 of the year preceding the 
     year in which the crop is planted, excluding the year in 
     which the average price was the highest and the year in which 
     the average price was the lowest in the period; or
       (B) 90 percent of the average, for the 15-week period 
     beginning July 1 of the year preceding the year in which the 
     crop is planted, of the five lowest-priced growths of the 
     growths quoted for Middling 1\3/32\-inch cotton C.I.F. 
     Northern Europe (adjusted downward by the average difference 
     during the period April 15 through October 15 of the year 
     preceding the year in which the crop is planted between the 
     average Northern European price quotation of such quality of 
     cotton and the market quotations in the designated United 
     States spot markets for the base quality of upland cotton), 
     as determined by the Secretary.
       (2) Limitations.--The loan rate for a marketing assistance 
     loan for upland cotton shall not be less than $0.50 per pound 
     or more than $0.5192 per pound.
       (d) Extra Long Staple Cotton.--The loan rate for a 
     marketing assistance loan under section 121 for extra long 
     staple cotton shall be--
       (1) not less than 85 percent of the simple average price 
     received by producers of extra long staple cotton, as 
     determined by the Secretary, during three years of the five-
     year period ending July 31 of the year preceding the year in 
     which the crop is planted, excluding the year in which the 
     average price was the highest and the year in which the 
     average price was the lowest in the period; but
       (2) not more than $0.7965 per pound.
       (e) Rice.--The loan rate for a marketing assistance loan 
     under section 121 for rice shall be $6.50 per hundredweight.
       (f) Oilseeds.--
       (1) Soybeans.--The loan rate for a marketing assistance 
     loan under section 121 for soybeans shall be--
       (A) not less than 85 percent of the simple average price 
     received by producers of soybeans, as determined by the 
     Secretary, during the marketing years for the immediately 
     preceding five crops of soybeans, excluding the year in which 
     the average price was the highest and the year in which the 
     average price was the lowest in the period; but
       (B) not more than $4.92 per bushel.
       (2) Other oilseeds.--The loan rate for a marketing 
     assistance loan under section 121 for other oilseeds shall 
     be--
       (A) not less than 85 percent of the simple average price 
     received by producers of the other oilseed, as determined by 
     the Secretary, during the marketing years for the immediately 
     preceding five crops of the other oilseed, excluding the year 
     in which the average price was the highest and the year in 
     which the average price was the lowest in the period; but
       (B) not more than $0.087 per pound.

     SEC. 123. TERM OF LOANS.

       (a) Term of Loan.--In the case of each covered commodity 
     (other than upland cotton or extra long staple cotton), a 
     marketing assistance loan under section 121 shall have a term 
     of nine months beginning on the first day of the first month 
     after the month in which the loan is made.
       (b) Special Rule for Cotton.--A marketing assistance loan 
     for upland cotton or extra long staple cotton shall have a 
     term of 10 months beginning on the first day of the month in 
     which the loan is made.
       (c) Extensions Prohibited.--The Secretary may not extend 
     the term of a marketing assistance loan for any covered 
     commodity.

     SEC. 124. REPAYMENT OF LOANS.

       (a) Repayment Rates for Wheat, Feed Grains, and Oilseeds.--
     The Secretary shall permit a producer to repay a marketing 
     assistance loan under section 121 for wheat, corn, grain 
     sorghum, barley, oats, and oilseeds at a rate that is the 
     lesser of--
       (1) the loan rate established for the commodity under 
     section 122, plus interest (as determined by the Secretary); 
     or
       (2) a rate that the Secretary determines will--
       (A) minimize potential loan forfeitures;
       (B) minimize the accumulation of stocks of the commodity by 
     the Federal Government;
       (C) minimize the cost incurred by the Federal Government in 
     storing the commodity; and
       (D) allow the commodity produced in the United States to be 
     marketed freely and competitively, both domestically and 
     internationally.
       (b) Repayment Rates for Upland Cotton and Rice.--The 
     Secretary shall permit producers to repay a marketing 
     assistance loan under section 121 for upland cotton and rice 
     at a rate that is the lesser of--
       (1) the loan rate established for the commodity under 
     section 122, plus interest (as determined by the Secretary); 
     or
       (2) the prevailing world market price for the commodity 
     (adjusted to United States quality and location), as 
     determined by the Secretary.
       (c) Repayment Rates for Extra Long Staple Cotton.--
     Repayment of a marketing assistance loan for extra long 
     staple cotton shall be at the loan rate established for the 
     commodity under section 122, plus interest (as determined by 
     the Secretary).
       (d) Prevailing World Market Price.--For purposes of this 
     section and section 127, the Secretary shall prescribe by 
     regulation--
       (1) a formula to determine the prevailing world market 
     price for each covered commodity, adjusted to United States 
     quality and location; and
       (2) a mechanism by which the Secretary shall announce 
     periodically the prevailing world market price for each 
     covered commodity.
       (e) Adjustment of Prevailing World Market Price for Upland 
     Cotton.--
       (1) In general.--During the period beginning on the date of 
     the enactment of this Act and ending July 31, 2012, the 
     prevailing world market price for upland cotton (adjusted to

[[Page H6193]]

     United States quality and location) established under 
     subsection (d) shall be further adjusted if--
       (A) the adjusted prevailing world market price is less than 
     115 percent of the loan rate for upland cotton established 
     under section 122, as determined by the Secretary; and
       (B) the Friday through Thursday average price quotation for 
     the lowest-priced United States growth as quoted for Middling 
     (M) 1\3/32\-inch cotton delivered C.I.F. Northern Europe is 
     greater than the Friday through Thursday average price of the 
     5 lowest-priced growths of upland cotton, as quoted for 
     Middling (M) 1\3/32\-inch cotton, delivered C.I.F. Northern 
     Europe (referred to in this section as the ``Northern Europe 
     price'').
       (2) Further adjustment.--Except as provided in paragraph 
     (3), the adjusted prevailing world market price for upland 
     cotton shall be further adjusted on the basis of some or all 
     of the following data, as available:
       (A) The United States share of world exports.
       (B) The current level of cotton export sales and cotton 
     export shipments.
       (C) Other data determined by the Secretary to be relevant 
     in establishing an accurate prevailing world market price for 
     upland cotton (adjusted to United States quality and 
     location).
       (3) Limitation on further adjustment.--The adjustment under 
     paragraph (2) may not exceed the difference between--
       (A) the Friday through Thursday average price for the 
     lowest-priced United States growth as quoted for Middling 
     1\3/32\-inch cotton delivered C.I.F. Northern Europe; and
       (B) the Northern Europe price.
       (f) Time for Fixing Repayment Rate.--In the case of a 
     producer that marketed or otherwise lost beneficial interest 
     in a covered commodity before repaying the marketing 
     assistance loan made under section 121 with respect to the 
     commodity, the Secretary shall permit the producer to repay 
     the loan at the lowest repayment rate that was in effect for 
     that covered commodity under this section as of the date that 
     the producer lost beneficial interest, as determined by the 
     Secretary.

     SEC. 125. LOAN DEFICIENCY PAYMENTS.

       (a) Availability of Loan Deficiency Payments.--Except as 
     provided in subsection (d), the Secretary may make loan 
     deficiency payments available to producers who, although 
     eligible to obtain a marketing assistance loan under section 
     121 with respect to a covered commodity, agree to forgo 
     obtaining the loan for the commodity in return for payments 
     under this section.
       (b) Computation.--A loan deficiency payment under this 
     section shall be computed by multiplying--
       (1) the loan payment rate determined under subsection (c) 
     for the covered commodity; by
       (2) the quantity of the covered commodity produced by the 
     eligible producers, excluding any quantity for which the 
     producers obtain a loan under section 121.
       (c) Loan Payment Rate.--For purposes of this section, the 
     loan payment rate shall be the amount by which--
       (1) the loan rate established under section 122 for the 
     covered commodity; exceeds
       (2) the rate at which a loan for the commodity may be 
     repaid under section 124.
       (d) Exception for Extra Long Staple Cotton.--This section 
     shall not apply with respect to extra long staple cotton.
       (e) Time for Payment.--The Secretary shall make a payment 
     under this section to a producer with respect to a quantity 
     of a covered commodity as of the earlier of the following:
       (1) The date on which the producer marketed or otherwise 
     lost beneficial interest in the commodity, as determined by 
     the Secretary.
       (2) The date the producer requests the payment.
       (f) Continuation of Special LDP Rule for 2001Crop Year.--
     Section 135(a)(2) of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and 
     Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7235(a)(2)) is amended by 
     striking ``2000 crop year'' and inserting ``2000 and 2001 
     crop years''.

     SEC. 126. PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF LOAN DEFICIENCY PAYMENTS FOR 
                   GRAZED ACREAGE.

       (a) Eligible Producers.--Effective for the 2002 through 
     2011 crop years, in the case of a producer that would be 
     eligible for a loan deficiency payment under section 125 for 
     wheat, barley, or oats, but that elects to use acreage 
     planted to the wheat, barley, or oats for the grazing of 
     livestock, the Secretary shall make a payment to the producer 
     under this section if the producer enters into an agreement 
     with the Secretary to forgo any other harvesting of the 
     wheat, barley, or oats on that acreage.
       (b) Payment Amount.--The amount of a payment made to a 
     producer on a farm under this section shall be equal to the 
     amount determined by multiplying--
       (1) the loan deficiency payment rate determined under 
     section 125(c) in effect, as of the date of the agreement, 
     for the county in which the farm is located; by
       (2) the payment quantity determined by multiplying--
       (A) the quantity of the grazed acreage on the farm with 
     respect to which the producer elects to forgo harvesting of 
     wheat, barley, or oats; and
       (B) the payment yield for that covered commodity on the 
     farm.
       (c) Time, Manner, and Availability of Payment.--
       (1) Time and manner.--A payment under this section shall be 
     made at the same time and in the same manner as loan 
     deficiency payments are made under section 125.
       (2) Availability.--The Secretary shall establish an 
     availability period for the payment authorized by this 
     section that is consistent with the availability period for 
     wheat, barley, and oats established by the Secretary for 
     marketing assistance loans authorized by this subtitle.
       (d) Prohibition on Crop Insurance or Noninsured Crop 
     Assistance.--A 2002 through 2011 crop of wheat, barley, or 
     oats planted on acreage that a producer elects, in the 
     agreement required by subsection (a), to use for the grazing 
     of livestock in lieu of any other harvesting of the crop 
     shall not be eligible for insurance under the Federal Crop 
     Insurance Act (7 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) or noninsured crop 
     assistance under section 196 of the Federal Agriculture 
     Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7333).

     SEC. 127. SPECIAL MARKETING LOAN PROVISIONS FOR UPLAND 
                   COTTON.

       (a) Cotton User Marketing Certificates.--
       (1) Issuance.--During the period beginning on the date of 
     the enactment of this Act and ending July 31, 2012, the 
     Secretary shall issue marketing certificates or cash 
     payments, at the option of the recipient, to domestic users 
     and exporters for documented purchases by domestic users and 
     sales for export by exporters made in the week following a 
     consecutive four-week period in which--
       (A) the Friday through Thursday average price quotation for 
     the lowest-priced United States growth, as quoted for 
     Middling (M) 1\3/32\-inch cotton, delivered C.I.F. Northern 
     Europe exceeds the Northern Europe price by more than 1.25 
     cents per pound; and
       (B) the prevailing world market price for upland cotton 
     (adjusted to United States quality and location) does not 
     exceed 134 percent of the loan rate for upland cotton 
     established under section 122.
       (2) Value of certificates or payments.--The value of the 
     marketing certificates or cash payments shall be based on the 
     amount of the difference (reduced by 1.25 cents per pound) in 
     the prices during the fourth week of the consecutive four-
     week period multiplied by the quantity of upland cotton 
     included in the documented sales.
       (3) Administration of marketing certificates.--
       (A) Redemption, marketing, or exchange.--The Secretary 
     shall establish procedures for redeeming marketing 
     certificates for cash or marketing or exchange of the 
     certificates for agricultural commodities owned by the 
     Commodity Credit Corporation or pledged to the Commodity 
     Credit Corporation as collateral for a loan in such manner, 
     and at such price levels, as the Secretary determines will 
     best effectuate the purposes of cotton user marketing 
     certificates, including enhancing the competitiveness and 
     marketability of United States cotton. Any price restrictions 
     that would otherwise apply to the disposition of agricultural 
     commodities by the Commodity Credit Corporation shall not 
     apply to the redemption of certificates under this 
     subsection.
       (B) Designation of commodities and products.--To the extent 
     practicable, the Secretary shall permit owners of 
     certificates to designate the commodities and products, 
     including storage sites, the owners would prefer to receive 
     in exchange for certificates
       (C) Transfers.--Marketing certificates issued to domestic 
     users and exporters of upland cotton may be transferred to 
     other persons in accordance with regulations issued by the 
     Secretary.
       (b) Special Import Quota.--
       (1) Establishment.--
       (A) In general.--The President shall carry out an import 
     quota program during the period beginning on the date of the 
     enactment of this Act and ending July 31, 2012, as provided 
     in this subsection.
       (B) Program requirements.--Except as provided in 
     subparagraph (C), whenever the Secretary determines and 
     announces that for any consecutive four-week period, the 
     Friday through Thursday average price quotation for the 
     lowest-priced United States growth, as quoted for Middling 
     (M) 1\3/32\-inch cotton, delivered C.I.F. Northern Europe, 
     adjusted for the value of any certificate issued under 
     subsection (a), exceeds the Northern Europe price by more 
     than 1.25 cents per pound, there shall immediately be in 
     effect a special import quota.
       (C) Tight domestic supply.--During any month for which the 
     Secretary estimates the season-ending United States upland 
     cotton stocks-to-use ratio, as determined under subparagraph 
     (D), to be below 16 percent, the Secretary, in making the 
     determination under subparagraph (B), shall not adjust the 
     Friday through Thursday average price quotation for the 
     lowest-priced United States growth, as quoted for Middling 
     (M) 1\3/32\-inch cotton, delivered C.I.F. Northern Europe, 
     for the value of any certificates issued under subsection 
     (a).
       (D) Season-ending united states stocks-to-use ratio.--For 
     the purposes of making estimates under subparagraph (C), the 
     Secretary shall, on a monthly basis, estimate and report the 
     season-ending United States upland cotton stocks-to-use 
     ratio, excluding projected raw cotton imports but including 
     the quantity of raw cotton that has been imported into the 
     United States during the marketing year.
       (2) Quantity.--The quota shall be equal to one week's 
     consumption of upland cotton by

[[Page H6194]]

     domestic mills at the seasonally adjusted average rate of the 
     most recent three months for which data are available.
       (3) Application.--The quota shall apply to upland cotton 
     purchased not later than 90 days after the date of the 
     Secretary's announcement under paragraph (1) and entered into 
     the United States not later than 180 days after the date.
       (4) Overlap.--A special quota period may be established 
     that overlaps any existing quota period if required by 
     paragraph (1), except that a special quota period may not be 
     established under this subsection if a quota period has been 
     established under subsection (c).
       (5) Preferential tariff treatment.--The quantity under a 
     special import quota shall be considered to be an in-quota 
     quantity for purposes of--
       (A) section 213(d) of the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery 
     Act (19 U.S.C. 2703(d));
       (B) section 204 of the Andean Trade Preference Act (19 
     U.S.C. 3203);
       (C) section 503(d) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 
     2463(d)); and
       (D) General Note 3(a)(iv) to the Harmonized Tariff 
     Schedule.
       (6) Definition.--In this subsection, the term ``special 
     import quota'' means a quantity of imports that is not 
     subject to the over-quota tariff rate of a tariff-rate quota.
       (7) Limitation.--The quantity of cotton entered into the 
     United States during any marketing year under the special 
     import quota established under this subsection may not exceed 
     the equivalent of five week's consumption of upland cotton by 
     domestic mills at the seasonally adjusted average rate of the 
     three months immediately preceding the first special import 
     quota established in any marketing year.
       (c) Limited Global Import Quota for Upland Cotton.--
       (1) In general.--The President shall carry out an import 
     quota program that provides that whenever the Secretary 
     determines and announces that the average price of the base 
     quality of upland cotton, as determined by the Secretary, in 
     the designated spot markets for a month exceeded 130 percent 
     of the average price of such quality of cotton in the markets 
     for the preceding 36 months, notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, there shall immediately be in effect a 
     limited global import quota subject to the following 
     conditions:
       (A) Quantity.--The quantity of the quota shall be equal to 
     21 days of domestic mill consumption of upland cotton at the 
     seasonally adjusted average rate of the most recent three 
     months for which data are available.
       (B) Quantity if prior quota.--If a quota has been 
     established under this subsection during the preceding 12 
     months, the quantity of the quota next established under this 
     subsection shall be the smaller of 21 days of domestic mill 
     consumption calculated under subparagraph (A) or the quantity 
     required to increase the supply to 130 percent of the demand.
       (C) Preferential tariff treatment.--The quantity under a 
     limited global import quota shall be considered to be an in-
     quota quantity for purposes of--
       (i) section 213(d) of the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery 
     Act (19 U.S.C. 2703(d));
       (ii) section 204 of the Andean Trade Preference Act (19 
     U.S.C. 3203);
       (iii) section 503(d) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 
     2463(d)); and
       (iv) General Note 3(a)(iv) to the Harmonized Tariff 
     Schedule.
       (D) Definitions.--In this subsection:
       (i) Supply.--The term ``supply'' means, using the latest 
     official data of the Bureau of the Census, the Department of 
     Agriculture, and the Department of the Treasury--

       (I) the carry-over of upland cotton at the beginning of the 
     marketing year (adjusted to 480-pound bales) in which the 
     quota is established;
       (II) production of the current crop; and
       (III) imports to the latest date available during the 
     marketing year.

       (ii) Demand.--The term ``demand'' means--

       (I) the average seasonally adjusted annual rate of domestic 
     mill consumption during the most recent three months for 
     which data are available; and
       (II) the larger of--

       (aa) average exports of upland cotton during the preceding 
     six marketing years; or
       (bb) cumulative exports of upland cotton plus outstanding 
     export sales for the marketing year in which the quota is 
     established.
       (iii) Limited global import quota.--The term ``limited 
     global import quota'' means a quantity of imports that is not 
     subject to the over-quota tariff rate of a tariff-rate quota.
       (E) Quota entry period.--When a quota is established under 
     this subsection, cotton may be entered under the quota during 
     the 90-day period beginning on the date the quota is 
     established by the Secretary.
       (2) No overlap.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a quota 
     period may not be established that overlaps an existing quota 
     period or a special quota period established under subsection 
     (b).

     SEC. 128. SPECIAL COMPETITIVE PROVISIONS FOR EXTRA LONG 
                   STAPLE COTTON.

       (a) Competitiveness Program.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, during the period beginning on the date of 
     the enactment of this Act and ending on July 31, 2012, the 
     Secretary shall carry out a program to maintain and expand 
     the domestic use of extra long staple cotton produced in the 
     United States, to increase exports of extra long staple 
     cotton produced in the United States, and to ensure that 
     extra long staple cotton produced in the United States 
     remains competitive in world markets.
       (b) Payments Under Program; Trigger.--Under the program, 
     the Secretary shall make payments available under this 
     section whenever--
       (1) for a consecutive four-week period, the world market 
     price for the lowest priced competing growth of extra long 
     staple cotton (adjusted to United States quality and location 
     and for other factors affecting the competitiveness of such 
     cotton), as determined by the Secretary, is below the 
     prevailing United States price for a competing growth of 
     extra long staple cotton; and
       (2) the lowest priced competing growth of extra long staple 
     cotton (adjusted to United States quality and location and 
     for other factors affecting the competitiveness of such 
     cotton), as determined by the Secretary, is less than 134 
     percent of the loan rate for extra long staple cotton.
       (c) Eligible Recipients.--The Secretary shall make payments 
     available under this section to domestic users of extra long 
     staple cotton produced in the United States and exporters of 
     extra long staple cotton produced in the United States who 
     enter into an agreement with the Commodity Credit Corporation 
     to participate in the program under this section.
       (d) Payment Amount.--Payments under this section shall be 
     based on the amount of the difference in the prices referred 
     to in subsection (b)(1) during the fourth week of the 
     consecutive four-week period multiplied by the amount of 
     documented purchases by domestic users and sales for export 
     by exporters made in the week following such a consecutive 
     four-week period.
       (e) Form of Payment.--Payments under this section shall be 
     made through the issuance of cash or marketing certificates, 
     at the option of eligible recipients of the payments.

     SEC. 129. AVAILABILITY OF RECOURSE LOANS FOR HIGH MOISTURE 
                   FEED GRAINS AND SEED COTTON AND OTHER FIBERS.

       (a) High Moisture Feed Grains.--
       (1) Recourse loans available.--For each of the 2002 through 
     2011 crops of corn and grain sorghum, the Secretary shall 
     make available recourse loans, as determined by the 
     Secretary, to producers on a farm who--
       (A) normally harvest all or a portion of their crop of corn 
     or grain sorghum in a high moisture state;
       (B) present--
       (i) certified scale tickets from an inspected, certified 
     commercial scale, including a licensed warehouse, feedlot, 
     feed mill, distillery, or other similar entity approved by 
     the Secretary, pursuant to regulations issued by the 
     Secretary; or
       (ii) field or other physical measurements of the standing 
     or stored crop in regions of the United States, as determined 
     by the Secretary, that do not have certified commercial 
     scales from which certified scale tickets may be obtained 
     within reasonable proximity of harvest operation;
       (C) certify that they were the owners of the feed grain at 
     the time of delivery to, and that the quantity to be placed 
     under loan under this subsection was in fact harvested on the 
     farm and delivered to, a feedlot, feed mill, or commercial or 
     on-farm high-moisture storage facility, or to a facility 
     maintained by the users of corn and grain sorghum in a high 
     moisture state; and
       (D) comply with deadlines established by the Secretary for 
     harvesting the corn or grain sorghum and submit applications 
     for loans under this subsection within deadlines established 
     by the Secretary.
       (2) Eligibility of acquired feed grains.--A loan under this 
     subsection shall be made on a quantity of corn or grain 
     sorghum of the same crop acquired by the producer equivalent 
     to a quantity determined by multiplying--
       (A) the acreage of the corn or grain sorghum in a high 
     moisture state harvested on the producer's farm; by
       (B) the lower of the farm program payment yield or the 
     actual yield on a field, as determined by the Secretary, that 
     is similar to the field from which the corn or grain sorghum 
     was obtained.
       (3) High moisture state defined.--In this subsection, the 
     term ``high moisture state'' means corn or grain sorghum 
     having a moisture content in excess of Commodity Credit 
     Corporation standards for marketing assistance loans made by 
     the Secretary under section 121.
       (b) Recourse Loans Available for Seed Cotton.--For each of 
     the 2002 through 2011 crops of upland cotton and extra long 
     staple cotton, the Secretary shall make available recourse 
     seed cotton loans, as determined by the Secretary, on any 
     production.
       (c) Repayment Rates.--Repayment of a recourse loan made 
     under this section shall be at the loan rate established for 
     the commodity by the Secretary, plus interest (as determined 
     by the Secretary).
       (d) Termination of Superseded Loan Authority.--
     Notwithstanding section 137 of the Federal Agriculture 
     Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7237), recourse 
     loans shall not be made for the 2002 crop of corn, grain 
     sorghum, and seed cotton under such section.

     SEC. 130. AVAILABILITY OF NONRECOURSE MARKETING ASSISTANCE 
                   LOANS FOR WOOL AND MOHAIR.

       (a) Nonrecourse Loans Available.--During the 2002 through 
     2011 marketing years for wool and mohair, the Secretary shall 
     make

[[Page H6195]]

     available to producers on a farm nonrecourse marketing 
     assistance loans for wool and mohair produced on the farm 
     during that marketing year.
       (b) Loan Rate.--The loan rate for a loan under subsection 
     (a) shall be not more than--
       (1) $1.00 per pound for graded wool;
       (2) $0.40 per pound for nongraded wool; and
       (3) $4.20 per pound for mohair.
       (c) Term of Loan.--A loan under subsection (a) shall have a 
     term of one year beginning on the first day of the first 
     month after the month in which the loan is made.
       (d) Repayment Rates.--The Secretary shall permit a producer 
     to repay a marketing assistance loan under subsection (a) for 
     wool or mohair at a rate that is the lesser of--
       (1) the loan rate established for the commodity under 
     subsection (b), plus interest (as determined by the 
     Secretary); or
       (2) a rate that the Secretary determines will--
       (A) minimize potential loan forfeitures;
       (B) minimize the accumulation of stocks of the commodity by 
     the Federal Government;
       (C) minimize the cost incurred by the Federal Government in 
     storing the commodity; and
       (D) allow the commodity produced in the United States to be 
     marketed freely and competitively, both domestically and 
     internationally.
       (e) Loan Deficiency Payments.--
       (1) Availability.--The Secretary may make loan deficiency 
     payments available to producers that, although eligible to 
     obtain a marketing assistance loan under this section, agree 
     to forgo obtaining the loan in return for payments under this 
     section.
       (2) Computation.--A loan deficiency payment under this 
     subsection shall be computed by multiplying--
       (A) the loan payment rate in effect under paragraph (3) for 
     the commodity; by
       (B) the quantity of the commodity produced by the eligible 
     producers, excluding any quantity for which the producers 
     obtain a loan under this subsection.
       (3) Loan payment rate.--For purposes of this subsection, 
     the loan payment rate for wool or mohair shall be the amount 
     by which--
       (A) the loan rate in effect for the commodity under 
     subsection (b); exceeds
       (B) the rate at which a loan for the commodity may be 
     repaid under subsection (d).
       (4) Time for payment.--The Secretary shall make a payment 
     under this subsection to a producer with respect to a 
     quantity of a wool or mohair as of the earlier of the 
     following:
       (A) The date on which the producer marketed or otherwise 
     lost beneficial interest in the wool or mohair, as determined 
     by the Secretary.
       (B) The date the producer requests the payment.
       (f) Limitations.--The marketing assistance loan gains and 
     loan deficiency payments that a person may receive for wool 
     and mohair under this section shall be subject to a separate 
     payment limitation, but in the same dollar amount, as the 
     payment limitation that applies to marketing assistance loans 
     and loan deficiency payments received by producers of other 
     agricultural commodities in the same marketing year.

     SEC. 131. AVAILABILITY OF NONRECOURSE MARKETING ASSISTANCE 
                   LOANS FOR HONEY.

       (a) Nonrecourse Loans Available.--During the 2002 through 
     2011 crop years for honey, the Secretary shall make available 
     to producers on a farm nonrecourse marketing assistance loans 
     for honey produced on the farm during that crop year.
       (b) Loan Rate.--The loan rate for a marketing assistance 
     loan for honey under subsection (a) shall be equal to $0.60 
     cents per pound.
       (c) Term of Loan.--A marketing assistance loan under 
     subsection (a) shall have a term of one year beginning on the 
     first day of the first month after the month in which the 
     loan is made.
       (d) Repayment Rates.--The Secretary shall permit a producer 
     to repay a marketing assistance loan for honey under 
     subsection (a) at a rate that is the lesser of--
       (1) the loan rate for honey, plus interest (as determined 
     by the Secretary); or
       (2) the prevailing domestic market price for honey, as 
     determined by the Secretary.
       (e) Loan Deficiency Payments.--
       (1) Availability.--The Secretary may make loan deficiency 
     payments available to any producer of honey that, although 
     eligible to obtain a marketing assistance loan under 
     subsection (a), agrees to forgo obtaining the loan in return 
     for a payment under this subsection.
       (2) Computation.--A loan deficiency payment under this 
     subsection shall be determined by multiplying--
       (A) the loan payment rate determined under paragraph (3); 
     by
       (B) the quantity of honey that the producer is eligible to 
     place under loan, but for which the producer forgoes 
     obtaining the loan in return for a payment under this 
     subsection.
       (3) Loan payment rate.--For the purposes of this 
     subsection, the loan payment rate shall be the amount by 
     which--
       (A) the loan rate established under subsection (b); exceeds
       (B) the rate at which a loan may be repaid under subsection 
     (d).
       (4) Time for payment.--The Secretary shall make a payment 
     under this subsection to a producer with respect to a 
     quantity of a honey as of the earlier of the following:
       (A) The date on which the producer marketed or otherwise 
     lost beneficial interest in the honey, as determined by the 
     Secretary.
       (B) The date the producer requests the payment.
       (f) Limitations.--The marketing assistance loan gains and 
     loan deficiency payments that a person may receive for a crop 
     of honey under this section shall be subject to a separate 
     payment limitation, but in the same dollar amount, as the 
     payment limitation that applies to marketing assistance loans 
     and loan deficiency payments received by producers of other 
     agricultural commodities in the same crop year.
       (g) Prevention of Forfeitures.--The Secretary shall carry 
     out this section in such a manner as to minimize forfeitures 
     of honey marketing assistance loans.

                     Subtitle C--Other Commodities

                            CHAPTER 1--DAIRY

     SEC. 141. MILK PRICE SUPPORT PROGRAM.

       (a) Support Activities.--During the period beginning on 
     January 1, 2002, and ending on December 31, 2011, the 
     Secretary of Agriculture shall support the price of milk 
     produced in the 48 contiguous States through the purchase of 
     cheese, butter, and nonfat dry milk produced from the milk.
       (b) Rate.--During the period specified in subsection (a), 
     the price of milk shall be supported at a rate equal to $9.90 
     per hundredweight for milk containing 3.67 percent butterfat.
       (c) Purchase Prices.--The support purchase prices under 
     this section for each of the products of milk (butter, 
     cheese, and nonfat dry milk) announced by the Secretary shall 
     be the same for all of that product sold by persons offering 
     to sell the product to the Secretary. The purchase prices 
     shall be sufficient to enable plants of average efficiency to 
     pay producers, on average, a price that is not less than the 
     rate of price support for milk in effect under subsection 
     (b).
       (d) Special Rule for Butter and Nonfat Dry Milk Purchase 
     Prices.--
       (1) Allocation of purchase prices.--The Secretary may 
     allocate the rate of price support between the purchase 
     prices for nonfat dry milk and butter in a manner that will 
     result in the lowest level of expenditures by the Commodity 
     Credit Corporation or achieve such other objectives as the 
     Secretary considers appropriate. Not later than 10 days after 
     making or changing an allocation, the Secretary shall notify 
     the Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives 
     and the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of 
     the Senate of the allocation. Section 553 of title 5, United 
     States Code, shall not apply with respect to the 
     implementation of this section.
       (2) Timing of purchase price adjustments.--The Secretary 
     may make any such adjustments in the purchase prices for 
     nonfat dry milk and butter the Secretary considers to be 
     necessary not more than twice in each calendar year.
       (e) Commodity Credit Corporation.--The Secretary shall 
     carry out the program authorized by this section through the 
     Commodity Credit Corporation.

     SEC. 142. REPEAL OF RECOURSE LOAN PROGRAM FOR PROCESSORS.

       Section 142 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and 
     Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7252) is repealed.

     SEC. 143. EXTENSION OF DAIRY EXPORT INCENTIVE AND DAIRY 
                   INDEMNITY PROGRAMS.

       (a) Dairy Export Incentive Program.--Section 153(a) of the 
     Food Security Act of 1985 (15 U.S.C. 713a-14(a)) is amended 
     by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.
       (b) Dairy Indemnity Program.--Section 3 of Public Law 90-
     484 (7 U.S.C. 450l) is amended by striking ``1995'' and 
     inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 144. FLUID MILK PROMOTION.

       (a) Definition of Fluid Milk Product.--Section 1999C of the 
     Fluid Milk Promotion Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 6402) is amended 
     by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(3) Fluid milk product.--The term `fluid milk product' 
     has the meaning given such term--
       ``(A) in section 1000.15 of title 7, Code of Federal 
     Regulations, subject to such amendments as may be made from 
     time to time; or
       ``(B) in any successor regulation providing a definition of 
     such term that is promulgated pursuant to the Agricultural 
     Adjustment Act (7 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), reenacted with 
     amendments by the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 
     1937.''.
       (b) Definition of Fluid Milk Processor.--Section 1999C(4) 
     of the Fluid Milk Promotion Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 6402(4)) is 
     amended by striking ``500,000'' and inserting ``3,000,000''.
       (c) Elimination of Order Termination Date.--Section 1999O 
     of the Fluid Milk Promotion Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 6414) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (a); and
       (2) by redesignating subsections (b) and (c) as subsections 
     (a) and (b), respectively.

     SEC. 145. DAIRY PRODUCT MANDATORY REPORTING.

       Section 273(b)(1)(B) of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 
     1946 (7 U.S.C. 1637b(b)(1)(B)) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``and substantially identical products 
     designated by the Secretary'' after ``dairy products'' the 
     first place it appears; and
       (2) by inserting ``and such substantially identical 
     products'' after ``dairy products'' the second place it 
     appears.

[[Page H6196]]

     SEC. 146. FUNDING OF DAIRY PROMOTION AND RESEARCH PROGRAM.

       (a) Definitions.--Section 111 of the Dairy Production 
     Stabilization Act of 1983 (7 U.S.C. 4502) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (k), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) in subsection (l), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting a semicolon; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(m) the term `imported dairy product' means any dairy 
     product that is imported into the United States, including 
     dairy products imported into the United States in the form 
     of--
       ``(1) milk, cream, and fresh and dried dairy products;
       ``(2) butter and butterfat mixtures;
       ``(3) cheese; and
       ``(4) casein and mixtures;
       ``(n) the term `importer' means a person that imports an 
     imported dairy product into the United States; and
       ``(o) the term `Customs' means the United States Customs 
     Service.''.
       (b) Representation of Importers on Board.--Section 113(b) 
     of the Dairy Production Stabilization Act of 1983 (7 U.S.C. 
     4504(b)) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``National Dairy Promotion and Research 
     Board.--'' after ``(b)'';
       (2) by designating the first through ninth sentences as 
     paragraphs (1) through (5) and paragraphs (7) through (10), 
     respectively, and indenting the paragraphs appropriately;
       (3) in paragraph (2) (as so designated), by striking 
     ``Members'' and inserting ``Except as provided in paragraph 
     (6), the members''; and
       (4) by inserting after paragraph (5) (as so designated) the 
     following:
       ``(6) Importers.--
       ``(A) Representation.--The Secretary shall appoint not more 
     than 2 members who represent importers of dairy products and 
     are subject to assessments under the order, to reflect the 
     proportion of domestic production and imports supplying the 
     United States market, which shall be based on the Secretary's 
     determination of the average volume of domestic production of 
     dairy products proportionate to the average volume of imports 
     of dairy products in the United States over the previous 
     three years.
       ``(B) Additional members; nominations.--The members 
     appointed under this paragraph--
       ``(i) shall be in addition to the total number of members 
     appointed under paragraph (2); and
       ``(ii) shall be appointed from nominations submitted by 
     importers under such procedures as the Secretary determines 
     to be appropriate.''.
       (c) Importer Assessment.--Section 113(g) of the Dairy 
     Production Stabilization Act of 1983 (7 U.S.C. 4504(g)) is 
     amended--
       (1) by inserting ``Assessments.--'' after ``(g)'';
       (2) by designating the first through fifth sentences as 
     paragraphs (1) through (5), respectively, and indenting 
     appropriately; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(6) Importers.--
       ``(A) In general.--The order shall provide that each 
     importer of imported dairy products shall pay an assessment 
     to the Board in the manner prescribed by the order.
       ``(B) Time for payment.--The assessment on imported dairy 
     products shall be paid by the importer to Customs at the time 
     of the entry of the products into the United States and shall 
     be remitted by Customs to the Board. For purposes of this 
     subparagraph, entry of the products into the United States 
     shall be deemed to have occurred when the products are 
     released from custody of Customs and introduced into the 
     stream of commerce within the United States. Importers 
     include persons who hold title to foreign-produced dairy 
     products immediately upon release by Customs, as well as 
     persons who act on behalf of others, as agents, brokers, or 
     consignees, to secure the release of dairy products from 
     Customs and the introduction of the released dairy products 
     into the stream of commerce.
       ``(C) Rate.--The rate of assessment on imported dairy 
     products shall be determined in the same manner as the rate 
     of assessment per hundredweight or the equivalent of milk.
       ``(D) Value of products.--For the purpose of determining 
     the assessment on imported dairy products under subparagraph 
     (C), the value to be placed on imported dairy products shall 
     be established by the Secretary in a fair and equitable 
     manner.
       ``(E) Use of assessments on imported dairy products.--
     Assessments collected on imported dairy products shall not be 
     used for foreign market promotion.''.
       (d) Records.--Section 113(k) of the Dairy Production 
     Stabilization Act of 1983 (7 U.S.C. 4504(k)) is amended in 
     the first sentence by striking ``person receiving'' and 
     inserting ``importer of imported dairy products, each person 
     receiving''.
       (e) Importer Eligibility To Vote in Referendum.--Section 
     116(b) of the Dairy Promotion Stabilization Act of 1983 (7 
     U.S.C. 4507(b)) is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence--
       (A) by inserting after ``of producers'' the following: 
     ``and importers''; and
       (B) by inserting after ``the producers'' the following: 
     ``and importers''; and
       (2) in the second sentence, by inserting after ``commercial 
     use'' the following: ``and importers voting in the referendum 
     (who have been engaged in the importation of dairy products 
     during the same representative period, as determined by the 
     Secretary)''.
       (f) Conforming Amendments To Reflect Addition of 
     Importers.--Section 110(b) of the Dairy Production 
     Stabilization Act of 1983 (7 U.S.C. 4501(b)) is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence--
       (A) by inserting after ``commercial use'' the following: 
     ``and on imported dairy products''; and
       (B) by striking ``products produced in the United States.'' 
     and inserting ``products.''; and
       (2) in the second sentence, by inserting after ``produce 
     milk'' the following: ``or the right of any person to import 
     dairy products''.

                            CHAPTER 2--SUGAR

     SEC. 151. SUGAR PROGRAM.

       (a) Continuation of Program.--Subsection (i) of section 156 
     of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 
     (7 U.S.C. 7251) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``(other than subsection (f))''; and
       (2) by striking ``2002 crops'' and inserting ``2011 
     crops''.
       (b) Termination of Marketing Assessment.--Effective as of 
     October 1, 2001, subsection (f) of such section is repealed.
       (c) Loan Rate Adjustments.--Subsection (c) of such section 
     is amended--
       (1) by striking ``Reduction in Loan Rates'' and inserting 
     ``Loan Rate Adjustments''; and
       (2) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) by striking ``Reduction required'' and inserting 
     ``Possible reduction''; and
       (B) by striking ``shall'' and inserting ``may''.
       (d) Notification.--Subsection (e) of such section is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) Prevention of onerous notification requirements.--The 
     Secretary may not impose or enforce any prenotification or 
     similar administrative requirement that has the effect of 
     preventing a processor from choosing to forfeit the loan 
     collateral upon the maturity of the loan.''.
       (e) In Process Sugar.--Such section is further amended by 
     inserting after subsection (e) the following new subsection 
     (f):
       ``(f) Loans for In-Process Sugar.--
       ``(1) Availability; rate.--The Secretary shall make 
     nonrecourse loans available to processors of domestically 
     grown sugarcane and sugar beets for in-process sugars and 
     syrups derived from such crops. The loan rate shall be equal 
     to 80 percent of the loan rate applicable to raw cane sugar 
     or refined beet sugar, depending on the source material for 
     the in-process sugars and syrups.
       ``(2) Further processing upon forfeiture.--As a condition 
     on the forfeiture of in-process sugars and syrups serving as 
     collateral for a loan under paragraph (1), the processor 
     shall, within such reasonable time period as the Secretary 
     may prescribe and at no cost to the Commodity Credit 
     Corporation, convert the in-process sugars and syrups into 
     raw cane sugar or refined beet sugar of acceptable grade and 
     quality for sugars eligible for loans under subsection (a) or 
     (b). Once the in-process sugars and syrups are fully 
     processed into raw cane sugar or refined beet sugar, the 
     processor shall transfer the sugar to the Corporation, which 
     shall make a payment to the processor in an amount equal to 
     the difference between the loan rate for raw cane sugar or 
     refined beet sugar, whichever applies, and the loan rate the 
     processor received under paragraph (1).
       ``(3) Loan conversion.--If the processor does not forfeit 
     the collateral as described in paragraph (2), but instead 
     further processes the in-process sugars and syrups into raw 
     cane sugar or refined beet sugar and repays the loan on the 
     in-process sugars and syrups, the processor may then obtain a 
     loan under subsection (a) or (b) on the raw cane sugar or 
     refined beet sugar, as appropriate.
       ``(4) Definition.--In this subsection the term `in-process 
     sugars and syrups' does not include raw sugar, liquid sugar, 
     invert sugar, invert syrup, or other finished products that 
     are otherwise eligible for loans under subsection (a) or 
     (b).''.
       (f) Administration of Program.--Such section is further 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(j) Avoiding Forfeitures; Corporation Inventory 
     Disposition.--
       ``(1) No cost.--To the maximum extent practicable, the 
     Secretary shall operate the sugar program established under 
     this section at no cost to the Federal Government by avoiding 
     the forfeiture of sugar to the Commodity Credit Corporation.
       ``(2) Inventory disposition.--In support of the objective 
     specified in paragraph (1), the Commodity Credit Corporation 
     may accept bids for commodities in the inventory of the 
     Corporation from (or otherwise make available such 
     commodities, on appropriate terms and conditions, to) 
     processors of sugarcane and processors of sugar beets (when 
     the processors are acting in conjunction with the producers 
     of the sugarcane or sugar beets processed by such processors) 
     in return for the reduction of production of raw cane sugar 
     or refined beet sugar, as appropriate. The authority provided 
     under this paragraph is in addition to any authority of the 
     Corporation under any other law.''.
       (g) Information Reporting.--Subsection (h) of such section 
     is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs 
     (4) and (5), respectively;
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new 
     paragraphs:
       ``(2) Duty of producers to report.--

[[Page H6197]]

       ``(A) Proportionate share states.--The Secretary shall 
     require a producer of sugarcane located in a State (other 
     than Puerto Rico) in which there are in excess of 250 
     sugarcane producers to report, in the manner prescribed by 
     the Secretary, the producer's sugarcane yields and acres 
     planted to sugarcane.
       ``(B) Other states.--The Secretary may require producers of 
     sugarcane or sugar beets not covered by paragraph (1) to 
     report, in the manner prescribed by the Secretary, each 
     producer's sugarcane or sugar beet yields and acres planted 
     to sugarcane or sugar beets, respectively.
       ``(3) Duty of importers to report.--The Secretary shall 
     require an importer of sugars, syrups or molasses to be used 
     for human consumption or to be used for the extraction of 
     sugar for human consumption, except such sugars, syrups, or 
     molasses that are within the quantities of tariff-rate quotas 
     that are at the lower rate of duties, to report, in the 
     manner prescribed by the Secretary, the quantities of such 
     products imported and the sugar content or equivalent of such 
     products.''; and
       (3) in paragraph (5), as so redesignated, by striking 
     ``paragraph (1)'' and inserting ``this subsection''.
       (h) Interest Rate.--Section 163 of the Federal Agriculture 
     Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7283) is amended 
     by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``For 
     purposes of this section, raw cane sugar, refined beet sugar, 
     and in process sugar eligible for a loan under section 156 
     shall not be considered an agricultural commodity.''.

     SEC. 152. REAUTHORIZE PROVISIONS OF AGRICULTURAL ADJUSTMENT 
                   ACT OF 1938 REGARDING SUGAR.

       (a) Information Reporting.--Section 359a of the 
     Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 (7 U.S.C. 1359aa) is 
     repealed.
       (b) Estimates.--Section 359b of the Agricultural Adjustment 
     Act of 1938 (7 U.S.C. 1359bb) is amended:
       (1) in the section heading--
       (A) by inserting ``FLEXIBLE'' before ``MARKETING''; and
       (B) by striking ``AND CRYSTALLINE FRUCTOSE'';
       (2) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in paragraph (1)--
       (i) by striking ``Before'' and inserting ``Not later than 
     August 1 before'';
       (ii) by striking ``1992 through 1998'' and inserting ``2002 
     through 2011'';
       (iii) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``(other than 
     sugar'' and all that follows through ``stocks'';
       (iv) by redesignating subparagraphs (B) and (C) as 
     subparagraphs (C) and (E), respectively;
       (v) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following:
       ``(B) the quantity of sugar that would provide for 
     reasonable carryover stocks;'';
       (vi) in subparagraph (C), as so redesignated--

       (I) by striking ``or'' and all that follows through 
     ``beets''; and
       (II) by striking the ``and'' following the semicolon;

       (vii) by inserting after subparagraph (C), as so 
     redesignated, the following:
       ``(D) the quantity of sugar that will be available from the 
     domestic processing of sugarcane and sugar beets; and''; and
       (viii) in subparagraph (E), as so redesignated--

       (I) by striking ``quantity of sugar'' and inserting 
     ``quantity of sugars, syrups, and molasses'';
       (II) by inserting ``human'' after ``imported for'' the 
     first place it appears;
       (III) by inserting after ``consumption'' the first place it 
     appears the following: ``or to be used for the extraction of 
     sugar for human consumption'';
       (IV) by striking ``year'' and inserting ``year, whether 
     such articles are under a tariff-rate quota or are in excess 
     or outside of a tariff rate quota''; and
       (V) by striking ``(other than sugar'' and all that follows 
     through ``carry-in stocks'';

       (B) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3);
       (C) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(2) Exclusion.--The estimates in this section shall not 
     include sugar imported for the production of polyhydric 
     alcohol or to be refined and re-exported in refined form or 
     in sugar containing products.'';
       (D) in paragraph (3), as so redesignated--
       (i) by striking ``Quarterly reestimates'' and inserting 
     ``Reestimates''; and
       (ii) by inserting ``as necessary, but'' after ``a fiscal 
     year'';
       (3) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(1) In general.--By the beginning of each fiscal year, 
     the Secretary shall establish for that fiscal year 
     appropriate allotments under section 359c for the marketing 
     by processors of sugar processed from sugar beets and from 
     domestically-produced sugarcane at a level that the Secretary 
     estimates will result in no forfeitures of sugar to the 
     Commodity Credit Corporation under the loan program for 
     sugar.''; and
       (B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``or crystalline 
     fructose'';
       (4) by striking subsection (c);
       (5) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (c); and
       (6) in subsection (c), as so redesignated--
       (A) by striking paragraph (2);
       (B) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs 
     (2) and (3), respectively; and
       (C) in paragraph (2), as so redesignated--
       (i) by striking ``or manufacturer'' and all that follows 
     through ``(2)''; and
       (ii) by striking ``or crystalline fructose''.
       (c) Establishment.--Section 359c of the Agricultural 
     Adjustment Act of 1938 (7 U.S.C. 1359cc) is amended--
       (1) in the section heading by inserting ``FLEXIBLE'' after 
     ``OF'';
       (2) in subsection (a), by inserting ``flexible'' after 
     ``establish'';
       (3) in subsection (b)--
       (A) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking ``1,250,000'' and 
     inserting ``1,532,000''; and
       (B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``to the maximum extent 
     practicable'';
       (4) by striking subsection (c) and inserting the following 
     new subsection:
       ``(c) Marketing Allotment for Sugar Derived from Sugar 
     Beets and Marketing Allotment for Sugar Derived from 
     Sugarcane.--The overall allotment quantity for the fiscal 
     year shall be allotted among--
       ``(1) sugar derived from sugar beets by establishing a 
     marketing allotment for a fiscal year at a quantity equal to 
     the product of multiplying the overall allotment quantity for 
     the fiscal year by the percentage of 54.35; and
       ``(2) sugar derived from sugarcane by establishing a 
     marketing allotment for a fiscal year at a quantity equal to 
     the product of multiplying the overall allotment quantity for 
     the fiscal year by the percentage of 45.65.'';
       (5) by amending subsection (d) to read as follows:
       ``(d) Filling Cane Sugar and Beet Sugar Allotments.--Each 
     marketing allotment for cane sugar established under this 
     section may only be filled with sugar processed from 
     domestically grown sugarcane, and each marketing allotment 
     for beet sugar established under this section may only be 
     filled with sugar domestically processed from sugar beets.'';
       (6) by striking subsection (e);
       (7) by redesignating subsection (f) as subsection (e);
       (8) in subsection (e), as so redesignated--
       (A) by inserting ``(1) In general.--'' before ``The 
     allotment for sugar'' and indenting such paragraph 
     appropriately;
       (B) in such paragraph (1)--
       (i) by striking ``the 5'' and inserting ``the'';
       (ii) by inserting after ``sugarcane is produced,'' the 
     following: ``after a hearing, if requested by the affected 
     sugar cane processors and growers, and on such notice as the 
     Secretary by regulation may prescribe,'';
       (iii) by striking ``on the basis of past marketings'' and 
     all that follows through ``allotments'', and inserting ``as 
     provided in this subsection and section 359d(a)(2)(A)(iv)''; 
     and
       (C) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new 
     paragraphs:
       ``(2) Offshore allotment.--
       ``(A) Collectively.--Prior to the allotment of sugar 
     derived from sugarcane to any other State, 325,000 short 
     tons, raw value shall be allotted to the offshore States.
       ``(B) Individually.--The collective offshore State 
     allotment provided for under subparagraph (A) shall be 
     further allotted among the offshore States in which sugarcane 
     is produced, after a hearing if requested by the affected 
     sugar cane processors and growers, and on such notice as the 
     Secretary by regulation may prescribe, in a fair and 
     equitable manner on the basis of--
       ``(i) past marketings of sugar, based on the average of the 
     2 highest years of production of raw cane sugar from the 1996 
     through 2000 crops;
       ``(ii) the ability of processors to market the sugar 
     covered under the allotments for the crop year; and
       ``(iii) past processings of sugar from sugarcane based on 
     the 3 year average of the crop years 1998 through 2000.
       ``(3) Mainland allotment.--The allotment for sugar derived 
     from sugarcane, less the amount provided for under paragraph 
     (2), shall be allotted among the mainland States in the 
     United States in which sugarcane is produced, after a hearing 
     if requested by the affected sugar cane processors and 
     growers, and on such notice as the Secretary by regulation 
     may prescribe, in a fair and equitable manner on the basis 
     of--
       ``(A) past marketings of sugar, based on the average of the 
     2 highest years of production of raw cane sugar from the 1996 
     through 2000 crops;
       ``(B) the ability of processors to market the sugar covered 
     under the allotments for the crop year; and
       ``(C) past processings of sugar from sugarcane, based on 
     the 3 crop years with the greatest processings (in the 
     mainland States collectively) during the 1991 through 2000 
     crop years.'';
       (9) by inserting after subsection (e), as so redesignated, 
     the following new subsection (f):
       ``(f) Filling Cane Sugar Allotments.--Except as otherwise 
     provided in section 359e, a State cane sugar allotment 
     established under subsection (e) for a fiscal year may be 
     filled only with sugar processed from sugarcane grown in the 
     State covered by the allotment.'';
       (10) in subsection (g)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``359b(a)(2)--'' and all 
     that follows through the comma at the end of subparagraph (C) 
     and inserting ``359b(a)(3), adjust upward or downward 
     marketing allotments in a fair and equitable manner'';

[[Page H6198]]

       (B) in paragraph (2) by striking ``359f(b)'' and inserting 
     ``359f(c)''; and
       (C) in paragraph (3)--
       (i) by striking ``Reductions'' and inserting ``Carry-over 
     of reductions'';
       (ii) by inserting after ``this subsection, if'' the 
     following: ``at the time of the reduction'';
       (iii) by striking ``price support'' and inserting 
     ``nonrecourse'';
       (iv) by striking ``206'' and all that follows through ``the 
     allotment'' and inserting ``156 of the Agricultural Market 
     Transition Act (7 U.S.C. 7272),''; and
       (v) by striking ``, if any,''; and
       (11) by amending subsection (h) to read as follows:
       ``(h) Suspension of Allotments.--Whenever the Secretary 
     estimates, or reestimates, under section 359b(a), or has 
     reason to believe that imports of sugars, syrups or molasses 
     for human consumption or to be used for the extraction of 
     sugar for human consumption, whether under a tariff-rate 
     quota or in excess or outside of a tariff-rate quota, will 
     exceed 1.532 million short tons, raw value equivalent, and 
     that such imports would lead to a reduction of the overall 
     allotment quantity, the Secretary shall suspend the marketing 
     allotments until such time as such imports have been 
     restricted, eliminated, or otherwise reduced to or below the 
     level of 1.532 million tons.''.
       (d) Allocation.--Section 359d of the Agricultural 
     Adjustment Act of 1938 (7 U.S.C. 1359dd) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(2)(A)--
       (A) by inserting ``(i) In general.--'' before ``The 
     Secretary shall'' and indenting such clause appropriately;
       (B) in clause (i), as so designated--
       (i) by striking ``interested parties'' and inserting ``the 
     affected sugar cane processors and growers'';
       (ii) by striking ``by taking'' and all that follows through 
     ``allotment allocated.'' and inserting ``with this 
     subparagraph.''; and
       (iii) by inserting at the end the following new sentence: 
     ``Each such allocation shall be subject to adjustment under 
     section 359c(g).'';
       (C) by inserting after clause (i) the following new 
     clauses:
       ``(ii) Multiple processor states.--Except as provided in 
     clause (iii), the Secretary shall allocate the allotment for 
     cane sugar among multiple cane sugar processors in a single 
     State based upon--

       ``(I) past marketings of sugar, based on the average of the 
     2 highest years of production of raw cane sugar from among 
     the 1996 through 2000 crops;
       ``(II) the ability of processors to market sugar covered by 
     that portion of the allotment allocated for the crop year;
       ``(III) past processings of sugar from sugarcane, based on 
     the average of the 3 highest years from among crop years 1996 
     through 2000; and
       ``(IV) however, only with respect to allotments under 
     subclauses (I), (II), and (III) attributable to the former 
     operations of the Talisman processing facility, shall be 
     allocated among processors in the State coincident with the 
     provisions of the agreements of March 25 and March 26, 1999, 
     between the affected processors and the Department of the 
     Interior.

       ``(iii) Proportionate share states.--In the case of States 
     subject to section 359f(c), the Secretary shall allocate the 
     allotment for cane sugar among multiple cane sugar processors 
     in a single state based upon--

       ``(I) past marketings of sugar, based on the average of the 
     two highest years of production of raw cane sugar from among 
     the 1997 through 2001 crop years;
       ``(II) the ability of processors to market sugar covered by 
     that portion of the allotments allocated for the crop year; 
     and
       ``(III) past processings of sugar from sugarcane, based on 
     the average of the two highest crop years from the five crop 
     years 1997 through 2001.

       ``(iv) New entrants.--Notwithstanding clauses (ii) and 
     (iii), the Secretary, on application of any processor that 
     begins processing sugarcane on or after the date of enactment 
     of this clause, and after a hearing if requested by the 
     affected sugarcane processors and growers, and on such notice 
     as the Secretary by regulation may prescribe, may provide 
     such processor with an allocation which provides a fair, 
     efficient and equitable distribution of the allocations from 
     the allotment for the State in which the processor is located 
     and, in the case of proportionate share States, shall 
     establish proportionate shares in an amount sufficient to 
     produce the sugarcane required to satisfy such allocations. 
     However, the allotment for a new processor under this clause 
     shall not exceed 50,000 short tons, raw value.
       ``(v) Transfer of ownership.--Except as otherwise provided 
     in section 359f(c)(8), in the event that a sugarcane 
     processor is sold or otherwise transferred to another owner, 
     or closed as part of an affiliated corporate group processing 
     consolidation, the Secretary shall transfer the allotment 
     allocation for the processor to the purchaser, new owner, or 
     successor in interest, as applicable, of the processor.''; 
     and
       (2) in subsection (a)(2)(B)--
       (A) by striking ``interested parties'' and inserting ``the 
     affected sugar beet processors and growers''; and
       (B) by striking ``processing capacity'' and all that 
     follows through ``allotment allocated'' and inserting the 
     following: ``the marketings of sugar processed from sugar 
     beets of any or all of the 1996 through 2000 crops, and such 
     other factors as the Secretary may deem appropriate after 
     consultation with the affected sugar beet processors and 
     growers. However, in the case of any processor which has 
     started processing sugar beets after January 1, 1996, the 
     Secretary shall provide such processor with an allocation 
     which provides a fair, efficient and equitable distribution 
     of the allocations''.
       (e) Reassignment.--Section 359e(b) of the Agricultural 
     Adjustment Act of 1938 (7 U.S.C. 1359ee(b)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) in subparagraph (B) by striking the ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (B) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (D);
       (C) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(C) if after the reassignments, the deficit cannot be 
     completely eliminated, the Secretary shall reassign the 
     estimated quantity of the deficit to the sale of any 
     inventories of sugar held by the Commodity Credit 
     Corporation; and''; and
       (D) in subparagraph (D), as so redesignated, by inserting 
     ``and sales'' after ``reassignments''; and
       (2) in paragraph (2)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A) by striking the ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``reassign the 
     remainder to imports.'' and inserting ``use the estimated 
     quantity of the deficit for the sale of any inventories of 
     sugar held by the Commodity Credit Corporation; and''; and
       (C) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(C) if after such reassignments and sales, the deficit 
     cannot be completely eliminated, the Secretary shall reassign 
     the remainder to imports.''.
       (f) Producer Provisions.--Section 359f of the Agricultural 
     Adjustment Act of 1938 (7 U.S.C. 1359ff) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by striking ``processor's allocation'' in the second 
     sentence and inserting ``allocation to the processor''; and
       (B) by inserting after ``request of either party'' the 
     following: ``, and such arbitration should be completed 
     within 45 days, but not more than 60 days, of the request'';
       (2) by redesignating subsection (b) as subsection (c);
       (3) by inserting after subsection (a) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(b) Sugar Beet Processing Facility Closures.-- In the 
     event that a sugar beet processing facility is closed and the 
     sugar beet growers who previously delivered beets to such 
     facility desire to deliver their beets to another processing 
     company:
       ``(1) Such growers may petition the Secretary to modify 
     existing allocations to accommodate such a transition; and
       ``(2) The Secretary may increase the allocation to the 
     processing company to which the growers desire to deliver 
     their sugar beets, and which the processing company agrees to 
     accept, not to exceed its processing capacity, to accommodate 
     the change in deliveries.
       ``(3) Such increased allocation shall be deducted from the 
     allocation to the company that owned the processing facility 
     that has been closed and the remaining allocation will be 
     unaffected.
       ``(4) The Secretary's determination on the issues raised by 
     the petition shall be made within 60 days of the filing of 
     the petition.'';
       (4) in subsection (c), as so redesignated--
       (A) in paragraph (3)(A), by striking ``the preceding five 
     years'' and inserting ``the two highest years from among the 
     years 1999, 2000, and 2001'';
       (B) in paragraph (4)(A), by striking ``each'' and all that 
     follows through ``in effect'' and inserting ``the two highest 
     of the three (3) crop years 1999, 2000, and 2001''; and
       (C) by inserting after paragraph (7) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(8) Processing facility closures.--In the event that a 
     sugarcane processing facility subject to this subsection is 
     closed and the sugarcane growers who previously delivered 
     sugarcane to such facility desire to deliver their sugarcane 
     to another processing company--
       ``(A) such growers may petition the Secretary to modify 
     existing allocations to accommodate such a transition;
       ``(B) the Secretary may increase the allocation to the 
     processing company to which the growers desire to deliver the 
     sugarcane, and which the processing company agrees to accept, 
     not to exceed its processing capacity, to accommodate the 
     change in deliveries;
       ``(C) such increased allocation shall be deducted from the 
     allocation to the company that owned the processing facility 
     that has been closed and the remaining allocation will be 
     unaffected; and
       ``(D) the Secretary's determination on the issues raised by 
     the petition shall be made within 60 days of the filing of 
     the petition.''.
       (g) Conforming Amendments.--(1) The heading of part VII of 
     subtitle B of Title III of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 
     1938 (7 U.S.C. 359aa et seq.) is amended to read as follows:

         ``PART VII--FLEXIBLE MARKETING ALLOTMENTS FOR SUGAR''.

       (2) Section 359g of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 
     (7 U.S.C. 1359gg) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``359f'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``359f(c)'';
       (B) in subsection (b), by striking ``3 consecutive'' and 
     inserting ``5 consecutive''; and

[[Page H6199]]

       (C) in subsection (c), by inserting ``or adjusted'' after 
     ``share established''.
       (3) Section 359j(c) of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 
     1938 (7 U.S.C. 1359jj) is amended--
       (A) by amending the subsection heading to read as follows: 
     ``Definitions.--'';
       (B) by striking ``Notwithstanding'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(1) United states and state.--Notwithstanding''; and
       (C) by inserting after such paragraph (1) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(2) Offshore states.--For purposes of this part, the term 
     `offshore States' means the sugarcane producing States 
     located outside of the continental United States.''.
       (h) Lifting of Suspension.--Section 171(a)(1)(E) of the 
     Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (7 
     U.S.C. 7301(a)(1)(E)) is amended by inserting before the 
     period at the end the following: ``, but only with respect to 
     sugar marketings through fiscal year 2002''.

     SEC. 153. STORAGE FACILITY LOANS.

       (a) Storage Facility Loan Program.--Notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law and as soon as practicable after the 
     date of enactment of this section, the Commodity Credit 
     Corporation shall amend part 1436 of title 7, Code of Federal 
     Regulations, to establish a sugar storage facility loan 
     program to provide financing for processors of domestically-
     produced sugarcane and sugar beets to build or upgrade 
     storage and handling facilities for raw sugars and refined 
     sugars.
       (b) Eligible Processors.--Storage facility loans shall be 
     made available to any processor of domestically produced 
     sugarcane or sugar beets that has a satisfactory credit 
     history, determines a need for increased storage capacity 
     (taking into account the effects of marketing allotments), 
     and demonstrates an ability to repay the loan.
       (c) Term of Loans.--Storage facility loans shall be for a 
     minimum of seven years, and shall be in such amounts and on 
     such terms and conditions (including down payment, security 
     requirements, and eligible equipment) as are normal, 
     customary, and appropriate for the size and commercial nature 
     of the borrower.
       (d) Administration.--The sugar storage facility loan 
     program shall be administered using the services, facilities, 
     funds, and authorities of the Commodity Credit Corporation.

                           CHAPTER 3--PEANUTS

     SEC. 161. DEFINITIONS.

       In this chapter:
       (1) Counter-cyclical payment.--The term ``counter-cyclical 
     payment'' means a payment made to peanut producers under 
     section 164.
       (2) Effective price.--The term ``effective price'' means 
     the price calculated by the Secretary under section 164 for 
     peanuts to determine whether counter-cyclical payments are 
     required to be made under such section for a crop year.
       (3) Historic peanut producer.--The term ``historic peanut 
     producer'' means a peanut producer on a farm in the United 
     States that produced or attempted to produce peanuts during 
     any or all of crop years 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001.
       (4) Fixed, decoupled payment.--The term ``fixed, decoupled 
     payment'' means a payment made to peanut producers under 
     section 163.
       (5) Payment acres.--The term ``payment acres'' means 85 
     percent of the peanut acres on a farm, as established under 
     section 162, upon which fixed, decoupled payments and 
     counter-cyclical payments are to be made.
       (6) Peanut acres.--The term ``peanut acres'' means the 
     number of acres assigned to a particular farm by historic 
     peanut producers pursuant to section 162(b).
       (7) Payment yield.--The term ``payment yield'' means the 
     yield assigned to a particular farm by historic peanut 
     producers pursuant to section 162(b).
       (8) Peanut producer.--The term ``peanut producer'' means an 
     owner, operator, landlord, tenant, or sharecropper who shares 
     in the risk of producing a crop of peanuts in the United 
     States and who is entitled to share in the crop available for 
     marketing from the farm, or would have shared had the crop 
     been produced.
       (9) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Agriculture.
       (10) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the several 
     States of the United States, the District of Columbia, the 
     Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any other territory or 
     possession of the United States.
       (11) Target price.--The term ``target price'' means the 
     price per ton of peanuts used to determine the payment rate 
     for counter-cyclical payments.
       (12) United states.--The term ``United States'', when used 
     in a geographical sense, means all of the States.

     SEC. 162. ESTABLISHMENT OF PAYMENT YIELD, PEANUT ACRES, AND 
                   PAYMENT ACRES FOR A FARM.

       (a) Establishment of Payment Yield and Payment Acres.--
       (1) Determination of average yield.--The Secretary shall 
     determine, for each historic peanut producer, the average 
     yield for peanuts on each farm on which the historic peanut 
     producer produced peanuts for the 1998 through 2001 crop 
     years, excluding any crop year in which the producer did not 
     produce peanuts. If, for any of these four crop years in 
     which peanuts were planted on a farm by the producer, the 
     farm would have satisfied the eligibility criteria 
     established to carry out section 1102 of the Agriculture, 
     Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related 
     Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999 (7 U.S.C. 1421 note; Public 
     Law 105-277), the Secretary shall assign a yield for the 
     producer for that year equal to 65 percent of the county 
     yield, as determined by the Secretary.
       (2) Determination of acreage average.--The Secretary shall 
     determine, for each historic peanut producer, the four-year 
     average of acreage actually planted in peanuts by the 
     historic peanut producer for harvest on one or more farms 
     during crop years 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001 and any acreage 
     that the producer was prevented from planting to peanuts 
     during such crop years because of drought, flood, or other 
     natural disaster, or other condition beyond the control of 
     the producer, as determined by the Secretary. If more than 
     one historic peanut producer shared in the risk of producing 
     the crop on the farm, the historic peanut producers shall 
     receive their proportional share of the number of acres 
     planted (or prevented from being planted) to peanuts for 
     harvest on the farm based on the sharing arrangement that was 
     in effect among the producers for the crop.
       (3) Time for determinations; considerations.--The Secretary 
     shall make the determinations required by this subsection not 
     later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this 
     Act. In making such determinations, the Secretary shall take 
     into account changes in the number and identity of persons 
     sharing in the risk of producing a peanut crop since the 1998 
     crop year, including providing a method for the assignment of 
     average acres and average yield to a farm when the historic 
     peanut producer is no longer living or an entity composed of 
     historic peanut producers has been dissolved.
       (b) Assignment of Payment Yield and Peanut Acres to 
     Farms.--
       (1) Assignment by historic peanut producers.--The Secretary 
     shall give each historic peanut producer an opportunity to 
     assign the average peanut yield and average acreage 
     determined under subsection (a) for the producer to cropland 
     on a farm.
       (2) Payment yield.--The average of all of the yields 
     assigned by historic peanut producers to a farm shall be 
     deemed to be the payment yield for that farm for the purpose 
     of making fixed decoupled payments and counter-cyclical 
     payments under this chapter.
       (3) Peanut acres.--Subject to subsection (e), the total 
     number of acres assigned by historic peanut producers to a 
     farm shall be deemed to be the peanut acres for a farm for 
     the purpose of making fixed decoupled payments and counter-
     cyclical payments under this chapter.
       (c) Time for Assignment.--The opportunity to make the 
     assignments described in subsection (b) shall be available to 
     historic peanut producers only once. The historic peanut 
     producers shall notify the Secretary of the assignments made 
     by such producers under such subsections not later than 180 
     days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (d) Payment Acres.--The payment acres for peanuts on a farm 
     shall be equal to 85 percent of the peanut acres assigned to 
     the farm.
       (e) Prevention of Excess Peanut Acres.--
       (1) Required reduction.--If the sum of the peanut acres for 
     a farm, together with the acreage described in paragraph (2), 
     exceeds the actual cropland acreage of the farm, the 
     Secretary shall reduce the quantity of peanut acres for the 
     farm or base acres for one or more covered commodities for 
     the farm as necessary so that the sum of the peanut acres and 
     acreage described in paragraph (2) does not exceed the actual 
     cropland acreage of the farm. The Secretary shall give the 
     peanut producers on the farm the opportunity to select the 
     peanut acres or base acres against which the reduction will 
     be made.
       (2) Other acreage.--For purposes of paragraph (1), the 
     Secretary shall include the following:
       (A) Any base acres for the farm under subtitle A.
       (B) Any acreage on the farm enrolled in the conservation 
     reserve program or wetlands reserve program under chapter 1 
     of subtitle D of title XII of the Food Security Act of 1985 
     (16 U.S.C. 3830 et seq.).
       (C) Any other acreage on the farm enrolled in a 
     conservation program for which payments are made in exchange 
     for not producing an agricultural commodity on the acreage.
       (3) Exception for double-cropped acreage.--In applying 
     paragraph (1), the Secretary shall make an exception in the 
     case of double cropping, as determined by the Secretary.

     SEC. 163. AVAILABILITY OF FIXED, DECOUPLED PAYMENTS FOR 
                   PEANUTS.

       (a) Payment Required.--For each of the 2002 through 2011 
     crop years, the Secretary shall make fixed, decoupled 
     payments to peanut producers on a farm.
       (b) Payment Rate.--The payment rate used to make fixed, 
     decoupled payments with respect to peanuts for a crop year 
     shall be equal to $36 per ton.
       (c) Payment Amount.--The amount of the fixed, decoupled 
     payment to be paid to the peanut producers on a farm for a 
     covered commodity for a crop year shall be equal to the 
     product of the following:
       (1) The payment rate specified in subsection (b).
       (2) The payment acres on the farm.

[[Page H6200]]

       (3) The payment yield for the farm.
       (d) Time for Payment.--
       (1) General rule.--Fixed, decoupled payments shall be paid 
     not later than September 30 of each of fiscal years 2002 
     through 2011. In the case of the 2002 crop, payments may 
     begin to be made on or after December 1, 2001.
       (2) Advance payments.--At the option of a peanut producer, 
     50 percent of the fixed, decoupled payment for a fiscal year 
     shall be paid on a date selected by the peanut producer. The 
     selected date shall be on or after December 1 of that fiscal 
     year, and the peanut producer may change the selected date 
     for a subsequent fiscal year by providing advance notice to 
     the Secretary.
       (3) Repayment of advance payments.--If a peanut producer 
     that receives an advance fixed, decoupled payment for a 
     fiscal year ceases to be a peanut producer before the date 
     the fixed, decoupled payment would otherwise have been made 
     by the Secretary under paragraph (1), the peanut producer 
     shall be responsible for repaying the Secretary the full 
     amount of the advance payment.

     SEC. 164. AVAILABILITY OF COUNTER-CYCLICAL PAYMENTS FOR 
                   PEANUTS.

       (a) Payment Required.--During the 2002 through 2011 crop 
     years for peanuts, the Secretary shall make counter-cyclical 
     payments with respect to peanuts whenever the Secretary 
     determines that the effective price for peanuts is less than 
     the target price.
       (b) Effective Price.--For purposes of subsection (a), the 
     effective price for peanuts is equal to the sum of the 
     following:
       (1) The higher of the following:
       (A) The national average market price received by peanut 
     producers during the 12-month marketing year for peanuts, as 
     determined by the Secretary.
       (B) The national average loan rate for a marketing 
     assistance loan for peanuts in effect for the same period 
     under this chapter.
       (2) The payment rate in effect under section 163 for the 
     purpose of making fixed, decoupled payments.
       (c) Target Price.--For purposes of subsection (a), the 
     target price for peanuts shall be equal to $480 per ton.
       (d) Payment Rate.--The payment rate used to make counter-
     cyclical payments for a crop year shall be equal to the 
     difference between--
       (1) the target price; and
       (2) the effective price determined under subsection (b).
       (e) Payment Amount.--The amount of the counter-cyclical 
     payment to be paid to the peanut producers on a farm for a 
     crop year shall be equal to the product of the following:
       (1) The payment rate specified in subsection (d).
       (2) The payment acres on the farm.
       (3) The payment yield for the farm.
       (f) Time for Payments.--
       (1) General rule.--The Secretary shall make counter-
     cyclical payments under this section for a peanut crop as 
     soon as possible after determining under subsection (a) that 
     such payments are required for that crop year.
       (2) Partial payment.--The Secretary may permit, and, if so 
     permitted, a peanut producer may elect to receive, up to 40 
     percent of the projected counter-cyclical payment, as 
     determined by the Secretary, to be made under this section 
     for a peanut crop upon completion of the first six months of 
     the marketing year for that crop. The peanut producer shall 
     repay to the Secretary the amount, if any, by which the 
     partial payment exceeds the actual counter-cyclical payment 
     to be made for that crop.

     SEC. 165. PRODUCER AGREEMENT REQUIRED AS CONDITION ON 
                   PROVISION OF FIXED, DECOUPLED PAYMENTS AND 
                   COUNTER-CYCLICAL PAYMENTS.

       (a) Compliance With Certain Requirements.--
       (1) Requirements.--Before the peanut producers on a farm 
     may receive fixed, decoupled payments or counter-cyclical 
     payments with respect to the farm, the peanut producers shall 
     agree, in exchange for the payments--
       (A) to comply with applicable conservation requirements 
     under subtitle B of title XII of the Food Security Act of 
     1985 (16 U.S.C. 3811 et seq.);
       (B) to comply with applicable wetland protection 
     requirements under subtitle C of title XII of the Act (16 
     U.S.C. 3821 et seq.);
       (C) to comply with the planting flexibility requirements of 
     section 166; and
       (D) to use the land on the farm, in an amount equal to the 
     peanut acres, for an agricultural or conserving use, and not 
     for a nonagricultural commercial or industrial use, as 
     determined by the Secretary.
       (2) Compliance.--The Secretary may issue such rules as the 
     Secretary considers necessary to ensure peanut producer 
     compliance with the requirements of paragraph (1).
       (b) Effect of Foreclosure.--A peanut producer may not be 
     required to make repayments to the Secretary of fixed, 
     decoupled payments and counter-cyclical payments if the farm 
     has been foreclosed on and the Secretary determines that 
     forgiving the repayments is appropriate to provide fair and 
     equitable treatment. This subsection shall not void the 
     responsibilities of the peanut producer under subsection (a) 
     if the peanut producer continues or resumes operation, or 
     control, of the farm. On the resumption of operation or 
     control over the farm by the producer, the requirements of 
     subsection (a) in effect on the date of the foreclosure shall 
     apply.
       (c) Transfer or Change of Interest in Farm.--
       (1) Termination.--Except as provided in paragraph (4), a 
     transfer of (or change in) the interest of a peanut producer 
     in peanut acres for which fixed, decoupled payments or 
     counter-cyclical payments are made shall result in the 
     termination of the payments with respect to the peanut acres, 
     unless the transferee or owner of the acreage agrees to 
     assume all obligations under subsection (a). The termination 
     shall be effective on the date of the transfer or change.
       (2) Transfer of payment base.--There is no restriction on 
     the transfer of a farm's peanut acres or payment yield as 
     part of a change in the peanut producers on the farm.
       (3) Modification.--At the request of the transferee or 
     owner, the Secretary may modify the requirements of 
     subsection (a) if the modifications are consistent with the 
     objectives of such subsection, as determined by the 
     Secretary.
       (4) Exception.--If a peanut producer entitled to a fixed, 
     decoupled payment or counter-cyclical payment dies, becomes 
     incompetent, or is otherwise unable to receive the payment, 
     the Secretary shall make the payment, in accordance with 
     regulations prescribed by the Secretary.
       (d) Acreage Reports.--As a condition on the receipt of any 
     benefits under this chapter, the Secretary shall require 
     peanut producers to submit to the Secretary acreage reports.
       (e) Tenants and Sharecroppers.--In carrying out this 
     chapter, the Secretary shall provide adequate safeguards to 
     protect the interests of tenants and sharecroppers.
       (f) Sharing of Payments.--The Secretary shall provide for 
     the sharing of fixed, decoupled payments and counter-cyclical 
     payments among the peanut producers on a farm on a fair and 
     equitable basis.

     SEC. 166. PLANTING FLEXIBILITY.

       (a) Permitted Crops.--Subject to subsection (b), any 
     commodity or crop may be planted on peanut acres on a farm.
       (b) Limitations and Exceptions Regarding Certain 
     Commodities.--
       (1) Limitations.--The planting of the following 
     agricultural commodities shall be prohibited on peanut acres:
       (A) Fruits.
       (B) Vegetables (other than lentils, mung beans, and dry 
     peas).
       (C) Wild rice.
       (2) Exceptions.--Paragraph (1) shall not limit the planting 
     of an agricultural commodity specified in such paragraph--
       (A) in any region in which there is a history of double-
     cropping of peanuts with agricultural commodities specified 
     in paragraph (1), as determined by the Secretary, in which 
     case the double-cropping shall be permitted;
       (B) on a farm that the Secretary determines has a history 
     of planting agricultural commodities specified in paragraph 
     (1) on peanut acres, except that fixed, decoupled payments 
     and counter-cyclical payments shall be reduced by an acre for 
     each acre planted to such an agricultural commodity; or
       (C) by a peanut producer who the Secretary determines has 
     an established planting history of a specific agricultural 
     commodity specified in paragraph (1), except that--
       (i) the quantity planted may not exceed the peanut 
     producer's average annual planting history of such 
     agricultural commodity in the 1991 through 1995 crop years 
     (excluding any crop year in which no plantings were made), as 
     determined by the Secretary; and
       (ii) fixed, decoupled payments and counter-cyclical 
     payments shall be reduced by an acre for each acre planted to 
     such agricultural commodity.

     SEC. 167. MARKETING ASSISTANCE LOANS AND LOAN DEFICIENCY 
                   PAYMENTS FOR PEANUTS.

       (a) Nonrecourse Loans Available.--
       (1) Availability.--For each of the 2002 through 2011 crops 
     of peanuts, the Secretary shall make available to peanut 
     producers on a farm nonrecourse marketing assistance loans 
     for peanuts produced on the farm. The loans shall be made 
     under terms and conditions that are prescribed by the 
     Secretary and at the loan rate established under subsection 
     (b).
       (2) Eligible production.--Any production of peanuts on a 
     farm shall be eligible for a marketing assistance loan under 
     this subsection.
       (3) Treatment of certain commingled commodities.--In 
     carrying out this subsection, the Secretary shall make loans 
     to a peanut producer that is otherwise eligible to obtain a 
     marketing assistance loan, but for the fact the peanuts owned 
     by the peanut producer are commingled with other peanuts in 
     facilities unlicensed for the storage of agricultural 
     commodities by the Secretary or a State licensing authority, 
     if the peanut producer obtaining the loan agrees to 
     immediately redeem the loan collateral in accordance with 
     section 166 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform 
     Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7286).
       (4) Options for obtaining loan.--A marketing assistance 
     loan under this subsection, and loan deficiency payments 
     under subsection (e), may be obtained at the option of the 
     peanut producer through--
       (A) a designated marketing association of peanut producers 
     that is approved by the Secretary;
       (B) a loan servicing agent approved by the Secretary; or

[[Page H6201]]

       (C) the Farm Service Agency.
       (5) Loan servicing agent.--As a condition of the 
     Secretary's approval of an entity to serve as a loan 
     servicing agent or to handle or store peanuts for peanut 
     producers that receive any marketing loan benefits, the 
     entity shall agree to provide adequate storage (if available) 
     and handling of peanuts at the commercial rate to other 
     approved loan servicing agents and marketing associations.
       (b) Loan Rate.--The loan rate for a marketing assistance 
     loan under for peanuts subsection (a) shall be equal to $350 
     per ton.
       (c) Term of Loan.--
       (1) In general.--A marketing assistance loan for peanuts 
     under subsection (a) shall have a term of nine months 
     beginning on the first day of the first month after the month 
     in which the loan is made.
       (2) Extensions prohibited.--The Secretary may not extend 
     the term of a marketing assistance loan under subsection (a).
       (d) Repayment Rate.--The Secretary shall permit peanut 
     producers to repay a marketing assistance loan for peanuts 
     under subsection (a) at a rate that is the lesser of--
       (1) the loan rate established for the commodity under 
     subsection (b), plus interest (as determined by the 
     Secretary); or
       (2) a rate that the Secretary determines will--
       (A) minimize potential loan forfeitures;
       (B) minimize the accumulation of stocks of peanuts by the 
     Federal Government;
       (C) minimize the cost incurred by the Federal Government in 
     storing peanuts; and
       (D) allow peanuts produced in the United States to be 
     marketed freely and competitively, both domestically and 
     internationally.
       (e) Loan Deficiency Payments.--
       (1) Availability.--The Secretary may make loan deficiency 
     payments available to peanut producers who, although eligible 
     to obtain a marketing assistance loan for peanuts under 
     subsection (a), agree to forgo obtaining the loan for the 
     peanuts in return for payments under this subsection.
       (2) Computation.--A loan deficiency payment under this 
     subsection shall be computed by multiplying--
       (A) the loan payment rate determined under paragraph (3) 
     for peanuts; by
       (B) the quantity of the peanuts produced by the peanut 
     producers, excluding any quantity for which the producers 
     obtain a loan under subsection (a).
       (3) Loan payment rate.--For purposes of this subsection, 
     the loan payment rate shall be the amount by which--
       (A) the loan rate established under subsection (b); exceeds
       (B) the rate at which a loan may be repaid under subsection 
     (d).
       (4) Time for payment.--The Secretary shall make a payment 
     under this subsection to a peanut producer with respect to a 
     quantity of peanuts as of the earlier of the following:
       (A) The date on which the peanut producer marketed or 
     otherwise lost beneficial interest in the peanuts, as 
     determined by the Secretary.
       (B) The date the peanut producer requests the payment.
       (f) Compliance With Conservation and Wetlands 
     Requirements.--As a condition of the receipt of a marketing 
     assistance loan under subsection (a), the peanut producer 
     shall comply with applicable conservation requirements under 
     subtitle B of title XII of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 
     U.S.C. 3811 et seq.) and applicable wetland protection 
     requirements under subtitle C of title XII of the Act (16 
     U.S.C. 3821 et seq.) during the term of the loan.
       (g) Reimbursable Agreements and Payment of Expenses.--To 
     the extent practicable, the Secretary shall implement any 
     reimbursable agreements or provide for the payment of 
     expenses under this chapter in a manner that is consistent 
     with such activities in regard to other commodities.
       (h) Termination of Superseded Price Support Authority.--
       (1) Repeal.--Section 155 of the Federal Agriculture 
     Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7271) is 
     repealed.
       (2) Conforming amendments.--The Agricultural Act of 1949 (7 
     U.S.C. 1441 et seq.) is amended--
       (A) in section 101(b) (7 U.S.C. 1441(b)), by striking ``and 
     peanuts''; and
       (B) in section 408(c) (7 U.S.C. 1428(c)), by striking 
     ``peanuts,''.

     SEC. 168. QUALITY IMPROVEMENT.

       (a) Official Inspection.--
       (1) Mandatory inspection.--All peanuts placed under a 
     marketing assistance loan under section 167 shall be 
     officially inspected and graded by Federal or State 
     inspectors.
       (2) Optional inspection.--Peanuts not placed under a 
     marketing assistance loan may be graded at the option of the 
     peanut producer.
       (b) Termination of Peanut Administrative Committee.--The 
     Peanut Administrative Committee established under Marketing 
     Agreement No. 1436, which regulates the quality of 
     domestically produced peanuts under the Agricultural 
     Adjustment Act (7 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), reenacted with 
     amendments by the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 
     1937, is terminated.
       (c) Establishment of Peanut Standards Board.--The Secretary 
     shall establish a Peanut Standards Board for the purpose of 
     assisting in the establishment of quality standards with 
     respect to peanuts. The authority of the Board is limited to 
     assisting in the establishment of quality standards for 
     peanuts. The members of the Board should fairly reflect all 
     regions and segments of the peanut industry.
       (d) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect with 
     the 2002 crop of peanuts.

     SEC. 169. PAYMENT LIMITATIONS.

       For purposes of sections 1001 through 1001C of the Food 
     Security Act of 1985 (7 U.S.C. 1308 through 1308-3), separate 
     payment limitations shall apply to peanuts with respect to--
       (1) fixed, decoupled payments;
       (2) counter-cyclical payments, and
       (3) limitations on marketing loan gains and loan deficiency 
     payments.

     SEC. 170. TERMINATION OF MARKETING QUOTA PROGRAMS FOR PEANUTS 
                   AND COMPENSATION TO PEANUT QUOTA HOLDERS FOR 
                   LOSS OF QUOTA ASSET VALUE.

       (a) Repeal of Marketing Quota.--
       (1) Repeal.--Part VI of subtitle B of title III of the 
     Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 (7 U.S.C. 1357-1359a), 
     relating to peanuts, is repealed.
       (2) Treatment of 2001 crop.--Part VI of subtitle B of title 
     III of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 (7 U.S.C. 
     1357-1359a), as in effect on the day before the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, shall continue to apply with respect 
     to the 2001 crop of peanuts notwithstanding the amendment 
     made by paragraph (1).
       (b) Compensation Contract Required.--The Secretary shall 
     offer to enter into a contract with eligible peanut quota 
     holders for the purpose of providing compensation for the 
     lost value of the quota on account of the repeal of the 
     marketing quota program for peanuts under subsection (a). 
     Under the contracts, the Secretary shall make payments to 
     eligible peanut quota holders during fiscal years 2002 
     through 2006.
       (c) Time for Payment.--The payments required under the 
     contracts shall be provided in five equal installments not 
     later than September 30 of each of fiscal years 2002 through 
     2006.
       (d) Payment Amount.--The amount of the payment for a fiscal 
     year to a peanut quota holder under a contract shall be equal 
     to the product obtained by multiplying--
       (1) $0.10 per pound; by
       (2) the actual farm poundage quota (excluding seed and 
     experimental peanuts) established for the peanut quota 
     holder's farm under section 358-1(b) of the Agricultural 
     Adjustment Act of 1938 (7 U.S.C. 1358-1(b)) for the 2001 
     marketing year.
       (e) Assignment of Payments.--The provisions of section 8(g) 
     of the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act (16 
     U.S.C. 590h(g)), relating to assignment of payments, shall 
     apply to the payments made to peanut quota holders under the 
     contracts. The peanut quota holder making the assignment, or 
     the assignee, shall provide the Secretary with notice, in 
     such manner as the Secretary may require, of any assignment 
     made under this subsection.
       (f) Peanut Quota Holder Defined.--In this section, the term 
     ``peanut quota holder'' means a person or enterprise that 
     owns a farm that--
       (1) was eligible, immediately before the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, to have a peanut quota established 
     upon it;
       (2) if there are not quotas currently established, would be 
     eligible to have a quota established upon it for the 
     succeeding crop year, in the absence of the amendment made by 
     subsection (a); or
       (3) is otherwise a farm that was eligible for such a quota 
     at the time the general quota establishment authority was 
     repealed.

     The Secretary shall apply this definition without regard to 
     temporary leases or transfers or quotas for seed or 
     experimental purposes.

                       Subtitle D--Administration

     SEC. 181. ADMINISTRATION GENERALLY.

       (a) Use of Commodity Credit Corporation.--The Secretary 
     shall carry out this title through the Commodity Credit 
     Corporation.
       (b) Determinations by Secretary.--A determination made by 
     the Secretary under this title shall be final and conclusive.
       (c) Regulations.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary and the Commodity 
     Credit Corporation, as appropriate, shall issue such 
     regulations as are necessary to implement this title. The 
     issuance of the regulations shall be made without regard to--
       (1) the notice and comment provisions of section 553 of 
     title 5, United States Code;
       (2) the Statement of Policy of the Secretary of Agriculture 
     effective July 24, 1971 (36 Fed. Reg. 13804) relating to 
     notices of proposed rulemaking and public participation in 
     rulemaking; and
       (3) chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code (commonly 
     know as the ``Paperwork Reduction Act'').
       (d) Protection of Producers.--The protection afforded 
     producers that elect the option to accelerate the receipt of 
     any payment under a production flexibility contract payable 
     under the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 
     1996 (7 U.S.C. 7212 note) shall also apply to the advance 
     payment of fixed, decoupled payments and counter-cyclical 
     payments.
       (e) Adjustment Authority Related to Uruguay Round 
     Compliance.--If the Secretary determines that expenditures 
     under subtitles A, B, and C that are subject to the total 
     allowable domestic support levels under the Uruguay Round 
     Agreements (as defined in section 2(7) of the Uruguay Round 
     Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3501(7))), as in effect on the date 
     of the enactment of this Act,

[[Page H6202]]

     will exceed such allowable levels for any applicable 
     reporting period, the Secretary may make adjustments in the 
     amount of such expenditures during that period to ensure that 
     such expenditures do not exceed, but in no case are less 
     than, such allowable levels.

     SEC. 182. EXTENSION OF SUSPENSION OF PERMANENT PRICE SUPPORT 
                   AUTHORITY.

       (a) Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938.--Section 171(a)(1) 
     of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 
     (7 U.S.C. 7301(a)(1)) is amended by striking ``2002'' both 
     places it appears and inserting ``2011''.
       (b) Agricultural Act of 1949.--Section 171(b)(1) of the 
     Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (7 
     U.S.C. 7301(b)(1)) is amended by striking ``2002'' both 
     places it appears and inserting ``2011''.
       (c) Suspension of Certain Quota Provisions.--Section 171(c) 
     of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 
     (7 U.S.C. 7301(c)) is amended by striking ``2002'' and 
     inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 183. LIMITATIONS.

       (a) Limitation on Amounts Received.--Section 1001 of the 
     Food Security Act of 1985 (7 U.S.C. 1308) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) by striking ``payments under production flexibility 
     contracts'' and inserting ``fixed, decoupled payments'';
       (B) by striking ``contract payments made under the 
     Agricultural Market Transition Act to a person under 1 or 
     more production flexibility contracts'' and inserting 
     ``fixed, decoupled payments made to a person''; and
       (C) by striking ``4'' and inserting ``5'';
       (2) in paragraphs (2) and (3)--
       (A) by striking ``payments specified'' and all that follows 
     through ``and oilseeds'' and inserting ``following payments 
     that a person shall be entitled to receive'';
       (B) by striking ``75'' and inserting ``150'';
       (C) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (2) and 
     all that follows through ``the following'' in paragraph (3);
       (D) by striking ``section 131'' and all that follows 
     through ``section 132'' and inserting ``section 121 of the 
     Farm Security Act of 2001 for a crop of any covered commodity 
     at a lower level than the original loan rate established for 
     the commodity under section 122''; and
       (E) by striking ``section 135'' and inserting ``section 
     125''; and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following new 
     paragraph (3):
       ``(3) Limitation on counter-cyclical payments.--The total 
     amount of counter-cyclical payments that a person may receive 
     during any crop year shall not exceed the amount specified in 
     paragraph (2), as in effect on the day before the date of the 
     enactment of the Farm Security Act of 2001.''.
       (b) Definitions.--Paragraph (4) of section 1001 of the Food 
     Security Act of 1985 (7 U.S.C. 1308) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(4) Definitions.--In this title, the terms `covered 
     commodity', `counter-cyclical payment', and `fixed, decoupled 
     payment' have the meaning given those terms in section 100 of 
     the Farm Security Act of 2001.''.
       (c) Transition.--Section 1001 of the Food Security Act of 
     1985 (7 U.S.C. 1308), as in effect on the day before the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, shall continue to apply with 
     respect to fiscal year 2001 and the 2001 crop of any covered 
     commodity.

     SEC. 184. ADJUSTMENTS OF LOANS.

       Section 162(b) of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and 
     Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7282(b)) is amended by striking 
     ``this title'' and inserting ``this title and title I of the 
     Farm Security Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 185. PERSONAL LIABILITY OF PRODUCERS FOR DEFICIENCIES.

       Section 164 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and 
     Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7284) is amended by striking 
     ``this title'' each places it appears and inserting ``this 
     title and title I of the Farm Security Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 186. EXTENSION OF EXISTING ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY 
                   REGARDING LOANS.

       Section 166 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and 
     Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7286) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by striking ``In General.--'' and inserting ``Specific 
     Payments.--''; and
       (B) by striking ``subtitle C'' and inserting ``subtitle C 
     of this title and title I of the Farm Security Act of 2001''; 
     and
       (2) in subsection (c)(1)--
       (A) by striking ``producer'' the first two places it 
     appears and inserting ``person''; and
       (B) by striking ``to producers under subtitle C'' and 
     inserting ``by the Commodity Credit Corporation''.

     SEC. 187. ASSIGNMENT OF PAYMENTS.

       The provisions of section 8(g) of the Soil Conservation and 
     Domestic Allotment Act (16 U.S.C. 590h(g)), relating to 
     assignment of payments, shall apply to payments made under 
     the authority of this Act. The producer making the 
     assignment, or the assignee, shall provide the Secretary with 
     notice, in such manner as the Secretary may require, of any 
     assignment made under this section.

                         TITLE II--CONSERVATION

     Subtitle A--Environmental Conservation Acreage Reserve Program

     SEC. 201. GENERAL PROVISIONS.

       Title XII of the Food Security Act of 1985 is amended--
       (1) in section 1230(a), by striking ``1996 through 2002'' 
     and inserting ``2002 through 2011'';
       (2) by striking subsection (c) of section 1230; and
       (3) in section 1230A (16 U.S.C. 3830a), by striking 
     ``chapter'' each place it appears and inserting ``title''.

                Subtitle B--Conservation Reserve Program

     SEC. 211. REAUTHORIZATION.

       (a) In General.--Section 1231 of the Food Security Act of 
     1985 (16 U.S.C. 3831) is amended in each of subsections (a) 
     and (d) by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.
       (b) Scope of Program.--Section 1231(a) of such Act (16 
     U.S.C. 3831(a)) is amended by striking ``and water'' and 
     inserting ``, water, and wildlife''.

     SEC. 212. ENROLLMENT.

       (a) Eligibility.--Section 1231(b) of the Food Security Act 
     of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3831(b)) is amended--
       (1) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
       ``(3) marginal pasturelands to be devoted to natural 
     vegetation in or near riparian areas or for similar water 
     quality purposes, including marginal pasturelands converted 
     to wetlands or established as wildlife habitat;''; and
       (2) in paragraph (4)--
       (A) by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(A) if the Secretary determines that--
       ``(i) the lands contribute to the degradation of soil, 
     water, or air quality, or would pose an on-site or off-site 
     environmental threat to soil, water, or air quality if 
     permitted to remain in agricultural production; and
       ``(ii) soil, water, and air quality objectives with respect 
     to the land cannot be achieved under the environmental 
     quality incentives program established under chapter 4;'';
       (B) by striking ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (C);
       (C) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (D) 
     and inserting ``; or''; and
       (D) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(E) if the Secretary determines that enrollment of such 
     lands would contribute to conservation of ground or surface 
     water.''.
       (b) Increase in Maximum Enrollment.--Section 1231(d) of 
     such Act (16 U.S.C. 3831(d)) is amended by striking 
     ``36,400,000'' and inserting ``39,200,000''.
       (c) Eligibility on Contract Expiration.--Section 1231(f) of 
     such Act (16 U.S.C. 3831(f)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(f) Eligibility on Contract Expiration.--On the 
     expiration of a contract entered into under this subchapter, 
     the land subject to the contract shall be eligible to be 
     considered for re-enrollment in the conservation reserve.''.
       (d) Balance of Natural Resource Purposes.--
       (1) In general.--Section 1231 of such Act (16 U.S.C. 3831) 
     is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(i) Balance of Natural Resource Purposes.--In determining 
     the acceptability of contract offers under this subchapter, 
     the Secretary shall ensure an equitable balance among the 
     conservation purposes of soil erosion, water quality and 
     wildlife habitat.''.
       (2) Regulations.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture shall 
     issue final regulations implementing section 1231(i) of the 
     Food Security Act of 1985, as added by paragraph (1) of this 
     subsection.

     SEC. 213. DUTIES OF OWNERS AND OPERATORS.

       Section 1232 of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 
     3832) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``as described in 
     section 1232(a)(7) or for other purposes'' before ``as 
     permitted'';
       (B) in paragraph (4), by inserting ``where practicable, or 
     maintain existing cover'' before ``on such land''; and
       (C) in paragraph (7), by striking ``Secretary--'' and all 
     that follows and inserting ``Secretary may permit, consistent 
     with the conservation of soil, water quality, and wildlife 
     habitat--
       ``(A) managed grazing and limited haying, in which case the 
     Secretary shall reduce the conservation reserve payment 
     otherwise payable under the contract by an amount 
     commensurate with the economic value of the activity;
       ``(B) wind turbines for the provision of wind energy, 
     whether or not commercial in nature; and
       ``(C) land subject to the contract to be harvested for 
     recovery of biomass used in energy production, in which case 
     the Secretary shall reduce the conservation reserve payment 
     otherwise payable under the contract by an amount 
     commensurate with the economic value of such activity;''; and
       (2) by striking subsections (c) and (d) and redesignating 
     subsection (e) as subsection (c).

     SEC. 214. REFERENCE TO CONSERVATION RESERVE PAYMENTS.

       Subchapter B of chapter 1 of subtitle D of title XII of 
     such Act (16 U.S.C. 3831-3836) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``rental payment'' each place it appears 
     and inserting ``conservation reserve payment'';
       (2) by striking ``rental payments'' each place it appears 
     and inserting ``conservation reserve payments''; and
       (3) in the paragraph heading for section 1235(e)(4), by 
     striking ``rental payment'' and inserting ``conservation 
     reserve payment''.

                  Subtitle C--Wetlands Reserve Program

     SEC. 221. ENROLLMENT.

       (a) Maximum.--Section 1237(b) of the Food Security Act of 
     1985 (16 U.S.C. 3837(b)) is amended by striking paragraph (1) 
     and inserting the following:

[[Page H6203]]

       ``(1) Annual enrollment.--In addition to any acres enrolled 
     in the wetlands reserve program as of the end of a calendar 
     year, the Secretary may in the succeeding calendar year 
     enroll in the program a number of additional acres equal to--
       ``(A) if the succeeding calendar year is calendar year 
     2002, 150,000; or
       ``(B) if the succeeding calendar year is a calendar year 
     after calendar year 2002--
       ``(i) 150,000; plus
       ``(ii) the amount (if any) by which 150,000, multiplied by 
     the number of calendar years in the period that begins with 
     calendar year 2002 and ends with the calendar year preceding 
     such succeeding calendar year, exceeds the total number of 
     acres added to the reserve during the period.''.
       (b) Methods.--Section 1237 of such Act (16 U.S.C. 
     3837(b)(2)) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b), by striking paragraph (2) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(2) Methods of enrollment.--The Secretary shall enroll 
     acreage into the wetlands reserve program through the use of 
     easements, restoration cost share agreements, or both.''; and
       (2) by striking subsection (g).
       (c) Extension.--Section 1237(c) of such Act (16 U.S.C. 
     3837(c)) is amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting 
     ``2011''.

     SEC. 222. EASEMENTS AND AGREEMENTS.

       Section 1237A of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 
     3837a) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b), by striking paragraph (2) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(2) prohibits the alteration of wildlife habitat and 
     other natural features of such land, unless specifically 
     permitted by the plan;'';
       (2) in subsection (e), by striking paragraph (2) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(2) shall be consistent with applicable State law.'';
       (3) by striking subsection (h).

     SEC. 223. DUTIES OF THE SECRETARY.

       Section 1237C of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 
     3837c) is amended by striking subsection (d).

     SEC. 224. CHANGES IN OWNERSHIP; AGREEMENT MODIFICATION; 
                   TERMINATION.

       Section 1237E(a)(2) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 
     U.S.C. 3837e(a)(2)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(2) the ownership change occurred due to foreclosure on 
     the land and the owner of the land immediately before the 
     foreclosure exercises a right of redemption from the mortgage 
     holder in accordance with State law; or''.

          Subtitle D--Environmental Quality Incentives Program

     SEC. 231. PURPOSES.

       Section 1240 of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 
     3839aa) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``to--'' and all that follows through 
     ``provides--'' and inserting ``to provide--'';
       (2) by striking ``that face the most serious threats to'' 
     and inserting ``to address environmental needs and provide 
     benefits to air,'';
       (3) by redesignating the subparagraphs (A) through (D) that 
     follow the matter amended by paragraph (2) of this section as 
     paragraphs (1) through (4), respectively;
       (4) by moving each of such redesignated provisions 2 ems to 
     the left; and
       (5) by striking ``farmers and ranchers'' each place it 
     appears and inserting ``producers''.

     SEC. 232. DEFINITIONS.

       Section 1240A of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 
     3839aa-1) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) by inserting ``non-industrial private forest land,'' 
     before ``and other land''; and
       (B) by striking ``poses a serious threat'' and all that 
     follows and inserting ``provides increased environmental 
     benefits to air, soil, water, or related resources.''; and
       (2) in paragraph (4), by inserting ``, including non-
     industrial private forestry'' before the period.

     SEC. 233. ESTABLISHMENT AND ADMINISTRATION.

       (a) Reauthorization.--Section 1240B(a)(1) of the Food 
     Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3839aa-2(a)(1)) is amended by 
     striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.
       (b) Term of Contracts.--Section 1240B(b)(2) of such Act (16 
     U.S.C. 3839aa-2(b)(2)) is amended by striking ``not less than 
     5, nor more than 10, years'' and inserting ``not less than 1 
     year, nor more than 10 years''.
       (c) Structural Practices.--Section 1240B(c)(1)(B) of such 
     Act (16 U.S.C. 3839aa-2(c)(1)(B)) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(B) achieving the purposes established under this 
     subtitle.''.
       (d) Elimination of Certain Limitations on Eligibility for 
     Cost-Share Payments.--Section 1240B(e)(1) of such Act (16 
     U.S.C. 3839aa-2(e)(1)) is amended--
       (1) by striking subparagraph (B) and redesignating 
     subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (B); and
       (2) in subparagraph (B) (as so redesignated), by striking 
     ``or 3''.
       (e) Incentive Payments.--Section 1240B of such Act (16 
     U.S.C. 3839aa-2) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (e)--
       (A) in the subsection heading, by striking ``, Incentive 
     Payments,''; and
       (B) by striking paragraph (2); and
       (2) by redesignating subsections (f) and (g) as subsections 
     (g) and (h), respectively, and inserting after subsection (e) 
     the following:
       ``(f) Conservation Incentive Payments.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary may make incentive 
     payments in an amount and at a rate determined by the 
     Secretary to be necessary to encourage a producer to perform 
     multiple land management practices and to promote the 
     enhancement of soil, water, wildlife habitat, air, and 
     related resources.
       ``(2) Special rule.--In determining the amount and rate of 
     incentive payments, the Secretary may accord great weight to 
     those practices that include residue, nutrient, pest, 
     invasive species, and air quality management.''.

     SEC. 234. EVALUATION OF OFFERS AND PAYMENTS.

       Section 1240C of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 
     3839aa-3) is amended by striking paragraphs (1) through (3) 
     and inserting the following:
       ``(1) aid producers in complying with this title and 
     Federal and State environmental laws, and encourage 
     environmental enhancement and conservation;
       ``(2) maximize the beneficial usage of animal manure and 
     other similar soil amendments which improve soil health, 
     tilth, and water-holding capacity; and
       ``(3) encourage the utilization of sustainable grazing 
     systems, such as year-round, rotational, or managed 
     grazing.''.

     SEC. 235. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY INCENTIVES PROGRAM PLAN.

       Section 1240E(a) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 
     U.S.C. 3839aa-5(a)) is amended by striking ``that 
     incorporates such conservation practices'' and all that 
     follows and inserting ``that provides or will continue to 
     provide increased environmental benefits to air, soil, water, 
     or related resources.''.

     SEC. 236. DUTIES OF THE SECRETARY.

       Section 1240F(3) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 
     U.S.C. 3839aa-6(3)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(3) providing technical assistance or cost-share payments 
     for developing and implementing 1 or more structural 
     practices or 1 or more land management practices, as 
     appropriate;''.

     SEC. 237. LIMITATION ON PAYMENTS.

       Section 1240G of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 
     3839aa-7) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``$10,000'' and inserting 
     ``$50,000''; and
       (B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``$50,000'' and inserting 
     ``$200,000'';
       (2) in subsection (b)(2), by striking ``the maximization of 
     environmental benefits per dollar expended and''; and
       (3) by striking subsection (c).

     SEC. 238. GROUND AND SURFACE WATER CONSERVATION.

       Section 1240H of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 
     3839aa-8) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 1240H. GROUND AND SURFACE WATER CONSERVATION.

       ``(a) Support for Conservation Measures.--The Secretary 
     shall provide cost-share payments and low-interest loans to 
     encourage ground and surface water conservation, including 
     irrigation system improvement, and provide incentive payments 
     for capping wells, reducing use of water for irrigation, and 
     switching from irrigation to dryland farming.
       ``(b) Funding.--Of the funds of the Commodity Credit 
     Corporation, the Secretary shall make available the following 
     amounts to carry out this section:
       ``(1) $30,000,000 for fiscal year 2002.
       ``(2) $45,000,000 for fiscal year 2003.
       ``(3) $60,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 
     2011.''.

                 Subtitle E--Funding and Administration

     SEC. 241. REAUTHORIZATION.

       Section 1241(a) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 
     3841(a)) is amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting 
     ``2011''.

     SEC. 242. FUNDING.

       Section 1241(b)(1) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 
     U.S.C. 3841(b)(1)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``$130,000,000'' and all that follows 
     through ``2002, for'' and inserting ``the following amounts 
     for purposes of'';
       (2) by striking ``subtitle D.'' and inserting ``subtitle 
     D:''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(A) $200,000,000 for fiscal year 2001.
       ``(B) $1,025,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2002 and 
     2003.
       ``(C) $1,200,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004, 2005, 
     and 2006.
       ``(D) $1,400,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2007, 2008, 
     and 2009.
       ``(E) $1,500,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2010 and 
     2011.''.

     SEC. 243. ALLOCATION FOR LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION.

       Section 1241(b)(2) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 
     U.S.C. 3841(b)(2)) is amended by striking ``2002'' and 
     inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 244. ADMINISTRATION AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.

       (a) Broadening of Exception to Acreage Limitation.--Section 
     1243(b)(2) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 
     3843(b)(2)) is amended by striking ``that--'' and all that 
     follows and inserting ``that the action would not adversely 
     affect the local economy of the county.''.
       (b) Rules Governing Provision of Technical Assistance.--
     Section 1243(d) of such Act (16 U.S.C. 3843(d)) is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(d) Rules Governing Provision of Technical Assistance.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall provide technical 
     assistance under this title to a producer eligible for such 
     assistance, by providing the assistance directly or, at the

[[Page H6204]]

     option of the producer, through an approved third party if 
     available.
       ``(2) Reevaluation.--The Secretary shall reevaluate the 
     provision of, and the amount of, technical assistance made 
     available under subchapters B and C of chapter 1 and chapter 
     4 of subtitle D.
       ``(3) Certification of third-party providers.--
       ``(A) In general.--Not later than 6 months after the date 
     of the enactment of this subsection, the Secretary of 
     Agriculture shall, by regulation, establish a system for 
     approving persons to provide technical assistance pursuant to 
     chapter 4 of subtitle D. For purposes of this paragraph, a 
     person shall be considered approved if they have a memorandum 
     of understanding regarding the provision of technical 
     assistance in place with the Secretary.
       ``(B) Expertise required.--In prescribing such regulations, 
     the Secretary shall ensure that persons with expertise in the 
     technical aspects of conservation planning, watershed 
     planning, environmental engineering, including commercial 
     entities, nonprofit entities, State or local governments or 
     agencies, and other Federal agencies, are eligible to become 
     approved providers of such technical assistance.''.
       (c) Duty of Secretary.--
       (1) In general.--Section 1770(d) of such Act (7 U.S.C. 
     2276(d)) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``or'' at the end of paragraph (9);
       (B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (11) and 
     inserting ``; or''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(12) title XII of this Act.''.
       (2) Conforming amendments.--Section 1770(e) of such Act (7 
     U.S.C. 2276(e)) is amended--
       (A) by striking the subsection heading and inserting 
     ``Exceptions''; and
       (B) by inserting ``, or as necessary to carry out a program 
     under title XII of this Act as determined by the Secretary'' 
     before the period.

                       Subtitle F--Other Programs

     SEC. 251. PRIVATE GRAZING LAND CONSERVATION ASSISTANCE.

       Section 386(d)(1) of the Federal Agriculture Improvement 
     and Reform Act of 1996 (16 U.S.C. 2005b(d)(1)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (G);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (H) 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(I) encouraging the utilization of sustainable grazing 
     systems, such as year-round, rotational, or managed 
     grazing.''.

     SEC. 252. WILDLIFE HABITAT INCENTIVES PROGRAM.

       Subsection (c) of section 387 of the Federal Agriculture 
     Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (16 U.S.C. 3836a) is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(c) Funding.--Of the funds of the Commodity Credit 
     Corporation, the Secretary of Agriculture shall make 
     available the following amounts to carry out this section:
       ``(1) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2002.
       ``(2) $30,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2003 and 2004.
       ``(3) $35,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2005 and 2006.
       ``(4) $40,000,000 for fiscal year 2007.
       ``(5) $45,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2008 and 2009.
       ``(6) $50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2010 and 
     2011.''.

     SEC. 253. FARMLAND PROTECTION PROGRAM.

       (a) Removal of Acreage Limitation; Expansion of Purposes.--
     Subsection (a) of section 388 of the Federal Agriculture 
     Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (16 U.S.C. 3830 note) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``not less than 170,000, nor more than 
     340,000 acres of''; and
       (2) by inserting ``, or agricultural land that contains 
     historic or archaeological resources,'' after ``other 
     productive soil''.
       (b) Funding.--Subsection (c) of such section is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(c) Funding.--The Secretary shall use not more than 
     $50,000,000 of the funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation 
     in each of fiscal years 2002 through 2011 to carry out this 
     section.''.
       (c) Eligible Entities.--Such section is further amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``a State or local 
     government'' and inserting ``an eligible entity''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(d) Definition of Eligible Entity.--In this section, the 
     term `eligible entity' means--
       ``(1) any agency of any State or local government, or 
     federally recognized Indian tribe, including farmland 
     protection boards and land resource councils established 
     under State law; and
       ``(2) any organization that--
       ``(A) is organized for, and at all times since the 
     formation of the organization has been operated principally 
     for, one or more of the conservation purposes specified in 
     clause (i), (ii), or (iii) of section 170(h)(4)(A) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986;
       ``(B) is an organization described in section 501(c)(3) of 
     that Code that is exempt from taxation under section 501(a) 
     of that Code;
       ``(C) is described in section 509(a)(2) of that Code; or
       ``(D) is described in section 509(a)(3) of that Code and is 
     controlled by an organization described in section 509(a)(2) 
     of that Code.''.

     SEC. 254. RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.

       (a) Purpose.--Section 1528 of the Agriculture and Food Act 
     of 1981 (16 U.S.C. 3451) is amended--
       (1) by striking the section heading and all that follows 
     through ``Sec. 1528. It is the purpose'' and inserting the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 1528. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE.

       ``It is the purpose''; and
       (2) by inserting ``through designated RC councils'' 
     before ``in rural areas''.
       (b) Definitions.--Section 1529 of such Act (16 U.S.C. 3452) 
     is amended--
       (1) by striking the section heading and all that follows 
     through ``Sec. 1529. As used in this subtitle--'' and 
     inserting the following:

     ``SEC. 1529. DEFINITIONS.

       ``In this title:'';
       (2) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by inserting 
     ``RC council'' before ``area plan'';
       (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``through control of 
     nonpoint sources of pollution'';
       (C) in subparagraph (C)--
       (i) by striking ``natural resources based'' and inserting 
     ``resource-based'';
       (ii) by striking ``development of aquaculture,'';
       (iii) by striking ``and satisfaction'' and inserting 
     ``satisfaction''; and
       (iv) by inserting ``, food security, economic development, 
     and education'' before the semicolon; and
       (D) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``other'' the 1st 
     place it appears and inserting ``land management'';
       (3) in paragraph (3), by striking ``any State, local unit 
     of government, or local nonprofit organization'' and 
     inserting ``the designated RC council'';
       (4) by striking paragraphs (4) through (6) and inserting 
     the following:
       ``(4)(A) The term `financial assistance' means the 
     Secretary may--
       ``(i) provide funds directly to RC councils or 
     associations of RC councils through grants, cooperative 
     agreements, and interagency agreements that directly 
     implement RC area plans; and
       ``(ii) may join with other federal agencies through 
     interagency agreements and other arrangements as needed to 
     carry out the program's purpose.
       ``(B) Funds may be used for such things as--
       ``(i) technical assistance;
       ``(ii) financial assistance in the form of grants for 
     planning, analysis and feasibility studies, and business 
     plans;
       ``(iii) training and education; and
       ``(iv) all costs associated with making such services 
     available to RC councils or RC associations.
       ``(5) The term `RC council' means the responsible 
     leadership of the RC area. RC councils and associations 
     are non-profit entities whose members are volunteers and 
     include local civic and elected officials. Affiliations of 
     RC councils are formed in states and regions.'';
       (5) in paragraph (8), by inserting ``and federally 
     recognized Indian tribes'' before the period;
       (6) in paragraph (9), by striking ``works of improvement'' 
     and inserting ``projects'';
       (7) by redesignating paragraphs (7) through (9) as 
     paragraphs (6) through (8), respectively; and
       (8) by striking paragraph (10) and inserting the following:
       ``(9) The term `project' means any action taken by a 
     designated RC council that achieves any of the elements 
     identified under paragraph (1).''.
       (c) Establishment and Scope.--Section 1530 of such Act (16 
     U.S.C. 3453) is amended--
       (1) by striking the section heading and all that follows 
     through ``Sec. 1530. The Secretary'' and inserting the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 1530. ESTABLISHMENT AND SCOPE.

       ``The Secretary''; and
       (2) by striking ``the technical and financial assistance 
     necessary to permit such States, local units of government, 
     and local nonprofit organizations'' and inserting ``through 
     designated RC councils the technical and financial 
     assistance necessary to permit such RC Councils''.
       (d) Selection of Designated Areas.--Section 1531 of such 
     Act (16 U.S.C. 3454) is amended by striking the section 
     heading and all that follows through ``Sec. 1531. The 
     Secretary'' and inserting the following:

     ``SEC. 1531. SELECTION OF DESIGNATED AREAS.

       ``The Secretary''.
       (e) Authority of Secretary.--Section 1532 of such Act (16 
     U.S.C. 3455) is amended--
       (1) by striking the section heading and all that follows 
     through ``Sec. 1532. In carrying'' and inserting the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 1532. AUTHORITY OF SECRETARY.

       ``In carrying'';
       (2) in each of paragraphs (1) and (3)--
       (A) by striking ``State, local unit of government, or local 
     nonprofit organization'' and inserting ``RC council''; and
       (B) by inserting ``RC council'' before ``area plan'';
       (3) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``RC council'' before 
     ``area plans''; and
       (4) in paragraph (4), by striking ``States, local units of 
     government, and local nonprofit organizations'' and inserting 
     ``RC councils or affiliations of RC councils''.
       (f) Technical and Financial Assistance.--Section 1533 of 
     such Act (16 U.S.C. 3456) is amended--
       (1) by striking the section heading and all that follows 
     through ``Sec. 1533. (a) Technical'' and inserting the 
     following:

[[Page H6205]]

     ``SEC. 1533. TECHNICAL AND FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE.

       ``(a) Technical'';
       (2) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by striking ``State, local unit of government, or local 
     nonprofit organization to assist in carrying out works of 
     improvement specified in an'' and inserting ``RC councils 
     or affiliations of RC councils to assist in carrying out a 
     project specified in a RC council'';
       (B) in paragraph (1)--
       (i) by striking ``State, local unit of government, or local 
     nonprofit organization'' and inserting ``RC council or 
     affiliate''; and
       (ii) by striking ``works of improvement'' each place it 
     appears and inserting ``project'';
       (C) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) by striking ``works of improvement'' and inserting 
     ``project''; and
       (ii) by striking ``State, local unit of government, or 
     local nonprofit organization'' and inserting ``RC 
     council'';
       (D) in paragraph (3), by striking ``works of improvement'' 
     and all that follows and inserting ``project concerned is 
     necessary to accomplish and RC council area plan 
     objective;'';
       (E) in paragraph (4), by striking ``the works of 
     improvement provided for in the'' and inserting ``the project 
     provided for in the RC council'';
       (F) in paragraph (5), by inserting ``federally recognized 
     Indian tribe'' before ``or local'' each place it appears; and
       (G) in paragraph (6), by inserting ``RC council'' before 
     ``area plan'';
       (3) in subsection (b), by striking ``work of improvement'' 
     and inserting ``project''; and
       (4) in subsection (c), by striking ``any State, local unit 
     of government, or local nonprofit organization to carry out 
     any'' and inserting ``RC council to carry out any RC 
     council''.
       (g) Resource Conservation and Development Policy Board.--
     Section 1534 of such Act (16 U.S.C. 3457) is amended--
       (1) by striking the section heading and all that follows 
     through ``Sec. 1534. (a) The Secretary'' and inserting the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 1534. RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT POLICY 
                   BOARD.

       ``(a) The Secretary''; and
       (2) in subsection (b), by striking ``seven''.
       (h) Program Evaluation.--Section 1535 of such Act (16 
     U.S.C. 3458) is amended--
       (1) by striking the section heading and all that follows 
     through ``Sec. 1535. The Secretary'' and inserting the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 1535. PROGRAM EVALUATION.

       ``The Secretary'';
       (2) by inserting ``with assistance from RC councils'' 
     before ``provided'';
       (3) by inserting ``federally recognized Indian tribes,'' 
     before ``local units''; and
       (4) by striking ``1986'' and inserting ``2007''.
       (i) Limitation on Assistance.--Section 1536 of such Act (16 
     U.S.C. 3458) is amended by striking the section heading and 
     all that follows through ``Sec. 1536. The program'' and 
     inserting the following:

     ``SEC. 1536. LIMITATION ON ASSISTANCE.

       ``The program''.
       (j) Supplemental Authority of the Secretary.--Section 1537 
     of such Act (16 U.S.C. 3460) is amended--
       (1) by striking the section heading and all that follows 
     through ``Sec. 1537. The authority'' and inserting the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 1537. SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY OF SECRETARY.

       ``The authority''; and
       (2) by striking ``States, local units of government, and 
     local nonprofit organizations'' and inserting ``RC 
     councils''.
       (i) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 1538 of such 
     Act (16 U.S.C. 3461) is amended--
       (1) by striking the section heading and all that follows 
     through ``Sec. 1538. There are'' and inserting the following:

     ``SEC. 1538. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       ``There are''; and
       (2) by striking ``for each of the fiscal years 1996 through 
     2002''.

     SEC. 255. GRASSLAND RESERVE PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 1 of subtitle D of title XII of 
     the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3830-3837f) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:

               ``Subchapter D--Grassland Reserve Program

     ``SEC. 1238. GRASSLAND RESERVE PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Establishment.--The Secretary, acting through the 
     Farm Service Agency, shall establish a grassland reserve 
     program (referred to in this subchapter as the `program') to 
     assist owners in restoring and conserving eligible land 
     described in subsection (c).
       ``(b) Enrollment Conditions.--
       ``(1) Maximum enrollment.--The total number of acres 
     enrolled in the program shall not exceed 2,000,000 acres, not 
     more than 1,000,000 of which shall be restored grassland, and 
     not more than 1,000,000 of which shall be virgin (never 
     cultivated) grassland.
       ``(2) Methods of enrollment.--The Secretary shall enroll in 
     the program for a willing owner not less than 100 contiguous 
     acres of land west of the 90th meridian or not less than 50 
     contiguous acres of land east of the 90th meridian through 
     the use of--
       ``(A) 10-year, 15-year, or 20-year contracts; and
       ``(B) 30-year or permanent easements.
       ``(3) Limitation on use of easements.--Not more than one-
     third of the total amount of funds expended under the program 
     may be used to acquire 30-year and permanent easements.
       ``(c) Eligible Land.--Land shall be eligible to be enrolled 
     in the program if the Secretary determines that--
       ``(1) the land is natural grass or shrubland; or
       ``(2) the land--
       ``(A) is located in an area that has been historically 
     dominated by natural grass or shrubland; and
       ``(B) has potential to serve as habitat for animal or plant 
     populations of significant ecological value if the land is 
     restored to natural grass or shrubland.

     ``SEC. 1238A. CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS.

       ``(a) Requirements of Landowner.--
       ``(1) Contracts.--To be eligible to enroll land in the 
     program under a multi-year contract, the owner of the land 
     shall--
       ``(A) agree to comply with the terms of the contract and 
     related restoration agreements; and
       ``(B) agree to the suspension of any existing cropland base 
     and allotment history for the land under any program 
     administered by the Secretary.
       ``(2) Easements.--To be eligible to enroll land in the 
     program under an easement, the owner of the land shall--
       ``(A) grant an easement that runs with the land to the 
     Secretary;
       ``(B) create and record an appropriate deed restriction in 
     accordance with applicable State law to reflect the easement;
       ``(C) provide a written statement of consent to the 
     easement signed by persons holding a security interest or any 
     vested interest in the land;
       ``(D) provide proof of unencumbered title to the underlying 
     fee interest in the land that is the subject of the easement;
       ``(E) agree to comply with the terms of the easement and 
     related restoration agreements; and
       ``(F) agree to the suspension of any existing cropland base 
     and allotment history for the land under any program 
     administered by the Secretary.
       ``(b) Terms of Contracts and Easements.--A contract or 
     easement under the program shall--
       ``(1) permit--
       ``(A) common grazing practices on the land in a manner that 
     is consistent with maintaining the viability of natural grass 
     and shrub species indigenous to that locality;
       ``(B) haying, mowing, or haying for seed production, except 
     that such uses shall not be permitted until after the end of 
     the nesting season for birds in the local area which are in 
     significant decline or are conserved pursuant to State or 
     Federal law, as determined by the Natural Resources 
     Conservation Service State conservationist; and
       ``(C) construction of fire breaks and fences, including 
     placement of the posts necessary for fences;
       ``(2) prohibit--
       ``(A) the production of any agricultural commodity (other 
     than hay); and
       ``(B) unless allowed under subsection (d), the conduct of 
     any other activity that would disturb the surface of the land 
     covered by the contract or easement; and
       ``(3) include such additional provisions as the Secretary 
     determines are appropriate to carry out or facilitate the 
     administration of this subchapter.
       ``(c) Ranking Applications.--
       ``(1) Establishment of criteria.--The Secretary shall 
     establish criteria to evaluate and rank applications for 
     contracts or easements under this subchapter.
       ``(2) Emphasis.--In establishing the criteria, the 
     Secretary shall emphasize support for native grass and 
     shrubland, grazing operations, and plant and animal 
     biodiversity.
       ``(d) Restoration Agreements.--The Secretary shall 
     prescribe the terms by which grassland that is subject to a 
     contract or easement under the program shall be restored. The 
     agreement shall include duties of the land owner and the 
     Secretary, including the Federal share of restoration 
     payments and technical assistance.
       ``(e) Violations.--On the violation of the terms or 
     conditions of a contract, easement, or restoration agreement 
     entered into under the program--
       ``(1) the contract or easement shall remain in force; and
       ``(2) the Secretary may require the owner to refund all or 
     part of any payments received by the owner under this 
     subchapter, with interest on the payments as determined 
     appropriate by the Secretary.

     ``SEC. 1238B. DUTIES OF SECRETARY.

       ``(a) In General.--In return for the granting of an 
     easement or the execution of a contract by an owner under 
     this subchapter, the Secretary shall make payments under 
     subsection (b), make payments of the Federal share of 
     restoration under subsection (c), and provide technical 
     assistance to the owner in accordance with this section.
       ``(b) Contract and Easement Payments.--
       ``(1) Contracts.--In return for entering into a contract by 
     an owner under this subchapter, the Secretary shall make 
     annual payments to the owner during the term of the contract 
     in an amount that is not more than 75 percent of the grazing 
     value of the land.
       ``(2) Easements.--
       ``(A) In general.--In return for the granting of an 
     easement by an owner under this subchapter, the Secretary 
     shall make easement payments to the owner in an amount equal 
     to--
       ``(i) in the case of a permanent easement, the fair market 
     value of the land less the

[[Page H6206]]

     grazing value of the land encumbered by the easement; and
       ``(ii) in the case of a 30-year easement or an easement for 
     the maximum duration allowed under applicable State law, 30 
     percent of the fair market value of the land less the grazing 
     value of the land for the period that the land is encumbered 
     by the easement.
       ``(B) Payment schedule.--Easement payments may be made as a 
     single payment or annual payments, but not to exceed 10 
     annual payments of equal or unequal amounts, as agreed to by 
     the Secretary and the owner.
       ``(c) Federal Share of Restoration.--The Secretary shall 
     make payments to the owner of not more than--
       ``(1) in the case of virgin (never cultivated) grassland, 
     90 percent of the costs of carrying out measures and 
     practices necessary to restore grassland functions and 
     values; or
       ``(2) in the case of restored grassland, 75 percent of such 
     costs.
       ``(d) Technical Assistance.--A landowner who is receiving a 
     benefit under this subchapter shall be eligible to receive 
     technical assistance in accordance with section 1243(d) to 
     assist the owner or operator in carrying out a contract 
     entered into under this subchapter.
       ``(e) Payments to Others.--If an owner who is entitled to a 
     payment under this subchapter dies, becomes incompetent, is 
     otherwise unable to receive the payment, or is succeeded by 
     another person who renders or completes the required 
     performance, the Secretary shall make the payment, in 
     accordance with regulations promulgated by the Secretary and 
     without regard to any other provision of law, in such manner 
     as the Secretary determines is fair and reasonable in light 
     of all the circumstances.''.
       (b) Funding.--Section 1241 of such Act (16 U.S.C. 3841) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Grassland Reserve Program.--For fiscal years 2002 
     through 2011, the Secretary shall use a total of $254,000,000 
     of the funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation to carry out 
     subchapter D of chapter 1 of subtitle D.''.

     SEC. 256. FARMLAND STEWARDSHIP PROGRAM.

       Subtitle D of title XII of the Food Security Act of 1985 
     (16 U.S.C. 3830-3839bb) is amended by inserting after chapter 
     1 (and the matter added by section 255 of this Act) the 
     following:

               ``CHAPTER 2--FARMLAND STEWARDSHIP PROGRAM

     ``SEC. 1239. DEFINITIONS.

       ``In this chapter:
       ``(1) Agreement.--The terms `farmland stewardship 
     agreement' and `agreement' mean a stewardship contract 
     authorized by this chapter.
       ``(2) Contracting agency.--The term `contracting agency' 
     means a local conservation district, resource conservation 
     and development council, local office of the Department of 
     Agriculture, other participating government agency, or other 
     nongovernmental organization that is designated by the 
     Secretary to enter into farmland stewardship agreements on 
     behalf of the Secretary.
       ``(3) Eligible agricultural lands.--The term `eligible 
     agricultural lands' means private lands that are in primarily 
     native or natural condition or are classified as cropland, 
     pastureland, grazing lands, timberlands, or other lands as 
     specified by the Secretary that--
       ``(A) contain wildlife habitat, wetlands, or other natural 
     resources; or
       ``(B) provide benefits to the public at large, such as--
       ``(i) conservation of soil, water, and related resources;
       ``(ii) water quality protection or improvement;
       ``(iii) control of invasive and exotic species;
       ``(iv) wetland restoration, protection, and creation; and
       ``(v) wildlife habitat development and protection;
       ``(vi) preservation of open spaces, or prime, unique, or 
     other productive farm lands; and
       ``(vii) and other similar conservation purposes.
       ``(4) Farmland stewardship program; program.--The terms 
     `Farmland Stewardship Program' and `Program' mean the 
     conservation program of the Department of Agriculture 
     established by this chapter.

     ``SEC. 1239A. ESTABLISHMENT AND PURPOSE OF PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish a 
     conservation program of the Department of Agriculture, to be 
     known as the Farmland Stewardship Program, that is designed 
     to more precisely tailor and target existing conservation 
     programs to the specific conservation needs and opportunities 
     presented by individual parcels of eligible agricultural 
     lands.
       ``(b) Relation to Other Conservation Programs.--Under the 
     Farmland Stewardship Program, the Secretary may implement, or 
     combine together, the features of--
       ``(1) the Wetlands Reserve Program;
       ``(2) the Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program;
       ``(3) the Forest Land Enhancement Program;
       ``(4) the Farmland Protection Program; or
       ``(5) other conservation programs administered by other 
     Federal agencies and State and local government entities, 
     where feasible and with the consent of the administering 
     agency or government.
       ``(c) Funding Sources.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Farmland Stewardship Program and 
     agreements under the Program shall be funded by the Secretary 
     using--
       ``(A) the funding authorities of the conservation programs 
     that are implemented in whole, or in part, through the use of 
     agreements or easements; and
       ``(B) such funds as are provided to carry out the programs 
     specified in paragraphs (1) through (4) of subsection (b).
       ``(2) Cost-sharing.--It shall be a requirement of the 
     Farmland Stewardship Program that the majority of the funds 
     to carry out the Program must come from other existing 
     conservation programs, which may be Federal, State, regional, 
     local, or private, that are combined into and made a part of 
     an agreement, or from matching funding contributions made by 
     State, regional, or local agencies and divisions of 
     government or from private funding sources.
       ``(d) Personnel Costs.--The Secretary may use the Natural 
     Resources Conservation Service to carry out the Farmland 
     Stewardship Program.
       ``(e) Technical Assistance.--An owner or operator who is 
     receiving a benefit under this chapter shall be eligible to 
     receive technical assistance in accordance with section 
     1243(d) to assist the owner or operator in carrying out a 
     contract entered into under this chapter.

     ``SEC. 1239B. USE OF FARMLAND STEWARDSHIP AGREEMENTS.

       ``(a) Agreements Authorized.--The Secretary shall carry out 
     the Farmland Stewardship Program by entering into stewardship 
     contracts as determined by the Secretary, to be known as 
     farmland stewardship agreements, with the owners or operators 
     of eligible agricultural lands to maintain and protect for 
     the natural and agricultural resources on the lands.
       ``(b) Basic Purposes.--An agreement with the owner or 
     operator of eligible agricultural lands shall be used--
       ``(1) to negotiate a mutually agreeable set of guidelines, 
     practices, and procedures under which conservation practices 
     will be provided by the owner or operator to protect, 
     maintain, and, where possible, improve, the natural resources 
     on the lands covered by the agreement in return for annual 
     payments to the owner or operator;
       ``(2) to implement a conservation program or series of 
     programs where there is no such program or to implement 
     conservation management activities where there is no such 
     activity; and
       ``(3) to expand conservation practices and resource 
     management activities to a property where it is not possible 
     at the present time to negotiate or reach agreement on a 
     public purchase of a fee-simple or less-than-fee interest in 
     the property for conservation purposes.
       ``(c) Modification of Other Conservation Program 
     Elements.--If most, but not all, of the limitations, 
     conditions, and requirements of a conservation program that 
     is implemented in whole, or in part, through the Farmland 
     Stewardship Program are met with respect to a parcel of 
     eligible agricultural lands, and the purposes to be achieved 
     by the agreement to be entered into for such lands are 
     consistent with the purposes of the conservation program, 
     then the Secretary may waive any remaining limitations, 
     conditions, or requirements of the conservation program that 
     would otherwise prohibit or limit the agreement.
       ``(d) State and Local Conservation Priorities.--To the 
     maximum extent practicable, agreements shall address the 
     conservation priorities established by the State and locality 
     in which the eligible agricultural lands are located.
       ``(e) Watershed Enhancement.--To the extent practicable, 
     the Secretary shall encourage the development of Farmland 
     Stewardship Program applications on a watershed basis.

     ``SEC. 1239C. PARTNERSHIP APPROACH TO PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Authority of Secretary Exercised Through 
     Partnerships.--The Secretary may administer agreements under 
     the Farmland Stewardship Program in partnership with other 
     Federal, State, and local agencies whose programs are 
     incorporated into the Program under section 1239A.
       ``(b) Designation and Use of Contracting Agencies.--Subject 
     to subsection (c), the Secretary may authorize a local 
     conservation district, resource conservation & development 
     district, nonprofit organization, or local office of the 
     Department of Agriculture or other participating government 
     agency to enter into and administer agreements under the 
     Program as a contracting agency on behalf of the Secretary.
       ``(c) Conditions on Designation.--The Secretary may 
     designate an eligible district or office as a contracting 
     agency under subsection (b) only if the district of office--
       ``(1) submits a written request for such designation to the 
     Secretary;
       ``(2) affirms that it is willing to follow all guidelines 
     for executing and administering an agreement, as promulgated 
     by the Secretary;
       ``(3) demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Secretary 
     that it has established working relationships with owners and 
     operators of eligible agricultural lands, and based on the 
     history of these working relationships, demonstrates that it 
     has the ability to work with owners and operators of eligible 
     agricultural lands in a cooperative manner;
       ``(4) affirms its responsibility for preparing all 
     documentation for the agreement, negotiating its terms with 
     an owner or operator, monitoring compliance, making annual 
     reports to the Secretary, and administering the agreement 
     throughout its full term; and

[[Page H6207]]

       ``(5) demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Secretary 
     that it has or will have the necessary staff resources and 
     expertise to carry out its responsibilities under paragraphs 
     (3) and (4).

     ``SEC. 1239D. PARTICIPATION OF OWNERS AND OPERATORS OF 
                   ELIGIBLE AGRICULTURAL LANDS.

       ``(a) Application and Approval Process.--To participate in 
     the Farmland Stewardship Program, an owner or operator of 
     eligible agricultural lands shall--
       ``(1) submit to the Secretary an application indicating 
     interest in the Program and describing the owner's or 
     operator's property, its resources, and their ecological and 
     agricultural values;
       ``(2) submit to the Secretary a list of services to be 
     provided, a management plan to be implemented, or both, under 
     the proposed agreement;
       ``(3) if the application and list are accepted by the 
     Secretary, enter into an agreement that details the services 
     to be provided, management plan to be implemented, or both, 
     and requires compliance with the other terms of the 
     agreement.
       ``(b) Application on Behalf of an Owner or Operator.--A 
     designated contracting agency may submit the application 
     required by subsection (a) on behalf of an owner or operator 
     by if the contracting agency has secured the consent of the 
     owner or operator to enter into an agreement.''.

     SEC. 257. SMALL WATERSHED REHABILITATION PROGRAM.

       Section 14(h) of the Watershed Protection and Flood 
     Prevention Act (16 U.S.C. 1012(h)) is amended--
       (1) by adding ``and'' at the end of paragraph (1); and
       (2) by striking all that follows paragraph (1) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(2) $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2002 and each succeeding 
     fiscal year.''.

                          Subtitle G--Repeals

     SEC. 261. PROVISIONS OF THE FOOD SECURITY ACT OF 1985.

       (a) Wetlands Mitigation Banking Program.--Section 1222 of 
     the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3822) is amended by 
     striking subsection (k).
       (b) Conservation Reserve Program.--
       (1) Repeals.--(A) Section 1234(f) of such Act (16 U.S.C. 
     3834(f)) is amended by striking paragraph (3) and by 
     redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (3).
       (B) Section 1236 of such Act (16 U.S.C. 3836) is repealed.
       (2) Conforming amendments.--(A) Section 1232(a)(5) of such 
     Act (16 U.S.C. 3832(a)(5)) is amended by striking ``in 
     addition to the remedies provided under section 1236(d),''.
       (B) Section 1234(d)(4) of such Act (16 U.S.C. 3834(d)(4)) 
     is amended by striking ``subsection (f)(4)'' and inserting 
     ``subsection (f)(3)''.
       (c) Wetlands Reserve Program.--Section 1237D(c) of such Act 
     (16 U.S.C. 3837d(c)) is amended by striking paragraph (3).
       (d) Environmental Easement Program.--
       (1) Repeal.--Chapter 3 of subtitle D of title XII of such 
     Act (16 U.S.C. 3839-3839d) is repealed.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--Section 1243(b)(3) of such Act 
     (16 U.S.C. 3843(b)(3)) is amended by striking ``or 3''.
       (e) Conservation Farm Option.--Chapter 5 of subtitle D of 
     title XII of such Act (16 U.S.C. 3839bb) is repealed.
       (f) Tree Planting Initiative.--Section 1256 of such Act (16 
     U.S.C. 2101 note) is repealed.

     SEC. 262. NATIONAL NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION FOUNDATION 
                   ACT.

       Subtitle F of title III of the Federal Agriculture 
     Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (16 U.S.C. 5801-5809) is 
     repealed.

                            TITLE III--TRADE

     SEC. 301. MARKET ACCESS PROGRAM.

       Section 211(c)(1) of the Agricultural Trade Act of 1978 (7 
     U.S.C. 5641(c)(1)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and not more'' and inserting ``not 
     more'';
       (2) by inserting ``and not more than $200,000,000 for each 
     of fiscal years 2002 through 2011,'' after ``2002,''; and
       (3) by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2001''.

     SEC. 302. FOOD FOR PROGRESS.

       (a) In General.--Subsections (f)(3), (g), (k), and (l)(1) 
     of section 1110 of the Food Security Act of 1985 (7 U.S.C. 
     1736o) are each amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting 
     ``2011''.
       (b) Increase in Funding.--Section 1110(l)(1) of the Food 
     Security Act of 1985 (7 U.S.C.1736o(l)(1)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''; and
       (2) by striking ``$10,000,000'' and inserting 
     ``$15,000,000.
       (c) Exclusion From Limitation.--Section 1110(e)(2) of the 
     Food Security Act of 1985 (7 U.S.C. 1736o(e)(2)) is amended 
     by inserting ``, and subsection (g) does not apply to such 
     commodities furnished on a grant basis or on credit terms 
     under title I of the Agricultural Trade Development Act of 
     1954'' before the final period.
       (d) Transportation Costs.--Section 1110(f)(3) of the Food 
     Security Act of 1985 (7 U.S.C. 1736o(f)(3)) is amended by 
     striking ``$30,000,000'' and inserting ``$40,000,000''.
       (e) Amounts of Commodities.--Section 1110(g) of the Food 
     Security Act of 1985 (7 U.S.C. 1736o(g)) is amended by 
     striking ``500,000'' and inserting ``1,000,000''.
       (f) Multiyear Basis.--Section 1110(j) of the Food Security 
     Act of 1985 (7 U.S.C. 1736o(j)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``may'' and inserting ``is encouraged''; 
     and
       (2) by inserting ``to'' before ``approve''.
       (g) Monetization.--Section 1110(l)(3) of the Food Security 
     Act of 1985 (7 U.S.C. 1736o(l)(3)) is amended by striking 
     ``local currencies'' and inserting ``proceeds''.
       (h) New Provisions.--Section 1110 of the Food Security Act 
     of 1985 (7 U.S.C. 1736o) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(p) The Secretary is encouraged to finalize program 
     agreements and resource requests for programs under this 
     section before the beginning of the relevant fiscal year. By 
     November 1 of the relevant fiscal year, the Secretary shall 
     provide to the Committee on Agriculture and the Committee on 
     International Relations of the House of Representatives, and 
     the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the 
     Senate a list of approved programs, countries, and 
     commodities, and the total amounts of funds approved for 
     transportation and administrative costs, under this 
     section.''.

     SEC. 303. SURPLUS COMMODITIES FOR DEVELOPING OR FRIENDLY 
                   COUNTRIES.

       (a) Use of Currencies.--Section 416(b)(7)(D) of the 
     Agricultural Act of 1949 (7 U.S.C. 1431(b)(7)(D)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in clauses (i) and (iii), by striking ``foreign 
     currency'' each place it appears;
       (2) in clause (ii)--
       (A) by striking ``Foreign currencies'' and inserting 
     ``Proceeds''; and
       (B) by striking ``foreign currency''; and
       (3) in clause (iv)--
       (A) by striking ``Foreign currency proceeds'' and inserting 
     ``Proceeds'';
       (B) by striking ``country of origin'' the second place it 
     appears and all that follows through ``as necessary to 
     expedite'' and inserting ``country of origin as necessary to 
     expedite'';
       (C) by striking ``; or'' and inserting a period; and
       (D) by striking subclause (II).
       (b) Implementation of Agreements.--Section 416(b)(8)(A) of 
     the Agricultural Act of 1949 (7 U.S.C. 1431(b)(8)(A)) is 
     amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(i)'' after ``(A)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new clauses:
       ``(ii) The Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register, 
     not later than October 31 of each fiscal year, an estimate of 
     the commodities that shall be available under this section 
     for that fiscal year.
       ``(iii) The Secretary is encouraged to finalize program 
     agreements under this section not later than December 31 of 
     each fiscal year.''.

     SEC. 304. EXPORT ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM.

       Section 301(e)(1)(G) of the Agricultural Trade Act of 1978 
     (7 U.S.C. 5651(e)(1)(G)) is amended by inserting ``and for 
     each fiscal year thereafter through fiscal year 2011'' after 
     ``2002''.

     SEC. 305. FOREIGN MARKET DEVELOPMENT COOPERATOR PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Section 703 of the Agricultural Trade Act 
     of 1978 (7 U.S.C.5723) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(a) Prior Years.--'' before ``There'';
       (2) by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2001''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(b) Fiscal 2002 and Later.--For each of fiscal years 2002 
     through 2011 there are authorized to be appropriated such 
     sums as may be necessary to carry out this title, and, in 
     addition to any sums so appropriated, the Secretary shall use 
     $37,000,000 of the funds of, or an equal value of the 
     commodities of, the Commodity Credit Corporation to carry out 
     this title.''.
       (b) Value Added Products.--
       (1) In general.--Section 702(a) of the Agricultural Trade 
     Act of 1978 (7 U.S.C. 5721 et seq.) is amended by inserting 
     ``, with a significant emphasis on the importance of the 
     export of value-added United States agricultural products 
     into emerging markets'' after ``products''.
       (2) Report to Congress.--Section 702 of the Agricultural 
     Trade Act of 1978 (7 U.S.C. 5722) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following:
       ``(c) Report to Congress.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall report annually to 
     appropriate congressional committees the amount of funding 
     provided, types of programs funded, the value added products 
     that have been targeted, and the foreign markets for those 
     products that have been developed.
       ``(2) Definition.--In this subsection, the term 
     `appropriate congressional committees' means--
       ``(A) the Committee on Agriculture and the Committee on 
     International Relations of the House of Representatives; and
       ``(B) the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry 
     and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate.''.

     SEC. 306. EXPORT CREDIT GUARANTEE PROGRAM.

       (a) Reauthorization.--Section 211(b)(1) of the Agricultural 
     Trade Act of 1978 (7 U.S.C. 5641(b)(1)) is amended by 
     striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.
       (b) Processed and High Value Products.--Section 202(k)(1) 
     of the Agricultural Trade Act of 1978 (7 U.S.C. 5622(k)(1)) 
     is amended by striking ``, 2001, and 2002'' and inserting 
     ``through 2011''.

     SEC. 307. FOOD FOR PEACE (PL 480).

       The Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 
     1954 (7 U.S.C. 1691 et seq.) is amended--
       (1) in section 2 (7 U.S.C. 1691), by striking paragraph (2) 
     and inserting the following:

[[Page H6208]]

       ``(2) promote broad-based, equitable, and sustainable 
     development, including agricultural development as well as 
     conflict prevention;'';
       (2) in section 202(e)(1) (7 U.S.C. 1722(e)(1)), by striking 
     ``not less than $10,000,000, and not more than $28,000,000'' 
     and inserting ``not less than 5 percent and not more than 10 
     percent of such funds'';
       (3) in section 203(a) (7 U.S.C. 1723(a)), by striking ``the 
     recipient country, or in a country'' and inserting ``one or 
     more recipient countries, or one or more countries'';
       (4) in section 203(c) (7 U.S.C. 1723(c))--
       (A) by striking ``foreign currency''; and
       (B) by striking ``the recipient country, or in a country'' 
     and inserting ``one or more recipient countries, or one or 
     more countries'';
       (5) in section 203(d) (7 U.S.C. 1723(d))--
       (A) by striking ``Foreign currencies'' and inserting 
     ``Proceeds'';
       (B) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) by striking ``income generating'' and inserting 
     ``income-generating''; and
       (ii) by striking ``the recipient country or within a 
     country'' and inserting ``one or more recipient countries, or 
     one or more countries''; and
       (C) in paragraph (3), by inserting a comma after 
     ``invested'' and ``used'';
       (6) in section 204(a) (7 U.S.C. 1724(a))--
       (A) by striking ``1996 through 2002'' and inserting ``2002 
     through 2011''; and
       (B) by striking ``2,025,000'' and inserting ``2,250,000'';
       (7) in section 205(f) (7 U.S.C. 1725(f)), by striking 
     ``2002'' and inserting ``2011'';
       (8) in section 207(a) (7 U.S.C. 1726a(a))--
       (A) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3); and
       (B) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
       ``(1) Recipient countries.--A proposal to enter into a non-
     emergency food assistance agreement under this title shall 
     identify the recipient country or countries subject to the 
     agreement.
       ``(2) Time for decision.--Not later than 120 days after 
     receipt by the Administrator of a proposal submitted by an 
     eligible organization under this title, the Administrator 
     shall make a decision concerning such proposal.'';
       (9) in section 208(f), by striking ``2002'' and inserting 
     ``2011'';
       (10) in section 403 (7 U.S.C. 1733), by inserting after 
     subsection (k) the following:
       ``(l) Sales Procedures.--Subsections (b) and (h) shall 
     apply to sales of commodities to generate proceeds for titles 
     II and III of this Act, section 416(b) of the Agricultural 
     Act of 1949, and section 1110 of the Food and Security Act of 
     1985. Such sales transactions may be in United States dollars 
     and other currencies.'';
       (11) in section 407(c)(4), by striking ``2001 and 2002'' 
     and inserting ``2001 through 2011'';
       (12) in section 408, by striking ``2002'' and inserting 
     ``2011''; and
       (13) in section 501(c), by striking ``2002'' and inserting 
     ``2011''.

     SEC. 308. EMERGING MARKETS.

       Section 1542 of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and 
     Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5622 note) is amended--
       (1) in subsections (a) and (d)(1)(A)(i), by striking 
     ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''; and
       (2) in subsection (d)(1)(H), by striking ``$10,000,000 in 
     any fiscal year'' and inserting ``$13,000,000 for each of 
     fiscal years 2002 through 2011''.

     SEC. 309. BILL EMERSON HUMANITARIAN TRUST.

       Subsections (b)(2)(B)(i), (h)(1), and (h)(2) of section 302 
     of the Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust Act (7 U.S.C. 1736f-1) 
     are each amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 310. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR SPECIALTY CROPS.

       (a) Establishment.--The Secretary of Agriculture shall 
     establish an export assistance program (referred to in this 
     section as the ``program'') to address unique barriers that 
     prohibit or threaten the export of United States specialty 
     crops.
       (b) Purpose.--The program shall provide direct assistance 
     through public and private sector projects and technical 
     assistance to remove, resolve, or mitigate sanitary and 
     phytosanitary and related barriers to trade.
       (c) Priority.--The program shall address time sensitive and 
     strategic market access projects based on--
       (1) trade effect on market retention, market access, and 
     market expansion; and
       (2) trade impact.
       (d) Funding.--The Secretary shall make available $3,000,000 
     for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2011 of the funds of, 
     or an equal value of commodities owned by, the Commodity 
     Credit Corporation.

     SEC. 311. FARMERS FOR AFRICA AND CARIBBEAN BASIN PROGRAM.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) Many African farmers and farmers in Caribbean Basin 
     countries use antiquated techniques to produce their crops, 
     which result in poor crop quality and low crop yields.
       (2) Many of these farmers are losing business to farmers in 
     European and Asian countries who use advanced planting and 
     production techniques and are supplying agricultural produce 
     to restaurants, resorts, tourists, grocery stores, and other 
     consumers in Africa and Caribbean Basin countries.
       (3) A need exists for the training of African farmers and 
     farmers in Caribbean Basin countries and other developing 
     countries in farming techniques that are appropriate for the 
     majority of eligible farmers in African or Caribbean 
     countries, including standard growing practices, insecticide 
     and sanitation procedures, and other farming methods that 
     will produce increased yields of more nutritious and 
     healthful crops.
       (4) African-American and other American farmers, as well as 
     banking and insurance professionals, are a ready source of 
     agribusiness expertise that would be invaluable for African 
     farmers and farmers in Caribbean Basin countries.
       (5) A United States commitment is appropriate to support 
     the development of a comprehensive agricultural skills 
     training program for these farmers that focuses on--
       (A) improving knowledge of insecticide and sanitation 
     procedures to prevent crop destruction;
       (B) teaching modern farming techniques, including the 
     identification and development of standard growing practices 
     and the establishment of systems for recordkeeping, that 
     would facilitate a continual analysis of crop production;
       (C) the use and maintenance of farming equipment that is 
     appropriate for the majority of eligible farmers in African 
     or Caribbean Basin countries;
       (D) expansion of small farming operations into agribusiness 
     enterprises through the development and use of village 
     banking systems and the use of agricultural risk insurance 
     pilot products, resulting in increased access to credit for 
     these farmers; and
       (E) marketing crop yields to prospective purchasers 
     (businesses and individuals) for local needs and export.
       (6) The participation of African-American and other 
     American farmers and American agricultural farming 
     specialists in such a training program promises the added 
     benefit of improving access to African and Caribbean Basin 
     markets for American farmers and United States farm equipment 
     and products and business linkages for United States 
     insurance providers offering technical assistance on, among 
     other things, agricultural risk insurance products.
       (7) Existing programs that promote the exchange of 
     agricultural knowledge and expertise through the exchange of 
     American and foreign farmers have been effective in promoting 
     improved agricultural techniques and food security, and, 
     thus, the extension of additional resources to such farmer-
     to- farmer exchanges is warranted.
       (b) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Agricultural farming specialist.--The term 
     ``agricultural farming specialist'' means an individual 
     trained to transfer information and technical support 
     relating to agribusiness, food security, the mitigation and 
     alleviation of hunger, the mitigation of agricultural and 
     farm risk, maximization of crop yields, agricultural trade, 
     and other needs specific to a geographical location as 
     determined by the President.
       (2) Caribbean basin country.--The term ``Caribbean Basin 
     country'' means a country eligible for designation as a 
     beneficiary country under section 212 of the Caribbean Basin 
     Economic Recovery Act (19 U.S.C. 2702).
       (3) Eligible farmer.--The term ``eligible farmer'' means an 
     individual owning or working on farm land (as defined by a 
     particular country's laws relating to property) in the sub-
     Saharan region of the continent of Africa, in a Caribbean 
     Basin country, or in any other developing country in which 
     the President determines there is a need for farming 
     expertise or for information or technical support described 
     in paragraph (1).
       (4) Program.--The term ``Program'' means the Farmers for 
     Africa and Caribbean Basin Program established under this 
     section.
       (c) Establishment of Program.--The President shall 
     establish a grant program, to be known as the ``Farmers for 
     Africa and Caribbean Basin Program'', to assist eligible 
     organizations in carrying out bilateral exchange programs 
     whereby African-American and other American farmers and 
     American agricultural farming specialists share technical 
     knowledge with eligible farmers regarding--
       (1) maximization of crop yields;
       (2) use of agricultural risk insurance as financial tools 
     and a means of risk management (as allowed by Annex II of the 
     World Trade Organization rules);
       (3) expansion of trade in agricultural products;
       (4) enhancement of local food security;
       (5) the mitigation and alleviation of hunger;
       (6) marketing agricultural products in local, regional, and 
     international markets; and
       (7) other ways to improve farming in countries in which 
     there are eligible farmers.
       (d) Eligible Grantees.--The President may make a grant 
     under the Program to--
       (1) a college or university, including a historically black 
     college or university, or a foundation maintained by a 
     college or university; and
       (2) a private organization or corporation, including 
     grassroots organizations, with an established and 
     demonstrated capacity to carry out such a bilateral exchange 
     program.
       (e) Terms of Program.--(1) It is the goal of the Program 
     that at least 1,000 farmers participate in the training 
     program by December 31, 2005, of which 80 percent of the 
     total number of participating farmers will be African farmers 
     or farmers in Caribbean Basin countries and 20 percent of the 
     total number of participating farmers will be American 
     farmers.
       (2) Training under the Program will be provided to eligible 
     farmers in groups to ensure

[[Page H6209]]

     that information is shared and passed on to other eligible 
     farmers. Eligible farmers will be trained to be specialists 
     in their home communities and will be encouraged not to 
     retain enhanced farming technology for their own personal 
     enrichment.
       (3) Through partnerships with American businesses, the 
     Program will utilize the commercial industrial capability of 
     businesses dealing in agriculture to train eligible farmers 
     on farming equipment that is appropriate for the majority of 
     eligible farmers in African or Caribbean Basin countries and 
     to introduce eligible farmers to the use of insurance as a 
     risk management tool.
       (f) Selection of Participants.--(1) The selection of 
     eligible farmers, as well as African-American and other 
     American farmers and agricultural farming specialists, to 
     participate in the Program shall be made by grant recipients 
     using an application process approved by the President.
       (2) Participating farmers must have sufficient farm or 
     agribusiness experience and have obtained certain targets 
     regarding the productivity of their farm or agribusiness.
       (g) Grant Period.--The President may make grants under the 
     Program during a period of 5 years beginning on October 1 of 
     the first fiscal year for which funds are made available to 
     carry out the Program.
       (h) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $10,000,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2002 through 2011.

     SEC. 312. GEORGE MCGOVERN-ROBERT DOLE INTERNATIONAL FOOD FOR 
                   EDUCATION AND CHILD NUTRITION PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--The President may, subject to subsection 
     (j), direct the procurement of commodities and the provision 
     of financial and technical assistance to carry out--
       (1) preschool and school feeding programs in foreign 
     countries to improve food security, reduce the incidence of 
     hunger, and improve literacy and primary education, 
     particularly with respect to girls; and
       (2) maternal, infant, and child nutrition programs for 
     pregnant women, nursing mothers, infants, and children who 
     are five years of age or younger.
       (b) Eligible Commodities and Cost Items.--Notwithstanding 
     any other provision of law--
       (1) any agricultural commodity is eligible for distribution 
     under this section;
       (2) as necessary to achieve the purposes of this section--
       (A) funds may be used to pay the transportation costs 
     incurred in moving commodities (including prepositioned 
     commodities) provided under this section from the designated 
     points of entry or ports of entry of one or more recipient 
     countries to storage and distribution sites in these 
     countries, and associated storage and distribution costs;
       (B) funds may be used to pay the costs of activities 
     conducted in the recipient countries by a nonprofit voluntary 
     organization, cooperative, or intergovernmental agency or 
     organization that would enhance the effectiveness of the 
     activities implemented by such entities under this section; 
     and
       (C) funds may be provided to meet the allowable 
     administrative expenses of private voluntary organizations, 
     cooperatives, or intergovernmental organizations which are 
     implementing activities under this section; and
       (3) for the purposes of this section, the term 
     ``agricultural commodities'' includes any agricultural 
     commodity, or the products thereof, produced in the United 
     States.
       (c) General Authorities.--The President shall designate one 
     or more Federal agencies to--
       (1) implement the program established under this section;
       (2) ensure that the program established under this section 
     is consistent with the foreign policy and development 
     assistance objectives of the United States; and
       (3) consider, in determining whether a country should 
     receive assistance under this section, whether the government 
     of the country is taking concrete steps to improve the 
     preschool and school systems in its country.
       (d) Eligible Recipients.--Assistance may be provided under 
     this section to private voluntary organizations, 
     cooperatives, intergovernmental organizations, governments 
     and their agencies, and other organizations.
       (e) Procedures.--
       (1) In general.--In carrying out subsection (a) the 
     President shall assure that procedures are established that--
       (A) provide for the submission of proposals by eligible 
     recipients, each of which may include one or more recipient 
     countries, for commodities and other assistance under this 
     section;
       (B) provide for eligible commodities and assistance on a 
     multi-year basis;
       (C) ensure eligible recipients demonstrate the 
     organizational capacity and the ability to develop, 
     implement, monitor, report on, and provide accountability for 
     activities conducted under this section;
       (D) provide for the expedited development, review, and 
     approval of proposals submitted in accordance with this 
     section;
       (E) ensure monitoring and reporting by eligible recipients 
     on the use of commodities and other assistance provided under 
     this section; and
       (F) allow for the sale or barter of commodities by eligible 
     recipients to acquire funds to implement activities that 
     improve the food security of women and children or otherwise 
     enhance the effectiveness of programs and activities 
     authorized under this section.
       (2) Priorities for program funding.--In carrying out 
     paragraph (1) with respect to criteria for determining the 
     use of commodities and other assistance provided for programs 
     and activities authorized under this section, the 
     implementing agency may consider the ability of eligible 
     recipients to--
       (A) identify and assess the needs of beneficiaries, 
     especially malnourished or undernourished mothers and their 
     children who are five years of age or younger, and school-age 
     children who are malnourished, undernourished, or do not 
     regularly attend school;
       (B)(i) in the case of preschool and school-age children, 
     target low-income areas where children's enrollment and 
     attendance in school is low or girls' enrollment and 
     participation in preschool or school is low, and incorporate 
     developmental objectives for improving literacy and primary 
     education, particularly with respect to girls; and
       (ii) in the case of programs to benefit mothers and 
     children who are five years of age or younger, coordinate 
     supplementary feeding and nutrition programs with existing or 
     newly-established maternal, infant, and children programs 
     that provide health-needs interventions, and which may 
     include maternal, prenatal, and postnatal and newborn care;
       (C) involve indigenous institutions as well as local 
     communities and governments in the development and 
     implementation to foster local capacity building and 
     leadership; and
       (D) carry out multiyear programs that foster local self-
     sufficiency and ensure the longevity of recipient country 
     programs.
       (f) Use of Food and Nutrition Service.--The Food and 
     Nutrition Service of the Department of Agriculture may 
     provide technical advice on the establishment of programs 
     under subsection (a)(1) and on their implementation in the 
     field in recipient countries.
       (g) Multilateral Involvement.--The President is urged to 
     engage existing international food aid coordinating 
     mechanisms to ensure multilateral commitments to, and 
     participation in, programs like those supported under this 
     section. The President shall report annually to the Committee 
     on International Relations and the Committee on Agriculture 
     of the United States House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Foreign Relations and the Committee on 
     Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the United States 
     Senate on the commitments and activities of governments, 
     including the United States government, in the global effort 
     to reduce child hunger and increase school attendance.
       (h) Private Sector Involvement.--The President is urged to 
     encourage the support and active involvement of the private 
     sector, foundations, and other individuals and organizations 
     in programs assisted under this section.
       (i) Requirement To Safeguard Local Production and Usual 
     Marketing.--The requirement of section 403(a) of the 
     Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 1954 (7 
     U.S.C. 1733(a) and 1733(h)) applies with respect to the 
     availability of commodities under this section.
       (j) Funding.--
       (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated 
     such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section for 
     each of fiscal years 2002 through 2011. Nothing in this 
     section shall be interpreted to preclude the use of 
     authorities in effect before the date of the enactment of 
     this Act to carry out the ongoing Global Food for Education 
     Initiative.
       (2) Administrative expenses.--Funds made available to carry 
     out the purposes of this section may be used to pay the 
     administrative expenses of any agency of the Federal 
     Government implementing or assisting in the implementation of 
     this section.

     SEC. 313. STUDY ON FEE FOR SERVICES.

       (a) Study.--Not later than one year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall provide a report 
     to the designated congressional committees on the feasibility 
     of instituting a program which would charge and retain a fee 
     to cover the costs for providing persons with commercial 
     services performed abroad on matters within the authority of 
     the Department of Agriculture administered through the 
     Foreign Agriculture Service or any successor agency.
       (b) Definition.--In this section, the term ``designated 
     congressional committees'' means the Committee on Agriculture 
     and the Committee on International Relations of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition 
     and Forestry of the Senate.

     SEC. 314. NATIONAL EXPORT STRATEGY REPORT.

       (a) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture shall 
     provide to the designated congressional committees a report 
     on the policies and programs that the Department of 
     Agriculture has undertaken to implement the National Export 
     Strategy Report. The report shall contain a description of 
     the effective coordination of these policies and programs 
     through all other appropriate Federal agencies participating 
     in the Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee and the steps 
     the Department of Agriculture is taking to reduce the level 
     of protectionism in agricultural trade, to foster market 
     growth, and to improve the commercial potential of markets in 
     both developed and developing countries for United States 
     agricultural commodities.
       (b) Definition.--In this section, the term ``designated 
     congressional committees''

[[Page H6210]]

     means the Committee on Agriculture and the Committee on 
     International Relations of the House of Representatives and 
     the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry of the 
     Senate.

                      TITLE IV--NUTRITION PROGRAMS

                     Subtitle A--Food Stamp Program

     SEC. 401. SIMPLIFIED DEFINITION OF INCOME.

       Section 5(d) of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 
     2014(d)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (3)--
       (A) by striking ``and (C)'' and inserting ``(C)''; and
       (B) by inserting after ``premiums,'' the following:
     ``and (D) to the extent that any other educational loans on 
     which payment is deferred, grants, scholarships, fellowships, 
     veterans' educational benefits, and the like, are required to 
     be excluded under title XIX of the Social Security Act, the 
     state agency may exclude it under this subsection,'';
       (2) by striking ``and (15)'' and inserting ``(15)'';
       (3) by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following:
     ``, (16) any state complementary assistance program payments 
     that are excluded pursuant to subsections (a) and (b) of 
     section 1931 of title XIX of the Social Security Act, and 
     (17) at the option of the State agency, any types of income 
     that the State agency does not consider when determining 
     eligibility for cash assistance under a program funded under 
     part A of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 601 
     et seq.) or medical assistance under section 1931 of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396u-1), except that this 
     paragraph shall not authorize a State agency to exclude 
     earned income, payments under title I, II, IV, X, XIV, or XVI 
     of the Social Security Act, or such other types of income 
     whose consideration the Secretary determines essential to 
     equitable determinations of eligibility and benefit levels 
     except to the extent that those types of income may be 
     excluded under other paragraphs of this subsection''.

     SEC. 402. STANDARD DEDUCTION.

       Section 5(e)(1) of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 
     2014(e)(1)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``of $134, $229, $189, $269, and $118'' and 
     inserting ``equal to 9.7 percent of the eligibility limit 
     established under section 5(c)(1) for fiscal year 2002 but 
     not more than 9.7 percent of the eligibility limit 
     established under section 5(c)(1) for a household of six for 
     fiscal year 2002 nor less than $134, $229, $189, $269, and 
     $118''; and
       (2) by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following:

     ``, except that the standard deduction for Guam shall be 
     determined with reference to 2 times the eligibility limits 
     under section 5(c)(1) for fiscal year 2002 for the 48 
     contiguous states and the District of Columbia''.

     SEC. 403. TRANSITIONAL FOOD STAMPS FOR FAMILIES MOVING FROM 
                   WELFARE.

       (a) In General.--Section 11 of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 
     (7 U.S.C. 2020) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(s) Transitional Benefits Option.--
       ``(1) In general.--A State may provide transitional food 
     stamp benefits to a household that is no longer eligible to 
     receive cash assistance under a State program funded under 
     part A of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 601 
     et seq.).
       ``(2) Transitional benefits period.--Under paragraph (1), a 
     household may continue to receive food stamp benefits for a 
     period of not more than 6 months after the date on which cash 
     assistance is terminated.
       ``(3) Amount.--During the transitional benefits period 
     under paragraph (2), a household shall receive an amount 
     equal to the allotment received in the month immediately 
     preceding the date on which cash assistance is terminated. A 
     household receiving benefits under this subsection may apply 
     for recertification at any time during the transitional 
     benefit period. If a household reapplies, its allotment shall 
     be determined without regard to this subsection for all 
     subsequent months.
       ``(4) Determination of future eligibility.--In the final 
     month of the transitional benefits period under paragraph 
     (2), the State agency may--
       ``(A) require a household to cooperate in a redetermination 
     of eligibility to receive an authorization card; and
       ``(B) renew eligibility for a new certification period for 
     the household without regard to whether the previous 
     certification period has expired.
       ``(5) Limitation.--A household sanctioned under section 6, 
     or for a failure to perform an action required by Federal, 
     State, or local law relating to such cash assistance program, 
     shall not be eligible for transitional benefits under this 
     subsection.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--(1) Section 3(c) of the Food 
     Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2012(c)) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following: ``The limits in this section may be 
     extended until the end of any transitional benefit period 
     established under section 11(s).''.
       (2) Section 6(c) of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 
     2015(c)) is amended by striking ``No household'' and 
     inserting ``Except in a case in which a household is 
     receiving transitional benefits during the transitional 
     benefits period under section 11(s), no household''.

     SEC. 404. QUALITY CONTROL SYSTEMS.

       (a) Targeted Quality Control System.--Section 16(c) of the 
     Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2025(c)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)(C)--
       (A) in the matter preceding clause (i), by inserting ``the 
     Secretary determines that a 95 percent statistical 
     probability exists that for the 3d consecutive year'' after 
     ``year in which''; and
       (B) in clause (i)(II)(aa)(bbb) by striking ``the national 
     performance measure for the fiscal year'' and inserting ``10 
     percent'';
       (2) in the 1st sentence of paragraph (4)--
       (A) by striking ``or claim'' and inserting ``claim''; and
       (B) by inserting ``or performance under the measures 
     established under paragraph (10),'' after ``for payment 
     error,'';
       (3) in paragraph (5), by inserting ``to comply with 
     paragraph (10) and'' before ``to establish'';
       (4) in the 1st sentence of paragraph (6), by inserting 
     ``one percentage point more than'' after ``measure that shall 
     be''; and
       (5) by inserting at the end the following:
       ``(10)(A) In addition to the measures established under 
     paragraph (1), the Secretary shall measure the performance of 
     State agencies in each of the following regards--
       ``(i) compliance with the deadlines established under 
     paragraphs (3) and (9) of section 11(e); and
       ``(ii) the percentage of negative eligibility decisions 
     that are made correctly.
       ``(B) For each fiscal year, the Secretary shall make 
     excellence bonus payments of $1,000,000 each to the 5 States 
     with the highest combined performance in the 2 measures in 
     subparagraph (A) and to the 5 States whose combined 
     performance under the 2 measures in subparagraph (A) most 
     improved in such fiscal year.
       ``(C) For any fiscal year in which the Secretary determines 
     that a 95 percent statistical probability exists that a State 
     agency's performance with respect to any of the 2 performance 
     measures established in subparagraph (A) is substantially 
     worse than a level the Secretary deems reasonable, other than 
     for good cause shown, the Secretary shall investigate that 
     State agency's administration of the food stamp program. If 
     this investigation determines that the State's administration 
     has been deficient, the Secretary shall require the State 
     agency to take prompt corrective action.''.
       (b) Implementation.--The amendment made by subsection 
     (a)(5) shall apply to all fiscal years beginning on or after 
     October 1, 2001, and ending before October 1, 2007. All other 
     amendments made by this section shall apply to all fiscal 
     years beginning on or after October 1, 1999.

     SEC. 405. SIMPLIFIED APPLICATION AND ELIGIBILITY 
                   DETERMINATION SYSTEMS.

       Section 16 of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2025) is 
     amended by inserting at the end the following:
       ``(l) Simplification of Systems.--The Secretary shall 
     expend up to $10 million in each fiscal year to pay 100 
     percent of the costs of State agencies to develop and 
     implement simple application and eligibility determination 
     systems.''.

     SEC. 406. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) Employment and Training Programs.--Section 16(h)(1) of 
     the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2025(h)(1)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A)(vii) by striking ``fiscal year 
     2002'' and inserting ``each of the fiscal years 2003 through 
     2011''; and
       (2) in subparagraph (B) by striking ``2002'' and inserting 
     ``2011''.
       (b) Cost Allocation.--Section 16(k)(3) of the Food Stamp 
     Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2025(k)(3)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A) by striking ``2002'' and inserting 
     ``2011''; and
       (2) in subparagraph (B)(ii) by striking ``2002'' and 
     inserting ``2011''.
       (c) Cash Payment Pilot Projects.--Section 17(b)(1)(B)(vi) 
     of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2026(b)(1)(B)(vi)) is 
     amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.
       (d) Outreach Demonstration Projects.--Section 17(i)(1)(A) 
     of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2026(i)(1)(A)) is 
     amended by striking ``1992 through 2002'' and inserting 
     ``2003 through 2011''.
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 18(a)(1) of 
     the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2027(a)(1)) is amended 
     by striking ``1996 through 2002'' and inserting ``2003 
     through 2011''.
       (f) Puerto Rico.--Section 19(a)(1)(A) of the Food Stamp Act 
     of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2028(a)(1)(A)) is amended--
       (1) in clause (ii) by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) in clause (iii) by adding ``and'' at the end; and
       (3) by inserting after clause (iii) the following:
       ``(iv) for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2011, the 
     amount equal to the amount required to be paid under this 
     subparagraph for the preceding fiscal year, as adjusted by 
     the percentage by which the thrifty food plan is adjusted 
     under section 3(o)(4) for the current fiscal year for which 
     the amount is determined under this clause;''.
       (g) Territory of American Samoa.--Section 24 of the Food 
     Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2033) is amended by striking 
     ``1996 through 2002'' and inserting ``2003 through 2011''.
       (h) Assistance for Community Food Projects.--Section 
     25(b)(2) of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2034(b)(2)) 
     is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A) by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) in subparagraph (B)--

[[Page H6211]]

       (A) by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2001''; and
       (B) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``; 
     and''; and
       (3) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following:
       ``(C) $7,500,000 for each of the fiscal years 2002 through 
     2011.''.
       (i) Availability of Commodities for the Emergency Food 
     Assistance Program.--Section 27 of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 
     (7 U.S.C. 2036) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by striking ``1997 through 2002'' and inserting ``2002 
     through 2011''; and
       (B) by striking ``$100,000,000'' and inserting 
     ``$140,000,000''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Use of Funds for Related Costs.--For each of the 
     fiscal years 2002 through 2011, the Secretary shall use 
     $10,000,000 of the funds made available under subsection (a) 
     to pay for the direct and indirect costs of the States 
     related to the processing, storing, transporting, and 
     distributing to eligible recipient agencies of commodities 
     purchased by the Secretary under such subsection and 
     commodities secured from other sources, including commodities 
     secured by gleaning (as defined in section 111 of the Hunger 
     Prevention Act of 1988 (7 U.S.C. 612c note)).''.
       (j) Special Effective Date.--The amendments made by 
     subsections (h) and (i) shall take effect of October 1, 2001.

                   Subtitle B--Commodity Distribution

     SEC. 441. DISTRIBUTION OF SURPLUS COMMODITIES TO SPECIAL 
                   NUTRITION PROJECTS.

       Section 1114(a) of the Agriculture and Food Act of 1981 (7 
     U.S.C. 1431e) is amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting 
     ``2011''.

     SEC. 442. COMMODITY SUPPLEMENTAL FOOD PROGRAM.

       The Agriculture and Consumer Protection Act of 1973 (7 
     U.S.C. 612c note) is amended--
       (1) in section 4(a) by striking ``1991 through 2002'' and 
     inserting ``2003 through 2011''; and
       (2) in subsections (a)(2) and (d)(2) of section 5 by 
     striking ``1991 through 2002'' and inserting ``2003 through 
     2011''.

     SEC. 443. EMERGENCY FOOD ASSISTANCE.

       The 1st sentence of section 204(a)(1) of the Emergency Food 
     Assistance Act of 1983 (7 U.S.C. 7508(a)(1)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``1991 through 2002'' and inserting ``2003 
     through 2011'';
       (2) by striking ``administrative''; and
       (3) by inserting ``storage,'' after ``processing,''.

                  Subtitle C--Miscellaneous Provisions

     SEC. 461. HUNGER FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM.

       (a) Short Title; Findings.--
       (1) Short title.--This section may be cited as the 
     ``Congressional Hunger Fellows Act of 2001''.
       (2) Findings.--The Congress finds as follows:
       (A) There is a critical need for compassionate individuals 
     who are committed to assisting people who suffer from hunger 
     as well as a need for such individuals to initiate and 
     administer solutions to the hunger problem.
       (B) Bill Emerson, the distinguished late Representative 
     from the 8th District of Missouri, demonstrated his 
     commitment to solving the problem of hunger in a bipartisan 
     manner, his commitment to public service, and his great 
     affection for the institution and the ideals of the United 
     States Congress.
       (C) George T. (Mickey) Leland, the distinguished late 
     Representative from the 18th District of Texas, demonstrated 
     his compassion for those in need, his high regard for public 
     service, and his lively exercise of political talents.
       (D) The special concern that Mr. Emerson and Mr. Leland 
     demonstrated during their lives for the hungry and poor was 
     an inspiration for others to work toward the goals of 
     equality and justice for all.
       (E) These 2 outstanding leaders maintained a special bond 
     of friendship regardless of political affiliation and worked 
     together to encourage future leaders to recognize and provide 
     service to others, and therefore it is especially appropriate 
     to honor the memory of Mr. Emerson and Mr. Leland by creating 
     a fellowship program to develop and train the future leaders 
     of the United States to pursue careers in humanitarian 
     service.
       (b) Establishment.--There is established as an independent 
     entity of the legislative branch of the United States 
     Government the Congressional Hunger Fellows Program 
     (hereinafter in this section referred to as the ``Program'').
       (c) Board of Trustees.--
       (1) In general.--The Program shall be subject to the 
     supervision and direction of a Board of Trustees.
       (2) Members of the board of trustees.--
       (A) Appointment.--The Board shall be composed of 6 voting 
     members appointed under clause (i) and 1 nonvoting ex officio 
     member designated in clause (ii) as follows:
       (i) Voting members.--(I) The Speaker of the House of 
     Representatives shall appoint 2 members.
       (II) The minority leader of the House of Representatives 
     shall appoint 1 member.
       (III) The majority leader of the Senate shall appoint 2 
     members.
       (IV) The minority leader of the Senate shall appoint 1 
     member.
       (ii) Nonvoting member.--The Executive Director of the 
     program shall serve as a nonvoting ex officio member of the 
     Board.
       (B) Terms.--Members of the Board shall serve a term of 4 
     years.
       (C) Vacancy.--
       (i) Authority of board.--A vacancy in the membership of the 
     Board does not affect the power of the remaining members to 
     carry out this section.
       (ii) Appointment of successors.--A vacancy in the 
     membership of the Board shall be filled in the same manner in 
     which the original appointment was made.
       (iii) Incomplete term.--If a member of the Board does not 
     serve the full term applicable to the member, the individual 
     appointed to fill the resulting vacancy shall be appointed 
     for the remainder of the term of the predecessor of the 
     individual.
       (D) Chairperson.--As the first order of business of the 
     first meeting of the Board, the members shall elect a 
     Chairperson.
       (E) Compensation.--
       (i) In general.--Subject to clause (ii), members of the 
     Board may not receive compensation for service on the Board.
       (ii) Travel.--Members of the Board may be reimbursed for 
     travel, subsistence, and other necessary expenses incurred in 
     carrying out the duties of the program.
       (3) Duties.--
       (A) Bylaws.--
       (i) Establishment.--The Board shall establish such bylaws 
     and other regulations as may be appropriate to enable the 
     Board to carry out this section, including the duties 
     described in this paragraph.
       (ii) Contents.--Such bylaws and other regulations shall 
     include provisions--

       (I) for appropriate fiscal control, funds accountability, 
     and operating principles;
       (II) to prevent any conflict of interest, or the appearance 
     of any conflict of interest, in the procurement and 
     employment actions taken by the Board or by any officer or 
     employee of the Board and in the selection and placement of 
     individuals in the fellowships developed under the program;
       (III) for the resolution of a tie vote of the members of 
     the Board; and
       (IV) for authorization of travel for members of the Board.

       (iii) Transmittal to congress.--Not later than 90 days 
     after the date of the first meeting of the Board, the 
     Chairperson of the Board shall transmit to the appropriate 
     congressional committees a copy of such bylaws.
       (B) Budget.--For each fiscal year the program is in 
     operation, the Board shall determine a budget for the program 
     for that fiscal year. All spending by the program shall be 
     pursuant to such budget unless a change is approved by the 
     Board.
       (C) Process for selection and placement of fellows.--The 
     Board shall review and approve the process established by the 
     Executive Director for the selection and placement of 
     individuals in the fellowships developed under the program.
       (D) Allocation of funds to fellowships.--The Board of 
     Trustees shall determine the priority of the programs to be 
     carried out under this section and the amount of funds to be 
     allocated for the Emerson and Leland fellowships.
       (d) Purposes; Authority of Program.--
       (1) Purposes.--The purposes of the program are--
       (A) to encourage future leaders of the United States to 
     pursue careers in humanitarian service, to recognize the 
     needs of people who are hungry and poor, and to provide 
     assistance and compassion for those in need;
       (B) to increase awareness of the importance of public 
     service; and
       (C) to provide training and development opportunities for 
     such leaders through placement in programs operated by 
     appropriate organizations or entities.
       (2) Authority.--The program is authorized to develop such 
     fellowships to carry out the purposes of this section, 
     including the fellowships described in paragraph (3).
       (3) Fellowships.--
       (A) In general.--The program shall establish and carry out 
     the Bill Emerson Hunger Fellowship and the Mickey Leland 
     Hunger Fellowship.
       (B) Curriculum.--
       (i) In general.--The fellowships established under 
     subparagraph (A) shall provide experience and training to 
     develop the skills and understanding necessary to improve the 
     humanitarian conditions and the lives of individuals who 
     suffer from hunger, including--

       (I) training in direct service to the hungry in conjunction 
     with community-based organizations through a program of field 
     placement; and
       (II) experience in policy development through placement in 
     a governmental entity or nonprofit organization.

       (ii) Focus of bill emerson hunger fellowship.--The Bill 
     Emerson Hunger Fellowship shall address hunger and other 
     humanitarian needs in the United States.
       (iii) Focus of mickey leland hunger fellowship.--The Mickey 
     Leland Hunger Fellowship shall address international hunger 
     and other humanitarian needs.
       (iv) Workplan.--To carry out clause (i) and to assist in 
     the evaluation of the fellowships under paragraph (4), the 
     program shall, for each fellow, approve a work plan that 
     identifies the target objectives for the fellow in the 
     fellowship, including specific duties and responsibilities 
     related to those objectives.
       (C) Period of fellowship.--
       (i) Emerson fellow.--A Bill Emerson Hunger Fellowship 
     awarded under this paragraph shall be for no more than 1 
     year.
       (ii) Leland fellow.--A Mickey Leland Hunger Fellowship 
     awarded under this paragraph shall be for no more than 2 
     years. Not less than one year of the fellowship shall be

[[Page H6212]]

     dedicated to fulfilling the requirement of subparagraph 
     (B)(i)(I).
       (D) Selection of fellows.--
       (i) In general.--A fellowship shall be awarded pursuant to 
     a nationwide competition established by the program.
       (ii) Qualification.--A successful applicant shall be an 
     individual who has demonstrated--

       (I) an intent to pursue a career in humanitarian service 
     and outstanding potential for such a career;
       (II) a commitment to social change;
       (III) leadership potential or actual leadership experience;
       (IV) diverse life experience;
       (V) proficient writing and speaking skills;
       (VI) an ability to live in poor or diverse communities; and
       (VII) such other attributes as determined to be appropriate 
     by the Board.

       (iii) Amount of award.--

       (I) In general.--Each individual awarded a fellowship under 
     this paragraph shall receive a living allowance and, subject 
     to subclause (II), an end-of-service award as determined by 
     the program.
       (II) Requirement for successful completion of fellowship.--
     Each individual awarded a fellowship under this paragraph 
     shall be entitled to receive an end-of-service award at an 
     appropriate rate for each month of satisfactory service as 
     determined by the Executive Director.

       (iv) Recognition of fellowship award.--

       (I) Emerson fellow.--An individual awarded a fellowship 
     from the Bill Emerson Hunger Fellowship shall be known as an 
     ``Emerson Fellow''.
       (II) Leland fellow.--An individual awarded a fellowship 
     from the Mickey Leland Hunger Fellowship shall be known as a 
     ``Leland Fellow''.

       (4) Evaluation.--The program shall conduct periodic 
     evaluations of the Bill Emerson and Mickey Leland Hunger 
     Fellowships. Such evaluations shall include the following:
       (A) An assessment of the successful completion of the work 
     plan of the fellow.
       (B) An assessment of the impact of the fellowship on the 
     fellows.
       (C) An assessment of the accomplishment of the purposes of 
     the program.
       (D) An assessment of the impact of the fellow on the 
     community.
       (e) Trust Fund.--
       (1) Establishment.--There is established the Congressional 
     Hunger Fellows Trust Fund (hereinafter in this section 
     referred to as the ``Fund'') in the Treasury of the United 
     States, consisting of amounts appropriated to the Fund under 
     subsection (i), amounts credited to it under paragraph (3), 
     and amounts received under subsection (g)(3)(A).
       (2) Investment of funds.--The Secretary of the Treasury 
     shall invest the full amount of the Fund. Each investment 
     shall be made in an interest bearing obligation of the United 
     States or an obligation guaranteed as to principal and 
     interest by the United States that, as determined by the 
     Secretary in consultation with the Board, has a maturity 
     suitable for the Fund.
       (3) Return on investment.--Except as provided in subsection 
     (f)(2), the Secretary of the Treasury shall credit to the 
     Fund the interest on, and the proceeds from the sale or 
     redemption of, obligations held in the Fund.
       (f) Expenditures; Audits.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall 
     transfer to the program from the amounts described in 
     subsection (e)(3) and subsection (g)(3)(A) such sums as the 
     Board determines are necessary to enable the program to carry 
     out the provisions of this section.
       (2) Limitation.--The Secretary may not transfer to the 
     program the amounts appropriated to the Fund under subsection 
     (i).
       (3) Use of funds.--Funds transferred to the program under 
     paragraph (1) shall be used for the following purposes:
       (A) Stipends for fellows.--To provide for a living 
     allowance for the fellows.
       (B) Travel of fellows.--To defray the costs of 
     transportation of the fellows to the fellowship placement 
     sites.
       (C) Insurance.--To defray the costs of appropriate 
     insurance of the fellows, the program, and the Board.
       (D) Training of fellows.--To defray the costs of preservice 
     and midservice education and training of fellows.
       (E) Support staff.--Staff described in subsection (g).
       (F) Awards.--End-of-service awards under subsection 
     (d)(3)(D)(iii)(II).
       (G) Additional approved uses.--For such other purposes that 
     the Board determines appropriate to carry out the program.
       (4) Audit by gao.--
       (A) In general.--The Comptroller General of the United 
     States shall conduct an annual audit of the accounts of the 
     program.
       (B) Books.--The program shall make available to the 
     Comptroller General all books, accounts, financial records, 
     reports, files, and all other papers, things, or property 
     belonging to or in use by the program and necessary to 
     facilitate such audit.
       (C) Report to congress.--The Comptroller General shall 
     submit a copy of the results of each such audit to the 
     appropriate congressional committees.
       (g) Staff; Powers of Program.--
       (1) Executive director.--
       (A) In general.--The Board shall appoint an Executive 
     Director of the program who shall administer the program. The 
     Executive Director shall carry out such other functions 
     consistent with the provisions of this section as the Board 
     shall prescribe.
       (B) Restriction.--The Executive Director may not serve as 
     Chairperson of the Board.
       (C) Compensation.--The Executive Director shall be paid at 
     a rate not to exceed the rate of basic pay payable for level 
     V of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of title 5, 
     United States Code.
       (2) Staff.--
       (A) In general.--With the approval of a majority of the 
     Board, the Executive Director may appoint and fix the pay of 
     additional personnel as the Executive Director considers 
     necessary and appropriate to carry out the functions of the 
     provisions of this section.
       (B) Compensation.--An individual appointed under 
     subparagraph (A) shall be paid at a rate not to exceed the 
     rate of basic pay payable for level GS-15 of the General 
     Schedule.
       (3) Powers.--In order to carry out the provisions of this 
     section, the program may perform the following functions:
       (A) Gifts.--The program may solicit, accept, use, and 
     dispose of gifts, bequests, or devises of services or 
     property, both real and personal, for the purpose of aiding 
     or facilitating the work of the program. Gifts, bequests, or 
     devises of money and proceeds from sales of other property 
     received as gifts, bequests, or devises shall be deposited in 
     the Fund and shall be available for disbursement upon order 
     of the Board.
       (B) Experts and consultants.--The program may procure 
     temporary and intermittent services under section 3109 of 
     title 5, United States Code, but at rates for individuals not 
     to exceed the daily equivalent of the maximum annual rate of 
     basic pay payable for GS-15 of the General Schedule.
       (C) Contract authority.--The program may contract, with the 
     approval of a majority of the members of the Board, with and 
     compensate Government and private agencies or persons without 
     regard to section 3709 of the Revised Statutes (41 U.S.C. 5).
       (D) Other necessary expenditures.--The program shall make 
     such other expenditures which the program considers necessary 
     to carry out the provisions of this section, but excluding 
     project development.
       (h) Report.--Not later than December 31 of each year, the 
     Board shall submit to the appropriate congressional 
     committees a report on the activities of the program carried 
     out during the previous fiscal year, and shall include the 
     following:
       (1) An analysis of the evaluations conducted under 
     subsection (d)(4) (relating to evaluations of the Emerson and 
     Leland fellowships and accomplishment of the program 
     purposes) during that fiscal year.
       (2) A statement of the total amount of funds attributable 
     to gifts received by the program in that fiscal year (as 
     authorized under subsection (g)(3)(A)), and the total amount 
     of such funds that were expended to carry out the program 
     that fiscal year.
       (i) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated $18,000,000 to carry out the provisions of 
     this section.
       (j) Definition.--In this section, the term ``appropriate 
     congressional committees'' means--
       (1) the Committee on Agriculture and the Committee on 
     International Relations of the House of Representatives; and
       (2) the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry 
     and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate.

     SEC. 462. GENERAL EFFECTIVE DATE.

       Except as otherwise provided in this title, the amendments 
     made by this title shall take effect on October 1, 2002.

                            TITLE V--CREDIT

     SEC. 501. ELIGIBILITY OF LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANIES FOR FARM 
                   OWNERSHIP LOANS, FARM OPERATING LOANS, AND 
                   EMERGENCY LOANS.

       (a) Sections 302(a), 311(a), and 321(a) of the Consolidated 
     Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1922(a), 1941(a), 
     and 1961(a)) are each amended by striking ``and joint 
     operations'' each place it appears and inserting ``joint 
     operations, and limited liability companies''.
       (b) Section 321(a) of such Act (7 U.S.C. 1961(a)) is 
     amended by striking ``or joint operations'' each place it 
     appears and inserting ``joint operations, or limited 
     liability companies''.

     SEC. 502. SUSPENSION OF LIMITATION ON PERIOD FOR WHICH 
                   BORROWERS ARE ELIGIBLE FOR GUARANTEED 
                   ASSISTANCE.

       During the period beginning January 1, 2002, and ending 
     December 31, 2006, section 319(b) of the Consolidated Farm 
     and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1949(b)) shall have no 
     force or effect.

     SEC. 503. ADMINISTRATION OF CERTIFIED LENDERS AND PREFERRED 
                   CERTIFIED LENDERS PROGRAMS.

       (a) In General.--Section 331(b) of the Consolidated Farm 
     and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1981(b)) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (2) through (9) as 
     paragraphs (3) through (10), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
       ``(2) administer the loan guarantee program under section 
     339(c) through central offices established in States or in 
     multi-State areas;''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 331(c) of such Act (7 
     U.S.C. 1981(c)) is amended by striking ``(b)(5)'' and 
     inserting ``(b)(6)''.

[[Page H6213]]

     SEC. 504. SIMPLIFIED LOAN GUARANTEE APPLICATION AVAILABLE FOR 
                   LOANS OF GREATER AMOUNTS.

       Section 333A(g)(1) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
     Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1983a(g)(1)) is amended by striking 
     ``$50,000'' and inserting ``$150,000''.

     SEC. 505. ELIMINATION OF REQUIREMENT THAT SECRETARY REQUIRE 
                   COUNTY COMMITTEES TO CERTIFY IN WRITING THAT 
                   CERTAIN LOAN REVIEWS HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED.

       Section 333 of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development 
     Act (7 U.S.C. 1983) is amended by striking paragraph (2) and 
     redesignating paragraphs (3) through (5) as paragraphs (2) 
     through (4), respectively.

     SEC. 506. AUTHORITY TO REDUCE PERCENTAGE OF LOAN GUARANTEED 
                   IF BORROWER INCOME IS INSUFFICIENT TO SERVICE 
                   DEBT.

       Section 339 of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development 
     Act (7 U.S.C. 1989) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (c)(4)(A), by inserting ``, except that 
     the Secretary may guarantee such lesser percentage as the 
     Secretary determines appropriate of such a loan if the income 
     of the borrower is less than the income necessary to meet the 
     requirements of subsection (b)'' before the period; and
       (2) in subsection (d)(4)(A), by inserting ``, except that 
     the Secretary may guarantee such lesser percentage as the 
     Secretary determines appropriate of such a loan if the income 
     of the borrower is less than the income necessary to meet the 
     requirements of subsection (b)'' before the semicolon.

     SEC. 507. TIMING OF LOAN ASSESSMENTS.

       Section 360(a) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
     Development Act (7 U.S.C. 2006b(a)) is amended by striking 
     ``After an applicant is determined eligible for assistance 
     under this title by the appropriate county committee 
     established pursuant to section 332, the'' and inserting 
     ``The''.

     SEC. 508. MAKING AND SERVICING OF LOANS BY PERSONNEL OF 
                   STATE, COUNTY, OR AREA COMMITTEES.

       (a) In General.--Subtitle D of the Consolidated Farm and 
     Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1981-2008j) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 376. MAKING AND SERVICING OF LOANS BY PERSONNEL OF 
                   STATE, COUNTY, OR AREA COMMITTEES.

       ``The Secretary shall employ personnel of a State, county 
     or area committee established under section 8(b)(5) of the 
     Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act (16 U.S.C 
     590h(b)(5)) to make and service loans under this title to the 
     extent the personnel have been trained to do so.''.
       (b) Inapplicability of Finality Rule.--Section 281(a)(1) of 
     the Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 (7 
     U.S.C. 7001(a)(1)) is amended by inserting ``, except 
     functions performed pursuant to section 376 of the 
     Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act'' before the 
     period.

     SEC. 509. ELIGIBILITY OF EMPLOYEES OF STATE, COUNTY, OR AREA 
                   COMMITTEE FOR LOANS AND LOAN GUARANTEES.

       Subtitle D of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development 
     Act (7 U.S.C. 1981-2008j) is further amended by adding at the 
     end the following:

     ``SEC. 377. ELIGIBILITY OF EMPLOYEES OF STATE, COUNTY, OR 
                   AREA COMMITTEE FOR LOANS AND LOAN GUARANTEES.

       ``The Secretary shall not prohibit an employee of a State, 
     county or area committee established under section 8(b)(5) of 
     the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act (16 U.S.C. 
     590h(b)(5)) or an employee of the Department of Agriculture 
     from obtaining a loan or loan guarantee under subtitle A, B 
     or C of this title if an office of the Department of 
     Agriculture other than the office in which the employee is 
     located determines that the employee is otherwise eligible 
     for the loan or loan guarantee.''.

     SEC. 510. EMERGENCY LOANS IN RESPONSE TO AN ECONOMIC 
                   EMERGENCY RESULTING FROM QUARANTINES AND 
                   SHARPLY INCREASING ENERGY COSTS.

       (a) Loan Authority.--Section 321(a) of the Consolidated 
     Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1961(a)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in each of the 1st and 3rd sentences--
       (A) by striking ``a natural disaster in the United States 
     or by'' and inserting ``a quarantine imposed by the Secretary 
     under the Plant Protection Act or the animal quarantine laws 
     (as defined in section 2509 of the Food, Agriculture, 
     Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990), an economic emergency 
     resulting from sharply increasing energy costs as described 
     in section 329(b), a natural disaster in the United States, 
     or''; and
       (B) by inserting ``Robert T. Stafford'' before ``Disaster 
     Relief and Emergency Assistance Act''; and
       (2) in the 4th sentence--
       (A) by striking ``a natural disaster'' and inserting ``such 
     a quarantine, economic emergency, or natural disaster''; and
       (B) by striking ``by such natural disaster'' and inserting 
     ``by such quarantine, economic emergency, or natural 
     disaster''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 323 of such Act (7 
     U.S.C. 1963) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``quarantine,'' before ``natural 
     disaster''; and
       (2) by inserting ``referred to in section 321(a), 
     including, notwithstanding any other provision of this title, 
     an economic emergency resulting from sharply increasing 
     energy costs as described in section 329(b)'' after 
     ``emergency''.
       (c) Sharply Increasing Energy Costs.--Section 329 of such 
     Act (7 U.S.C. 1969) is amended--
       (1) by striking all that precedes ``Secretary shall'' and 
     inserting the following:

     ``SEC. 329. LOSS CONDITIONS.

       ``(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), 
     the''; and
       (2) by adding after and below the end the following:
       ``(b) Loss Resulting From Sharply Increasing Energy 
     Costs.--The Secretary shall make financial assistance under 
     this subtitle available to any applicant seeking assistance 
     based on an income loss resulting from sharply increasing 
     energy costs referred to in section 323 if--
       ``(1) the price of electricity, gasoline, diesel fuel, 
     natural gas, propane, or other equivalent fuel during any 3-
     month period is at least 50 percent greater than the average 
     price of the same form of energy during the preceding 5 
     years, as determined by the Secretary; and
       ``(2) the income loss of the applicant is directly related 
     to expenses incurred to prevent livestock mortality, the 
     degradation of a perishable agricultural commodity, or damage 
     to a field crop.''.
       (d) Maximum Amount of Loan.--Section 324(a) of such Act (7 
     U.S.C. 1964(a)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``or'' at the end of paragraph (1);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (2) and 
     inserting a semicolon; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) in the case of a loan made in response to a 
     quarantine referred to in section 321, exceeds $500,000; or
       ``(4) in the case of a loan made in response to an economic 
     emergency referred to in section 321, exceeds $200,000.''.

     SEC. 511. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY TO CONTRACT FOR SERVICING OF 
                   FARMER PROGRAM LOANS.

       Section 331(d) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
     Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1981(d)) is amended--
       (1) in the heading by striking ``Temporary''; and
       (2) in paragraph (5), by striking ``2002'' and inserting 
     ``2011''.

     SEC. 512. AUTHORIZATION FOR LOANS.

       Section 346(b)(1) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
     Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1994(b)(1)) is amended by striking 
     ``not more than the following amounts:'' and all that follows 
     and inserting ``such sums as may be necessary.''.

     SEC. 513. RESERVATION OF FUNDS FOR DIRECT OPERATING LOANS FOR 
                   BEGINNING FARMERS AND RANCHERS.

       Section 346(b)(2)(A)(ii)(III) of the Consolidated Farm and 
     Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1994(b)(2)(A)(ii)(III)) is 
     amended by striking ``2000 through 2002'' and inserting 
     ``2002 through 2011''.

     SEC. 514. EXTENSION OF INTEREST RATE REDUCTION PROGRAM.

       Section 351(a)(2) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
     Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1999(a)(2)) is amended by striking 
     ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 515. INCREASE IN DURATION OF LOANS UNDER DOWN PAYMENT 
                   LOAN PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Section 310E(b)(3) of the Consolidated 
     Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1935(b)(3)) is 
     amended by striking ``10'' and inserting ``15''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 310E(c)(3)(B) of the 
     Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 
     1935(c)(3)(B)) is amended by striking ``10-year'' and 
     inserting ``15-year''.

     SEC. 516. HORSE BREEDER LOANS.

       (a) Definition of Horse Breeder.--In this section, the term 
     ``horse breeder'' means a person that, as of the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, derives more than 70 percent of the 
     income of the person from the business of breeding, boarding, 
     raising, training, or selling horses, during the shorter of--
       (1) the 5-year period ending on January 1, 2001; or
       (2) the period the person has been engaged in the business.
       (b) Loan Authorization.--The Secretary shall make a loan to 
     an eligible horse breeder to assist the breeder for losses 
     suffered as a result of mare reproductive loss syndrome.
       (c) Eligibility.--A horse breeder shall be eligible for a 
     loan under this section if the Secretary determines that, as 
     a result of mare reproductive loss syndrome--
       (1) during the period beginning January 1, 2000, and ending 
     October 1, 2000, or during the period beginning January 1, 
     2001, and ending October 1, 2001--
       (A) 30 percent or more of the mares owned by the breeder 
     failed to conceive, miscarried, aborted, or otherwise failed 
     to produce a live healthy foal; or
       (B) 30 percent or more of the mares boarded on a farm 
     owned, operated, or leased by the breeder failed to conceive, 
     miscarried, aborted, or otherwise failed to produce a live 
     healthy foal;
       (2) during the period beginning January 1, 2000, and ending 
     on September 30, 2002, the breeder was unable to meet the 
     financial obligations, or pay the ordinary and necessary 
     expenses, of the breeder incurred in connection with 
     breeding, boarding, raising, training, or selling horses; and
       (3) the breeder is not able to obtain sufficient credit 
     elsewhere (within the meaning of section 321(a) of the 
     Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act).

[[Page H6214]]

       (d) Amount.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary 
     shall determine the amount of a loan to be made to a horse 
     breeder under this section, on the basis of the amount of 
     losses suffered by the breeder, and the financial needs of 
     the breeder, as a result of mare reproductive loss syndrome.
       (2) Maximum amount.--The amount of a loan made under this 
     section shall not exceed $500,000.
       (e) Term.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the term for 
     repayment of a loan made to a horse breeder under this 
     section shall be determined by the Secretary based on the 
     ability of the breeder to repay the loan.
       (2) Maximum term.--The term of a loan made under this 
     section shall not exceed 15 years.
       (f) Interest Rate.--Interest shall be payable on a loan 
     made under this section, at the rate prescribed under section 
     324(b)(1) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act.
       (g) Security.--Security shall be required on a loan made 
     under this section, in accordance with section 324(d) of the 
     Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act.
       (h) Application.--To be eligible to obtain a loan under 
     this section, a horse breeder shall submit to the Secretary 
     an application for the loan not later than September 30, 
     2002.
       (i) Funding.--The Secretary shall carry out this section 
     using funds available for emergency loans under subtitle C of 
     the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act.
       (j) Termination.--The authority provided by this section 
     shall terminate on September 30, 2003.

     SEC. 517. SUNSET OF DIRECT LOAN PROGRAMS UNDER THE 
                   CONSOLIDATED FARM AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT ACT.

       (a) In General.--Subtitle D of the Consolidated Farm and 
     Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1981-2008j) is amended by 
     inserting after section 344 the following:

     ``SEC. 345. SUNSET OF DIRECT LOAN PROGRAMS.

       ``(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), 
     beginning 5 years after the date of the enactment of this 
     section, the Secretary may not make a direct loan under 
     section 302 or 311.
       ``(b) Exceptions.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to any 
     authority to make direct loans to youths, qualified beginning 
     farmers or ranchers, or members of socially disadvantaged 
     groups.
       ``(c) No Effect on Existing Contracts.--Subsection (a) 
     shall not be construed to permit the violation of any 
     contract entered into before the 5-year period described in 
     subsection (a).''.
       (b) Evaluations of Direct and Guaranteed Loan Programs.--
       (1) Studies.--The Secretary of Agriculture shall conduct 2 
     studies of the direct and guaranteed loan progams under 
     sections 302 and 311 of the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
     Development Act, each of which shall include an examination 
     of the number, average principal amount, and delinquency and 
     default rates of loans provided or guaranteed during the 
     period covered by the study.
       (2) Periods covered.--
       (A) First study.--1 study under paragraph (1) shall cover 
     the 1-year period that begins 1 year after the date of the 
     enactment of this section.
       (B) Second study.--1 study under paragraph (1) shall cover 
     the 1-year period that begins 3 years after such date of 
     enactment.
       (3) Reports to the congress.--At the end of the period 
     covered by a study under this subsection, the Secretary of 
     Agriculture shall submit to the Congress a report that 
     contains an evaluation of the results of the study, including 
     an analysis of the effectiveness of loan programs referred to 
     in paragraph (1) in meeting the credit needs of agricultural 
     producers in an efficient and fiscally responsible manner.

     SEC. 518. DEFINITION OF DEBT FORGIVENESS.

       Section 343(a)(12)(B) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
     Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1991(a)(12)(B)) is amended to read 
     as follows:
       ``(B) Exceptions.--The term `debt forgiveness' does not 
     include--
       ``(i) consolidation, rescheduling, reamortization, or 
     deferral of a loan; or
       ``(ii) any write-down provided as a part of a resolution of 
     a discrimination complaint against the Secretary.''.

     SEC. 519. LOAN ELIGIBILITY FOR BORROWERS WITH PRIOR DEBT 
                   FORGIVENESS.

       Section 373(b)(1) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
     Development Act (7 U.S.C. 2008h(b)(1)) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(1) Prohibitions.--Except as provided in paragraph (2)--
       ``(A) the Secretary may not make a loan under this title to 
     a borrower who, on more than 2 occasions, received debt 
     forgiveness on a loan made or guaranteed under this title; 
     and
       ``(B) the Secretary may not guarantee a loan under this 
     title to a borrower who, on more than 3 occasions, received 
     debt forgiveness on a loan made or guaranteed under this 
     title.''.

     SEC. 520. ALLOCATION OF CERTAIN FUNDS FOR SOCIALLY 
                   DISADVANTAGED FARMERS AND RANCHERS.

       The last sentence of section 355(c)(2) of the Consolidated 
     Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 2003(c)(2)) is 
     amended to read as follows: ``Any funds reserved and 
     allocated under this paragraph but not used within a State 
     shall, to the extent necessary to satisfy pending 
     applications under this title, be available for use by 
     socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers in other States, 
     as determined by the Secretary, and any remaining funds shall 
     be reallocated within the State.''.

     SEC. 521. HORSES CONSIDERED TO BE LIVESTOCK UNDER THE 
                   CONSOLIDATED FARM AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT ACT.

       Section 343 of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development 
     Act (7 U.S.C. 1991) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(c) Livestock Includes Horses.--The term `livestock' 
     includes horses.''.

                      TITLE VI--RURAL DEVELOPMENT

     SEC. 601. FUNDING FOR RURAL LOCAL TELEVISION BROADCAST SIGNAL 
                   LOAN GUARANTEES.

       Section 1011(a) of the Launching Our Communities' Access to 
     Local Television Act of 2000 (title X of H.R. 5548, as 
     enacted by section 1(a)(2) of Public Law 106-553) is amended 
     by adding at the end the following: ``In addition, a total of 
     $200,000,000 of the funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation 
     shall be available during fiscal years 2002 through 2006, 
     without fiscal year limitation, for loan guarantees under 
     this title.''.

     SEC. 602. EXPANDED ELIGIBILITY FOR VALUE-ADDED AGRICULTURAL 
                   PRODUCT MARKET DEVELOPMENT GRANTS.

       Section 231(a) of the Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 
     2000 (7 U.S.C. 1621 note) is amended--
       (1) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
       ``(1) Establishment and purposes.--In each of fiscal years 
     2002 through 2011, the Secretary shall use $50,000,000 of the 
     funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation to award 
     competitive grants--
       ``(A) to eligible independent producers (as determined by 
     the Secretary) of value-added agricultural commodities and 
     products of agricultural commodities to assist an eligible 
     producer--
       ``(i) to develop a business plan for viable marketing 
     opportunities for a value-added agricultural commodity or 
     product of an agricultural commodity; or
       ``(ii) to develop strategies for the ventures that are 
     intended to create marketing opportunities for the producers; 
     and
       ``(B) to public bodies, institutions of higher learning, 
     and trade associations to assist such entities--
       ``(i) to develop a business plan for viable marketing 
     opportunities in emerging markets for a value-added 
     agricultural commodity or product of an agricultural 
     commodity; or
       ``(ii) to develop strategies for the ventures that are 
     intended to create marketing opportunities in emerging 
     markets for the producers.'';
       (2) by striking ``producer'' each place it appears 
     thereafter and inserting ``grantee''; and
       (3) in the heading for paragraph (3), by striking 
     ``Producer'' and inserting ``Grantee''.

     SEC. 603. AGRICULTURE INNOVATION CENTER DEMONSTRATION 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) Purposes.--The purposes of this section are to carry 
     out a demonstration program under which agricultural 
     producers are provided--
       (1) technical assistance, including engineering services, 
     applied research, scale production, and similar services to 
     enable the producers to establish businesses for further 
     processing of agricultural products;
       (2) marketing, market development, and business planning; 
     and
       (3) overall organizational, outreach, and development 
     assistance to increase the viability, growth, and 
     sustainability of value-added agricultural businesses.
       (b) Nature of Program.--The Secretary of Agriculture (in 
     this section referred to as the ``Secretary'') shall--
       (1) make grants to eligible applicants for the purposes of 
     enabling the applicants to obtain the assistance described in 
     subsection (a); and
       (2) provide assistance to eligible applicants through the 
     research and technical services of the Department of 
     Agriculture.
       (c) Eligibility Requirements.--
       (1) In general.--An applicant shall be eligible for a grant 
     and assistance described in subsection (b) to establish an 
     Agriculture Innovation Center if--
       (A) the applicant--
       (i) has provided services similar to those described in 
     subsection (a); or
       (ii) shows the capability of providing the services;
       (B) the application of the applicant for the grant and 
     assistance sets forth a plan, in accordance with regulations 
     which shall be prescribed by the Secretary, outlining support 
     of the applicant in the agricultural community, the technical 
     and other expertise of the applicant, and the goals of the 
     applicant for increasing and improving the ability of local 
     producers to develop markets and processes for value-added 
     agricultural products;
       (C) the applicant demonstrates that resources (in cash or 
     in kind) of definite value are available, or have been 
     committed to be made available, to the applicant, to increase 
     and improve the ability of local producers to develop markets 
     and processes for value-added agricultural products; and
       (D) the applicant meets the requirement of paragraph (2).
       (2) Board of directors.--The requirement of this paragraph 
     is that the applicant shall have a board of directors 
     comprised of representatives of the following groups:

[[Page H6215]]

       (A) The 2 general agricultural organizations with the 
     greatest number of members in the State in which the 
     applicant is located.
       (B) The Department of Agriculture or similar State 
     organization or department, for the State.
       (C) Organizations representing the 4 highest grossing 
     commodities produced in the State, according to annual gross 
     cash sales.
       (d) Grants and Assistance.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to subsection (g), the Secretary 
     shall make annual grants to eligible applicants under this 
     section, each of which grants shall not exceed the lesser 
     of--
       (A) $1,000,000; or
       (B) twice the dollar value of the resources (in cash or in 
     kind) that the applicant has demonstrated are available, or 
     have been committed to be made available, to the applicant in 
     accordance with subsection (c)(1)(C).
       (2) Initial limitation.--In the first year of the 
     demonstration program under this section, the Secretary shall 
     make grants under this section, on a competitive basis, to 
     not more than 5 eligible applicants.
       (3) Expansion of demonstration program.--In the second year 
     of the demonstration program under this section, the 
     Secretary may make grants under this section to not more than 
     10 eligible applicants, in addition to any entities to which 
     grants are made under paragraph (2) for such year.
       (4) State limitation.--In the first 3 years of the 
     demonstration program under this section, the Secretary shall 
     not make an Agricultural Innovation Center Demonstration 
     Program grant under this section to more than 1 entity in a 
     single State.
       (e) Use of Funds.--An entity to which a grant is made under 
     this section may use the grant only for the following 
     purposes, but only to the extent that the use is not 
     described in section 231(d) of the Agricultural Risk 
     Protection Act of 2000:
       (1) Applied research.
       (2) Consulting services.
       (3) Hiring of employees, at the discretion of the board of 
     directors of the entity.
       (4) The making of matching grants, each of which shall be 
     not more than $5,000, to agricultural producers, so long as 
     the aggregate amount of all such matching grants shall be not 
     more than $50,000.
       (5) Legal services.
       (f) Rule of Interpretation.--This section shall not be 
     construed to prevent a recipient of a grant under this 
     section from collaborating with any other institution with 
     respect to activities conducted using the grant.
       (g) Availability of Funds.--Of the amount made available 
     under section 231(a)(1) of the Agricultural Risk Protection 
     Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-224; 7 U.S.C. 1621 note), the 
     Secretary shall use to carry out this section--
       (1) not less than $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2002; and
       (2) not less than $10,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 
     2003 and 2004.
       (h) Report on Best Practices.--
       (1) Effects on the agricultural sector.--The Secretary 
     shall utilize $300,000 per year of the funds made available 
     pursuant to this section to support research at any 
     university into the effects of value-added projects on 
     agricultural producers and the commodity markets. The 
     research should systematically examine possible effects on 
     demand for agricultural commodities, market prices, farm 
     income, and Federal outlays on commodity programs using 
     linked, long-term, global projections of the agricultural 
     sector.
       (2) Department of agriculture.--Not later than 3 years 
     after the first 10 grants are made under this section, the 
     Secretary shall prepare and submit to the Committee on 
     Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate and to the 
     Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives a 
     written report on the effectiveness of the demonstration 
     program conducted under this section at improving the 
     production of value-added agricultural products and on the 
     effects of the program on the economic viability of the 
     producers, which shall include the best practices and 
     innovations found at each of the Agriculture Innovation 
     Centers established under the demonstration program under 
     this section, and detail the number and type of agricultural 
     projects assisted, and the type of assistance provided, under 
     this section.

     SEC. 604. FUNDING OF COMMUNITY WATER ASSISTANCE GRANT 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) Funding.--In each of fiscal years 2002 through 2011, 
     the Secretary of Agriculture shall use $30,000,000 of the 
     funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation to carry out 
     section 306A of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development 
     Act (7 U.S.C. 1926a).
       (b) Extension of Program.--Section 306A(i) of the 
     Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 
     1926a(i)) is amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting 
     ``2011''.
       (c) Miscellaneous Amendments.--Section 306A of such Act (7 
     U.S.C. 1926a) is amended--
       (1) in the heading by striking ``EMERGENCY'';
       (2) in subsection (a)(1)--
       (A) by striking ``after'' and inserting ``when''; and
       (B) by inserting ``is imminent'' after ``communities''; and
       (3) in subsection (c), by striking ``shall--'' and all that 
     follows and inserting ``shall be a public or private 
     nonprofit entity.''.

     SEC. 605. LOAN GUARANTEES FOR THE FINANCING OF THE PURCHASE 
                   OF RENEWABLE ENERGY SYSTEMS.

       Section 4 of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (7 
     U.S.C. 904) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(a)'' before ``The Secretary''; and
       (2) by adding after and below the end the following:
       ``(b) Loan Guarantees for the Financing of the Purchase of 
     Renewable Energy Systems.--The Secretary may provide a loan 
     guarantee, on such terms and conditions as the Secretary 
     deems appropriate, for the purpose of financing the purchase 
     of a renewable energy system, including a wind energy system 
     and anaerobic digestors for the purpose of energy generation, 
     by any person or individual who is a farmer, a rancher, or an 
     owner of a small business (as defined by the Secretary) that 
     is located in a rural area (as defined by the Secretary). In 
     providing guarantees under this subsection, the Secretary 
     shall give priority to loans used primarily for power 
     generation on a farm, ranch, or small business (as so 
     defined).''.

     SEC. 606. LOANS AND LOAN GUARANTEES FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY 
                   SYSTEMS.

       Section 310B(a)(3) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
     Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1932(a)(3)) is amended by inserting 
     ``and other renewable energy systems including wind energy 
     systems and anaerobic digestors for the purpose of energy 
     generation'' after ``solar energy systems''.

     SEC. 607. RURAL BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY GRANTS.

       Section 306(a)(11)(D) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
     Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1926(a)(11)(D)) is amended by 
     striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 608. GRANTS FOR WATER SYSTEMS FOR RURAL AND NATIVE 
                   VILLAGES IN ALASKA.

       Section 306D(d)(1) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
     Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1926d(d)(1)) is amended by striking 
     ``and 2002'' and inserting ``through 2011''.

     SEC. 609. RURAL COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT GRANTS.

       Section 310B(e)(9) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
     Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1932(e)(9)) is amended by striking 
     ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 610. NATIONAL RESERVE ACCOUNT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT TRUST 
                   FUND.

       Section 381E(e)(3)(F) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
     Development Act (7 U.S.C. 2009d(e)(3)(F)) is amended by 
     striking ``fiscal year 2002'' and inserting ``each of the 
     fiscal years 2002 through 2011''.

     SEC. 611. RURAL VENTURE CAPITAL DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM.

       Section 381O(b)(3) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
     Development Act (7 U.S.C. 2009n(b)(3)) is amended by striking 
     ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 612. INCREASE IN LIMIT ON CERTAIN LOANS FOR RURAL 
                   DEVELOPMENT.

       Section 310B(a) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
     Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1932(a)) is amended by striking 
     ``$25,000,000'' and inserting ``$100,000,000''.

     SEC. 613. PILOT PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF 
                   STRATEGIC REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS.

       (a) Development.--
       (1) Selection of states.--The Secretary of Agriculture (in 
     this section referred to as the ``Secretary'') shall select 
     10 States in which to implement strategic regional 
     development plans developed under this subsection.
       (2) Grants.--
       (A) Authority.--
       (i) In general.--From the funds made available to carry out 
     this subsection, the Secretary shall make a matching grant to 
     1 or more entities in each State selected under subsection 
     (a), to develop a strategic regional development plan that 
     provides for rural economic development in a region in the 
     State in which the entity is located.
       (ii) Priority.--In making grants under this subsection, the 
     Secretary shall give priority to entities that represent a 
     regional coalition of community-based planning, development, 
     governmental, and business organizations.
       (B) Terms of match.--In order for an entity to be eligible 
     for a matching grant under this subsection, the entity shall 
     make a commitment to the Secretary to provide funds for the 
     development of a strategic regional development plan of the 
     kind referred to in subparagraph (A) in an amount that is not 
     less than the amount of the matching grant.
       (C) Limitation.--The Secretary shall not make a grant under 
     this subsection in an amount that exceeds $150,000.
       (3) Funding.--
       (A) In general.--The Secretary shall use $2,000,000 of the 
     funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation in each of fiscal 
     years 2002 through 2011 to carry out this subsection.
       (B) Availability.--Funds made available pursuant to 
     subparagraph (A) shall remain available without fiscal year 
     limitation.
       (b) Strategic Planning Implementation.--
       (1) The Secretary shall use the authorities provided in the 
     provisions of law specified in section 793(c)(1)(A)(ii) of 
     the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 to 
     implement the strategic regional development plans developed 
     pursuant to subsection (a) of this section.
       (2) Funding.--
       (A) In general.--The Secretary shall use $13,000,000 of the 
     funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation in each of fiscal 
     years 2002 through 2011 to carry out this subsection.

[[Page H6216]]

       (B) Availability.--Funds made available pursuant to 
     subparagraph (A) shall remain available without fiscal year 
     limitation.
       (c) Use of Funds.--The amounts made available under 
     subsections (a) and (b) may be used as the Secretary deems 
     appropriate to carry out any provision of this section.

     SEC. 614. GRANTS TO NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS TO FINANCE THE 
                   CONSTRUCTION, REFURBISHING, AND SERVICING OF 
                   INDIVIDUALLY-OWNED HOUSEHOLD WATER WELL SYSTEMS 
                   IN RURAL AREAS FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH LOW OR 
                   MODERATE INCOMES.

       (a) In General.--Subtitle A of the Consolidated Farm and 
     Rural Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1922-1949) is amended by 
     inserting after section 306D the following:

     ``SEC. 306E. GRANTS TO NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS TO FINANCE THE 
                   CONSTRUCTION, REFURBISHING, AND SERVICING OF 
                   INDIVIDUALLY-OWNED HOUSEHOLD WATER WELL SYSTEMS 
                   IN RURAL AREAS FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH LOW OR 
                   MODERATE INCOMES.

       ``(a) Definition of Eligible Individual.--In this section, 
     the term `eligible individual' means an individual who is a 
     member of a household, the combined income of whose members 
     for the most recent 12-month period for which the information 
     is available, is not more than 100 percent of the median 
     nonmetropolitan household income for the State or territory 
     in which the individual resides, according to the most recent 
     decennial census of the United States.
       ``(b) Grants.--The Secretary may make grants to private 
     nonprofit organizations for the purpose of assisting eligible 
     individuals in obtaining financing for the construction, 
     refurbishing, and servicing of individual household water 
     well systems in rural areas that are owned (or to be owned) 
     by the eligible individuals.
       ``(c) Use of Funds.--A grant made under this section may 
     be--
       ``(1) used, or invested to provide income to be used, to 
     carry out subsection (b); and
       ``(2) used to pay administrative expenses associated with 
     providing the assistance described in subsection (b).
       ``(d) Priority in Awarding Grants.--In awarding grants 
     under this section, the Secretary shall give priority to an 
     applicant that has substantial expertise and experience in 
     promoting the safe and productive use of individually-owned 
     household water well systems and ground water.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     takes effect on October 1, 2001.

     SEC. 615. NATIONAL RURAL DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP.

       Subtitle E of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development 
     Act (7 U.S.C. 2009-2009n) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 381P. NATIONAL RURAL DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP.

       ``(a) Rural Area Defined.--In this section, the term `rural 
     area' means such areas as the Secretary may determine.
       ``(b) Establishment.--There is established a National Rural 
     Development Partnership (in this section referred to as the 
     `Partnership'), which shall be composed of--
       ``(1) the National Rural Development Coordinating Committee 
     established in accordance with subsection (c); and
       ``(2) State rural development councils established in 
     accordance with subsection (d).
       ``(c) National Rural Development Coordinating Committee.--
       ``(1) Composition.--The National Rural Development 
     Coordinating Committee (in this section referred to as the 
     `Coordinating Committee') may be composed of--
       ``(A) representatives of all Federal departments and 
     agencies with policies and programs that affect or benefit 
     rural areas;
       ``(B) representatives of national associations of State, 
     regional, local, and tribal governments and intergovernmental 
     and multi-jurisdictional agencies and organizations;
       ``(C) national public interest groups; and
       ``(D) other national nonprofit organizations that elect to 
     participate in the activities of the Coordinating Committee.
       ``(2) Functions.--The Coordinating Committee may--
       ``(A) provide support for the work of the State rural 
     development councils established in accordance with 
     subsection (d); and
       ``(B) develop and facilitate strategies to reduce or 
     eliminate conflicting or duplicative administrative and 
     regulatory impediments confronting rural areas.
       ``(d) State Rural Development Councils.--
       ``(1) Composition.--A State rural development council may--
       ``(A) be composed of representatives of Federal, State, 
     local, and tribal governments, and nonprofit organizations, 
     the private sector, and other entities committed to rural 
     advancement; and
       ``(B) have a nonpartisan and nondiscriminatory membership 
     that is broad and representative of the economic, social, and 
     political diversity of the State.
       ``(2) Functions.--A State rural development council may--
       ``(A) facilitate collaboration among Federal, State, local, 
     and tribal governments and the private and non-profit sectors 
     in the planning and implementation of programs and policies 
     that affect the rural areas of the State, and to do so in 
     such a way that provides the greatest degree of flexibility 
     and innovation in responding to the unique needs of the State 
     and the rural areas; and
       ``(B) in conjunction with the Coordinating Committee, 
     develop and facilitate strategies to reduce or eliminate 
     conflicting or duplicative administrative and regulatory 
     impediments confronting the rural areas of the State.
       ``(e) Administration of the Partnership.--The Secretary may 
     provide for any additional support staff to the Partnership 
     as the Secretary determines to be necessary to carry out the 
     duties of the Partnership.
       ``(f) Termination.--The authority provided by this section 
     shall terminate on the date that is 5 years after the date of 
     the enactment of this section.''.

     SEC. 616. ELIGIBILITY OF RURAL EMPOWERMENT ZONES, RURAL 
                   ENTERPRISE COMMUNITIES, AND CHAMPION 
                   COMMUNITIES FOR DIRECT AND GUARANTEED LOANS FOR 
                   ESSENTIAL COMMUNITY FACILITIES.

       Section 306(a)(1) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
     Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1926(a)(1)) is amended by inserting 
     after the 1st sentence the following: ``The Secretary may 
     also make or insure loans to communities that have been 
     designated as rural empowerment zones or rural enterprise 
     communities pursuant to part I of subchapter U of chapter 1 
     of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as rural enterprise 
     communities pursuant to section 766 of the Agriculture, Rural 
     Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related 
     Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999, or as champion communities 
     (as determined by the Secretary), to provide for the 
     installation or improvement of essential community facilities 
     including necessary related equipment, and to furnish 
     financial assistance or other aid in planning projects for 
     such purposes.''.

     SEC. 617. GRANTS TO TRAIN FARM WORKERS IN NEW TECHNOLOGIES 
                   AND TO TRAIN FARM WORKERS IN SPECIALIZED SKILLS 
                   NECESSARY FOR HIGHER VALUE CROPS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Agriculture may make a 
     grant to a nonprofit organization with the capacity to train 
     farm workers, or to a consortium of non-profit organizations, 
     agribusinesses, State and local governments, agricultural 
     labor organizations, and community-based organizations with 
     that capacity.
       (b) Use of Funds.--An entity to which a grant is made under 
     this section shall use the grant to train farm workers to use 
     new technologies and develop specialized skills for 
     agricultural development.
       (c) Limitations on Authorization of Appropriations.--For 
     grants under this section, there are authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Secretary of Agriculture not more than 
     $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2011.

     SEC. 618. LOAN GUARANTEES FOR THE PURCHASE OF STOCK IN A 
                   FARMER COOPERATIVE SEEKING TO MODERNIZE OR 
                   EXPAND.

       Section 310B(g)(2) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
     Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1932(g)(2)) is amended by striking 
     ``start-up'' and all that follows and inserting ``capital 
     stock of a farmer cooperative established for an agricultural 
     purpose.''.

     SEC. 619. INTANGIBLE ASSETS AND SUBORDINATED UNSECURED DEBT 
                   REQUIRED TO BE CONSIDERED IN DETERMINING 
                   ELIGIBILITY OF FARMER-OWNED COOPERATIVE FOR 
                   BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY GUARANTEED LOAN.

       Section 310B of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development 
     Act (7 U.S.C. 1932) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(h) Intangible Assets and Subordinated Unsecured Debt 
     Required to be Considered in Determining Eligibility of 
     Farmer-Owned Cooperative for Business and Industry Guaranteed 
     Loan.--In determining whether a cooperative organization 
     owned by farmers is eligible for a guaranteed loan under 
     subsection (a)(1), the Secretary may consider the value of 
     the intangible assets and subordinated unsecured debt of the 
     cooperative organization.''.

     SEC. 620. BAN ON LIMITING ELIGIBILITY OF FARMER COOPERATIVE 
                   FOR BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY LOAN GUARANTEE BASED 
                   ON POPULATION OF AREA IN WHICH COOPERATIVE IS 
                   LOCATED.

       Section 310B of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development 
     Act (7 U.S.C. 1932) is further amended by adding at the end 
     of the following:
       ``(i) Special Rules Applicable to Farmer Cooperatives under 
     the Business and Industry Loan Program.--In determining 
     whether a cooperative organization owned by farmers is 
     eligible for a guaranteed loan under subsection (a)(1), the 
     Secretary shall not apply any lending restriction based on 
     population to the area in which the cooperative organization 
     is located.''.

     SEC. 621. RURAL WATER AND WASTE FACILITY GRANTS.

       Section 306(a)(2) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
     Development Act (7 U.S.C. 1926(a)(2)) is amended by striking 
     ``aggregating not to exceed $590,000,000 in any fiscal 
     year''.

     SEC. 622. RURAL WATER CIRCUIT RIDER PROGRAM.

       (a) Establishment.--The Secretary of Agriculture shall 
     establish a national rural water and wastewater circuit rider 
     grant program that shall be modeled after the National Rural 
     Water Association Rural Water Circuit Rider Program that 
     receives funding from the Rural Utilities Service.
       (b) Limitations on Authorization of Appropriations.--To 
     carry out subsection (a), there are authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Secretary of Agriculture $15,000,000 for 
     each fiscal year.

[[Page H6217]]

     SEC. 623. RURAL WATER GRASSROOTS SOURCE WATER PROTECTION 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) Establishment.--The Secretary of Agriculture shall 
     establish a national grassroots source water protection 
     program that will utilize the on-site technical assistance 
     capabilities of State rural water associations that are 
     operating wellhead or ground water protection programs in 
     each State.
       (b) Limitations on Authorization of Appropriations.--To 
     carry out subsection (a), there are authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Secretary of Agriculture $5,000,000 for 
     each fiscal year.

                TITLE VII--RESEARCH AND RELATED MATTERS

                         Subtitle A--Extensions

     SEC. 700. MARKET EXPANSION RESEARCH.

       Section 1436(b)(3)(C) of the Food Security Act of 1985 (7 
     U.S.C. 1632(b)(3)(C)) is amended by striking ``1990'' and 
     inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 701. NATIONAL RURAL INFORMATION CENTER CLEARINGHOUSE.

       Section 2381(e) of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and 
     Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 3125b(e)) is amended by striking 
     ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 702. GRANTS AND FELLOWSHIPS FOR FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL 
                   SCIENCES EDUCATION.

       Section 1417(l) of the National Agricultural Research, 
     Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3152(l)) 
     is amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 703. POLICY RESEARCH CENTERS.

       Section 1419A(d) of the National Agricultural Research, 
     Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3155(d)) 
     is amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 704. HUMAN NUTRITION INTERVENTION AND HEALTH PROMOTION 
                   RESEARCH PROGRAM.

       Section 1424(d) of the National Agricultural Research, 
     Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3174(d)) 
     is amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 705. PILOT RESEARCH PROGRAM TO COMBINE MEDICAL AND 
                   AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH.

       Section 1424A(d) of the National Agricultural Research, 
     Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 
     3174a(d)) is amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting 
     ``2011''.

     SEC. 706. NUTRITION EDUCATION PROGRAM.

       Section 1425(c)(3) of the National Agricultural Research, 
     Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 
     3175(c)(3)) is amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting 
     ``2011''.

     SEC. 707. CONTINUING ANIMAL HEALTH AND DISEASE RESEARCH 
                   PROGRAMS.

       Section 1433(a) of the National Agricultural Research, 
     Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3195(a)) 
     is amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 708. APPROPRIATIONS FOR RESEARCH ON NATIONAL OR REGIONAL 
                   PROBLEMS.

       Section 1434(a) of the National Agricultural Research, 
     Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3196(a)) 
     is amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 709. GRANTS TO UPGRADE AGRICULTURAL AND FOOD SCIENCES 
                   FACILITIES AT 1890 LAND-GRANT COLLEGES, 
                   INCLUDING TUSKEGEE UNIVERSITY.

       Section 1447(b) of the National Agricultural Research, 
     Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 
     3222b(b)) is amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting 
     ``2011''.

     SEC. 710. NATIONAL RESEARCH AND TRAINING CENTENNIAL CENTERS 
                   AT 1890 LAND-GRANT INSTITUTIONS.

       Sections 1448(a)(1) and (f) of the National Agricultural 
     Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 
     U.S.C. 3222c(a)(1) and (f)) are amended by striking ``2002'' 
     each place it appears and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 711. HISPANIC-SERVING INSTITUTIONS.

       Section 1455(c) of the National Agricultural Research, 
     Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3241(c)) 
     is amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 712. COMPETITIVE GRANTS FOR INTERNATIONAL AGRICULTURAL 
                   SCIENCE AND EDUCATION PROGRAMS.

       Section 1459A(c) of the National Agricultural Research, 
     Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 
     3292b(c)) is amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting 
     ``2011''.

     SEC. 713. UNIVERSITY RESEARCH.

       Subsections (a) and (b) of section 1463 of the National 
     Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 
     1977 (7 U.S.C. 3311(a) and (b)) are amended by striking 
     ``2002'' each place it appears and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 714. EXTENSION SERVICE.

       Section 1464 of the National Agricultural Research, 
     Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3312) is 
     amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 715. SUPPLEMENTAL AND ALTERNATIVE CROPS.

       Section 1473D(a) of the National Agricultural Research, 
     Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 
     3319d(a)) is amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting 
     ``2011''.

     SEC. 716. AQUACULTURE RESEARCH FACILITIES.

       The first sentence of section 1477 of the National 
     Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 
     1977 (7 U.S.C. 3324) is amended by striking ``2002'' and 
     inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 717. RANGELAND RESEARCH.

       Section 1483(a) of the National Agricultural Research, 
     Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3336(a)) 
     is amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 718. NATIONAL GENETICS RESOURCES PROGRAM.

       Section 1635(b) of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and 
     Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5844(b)) is amended by striking 
     ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 719. HIGH-PRIORITY RESEARCH AND EXTENSION INITIATIVES.

       Section 1672(h) of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and 
     Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5925(h)) is amended by striking 
     ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 720. NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT RESEARCH AND EXTENSION 
                   INITIATIVE.

       Section 1672A(g) of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, 
     and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5925a(g)) is amended by 
     striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 721. AGRICULTURAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROGRAM.

       Section 1673(h) of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and 
     Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5926(h)) is amended by striking 
     ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 722. ALTERNATIVE AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND 
                   COMMERCIALIZATION REVOLVING FUND.

       (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 1664(g)(1) of 
     the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 
     U.S.C. 5908(g)(1)) is amended by striking ``2002'' and 
     inserting ``2011''.
       (b) Capitalization.--Section 1664(g)(2) of such Act (7 
     U.S.C. 5908(g)(2)) is amended by striking ``2002'' and 
     inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 723. ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM FOR FARMERS WITH 
                   DISABILITIES.

       Section 1680(c)(1) of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, 
     and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5933(c)(1)) is amended by 
     striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 724. PARTNERSHIPS FOR HIGH-VALUE AGRICULTURAL PRODUCT 
                   QUALITY RESEARCH.

       Section 402(g) of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and 
     Education Reform Act of 1998 (7 U.S.C. 7622(g)) is amended by 
     striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 725. BIOBASED PRODUCTS.

       (a) Pilot Project.--Section 404(e)(2) of the Agricultural 
     Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998 (7 
     U.S.C. 7624(e)(2)) is amended by striking ``2001'' and 
     inserting ``2011''.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 404(h) of 
     such Act (7 U.S.C. 7624(h)) is amended by striking ``2002'' 
     and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 726. INTEGRATED RESEARCH, EDUCATION, AND EXTENSION 
                   COMPETITIVE GRANTS PROGRAM.

       Section 406(e) of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and 
     Education Reform Act of 1998 (7 U.S.C. 7626(e)) is amended by 
     striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 727. INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY BUILDING GRANTS.

       (a) Generally.--Section 535(b)(1) of the Equity in 
     Educational Land-Grant Status Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 301 note) 
     is amended by striking ``2000'' and inserting ``2011''.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 535(c) of 
     such Act is amended by striking ``2000'' and inserting 
     ``2011''.

     SEC. 728. 1994 INSTITUTION RESEARCH GRANTS.

       Section 536(c) of the Equity in Educational Land-Grant 
     Status Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 301 note) is amended by striking 
     ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 729. ENDOWMENT FOR 1994 INSTITUTIONS.

       The first sentence of section 533(b) of the Equity in 
     Educational Land-Grant Status Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 301 note) 
     is amended by striking ``$4,600,000'' and all that follows 
     through the period and inserting ``such sums as are necessary 
     to carry out this section for each of fiscal years 1996 
     through 2011.''.

     SEC. 730. PRECISION AGRICULTURE.

       Section 403(i) of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and 
     Education Reform Act of 1998 (7 U.S.C. 7623(i)) is amended by 
     striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 731. THOMAS JEFFERSON INITIATIVE FOR CROP 
                   DIVERSIFICATION.

       Section 405(h) of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and 
     Education Reform Act of 1998 (7 U.S.C. 7625(h)) is amended by 
     striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 732. SUPPORT FOR RESEARCH REGARDING DISEASES OF WHEAT, 
                   TRITICALE, AND BARLEY CAUSED BY FUSARIUM 
                   GRAMINEARUM OR BY TILLETIA INDICA.

       Section 408(e) of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and 
     Education Reform Act of 1998 (7 U.S.C. 7628(e)) is amended by 
     striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 733. OFFICE OF PEST MANAGEMENT POLICY.

       Section 614(f) of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and 
     Education Reform Act of 1998 (7 U.S.C. 7653(f)) is amended by 
     striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 734. NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH, EXTENSION, 
                   EDUCATION, AND ECONOMICS ADVISORY BOARD.

       Section 1408(h) of the National Agricultural Research, 
     Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3123(h)) 
     is amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 735. GRANTS FOR RESEARCH ON PRODUCTION AND MARKETING OF 
                   ALCOHOLS AND INDUSTRIAL HYDROCARBONS FROM 
                   AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES AND FOREST PRODUCTS.

       Section 1419(d) of the National Agricultural Research, 
     Extension, and Teaching

[[Page H6218]]

     Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3154(d)) is amended by striking 
     ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 736. BIOMASS RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.

       Title III of the Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 2000 
     (7 U.S.C. 7624 note) is amended--
       (1) in section 307(f), by striking ``2005'' and inserting 
     ``2011''; and
       (2) in section 310, by striking ``2005'' and inserting 
     ``2011''.

     SEC. 737. AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS RESEARCH 
                   FACILITIES.

       Section 6(a) of the Research Facilities Act (7 U.S.C. 
     390d(a)) is amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting 
     ``2011''.

     SEC. 738. COMPETITIVE, SPECIAL, AND FACILITIES RESEARCH 
                   GRANTS NATIONAL RESEARCH INITIATIVE.

       Section 2(b)(10) of the Competitive, Special, and 
     Facilities Research Grant Act (7 U.S.C. 450i(b)(10)) is 
     amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 739. FEDERAL AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH FACILITIES 
                   AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       Section 1431 of the National Agricultural Research, 
     Extension, and Teaching Policy Act Amendments of 1985 (Public 
     Law 99-198; 99 Stat. 1556) is amended by striking ``2002'' 
     and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 740. COTTON CLASSIFICATION SERVICES.

       The first sentence of section 3a of the Act of March 3, 
     1927 (commonly known as the ``Cotton Statistics and Estimates 
     Act''; 7 U.S.C. 473a) is amended by striking ``2002'' and 
     inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 740A. CRITICAL AGRICULTURAL MATERIALS RESEARCH.

       Section 16(a) of the Critical Agricultural Materials Act (7 
     U.S.C. 178n(a)) is amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting 
     ``2011''.

                       Subtitle B--Modifications

     SEC. 741. EQUITY IN EDUCATIONAL LAND-GRANT STATUS ACT OF 
                   1994.

       (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 534(a)(1)(A) 
     of the Equity in Educational Land-Grant Status Act of 1994 (7 
     U.S.C. 301 note) is amended by striking ``$50,000'' and 
     inserting ``$100,000''.
       (b) Withdrawals and Expenditures.--Section 533(c)(4)(A) of 
     such Act is amended by striking ``section 390(3)'' and all 
     that follows through ``1998)'' and inserting ``section 
     2(a)(7) of the Tribally Controlled College or University 
     Assistance Act of 1978)''.
       (c) Accreditation.--Section 533(a)(3) of such Act is 
     amended by striking ``under sections 534 and 535'' and 
     inserting ``under sections 534, 535, and 536''.
       (d) 1994 Institutions.--Section 532 of such Act is amended 
     by striking paragraphs (1) through (30) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(1) Bay Mills Community College.
       ``(2) Blackfeet Community College.
       ``(3) Cankdeska Cikana Community College.
       ``(4) College of Menominee Nation.
       ``(5) Crownpoint Institute of Technology.
       ``(6) D-Q University.
       ``(7) Dine College.
       ``(8) Dull Knife Memorial College.
       ``(9) Fond du Lac Tribal and Community College.
       ``(10) Fort Belknap College.
       ``(11) Fort Berthold Community College.
       ``(12) Fort Peck Community College.
       ``(13) Haskell Indian Nations University.
       ``(14) Institute of American Indian and Alaska Native 
     Culture and Arts Development.
       ``(15) Lac Courte Oreilles Ojibwa Community College.
       ``(16) Leech Lake Tribal College.
       ``(17) Little Big Horn College.
       ``(18) Little Priest Tribal College.
       ``(19) Nebraska Indian Community College.
       ``(20) Northwest Indian College.
       ``(21) Oglala Lakota College.
       ``(22) Salish Kootenai College.
       ``(23) Sinte Gleska University.
       ``(24) Sisseton Wahpeton Community College.
       ``(25) Si Tanka/Huron University.
       ``(26) Sitting Bull College.
       ``(27) Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute.
       ``(28) Stone Child College.
       ``(29) Turtle Mountain Community College.
       ``(30) United Tribes Technical College.''.

     SEC. 742. NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH, EXTENSION, AND 
                   TEACHING POLICY ACT OF 1977.

       Section 1404(4) of the National Agricultural Research, 
     Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3103(4)) 
     is amended--
       (1) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (E) 
     and inserting ``, or''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following: ``(F) is one of the 
     1994 Institutions (as defined in section 532 of the Equity in 
     Educational Land-Grant Status Act of 1994).''.

     SEC. 743. AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH, EXTENSION, AND EDUCATION 
                   REFORM ACT OF 1998.

       (a) Priority Mission Areas.--Section 401(c)(2) of the 
     Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 
     1998 (7 U.S.C. 7621(c)(2)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (E);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (F) 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(G) alternative fuels and renewable energy sources.''.
       (b) Precision Agriculture.--Section 403 of the Agricultural 
     Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998 (7 
     U.S.C. 7623) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(5)(F), by inserting ``(including 
     improved use of energy inputs)'' after ``farm production 
     efficiencies''; and
       (2) in subsection (d)--
       (A) by redesignating paragraphs (4) and (5) as paragraphs 
     (5) and (6), respectively; and
       (B) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(4) Improve on farm energy use efficiencies.''.
       (c) Thomas Jefferson Initiative for Crop Diversification.--
     Section 405(a) of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and 
     Education Reform Act of 1998 (7 U.S.C. 7625(a)) is amended by 
     striking ``and marketing'' and inserting ``, marketing, and 
     efficient use''.
       (d) Coordinated Program of Research, Extension, and 
     Education To Improve Viability of Small- and Medium-Size 
     Dairy, Livestock, and Poultry Operations.--Section 407(b)(3) 
     of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform 
     Act of 1998 (7 U.S.C. 7627(b)(3)) is amended by inserting 
     ``(including improved use of energy inputs)'' after ``poultry 
     systems that increase efficiencies''.
       (e) Support for Research Regarding Diseases of Wheat, 
     Triticale, and Barley Caused by Fusarium Graminearum or By 
     Tilletia Indica.--
       (1) Research grant authorized.--Section 408(a) of the 
     Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 
     1998 (7 U.S.C. 7628(a)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(a) Research Grant Authorized.--The Secretary of 
     Agriculture may make grants to consortia of land-grant 
     colleges and universities to enhance the ability of the 
     consortia to carry out multi-State research projects aimed at 
     understanding and combating diseases of wheat, triticale, and 
     barley caused by Fusarium graminearum and related fungi 
     (referred to in this section as `wheat scab') or by Tilletia 
     indica and related fungi (referred to in this section as 
     `Karnal bunt').''.
       (2) Research components.--Section 408(b) of such Act (7 
     U.S.C. 7628(b)) is amended--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``or of Karnal bunt,'' 
     after ``epidemiology of wheat scab'';
       (B) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``, triticale,'' after 
     ``occurring in wheat'';
       (C) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``or Karnal bunt'' after 
     ``wheat scab'';
       (D) in paragraph (3)(A), by striking ``and barley for the 
     presence of'' and inserting ``, triticale, and barley for the 
     presence of Karnal bunt or of'';
       (E) in paragraph (3)(B), by striking ``and barley infected 
     with wheat scab'' and inserting ``, triticale, and barley 
     infected with wheat scab or with Karnal bunt'';
       (F) in paragraph (3)(C), by inserting ``wheat scab'' after 
     ``to render'';
       (G) in paragraph (4), by striking ``and barley to wheat 
     scab'' and inserting ``, triticale, and barley to wheat scab 
     and to Karnal bunt''; and
       (H) in paragraph (5)--
       (i) by inserting ``and Karnal bunt'' after ``wheat scab''; 
     and
       (ii) by inserting ``, triticale,'' after ``resistant 
     wheat''.
       (3) Communications networks.--Section 408(c) of such Act (7 
     U.S.C. 7628(c)) is amended by inserting ``or Karnal bunt'' 
     after ``wheat scab''.
       (4) Technical amendments.--(A) The section heading for 
     section 408 of such Act is amended by striking ``AND BARLEY 
     CAUSED BY FUSARIUM GRAMINEARUM'' and inserting ``, TRITICALE, 
     AND BARLEY CAUSED BY FUSARIUM GRAMINEARUM OR BY TILLETIA 
     INDICA''.
       (B) The table of sections for such Act is amended by 
     striking ``and barley caused by fusarium graminearum'' in the 
     item relating to section 408 and inserting ``, triticale, and 
     barley caused by Fusarium graminearum or by Tilletia 
     indica''.
       (f) Program to Control Johne's Disease.--Title IV of the 
     Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 
     1998 (7 U.S.C. 7621 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new section:

     ``SEC. 409. BOVINE JOHNE'S DISEASE CONTROL PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Establishment.--The Secretary of Agriculture, in 
     coordination with State veterinarians and other appropriate 
     State animal health professionals, may establish a program to 
     conduct research, testing, and evaluation of programs for the 
     control and management of Johne's disease in livestock.
       ``(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Secretary such sums as may be 
     necessary to carry out this section for each of fiscal years 
     2003 through 2011.''.

     SEC. 744. FOOD, AGRICULTURE, CONSERVATION, AND TRADE ACT OF 
                   1990.

       (a) Agricultural Genome Initiative.--Section 1671(b) of the 
     Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 
     U.S.C. 5924(b)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (3), by inserting ``pathogens and'' before 
     ``diseases causing economic hardship'';
       (2) in paragraph (6), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (3) by redesignating paragraph (7) as paragraph (8); and
       (4) by inserting after paragraph (6) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(7) reducing the economic impact of plant pathogens on 
     commercially important crop plants; and''.
       (b) High-Priority Research and Extension Initiatives.--
     Section 1672(e) of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and 
     Trade

[[Page H6219]]

     Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5925) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new paragraphs:
       ``(25) Research to protect the united states food supply 
     and agriculture from bioterrorism.--Research grants may be 
     made under this section for the purpose of developing 
     technologies, which support the capability to deal with the 
     threat of agricultural bioterrorism.
       ``(26) Wind erosion research and extension.--Research and 
     extension grants may be made under this section for the 
     purpose of validating wind erosion models.
       ``(27) Crop loss research and extension.--Research and 
     extension grants may be made under this section for the 
     purpose of validating crop loss models.
       ``(28) Land use management research and extension.--
     Research and extension grants may be made under this section 
     for the purposes of evaluating the environmental benefits of 
     land use management tools such as those provided in the 
     Farmland Protection Program.
       ``(29) Water and air quality research and extension.--
     Research and extension grants may be made under this section 
     for the purpose of better understanding agricultural impacts 
     to air and water quality and means to address them.
       ``(30) Revenue and insurance tools research and 
     extension.--Research and extension grants may be made under 
     this section for the purposes of better understanding the 
     impact of revenue and insurance tools on farm income.
       ``(31) Agrotourism research and extension.--Research and 
     extension grants may be made under this section for the 
     purpose of better understanding the economic, environmental, 
     and food systems impacts on agrotourism.
       ``(32) Harvesting productivity for fruits and vegetables.--
     Research and extension grants may be made under this section 
     for the purpose of improving harvesting productivity for 
     fruits and vegetables (including citrus), including the 
     development of mechanical harvesting technologies and 
     effective, economical, and safe abscission compounds.
       ``(33) Nitrogen-fixation by plants.--Research and extension 
     grants may be made under this section for the purpose of 
     enhancing the nitrogen-fixing ability and efficiency of 
     legumes, developing new varieties of legumes that fix 
     nitrogen more efficiently, and developing new varieties of 
     other commercially important crops that potentially are able 
     to fix nitrogen.
       ``(34) Agricultural marketing.--Extension grants may be 
     made under this section for the purpose of providing 
     education materials, information, and outreach programs 
     regarding commodity and livestock marketing strategies for 
     agricultural producers and for cooperatives and other 
     marketers of any agricultural commodity, including livestock.
       ``(35) Environment and private lands research and 
     extension.--Research and extension grants may be made under 
     this section for the purpose of researching the use of 
     computer models to aid in assessment of best management 
     practices on a watershed basis, working with government, 
     industry, and private landowners to help craft industry-led 
     solutions to identified environmental issues, researching and 
     monitoring water, air, or soil environmental quality to aid 
     in the development of new approaches to local environmental 
     concerns, and working with local, State, and federal 
     officials to help craft effective environmental solutions 
     that respect private property rights and agricultural 
     production realities.
       ``(36) Livestock disease research and extension.--Research 
     and extension grants may be made under this section for the 
     purpose of identifying possible livestock disease threats, 
     educating the public regarding livestock disease threats, 
     training persons to deal with such threats, and conducting 
     related research.
       ``(37) Plant gene expression.--Research and development 
     grants may be made under this section for the purpose of 
     plant gene expression research to accelerate the application 
     of basic plant genomic science to the development and testing 
     of new varieties of enhanced food crops, crops that can be 
     used as renewable energy sources, and other alternative uses 
     of agricultural crops.''.

     SEC. 745. NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH, EXTENSION, AND 
                   TEACHING POLICY ACT OF 1977.

       (a) National Agricultural Research, Extension, Education, 
     and Economic Advisory Board.--Section 1408 of the National 
     Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 
     1977 (7 U.S.C. 3123) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)(3)--
       (A) by redesignating subparagraphs (R) through (DD) as 
     subparagraphs (S) through (EE), respectively; and
       (B) by inserting after subparagraph (Q) the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(R) 1 member representing a nonland grant college or 
     university with a historic commitment to research in the food 
     and agricultural sciences.'';
       (2) in subsection (c)(1), by striking ``and land-grant 
     colleges and universities'' and inserting ``, land-grant 
     colleges and universities, and the Committee on Agriculture 
     of the House of Representatives, the Committee on 
     Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate, the 
     Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug 
     Administration and Related Agencies of the Committee on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives, and the 
     Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development and Related 
     Agencies of the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate'';
       (3) in subsection (d)(1), inserting ``consult with any 
     appropriate agencies of the Department of Agriculture and'' 
     after ``the Advisory Board shall''; and
       (4) in subsection (b)(1), by striking ``30 members'' and 
     inserting ``31 members''.
       (b) Grants for Research on Production and Marketing of 
     Alcohols and Industrial Hydrocarbons from Agricultural 
     Commodities and Forest Products.--Section 1419 of the 
     National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching 
     Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3154) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(2), by inserting ``and animal fats 
     and oils'' after ``industrial oilseed crops''; and
       (2) in subsection (a)(4), by inserting ``or triglycerides'' 
     after ``other industrial hydrocarbons''.
       (c) FAS Overseas Intern Program.--Section 1458(a) of the 
     National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching 
     Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3291(a)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (8);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (9) and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(10) establish a program, to be coordinated by the 
     Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service 
     and the Foreign Agricultural Service, to place interns from 
     United States colleges and universities at Foreign 
     Agricultural Service field offices overseas.''.

     SEC. 746. BIOMASS RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.

       Title III of the Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 2000 
     (7 U.S.C. 7624 note) is amended--
       (1) in section 302(3), by inserting ``or biodiesel'' after 
     ``such as ethanol'';
       (2) in section 303(3), by inserting ``animal byproducts,'' 
     after ``fibers,''; and
       (3) in section 306(b)(1)--
       (A) by redesignating subparagraphs (E) through (J) as 
     subparagraphs (F) through (K), respectively; and
       (B) by inserting after subparagraph (D) the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(E) an individual affiliated with a livestock trade 
     association;''.

     SEC. 747. BIOTECHNOLOGY RISK ASSESSMENT RESEARCH.

       Section 1668 of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and 
     Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5921) is amended to read as 
     follows:

     ``SEC. 1668. BIOTECHNOLOGY RISK ASSESSMENT RESEARCH.

       ``(a) Purpose.--It is the purpose of this section--
       ``(1) to authorize and support environmental assessment 
     research to help identify and analyze environmental effects 
     of biotechnology; and
       ``(2) to authorize research to help regulators develop 
     long-term policies concerning the introduction of such 
     technology.
       ``(b) Grant Program.-- The Secretary of Agriculture shall 
     establish a grant program within the Cooperative State 
     Research, Education, and Extension Service and the 
     Agricultural Research Service to provide the necessary 
     funding for environmental assessment research concerning the 
     introduction of genetically engineered plants and animals 
     into the environment.
       ``(c) Types of Research.-- Types of research for which 
     grants may be made under this section shall include the 
     following:
       ``(1) Research designed to identify and develop appropriate 
     management practices to minimize physical and biological 
     risks associated with genetically engineered animals and 
     plants once they are introduced into the environment.
       ``(2) Research designed to develop methods to monitor the 
     dispersal of genetically engineered animals and plants.
       ``(3) Research designed to further existing knowledge with 
     respect to the characteristics, rates and methods of gene 
     transfer that may occur between genetically engineered plants 
     and animals and related wild and agricultural organisms.
       ``(4) Environmental assessment research designed to provide 
     analysis, which compares the relative impacts of plants and 
     animals modified through genetic engineering to other types 
     of production systems.
       ``(5) Other areas of research designed to further the 
     purposes of this section.
       ``(d) Eligibility Requirements.--Grants under this section 
     shall be--
       ``(1) made on the basis of the quality of the proposed 
     research project; and
       ``(2) available to any public or private research or 
     educational institution or organization.
       ``(e) Consultation.-- In considering specific areas of 
     research for funding under this section, the Secretary of 
     Agriculture shall consult with the Administrator of the 
     Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and the National 
     Agricultural Research, Extension, Education, and Economics 
     Advisory Board.
       ``(f) Program Coordination.-- The Secretary of Agriculture 
     shall coordinate research funded under this section with the 
     Office of Research and Development of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency in order to avoid duplication of research 
     activities.

[[Page H6220]]

       ``(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       ``(1) In general.-- There are authorized to be appropriated 
     such sums as necessary to carry out this section.
       ``(2) Withholdings from biotechnology outlays.--The 
     Secretary of Agriculture shall withhold from outlays of the 
     Department of Agriculture for research on biotechnology, as 
     defined and determined by the Secretary, at least one percent 
     of such amount for the purpose of making grants under this 
     section for research on biotechnology risk assessment. Except 
     that, funding from this authorization should be collected and 
     applied to the maximum extent practicable to risk assessment 
     research on all categories identified as biotechnology by the 
     Secretary.''.

     SEC. 748. COMPETITIVE, SPECIAL, AND FACILITIES RESEARCH 
                   GRANTS.

       Section 2(a) of the Competitive, Special, and Facilities 
     Research Grant Act (7 U.S.C. 450i(a)) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) Determination of high priority research.--Research 
     priorities shall be determined by the Secretary on an annual 
     basis, taking into account input as gathered by the Secretary 
     through the National Agricultural Research, Extension, 
     Education, and Economics Advisory Board.''.

     SEC. 749. MATCHING FUNDS REQUIREMENT FOR RESEARCH AND 
                   EXTENSION ACTIVITIES OF 1890 INSTITUTIONS.

       Section 1449 of the National Agricultural Research, 
     Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3222d) 
     is amended--
       (1) by amending subsection (c) to read as follows:
       ``(c) Matching Formula.--For each of fiscal years 2003 
     through 2011, the State shall provide matching funds from 
     non-Federal sources. Such matching funds shall be for an 
     amount equal to not less than 60 percent of the formula funds 
     to be distributed to the eligible institution, and shall 
     increase by 10 percent each fiscal year thereafter until 
     fiscal year 2007.''; and
       (2) by amending subsection (d) to read as follows:
       ``(d) Waiver Authority.--Notwithstanding subsection (f), 
     the Secretary may waive the matching funds requirement under 
     subsection (c) above the 50 percent level for fiscal years 
     2003 through 2011 for an eligible institution of a State if 
     the Secretary determines that the State will be unlikely to 
     satisfy the matching requirement.''.

     SEC. 749A. MATCHING FUNDS REQUIREMENT FOR RESEARCH AND 
                   EXTENSION ACTIVITIES FOR THE UNITED STATES 
                   TERRITORIES.

       (a) Research Matching Requirement.--Section 3(d)(4) of the 
     Hatch Act of 1887 (7 U.S.C. 361c(d)(4)) is amended by 
     striking ``the same matching funds'' and all that follows 
     through the end of the sentence and inserting ``matching 
     funds requirements from non-Federal sources for fiscal years 
     2003 through 2011 in an amount equal to not less than 50 
     percent of the formula funds to be distributed to the 
     Territory. The Secretary may waive the matching funds 
     requirements for a Territory for any of the fiscal years 2003 
     through 2011 if the Secretary determines that the Territory 
     will be unlikely to satisfy the matching funds requirement 
     for that fiscal year.''.
       (b) Extension Matching Requirement.--Section 3(e)(4) of the 
     Smith-Lever Act (7 U.S.C. 343(e)(4)) is amended by striking 
     ``the same matching funds'' and all that follows through the 
     end of the sentence and inserting ``matching funds 
     requirements from non-Federal sources for fiscal years 2003 
     through 2011 in an amount equal to not less than 50 percent 
     of the formula funds to be distributed to the Territory. The 
     Secretary may waive the matching funds requirements for a 
     Territory for any of the fiscal years 2003 through 2011 if 
     the Secretary determines that the Territory will be unlikely 
     to satisfy the matching funds requirement for that fiscal 
     year.''.

     SEC. 750. INITIATIVE FOR FUTURE AGRICULTURE AND FOOD SYSTEMS.

       (a) Funding.--Section 401(b)(1) of the Agricultural 
     Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998 (7 
     U.S.C. 7621(b)(1)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(1) In general.--
       ``(A) Total amount to be transferred.--On October 1, 2003, 
     and each October 1 thereafter through September 30, 2011, the 
     Secretary of Agriculture shall deposit funds of the Commodity 
     Credit Corporation into the Account. The total amount of 
     Commodity Credit Corporation funds deposited into the Account 
     under this subparagraph shall equal $1,160,000,000.
       ``(B) Equal amounts.--To the maximum extent practicable, 
     the amounts deposited into the Account pursuant to 
     subparagraph (A) shall be deposited in equal amounts for each 
     fiscal year.
       ``(C) Availability of funds.--Amounts deposited into the 
     Account pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall remain available 
     until expended.''.
       (b) Availability of Funds.--Section 401(f)(6) of the 
     Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 
     1998 (7 U.S.C. 7621(f)(6)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(6) Availability of funds.--Funds made available under 
     this section to the Secretary prior to October 1, 2003, for 
     grants under this section shall be available to the Secretary 
     for a 2-year period.''.

     SEC. 751. CARBON CYCLE RESEARCH.

       Section 221 of the Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 2000 
     (Public Law 106-224; 114 Stat. 407) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``Of the amount'' and 
     all that follows through ``to provide'' and inserting ``To 
     the extent funds are made available for this purpose, the 
     Secretary shall provide'';
       (2) in subsection (d), by striking ``under subsection (a)'' 
     and inserting ``for this section''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years 2002 through 
     2011 such sums as may be necessary to carry out this 
     section.''

     SEC. 752. DEFINITION OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES.

       Section 2(3) of the Research Facilities Act (7 U.S.C. 
     390(2)(3)) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(3) Food and agricultural sciences.--The term `food and 
     agricultural sciences' has the meaning given that term in 
     section 1404(8) of the National Agricultural Research, 
     Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 
     3103(8)).''.

     SEC. 753. FEDERAL EXTENSION SERVICE.

       Section 3(b)(3) of the Smith-Lever Act (7 U.S.C. 343(b)(3)) 
     is amended by striking ``$5,000,000'' and inserting ``such 
     sums as are necessary''.

     SEC. 754. POLICY RESEARCH CENTERS.

       Section 1419A(c)(3) of the National Agricultural Research, 
     Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 
     3155(c)(3)) is amended by striking ``collect and analyze 
     data'' and inserting ``collect, analyze, and disseminate 
     data''.

                      Subtitle C--Related Matters

     SEC. 761. RESIDENT INSTRUCTION AT LAND-GRANT COLLEGES IN 
                   UNITED STATES TERRITORIES.

       (a) Purpose.--It is the purpose of this section to promote 
     and strengthen higher education in the food and agricultural 
     sciences at agricultural and mechanical colleges located in 
     the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands of the 
     United States, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the 
     Northern Mariana Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, 
     the Republic of the Marshall Islands, or the Republic of 
     Palau (hereinafter referred to in this section as ``eligible 
     institutions'') by formulating and administering programs to 
     enhance teaching programs in agriculture, natural resources, 
     forestry, veterinary medicine, home economics, and 
     disciplines closely allied to the food and agriculture 
     production and delivery system.
       (b) Grants.--The Secretary of Agriculture shall make 
     competitive grants to those eligible institutions having a 
     demonstrable capacity to carry out the teaching of food and 
     agricultural sciences.
       (c) Use of Grant Funds.--Grants made under subsection (b) 
     shall be used to--
       (1) strengthen institutional educational capacities, 
     including libraries, curriculum, faculty, scientific 
     instrumentation, instruction delivery systems, and student 
     recruitment and retention, in order to respond to identified 
     State, regional, national, or international education needs 
     in the food and agricultural sciences;
       (2) attract and support undergraduate and graduate students 
     in order to educate them in identified areas of national need 
     to the food and agriculture sciences;
       (3) facilitate cooperative initiatives between two or more 
     eligible institutions or between eligible institutions and 
     units of State Government, organizational in the private 
     sector, to maximize the development and use of resources such 
     as faculty, facilities, and equipment to improve food and 
     agricultural sciences teaching programs; and
       (4) conduct undergraduate scholarship programs to assist in 
     meeting national needs for training food and agricultural 
     scientists.
       (d) Grant Requirements.--
       (1) The Secretary of Agriculture shall ensure that each 
     eligible institution, prior to receiving grant funds under 
     subsection (b), shall have a significant demonstrable 
     commitment to higher educations programs in the food and 
     agricultural sciences and to each specific subject area for 
     which grant funds under this subsection are to be used.
       (2) The Secretary of Agriculture may require that any grant 
     awarded under this section contain provisions that require 
     funds to be targeted to meet the needs identified in section 
     1402 of the National Agriculture Research, Extension, and 
     Teaching Policy Act of 1977.
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated such sums as are necessary for each of the 
     fiscal years 2002 through 2011 to carry out this section.

     SEC. 762. DECLARATION OF EXTRAORDINARY EMERGENCY AND 
                   RESULTING AUTHORITIES.

       (a) Review of Payment of Compensation.--Section 415(e) of 
     the Plant Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 7715(e)) is amended by 
     inserting before the final period the following: ``or review 
     by any officer of the Government other than the Secretary or 
     the designee of the Secretary''.
       (b) Review of Certain Decisions.--
       (1) Plant protection act.--Section 442 of the Plant 
     Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 7772) is amended by adding at the 
     end following new subsection:
       ``(f) Secretarial Discretion.--The action of any officer, 
     employee, or agent of the Secretary in carrying out this 
     section, including determining the amount of and making any 
     payment authorized to be made under this section, shall not 
     be subject to review by any

[[Page H6221]]

     officer of the Government other than the Secretary or the 
     designee of the Secretary.''.
       (2) Other plant and animal pest and disease laws.--Section 
     11 of the Act of May 29, 1884 (21 U.S.C. 114a; commonly known 
     as the ``Animal Industry Act'') and the first section of the 
     Act of September 25, 1981 (7 U.S.C. 147b), are each amended 
     by adding at the end the following new sentence: ``The action 
     of any officer, employee, or agent of the Secretary in 
     carrying out this section, including determining the amount 
     of and making any payment authorized to be made under this 
     section, shall not be subject to review by any officer of the 
     Government other than the Secretary or the designee of the 
     Secretary.''.
       (c) Methyl Bromide.--The Plant Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 
     7701 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 418 the 
     following new section:

     ``SEC. 419. METHYL BROMIDE.

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary, upon request of State, 
     local, or tribal authorities, shall determine whether methyl 
     bromide treatments or applications required by State, local, 
     or tribal authorities to prevent the introduction, 
     establishment, or spread of plant pests (including diseases) 
     or noxious weeds should be authorized as an official control 
     or official requirement.
       ``(b) Administration.--
       ``(1) Timeline for determination.--The Secretary shall make 
     the determination required by subsection (a) not later than 
     90 days after receiving the request for such a determination.
       ``(2) Regulations.--The promulgation of regulations for and 
     the administration of this section shall be made without 
     regard to--
       ``(A) the notice and comment provisions of section 553 of 
     title 5, United States Code;
       ``(B) the Statement of Policy of the Secretary of 
     Agriculture, effective July 24, 1971 (36 Fed. Reg. 13804; 
     relating to notices of proposed rulemaking and public 
     participation in rulemaking); and
       ``(C) chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code (commonly 
     known as the `Paperwork Reduction Act').
       ``(c) Registry.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     the enactment of this section, the Secretary shall publish, 
     and thereafter maintain, a registry of State, local, and 
     tribal requirements authorized by the Secretary under this 
     section.''.

        Subtitle D--Repeal of Certain Activities and Authorities

     SEC. 771. FOOD SAFETY RESEARCH INFORMATION OFFICE AND 
                   NATIONAL CONFERENCE.

       (a) Repeal.--Subsections (b) and (c) of section 615 of the 
     Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 
     1998 (7 U.S.C. 7654(b) and (c)) are repealed.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Generally.--Section 615 of such Act is amended--
       (A) in the section heading, by striking ``AND NATIONAL 
     CONFERENCE'';
       (B) by striking ``(a) Food Safety Research Information 
     Office.--'';
       (C) by redesignating paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) as 
     subsections (a), (b), and (c), respectively, and moving the 
     margins 2 ems to the left;
       (D) in subsection (b) (as so redesignated), by 
     redesignating subparagraphs (A) and (B) as paragraphs (1) and 
     (2), respectively, and moving the margins 2 ems to the left; 
     and
       (E) in subsection (c) (as so redesignated), by striking 
     ``this subsection'' and inserting ``this section''.
       (2) Table of sections.--The table of sections for such Act 
     is amended by striking ``and National Conference'' in the 
     item relating to section 615.

     SEC. 772. REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES UNDER SHEEP PROMOTION, 
                   RESEARCH, AND INFORMATION ACT OF 1994.

       Section 617 of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and 
     Education Reform Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-185; 112 Stat. 
     607) is repealed.

     SEC. 773. NATIONAL GENETIC RESOURCES PROGRAM.

       Section 1634 of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and 
     Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5843) is repealed.

     SEC. 774. NATIONAL ADVISORY BOARD ON AGRICULTURAL WEATHER.

       (a) Repeal.--Section 1639 of the Food, Agriculture, 
     Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5853) is 
     repealed.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 1640(b) of the Food, 
     Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 
     5854(b)) is amended by striking ``take into'' and all that 
     follows through ``Weather and''.

     SEC. 775. AGRICULTURAL INFORMATION EXCHANGE WITH IRELAND.

       Section 1420 of the National Agricultural Research, 
     Extension and Teaching Policy Act Amendments of 1985 (Public 
     Law 99-198; 99 Stat. 1551) is repealed.

     SEC. 776. PESTICIDE RESISTANCE STUDY.

       Section 1437 of the National Agricultural Research, 
     Extension, and Teaching Policy Act Amendments of 1985 (Public 
     Law 99-198; 99 Stat. 1558) is repealed.

     SEC. 777. EXPANSION OF EDUCATION STUDY.

       Section 1438 of the National Agricultural Research, 
     Extension, and Teaching Policy Act Amendments of 1985 (Public 
     Law 99-198; 99 Stat. 1559) is repealed.

     SEC. 778. SUPPORT FOR ADVISORY BOARD.

       (a) Repeal.--Section 1412 of the National Agricultural 
     Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 
     U.S.C. 3127) is repealed.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 1413(c) of such Act (7 
     U.S.C. 3128(c)) is amended by striking ``section 1412 of this 
     title and''.

     SEC. 779. TASK FORCE ON 10-YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN FOR 
                   AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH FACILITIES.

       (a) Repeal.--Section 4 of the Research Facilities Act (7 
     U.S.C. 390b) is repealed.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 2 of such Act (7 U.S.C. 
     390) is amended by striking paragraph (5).

              Subtitle E--Agriculture Facility Protection

     SEC. 790. ADDITIONAL PROTECTIONS FOR ANIMAL OR AGRICULTURAL 
                   ENTERPRISES, RESEARCH FACILITIES, AND OTHER 
                   ENTITIES.

       (a) Definitions.--The Research Facilities Act (7 U.S.C. 390 
     et seq.) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating section 6 as section 7; and
       (2) by inserting after section 5 the following new section:

     ``SEC. 6. ADDITIONAL PROTECTIONS FOR ANIMAL OR AGRICULTURAL 
                   ENTERPRISES, RESEARCH FACILITIES, AND OTHER 
                   ENTITIES AGAINST DISRUPTION.

       ``(a) Definitions.--For the purposes of this section, the 
     following definitions apply:
       ``(1) Animal or agricultural enterprise.--The term `animal 
     or agricultural enterprise' means any of the following:
       ``(A) A commercial, governmental, or academic enterprise 
     that uses animals, plants, or other biological materials for 
     food or fiber production, breeding, processing, research, or 
     testing.
       ``(B) A zoo, aquarium, circus, rodeo, or other entity that 
     exhibits or uses animals, plants, or other biological 
     materials for educational or entertainment purposes.
       ``(C) A fair or similar event intended to advance 
     agricultural arts and sciences.
       ``(D) A facility managed or occupied by an association, 
     federation, foundation, council, or other group or entity of 
     food or fiber producers, processors, or agricultural or 
     biomedical researchers intended to advance agricultural or 
     biomedical arts and sciences.
       ``(2) Economic damage.--The term `economic damage' means 
     the replacement of the following:
       ``(A) The cost of lost or damaged property (including all 
     real and personal property) of an animal or agricultural 
     enterprise.
       ``(B) The cost of repeating an interrupted or invalidated 
     experiment.
       ``(C) The loss of revenue (including costs related to 
     business recovery) directly related to the disruption of an 
     animal or agricultural enterprise.
       ``(D) The cost of the tuition and expenses of any student 
     to complete an academic program that was disrupted, or to 
     complete a replacement program, when the tuition and expenses 
     are incurred as a result of the damage or loss of the 
     property of an animal or agricultural enterprise.
       ``(3) Property of an animal or agricultural enterprise.--
     The term `property of an animal or agricultural enterprise' 
     means real and personal property of or used by any of the 
     following:
       ``(A) An animal or agricultural enterprise.
       ``(B) An employee of an animal or agricultural enterprise.
       ``(C) A student attending an academic animal or 
     agricultural enterprise.
       ``(4) Disruption.--The term `disruption' does not include 
     any lawful disruption that results from lawful public, 
     governmental, or animal or agricultural enterprise employee 
     reaction to the disclosure of information about an animal or 
     agricultural enterprise.
       ``(b) Violation.--A person may not recklessly, knowingly, 
     or intentionally cause, or contribute to, the disruption of 
     the functioning of an animal or agricultural enterprise by 
     damaging or causing the loss of any property of the animal or 
     agricultural enterprise that results in economic damage, as 
     determined by the Secretary.
       ``(c) Assessment of Civil Penalty.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary may impose on any person 
     that the Secretary determines violates subsection (b) a civil 
     penalty in an amount determined under paragraphs (2) and (3). 
     The civil penalty may be assessed only on the record after an 
     opportunity for a hearing.
       ``(2) Recovery of department costs.--The civil penalty 
     assessed by the Secretary against a person for a violation of 
     subsection (b) shall be not less than the total cost incurred 
     by the Secretary for investigation of the violation, 
     conducting any hearing regarding the violation, and assessing 
     the civil penalty.
       ``(3) Recovery of economic damage.--In addition to the 
     amount determined under paragraph (2), the amount of the 
     civil penalty shall include an amount not less than the total 
     cost (or, in the case of knowing or intentional disruption, 
     not less than 150 percent of the total cost) of the economic 
     damage incurred by the animal or agricultural enterprise, any 
     employee of the animal or agricultural enterprise, or any 
     student attending an academic animal or agricultural 
     enterprise as a result of the damage or loss of the property 
     of an animal or agricultural enterprise.
       ``(d) Identification.--The Secretary shall identify for 
     each civil penalty assessed under subsection (c), the portion 
     of the amount of the civil penalty that represents the 
     recovery of Department costs and the portion that represents 
     the recovery of economic losses.
       ``(e) Other Factors in Determining Penalty.-- In 
     determining the amount of a civil penalty under subsection 
     (c), the Secretary shall consider the following:

[[Page H6222]]

       ``(1) The nature, circumstance, extent, and gravity of the 
     violation or violations.
       ``(2) The ability of the injured animal or agricultural 
     enterprise to continue to operate, costs incurred by the 
     animal or agricultural enterprise to recover lost business, 
     and the effect of the violation on earnings of employees of 
     the animal or agricultural enterprise.
       ``(3) The interruptions experienced by students attending 
     an academic animal or agricultural enterprise.
       ``(4) Whether the violator has previously violated 
     subsection (a).
       ``(5) The violator's degree of culpability.
       ``(f) Fund to Assist Victims of Disruption.--
       ``(1) Fund established.--There is established in the 
     Treasury a fund which shall consist of that portion of each 
     civil penalty collected under subsection (c) that represents 
     the recovery of economic damages.
       ``(2) Use of amounts in fund.--The Secretary of Agriculture 
     shall use amounts in the fund to compensate animal or 
     agricultural enterprises, employees of an animal or 
     agricultural enterprise, and student attending an academic 
     animal or agricultural enterprise for economic losses 
     incurred as a result of the disruption of the functioning of 
     an animal or agricultural enterprise in violation of 
     subsection (b).''.

                    TITLE VIII--FORESTRY INITIATIVES

     SEC. 801. REPEAL OF FORESTRY INCENTIVES PROGRAM AND 
                   STEWARDSHIP INCENTIVE PROGRAM.

       The Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act of 1978 is amended 
     by striking section 4 (16 U.S.C. 2103) and section 6 (16 
     U.S.C. 2103b).

     SEC. 802. ESTABLISHMENT OF FOREST LAND ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) There is a growing dependence on private nonindustrial 
     forest lands to supply the necessary market commodities and 
     nonmarket values, such as habitat for fish and wildlife, 
     aesthetics, outdoor recreation opportunities, and other 
     forest resources, required by a growing population.
       (2) There is a strong demand for expanded assistance 
     programs for owners of nonindustrial private forest land 
     since the majority of the wood supply of the United States 
     comes from nonindustrial private forest land.
       (3) The soil, carbon stores, water and air quality of the 
     United States can be maintained and improved through good 
     stewardship of nonindustrial private forest lands.
       (4) The products and services resulting from stewardship of 
     nonindustrial private forest lands provide income and 
     employment that contribute to the economic health and 
     diversity of rural communities.
       (5) Wildfires threaten human lives, property, forests, and 
     other resources, and Federal and State cooperation in forest 
     fire prevention and control has proven effective and 
     valuable, in that properly managed forest stands are less 
     susceptible to catastrophic fire, as dramatized by the 
     catastrophic fire seasons of 1998 and 2000.
       (6) Owners of private nonindustrial forest lands are being 
     faced with increased pressure to convert their forestland to 
     development and other uses.
       (7) Complex, long-rotation forest investments, including 
     sustainable hardwood management, are often the most difficult 
     commitment for small, nonindustrial private forest landowners 
     and, thus, should receive equal consideration under cost-
     share programs.
       (8) The investment of one Federal dollar in State and 
     private forestry programs is estimated to leverage $9 on 
     average from State, local, and private sources.
       (b) Purpose.--It is the purpose of this section to 
     strengthen the commitment of the Department of Agriculture to 
     sustainable forestry and to establish a coordinated and 
     cooperative Federal, State, and local sustainable forest 
     program for the establishment, management, maintenance, 
     enhancement, and restoration of forests on nonindustrial 
     private forest lands in the United States.
       (c) Forest Land Enhancement Program.--The Cooperative 
     Forestry Assistance Act of 1978 is amended by inserting after 
     section 3 (16 U.S.C. 2102) the following new section 4:

     ``SEC. 4. FOREST LAND ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Establishment.--
       ``(1) Establishment; purpose.--The Secretary shall 
     establish a Forest Land Enhancement Program (in this section 
     referred to as the `Program') for the purpose of providing 
     financial, technical, educational, and related assistance to 
     State foresters to encourage the long-term sustainability of 
     nonindustrial private forest lands in the United States by 
     assisting the owners of such lands in more actively managing 
     their forest and related resources by utilizing existing 
     State, Federal, and private sector resource management 
     expertise, financial assistance, and educational programs.
       ``(2) Administration.--The Secretary shall carry out the 
     Program within, and administer the Program through, the 
     Natural Resources Conservation Service.
       ``(3) Coordination.--The Secretary shall implement the 
     Program in coordination with State foresters.
       ``(b) Program Objectives.--In implementing the Program, the 
     Secretary shall target resources to achieve the following 
     objectives:
       ``(1) Investment in practices to establish, restore, 
     protect, manage, maintain, and enhance the health and 
     productivity of the nonindustrial private forest lands in the 
     United States for timber, habitat for flora and fauna, water 
     quality, and wetlands.
       ``(2) Ensuring that afforestation, reforestation, 
     improvement of poorly stocked stands, timber stand 
     improvement, practices necessary to improve seedling growth 
     and survival, and growth enhancement practices occur where 
     needed to enhance and sustain the long-term productivity of 
     timber and nontimber forest resources to help meet future 
     public demand for all forest resources and provide 
     environmental benefits.
       ``(3) Reduce the risks and help restore, recover, and 
     mitigate the damage to forests caused by fire, insects, 
     invasive species, disease, and damaging weather.
       ``(4) Increase and enhance carbon sequestration 
     opportunities.
       ``(5) Enhance implementation of agroforestry practices.
       ``(6) Maintain and enhance the forest landbase and leverage 
     State and local financial and technical assistance to owners 
     that promote the same conservation and environmental values.
       ``(c) Eligibility.--
       ``(1) In general.--An owner of nonindustrial private forest 
     land is eligible for cost-sharing assistance under the 
     Program if the owner--
       ``(A) agrees to develop and implement an individual 
     stewardship, forest, or stand management plan addressing site 
     specific activities and practices in cooperation with, and 
     approved by, the State forester, state official, or private 
     sector program in consultation with the State forester;
       ``(B) agrees to implement approved activities in accordance 
     with the plan for a period of not less than 10 years, unless 
     the State forester approves a modification to such plan; and
       ``(C) meets the acreage restrictions as determined by the 
     State forester in conjunction with the State Forest 
     Stewardship Coordinating Committee established under section 
     19.
       ``(2) State priorities.--The Secretary, in consultation 
     with the State forester and the State Forest Stewardship 
     Coordinating Committee may develop State priorities for cost 
     sharing under the Program that will promote forest management 
     objectives in that State.
       ``(3) Development of plan.--An owner shall be eligible for 
     cost-share assistance for the development of the individual 
     stewardship, forest, or stand management plan required by 
     paragraph (1).
       ``(d) Approved Activities.--
       ``(1) Development.--The Secretary, in consultation with the 
     State forester and the State Forest Stewardship Coordinating 
     Committee, shall develop a list of approved forest activities 
     and practices that will be eligible for cost-share assistance 
     under the Program within each State.
       ``(2) Type of activities.--In developing a list of approved 
     activities and practices under paragraph (1), the Secretary 
     shall attempt to achieve the establishment, restoration, 
     management, maintenance, and enhancement of forests and trees 
     for the following:
       ``(A) The sustainable growth and management of forests for 
     timber production.
       ``(B) The restoration, use, and enhancement of forest 
     wetlands and riparian areas.
       ``(C) The protection of water quality and watersheds 
     through the application of State-developed forestry best 
     management practices.
       ``(D) Energy conservation and carbon sequestration 
     purposes.
       ``(E) Habitat for flora and fauna.
       ``(F) The control, detection, and monitoring of invasive 
     species on forestlands as well as preventing the spread and 
     providing for the restoration of lands affected by invasive 
     species.
       ``(G) Hazardous fuels reduction and other management 
     activities that reduce the risks and help restore, recover, 
     and mitigate the damage to forests caused by fire.
       ``(H) The development of forest or stand management plans.
       ``(I) Other activities approved by the Secretary, in 
     coordination with the State forester and the State Forest 
     Stewardship Coordinating Committee.
       ``(e) Cooperation.--In implementing the Program, the 
     Secretary shall cooperate with other Federal, State, and 
     local natural resource management agencies, institutions of 
     higher education, and the private sector.
       ``(f) Reimbursement of Eligible Activities.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall share the cost of 
     implementing the approved activities that the Secretary 
     determines are appropriate, in the case of an owner that has 
     entered into an agreement to place nonindustrial private 
     forest lands of the owner in the Program.
       ``(2) Rate.--The Secretary shall determine the appropriate 
     reimbursement rate for cost-share payments under paragraph 
     (1) and the schedule for making such payments.
       ``(3) Maximum.--The Secretary shall not make cost-share 
     payments under this subsection to an owner in an amount in 
     excess of 75 percent of the total cost, or a lower percentage 
     as determined by the State forester, to such owner for 
     implementing the practices under an approved plan. The 
     maximum payments to any one owner shall be determined by the 
     Secretary.
       ``(4) Consultation.--The Secretary shall make 
     determinations under this subsection in consultation with the 
     State forester.

[[Page H6223]]

       ``(g) Recapture.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish and 
     implement a mechanism to recapture payments made to an owner 
     in the event that the owner fails to implement any approved 
     activity specified in the individual stewardship, forest, or 
     stand management plan for which such owner received cost-
     share payments.
       ``(2) Additional remedy.--The remedy provided in paragraph 
     (1) is in addition to any other remedy available to the 
     Secretary.
       ``(h) Distribution.--The Secretary shall distribute funds 
     available for cost sharing under the Program among the States 
     only after giving appropriate consideration to--
       ``(1) the total acreage of nonindustrial private forest 
     land in each State;
       ``(2) the potential productivity of such land;
       ``(3) the number of owners eligible for cost sharing in 
     each State;
       ``(4) the opportunities to enhance non-timber resources on 
     such forest lands;
       ``(5) the anticipated demand for timber and nontimber 
     resources in each State;
       ``(6) the need to improve forest health to minimize the 
     damaging effects of catastrophic fire, insects, disease, or 
     weather; and
       ``(7) the need and demand for agroforestry practices in 
     each State.
       ``(i) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Nonindustrial private forest lands.--The term 
     `nonindustrial private forest lands' means rural lands, as 
     determined by the Secretary, that--
       ``(A) have existing tree cover or are suitable for growing 
     trees; and
       ``(B) are owned or controlled by any nonindustrial private 
     individual, group, association, corporation, Indian tribe, or 
     other private legal entity (other than a nonprofit private 
     legal entity) so long as the individual, group, association, 
     corporation, tribe, or entity has definitive decision-making 
     authority over the lands, including through long-term leases 
     and other land tenure systems, for a period of time long 
     enough to ensure compliance with the Program.
       ``(2) Owner.--The term `owner' includes a private 
     individual, group, association, corporation, Indian tribe, or 
     other private legal entity (other than a nonprofit private 
     legal entity) that has definitive decision-making authority 
     over nonindustrial private forest lands through a long-term 
     lease or other land tenure systems.
       ``(3) Secretary.--The term `Secretary' means the Secretary 
     of Agriculture.
       ``(4) State forester.--The term `State forester' means the 
     director or other head of a State Forestry Agency or 
     equivalent State official.
       ``(j) Availability of Funds.--The Secretary shall use 
     $200,000,000 of funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation to 
     carry out the Program during the period beginning on October 
     1, 2001, and ending on September 30, 2011.''.
       (d) Conforming Amendment.--Section 246(b)(2) of the 
     Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act of 1994 (7 
     U.S.C. 6962(b)(2)) is amended by striking ``forestry 
     incentive program'' and inserting ``Forest Land Enhancement 
     Program''.

     SEC. 803. RENEWABLE RESOURCES EXTENSION ACTIVITIES.

       (a) Extension and Authorization Increase.--Section 6 of the 
     Renewable Resources Extension Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 1675) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``$15,000,000'' and inserting 
     ``$30,000,000''; and
       (2) by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.
       (b) Sustainable Forestry Outreach Initiative.--The 
     Renewable Resources Extension Act of 1978 is amended by 
     inserting after section 5A (16 U.S.C. 1674a) the following 
     new section:

     ``SEC. 5B. SUSTAINABLE FORESTRY OUTREACH INITIATIVE.

       ``The Secretary shall establish a program to be known as 
     the `Sustainable Forestry Outreach Initiative' for the 
     purpose of educating landowners regarding the following:
       ``(1) The value and benefits of practicing sustainable 
     forestry.
       ``(2) The importance of professional forestry advice in 
     achieving their sustainable forestry objectives.
       ``(3) The variety of public and private sector resources 
     available to assist them in planning for and practicing 
     sustainable forestry.''.

     SEC. 804. ENHANCED COMMUNITY FIRE PROTECTION.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) The severity and intensity of wildland fires has 
     increased dramatically over the past few decades as a result 
     of past fire and land management policies.
       (2) The record 2000 fire season is a prime example of what 
     can be expected if action is not taken.
       (3) These wildfires threaten not only the nation's forested 
     resources, but the thousands of communities intermingled with 
     the wildlands in the wildland-urban interface.
       (4) The National Fire Plan developed in response to the 
     2000 fire season is the proper, coordinated, and most 
     effective means to address this wildfire issue.
       (5) Whereas adequate authorities exist to tackle the 
     wildfire issues at the landscape level on Federal lands, 
     there is limited authority to take action on most private 
     lands where the largest threat to life and property lies.
       (6) There is a significant Federal interest in enhancing 
     community protection from wildfire.
       (b) Enhanced Protection.--The Cooperative Forestry 
     Assistance Act of 1978 is amended by inserting after section 
     10 (16 U.S.C. 2106) the following new section:

     ``SEC. 10A. ENHANCED COMMUNITY FIRE PROTECTION.

       ``(a) Cooperative Management Related to Wildfire Threats.--
     The Secretary may cooperate with State foresters and 
     equivalent State officials in the management of lands in the 
     United States for the following purposes:
       ``(1) Aid in wildfire prevention and control.
       ``(2) Protect communities from wildfire threats.
       ``(3) Enhance the growth and maintenance of trees and 
     forests that promote overall forest health.
       ``(4) Ensure the continued production of all forest 
     resources, including timber, outdoor recreation 
     opportunities, wildlife habitat, and clean water, through 
     conservation of forest cover on watersheds, shelterbelts, and 
     windbreaks.
       ``(b) Community and Private Land Fire Assistance Program.--
       ``(1) Establishment; purpose.--The Secretary shall 
     establish a Community and Private Land Fire Assistance 
     program (in this section referred to as the `Program')--
       ``(A) to focus the Federal role in promoting optimal 
     firefighting efficiency at the Federal, State, and local 
     levels;
       ``(B) to augment Federal projects that establish landscape 
     level protection from wildfires;
       ``(C) to expand outreach and education programs to 
     homeowners and communities about fire prevention; and
       ``(D) to establish defensible space around private 
     landowners homes and property against wildfires.
       ``(2) Administration and implementation.--The Program shall 
     be administered by the Forest Service and implemented through 
     the State forester or equivalent State official.
       ``(3) Components.--In coordination with existing 
     authorities under this Act, the Secretary may undertake on 
     both Federal and non-Federal lands--
       ``(A) fuel hazard mitigation and prevention;
       ``(B) invasive species management;
       ``(C) multi-resource wildfire planning;
       ``(D) community protection planning;
       ``(E) community and landowner education enterprises, 
     including the program known as FIREWISE;
       ``(F) market development and expansion;
       ``(G) improved wood utilization;
       ``(H) special restoration projects.
       ``(4) Considerations.--The Secretary shall use local 
     contract personnel wherever possible to carry out projects 
     under the Program.
       ``(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are hereby 
     authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary $35,000,000 
     for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2011, and such sums as 
     may be necessary thereafter, to carry out this section.''.

     SEC. 805. INTERNATIONAL FORESTRY PROGRAM.

       Section 2405(d) of the Global Climate Change Prevention Act 
     of 1990 (title XXIV of Public Law 101-624; 7 U.S.C. 6704(d)) 
     is amended by striking ``2002'' and inserting ``2011''.

     SEC. 806. LONG-TERM FOREST STEWARDSHIP CONTRACTS FOR 
                   HAZARDOUS FUELS REMOVAL AND IMPLEMENTATION OF 
                   NATIONAL FIRE PLAN.

       (a) Annual Assessment of Treatment Acreage.--Not later than 
     March 1 of each of fiscal years 2002 through 2006, the 
     Secretary of Agriculture shall submit to Congress an 
     assessment of the number of acres of forested National Forest 
     System lands recommended to be treated during the next fiscal 
     year using stewardship end result contracts authorized by 
     subsection (c). The assessment shall be based on the 
     treatment schedules contained in the report entitled 
     ``Protecting People and Sustaining Resources in Fire-Adapted 
     Ecosystems'', dated October 13, 2000, and incorporated into 
     the National Fire Plan. The assessment shall identify the 
     acreage by condition class, type of treatment, and treatment 
     year to achieve the restoration goals outlined in the report 
     within 10-, 15-, and 20-year time periods. The assessment 
     shall also include changes in the restoration goals based on 
     the effects of fire, hazardous fuel treatments pursuant to 
     the National Fire Plan, or updates in data.
       (b) Funding Recommendation.--The Secretary of Agriculture 
     shall include in the annual assessment a request for funds 
     sufficient to implement the recommendations contained in the 
     assessment using stewardship end result contracts under 
     subsection (c) when the Secretary determines that the 
     objectives of the National Fire Plan are best accomplished 
     through forest stewardship end result contracting.
       (c) Stewardship End Result Contracting.--
       (1) Authority.--Subject to the amount of funds made 
     available pursuant to subsection (b), the Secretary of 
     Agriculture may enter into stewardship end result contracts 
     to implement the National Fire Plan on National Forest System 
     lands based upon the stewardship treatment schedules provided 
     in the annual assessments under subsection (a). The 
     contracting goals and authorities described in subsections 
     (b) through (f) of section 347 of the Department of the 
     Interior and Related

[[Page H6224]]

     Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999 (as contained in section 
     101(e) of division A of Public Law 105-277; 16 U.S.C. 2104 
     note; commonly known as the Stewardship End Result 
     Contracting Demonstration Project) shall apply to contracts 
     entered into under this subsection, except that the period of 
     the contract shall be 10 years.
       (2) Duration.--The authority of the Secretary of 
     Agriculture to enter into contracts under this subsection 
     expires September 30, 2007.
       (d) Status Report.--Beginning with the assessment required 
     under subsection (a) in 2003, the Secretary of Agriculture 
     shall include in the annual assessment a status report of the 
     stewardship end result contracts entered into under the 
     authority of this section.

     SEC. 807. MCINTIRE-STENNIS COOPERATIVE FORESTRY RESEARCH 
                   PROGRAM.

       It is the sense of Congress to reaffirm the importance of 
     Public Law 87-88 (16 U.S.C. 582a et seq.), commonly known as 
     the McIntire-Stennis Cooperative Forestry Act.

                   TITLE IX--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

                  Subtitle A--Tree Assistance Program

     SEC. 901. ELIGIBILITY.

       (a) Loss.--Subject to the limitation in subsection (b), the 
     Secretary of Agriculture shall provide assistance, as 
     specified in section 902, to eligible orchardists that 
     planted trees for commercial purposes but lost such trees as 
     a result of a natural disaster, as determined by the 
     Secretary.
       (b) Limitation.--An eligible orchardist shall qualify for 
     assistance under subsection (a) only if such orchardist's 
     tree mortality, as a result of the natural disaster, exceeds 
     15 percent (adjusted for normal mortality).

     SEC. 902. ASSISTANCE.

       The assistance provided by the Secretary of Agriculture to 
     eligible orchardists for losses described in section 901 
     shall consist of either--
       (1) reimbursement of 75 percent of the cost of replanting 
     trees lost due to a natural disaster, as determined by the 
     Secretary, in excess of 15 percent mortality (adjusted for 
     normal mortality); or
       (2) at the discretion of the Secretary, sufficient 
     seedlings to reestablish the stand.

     SEC. 903. LIMITATION ON ASSISTANCE.

       (a) Limitation.--The total amount of payments that a person 
     shall be entitled to receive under this subtitle may not 
     exceed $50,000, or an equivalent value in tree seedlings.
       (b) Regulations.--The Secretary of Agriculture shall issue 
     regulations--
       (1) defining the term ``person'' for the purposes of this 
     subtitle, which shall conform, to the extent practicable, to 
     the regulations defining the term ``person'' issued under 
     section 1001 of the Food Security Act of 1985 (7 U.S.C. 1308) 
     and the Disaster Assistance Act of 1988 (7 U.S.C. 1421 note); 
     and
       (2) prescribing such rules as the Secretary determines 
     necessary to ensure a fair and reasonable application of the 
     limitation established under this section.

     SEC. 904. DEFINITIONS.

       In this subtitle:
       (1) Eligible orchardist.--The term ``eligible orchardist'' 
     means a person who produces annual crops from trees for 
     commercial purposes and owns 500 acres or less of such trees.
       (2) Natural disaster.--The term ``natural disaster'' 
     includes plant disease, insect infestation, drought, fire, 
     freeze, flood, earthquake, and other occurrences, as 
     determined by the Secretary.
       (3) Tree.--The term ``tree'' includes trees, bushes, and 
     vines.

                       Subtitle B--Other Matters

     SEC. 921. HAZARDOUS FUEL REDUCTION GRANTS TO PREVENT WILDFIRE 
                   DISASTERS AND TRANSFORM HAZARDOUS FUELS TO 
                   ELECTRIC ENERGY, USEFUL HEAT, OR TRANSPORTATION 
                   FUELS.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) The damages caused by wildfire disasters have been 
     equivalent in magnitude to the damage resulting from the 
     Northridge earthquake, Hurricane Andrew, and the recent 
     flooding of the Mississippi River and the Red River.
       (2) More than 20,000 communities in the United States are 
     at risk to wildfire and approximately 11,000 of these 
     communities are located near Federal lands. More than 
     72,000,000 acres of National Forest System lands and 
     57,000,000 acres of lands managed by the Secretary of the 
     Interior are at risk of catastrophic fire in the near future. 
     The accumulation of heavy forest fuel loads continues to 
     increase as a result of disease, insect infestations, and 
     drought, further raising the risk of fire each year.
       (3) Modification of forest fuel load conditions through the 
     removal of hazardous fuels will minimize catastrophic damage 
     from wildfires, reducing the need for emergency funding to 
     respond to wildfires and protecting lives, communities, 
     watersheds, and wildlife habitat.
       (4) The hazardous fuels removed from forest lands represent 
     an abundant renewable resource as well as a significant 
     supply of biomass for biomass-to-energy facilities.
       (b) Hazardous Fuels to Energy Grant Program.--The Secretary 
     concerned may make a grant to a person that operates a 
     biomass-to-energy facility to offset the costs incurred to 
     purchase hazardous fuels from forest lands for use by the 
     facility in the production of electric energy, useful heat, 
     or transportation fuels. The Secretary concerned shall select 
     grant recipients on the basis of their planned purchases of 
     hazardous fuels and the level of anticipated benefits to 
     reduced wildfire risk.
       (c) Grant Amounts.--A grant under this section shall be 
     equal to at least $5 per ton of hazardous fuels delivered, 
     but not to exceed $10 per ton of hazardous fuels delivered, 
     based on the distance of the hazardous fuels from the 
     biomass-to-energy facility.
       (d) Monitoring of Grant Recipient Activities.--As a 
     condition on a grant under this section, the grant recipient 
     shall keep such records as the Secretary concerned may 
     require to fully and correctly disclose the use of the grant 
     funds and all transactions involved in the purchase of 
     hazardous fuels derived from forest lands. Upon notice by a 
     duly authorized representative of the Secretary concerned, 
     the operator of a biomass-to-energy facility that purchases 
     or uses the resulting hazardous fuels shall afford the 
     representative reasonable access to the facility and an 
     opportunity to examine the inventory and records of the 
     facility.
       (e) Monitoring of Effect of Treatments.--The Secretary 
     concerned shall monitor Federal lands from which hazardous 
     fuels are removed and sold to a biomass-to-energy facility to 
     determine and document the reduction in fire hazards on such 
     lands.
       (f) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Biomass-to-energy facility.--The term ``biomass-to-
     energy facility'' means a facility that uses forest biomass 
     as a raw material to produce electric energy, useful heat, or 
     transportation fuels.
       (2) Forest biomass.--The term ``forest biomass'' means 
     hazardous fuels and biomass accumulations from precommercial 
     thinnings, slash, and brush on forest lands that do not 
     satisfy the definition of hazardous fuels.
       (3) Hazardous fuels.--The term ``hazardous fuels'' means 
     any unnaturally excessive accumulation of organic material, 
     particularly in areas designated as condition class 2 or 
     condition class 3 (as defined in the report entitled 
     ``Protecting People and Sustainable Resources in Fire-Adapted 
     Ecosystems'', prepared by the Forest Service, and dated 
     October 13, 2000), on forest lands that the Secretary 
     concerned determines poses a substantial present or potential 
     hazard to forest ecosystems, wildlife, human, community, or 
     firefighter safety in the case of a wildfire, particularly a 
     wildfire in a drought year.
       (4) Secretary concerned.--The term ``Secretary concerned'' 
     means--
       (A) the Secretary of Agriculture or the designee of the 
     Secretary of Agriculture with respect to the National Forest 
     System lands and private lands; and
       (B) the Secretary of the Interior or the designee of the 
     Secretary of the Interior with respect to Federal lands under 
     the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior and Indian 
     lands.
       (g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated $50,000,000 for each fiscal year to carry 
     out this section.

     SEC. 922. BIOENERGY PROGRAM.

       Notwithstanding any limitations in the Commodity Credit 
     Corporation Charter Act (15 U.S.C. 714 et seq.) or part 1424 
     of title 7, Code of Federal Regulations, the Commodity Credit 
     Corporation shall designate animal fats, agricultural 
     byproducts, and oils as eligible agricultural commodities for 
     use in the Bioenergy Program to promote industrial 
     consumption of agricultural commodities for the production of 
     ethanol and biodiesel fuels.

     SEC. 923. AVAILABILITY OF SECTION 32 FUNDS.

       The 2d undesignated paragraph of section 32 of the Act of 
     August 24, 1935 (Public Law 320; 49 Stat. 774; 7 U.S.C. 
     612c), is amended by striking ``$300,000,000'' and inserting 
     ``$500,000,000''.

     SEC. 924. SENIORS FARMERS' MARKET NUTRITION PROGRAM.

       (a) Establishment.--For each of the fiscal years 2002 
     through 2011, the Secretary of Agriculture shall use 
     $15,000,000 of the funds available to the Commodity Credit 
     Corporation to carry out and expand a seniors farmers' market 
     nutrition program.
       (b) Program Purposes.-- The purposes of the seniors 
     farmers' market nutrition program are--
       (1) to provide resources in the form of fresh, nutritious, 
     unprepared, locally grown fruits, vegetables, and herbs from 
     farmers' markets, roadside stands and community supported 
     agriculture programs to low-income seniors;
       (2) to increase the domestic consumption of agricultural 
     commodities by expanding or aiding in the expansion of 
     domestic farmers' markets, roadside stands, and community 
     supported agriculture programs; and
       (3) to develop or aid in the development of new and 
     additional farmers' markets, roadside stands, and community 
     supported agriculture programs.
       (c) Regulations.--The Secretary may issue such regulations 
     as the Secretary considers necessary to carry out the seniors 
     farmers' market nutrition program.

     SEC. 925. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AUTHORITIES REGARDING 
                   CANEBERRIES.

       (a) Authority for Marketing Order and Research and 
     Promotion Order.--Section 8c of the Agricultural Adjustment 
     Act (7 U.S.C. 608c), reenacted with amendments by the 
     Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (2)--

[[Page H6225]]

       (A) in paragraph (A), by inserting ``caneberries (including 
     raspberries, blackberries, and logenberries),'' after ``other 
     than pears, olives, grapefruit,''; and
       (B) in the second sentence, by inserting ``caneberries 
     (including raspberries, blackberries, and logenberries),'' 
     after ``effective as to cherries, apples,''; and
       (2) in subsection (6)(I), by inserting ``caneberries 
     (including raspberries, blackberries, and logenberries)'' 
     after ``tomatoes,''.
       (b) Authority With Respect to Imports.--Section 8e(a) of 
     such Act (7 U.S.C. 608e-1(a)) is amended by inserting 
     ``caneberries (including raspberries, blackberries, and 
     logenberries),'' after ``pistachios,''.

     SEC. 926. NATIONAL APPEALS DIVISION.

       Section 278 of the Department of Agriculture Reorganization 
     Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 6998) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new subsection:
       ``(f) Finality of Certain Appeal Decisions.--If an 
     appellant prevails at the regional level in an administrative 
     appeal of a decision by the Division, the agency may not 
     pursue an administrative appeal of that decision to the 
     national level.''.

     SEC. 927. OUTREACH AND ASSISTANCE FOR SOCIALLY DISADVANTAGED 
                   FARMERS AND RANCHERS.

       Subsection (a) of section 2501 of the Food, Agriculture, 
     Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 2279) is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(a) Outreach and Assistance.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary of Agriculture (in this 
     section referred to as the `Secretary') shall provide 
     outreach and technical assistance programs specifically to 
     encourage and assist socially disadvantaged farmers and 
     ranchers to own and operate farms and ranches and to 
     participate equitably in the full range of agricultural 
     programs. This assistance, which should enhance coordination 
     and make more effective the outreach, technical assistance, 
     and education efforts authorized in specific agriculture 
     programs, shall include information and assistance on 
     commodity, conservation, credit, rural, and business 
     development programs, application and bidding procedures, 
     farm and risk management, marketing, and other essential 
     information to participate in agricultural and other programs 
     of the Department.
       ``(2) Grants and contracts.--The Secretary may make grants 
     and enter into contracts and other agreements in the 
     furtherance of this section with the following entities:
       ``(A) Any community-based organization, network, or 
     coalition of community-based organizations that--
       ``(i) has demonstrated experience in providing agricultural 
     education or other agriculturally related services to 
     socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers;
       ``(ii) provides documentary evidence of its past experience 
     of working with socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers 
     during the two years preceding its application for assistance 
     under this section; and
       ``(iii) does not engage in activities prohibited under 
     section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
       ``(B) 1890 Land-Grant Colleges, including Tuskegee 
     Institute, Indian tribal community colleges and Alaska native 
     cooperative colleges, Hispanic serving post-secondary 
     educational institutions, and other post-secondary 
     educational institutions with demonstrated experience in 
     providing agriculture education or other agriculturally 
     related services to socially disadvantaged family farmers and 
     ranchers in their region.
       ``(C) Federally recognized tribes and national tribal 
     organizations with demonstrated experience in providing 
     agriculture education or other agriculturally related 
     services to socially disadvantaged family farmers and 
     ranchers in their region.
       ``(3) Funding.--There are authorized to be appropriated 
     $25,000,000 for each fiscal year to make grants and enter 
     into contracts and other agreements with the entities 
     described in paragraph (2) and to otherwise carry out the 
     purposes of this subsection.''.

     SEC. 928. EQUAL TREATMENT OF POTATOES AND SWEET POTATOES.

       Section 508(a)(2) of the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 
     U.S.C. 1508(a)(2)) is amended by striking ``and potatoes'' 
     and inserting ``, potatoes, and sweet potatoes''.

     SEC. 929. REFERENCE TO SEA GRASS AND SEA OATS AS CROPS 
                   COVERED BY NONINSURED CROP DISASTER ASSISTANCE 
                   PROGRAM.

       Section 196(a)(2)(B) of the Federal Agriculture Improvement 
     and Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7333(a)(2)(B)) is amended by 
     inserting ``sea grass and sea oats,'' after ``fish),''.

     SEC. 930. OPERATION OF GRADUATE SCHOOL OF DEPARTMENT OF 
                   AGRICULTURE.

       (a) Competition.--Section 921 of the Federal Agriculture 
     Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 2279b) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (c)--
       (A) by striking ``Under'' and inserting the following:
       ``(1) Educational, training, and professional development 
     activities.--Under''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) Competition.--The Graduate School may not enter into 
     a contract or agreement with a Federal agency to provide 
     services or conduct activities described in paragraph (1) 
     unless, before the awarding of the contract or agreement, the 
     contract or agreement was subject to competition that was 
     open to individuals and entities of the private sector.''; 
     and
       (2) in subsection (i), by striking ``The'' and inserting 
     ``Subject to subsection (c)(2), the''.
       (b) Audits of Records.--Such section is further amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(k) Audits of Records.--The financial records of the 
     Graduate School relating to contracts and agreements for 
     services or activities described in subsection (c)(1) shall 
     be made available to the Comptroller General for purposes of 
     conducting an audit.''.
       (c) Conforming Repeal.--Section 1669 of the Food, 
     Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 
     5922) is repealed.

     SEC. 931. ASSISTANCE FOR LIVESTOCK PRODUCERS.

       (a) Availability of Assistance.--In such amounts as are 
     provided in advance in appropriation Acts, the Secretary may 
     provide assistance to dairy and other livestock producers to 
     cover economic losses incurred by such producers in 
     connection with the production of livestock.
       (b) Types of Assistance.--The assistance provided to 
     livestock producers may be in the form of--
       (1) indemnity payments to livestock producers who incur 
     livestock mortality losses;
       (2) livestock feed assistance to livestock producers 
     affected by shortages of feed;
       (3) compensation for sudden increases in production costs; 
     and
       (4) such other assistance, and for such other economic 
     losses, as the Secretary considers appropriate.
       (c) Limitations.--Notwithstanding section 181(a), the 
     Secretary may not use the funds of the Commodity Credit 
     Corporation to provide assistance under this section.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Secretary such sums as may be 
     necessary to carry out this section.

  The CHAIRMAN. No amendment to that amendment, as modified, shall be 
in order except those printed before October 3, 2001, in the portion of 
the Congressional Record designated for that purpose and pro forma 
amendments for the purpose of debate. Amendments printed in the Record 
may be offered only by the Member who caused it to be printed or his 
designee and shall be considered read.
  Are there any amendments to the bill?


                Amendment No. 54 Offered by Mr. Stenholm

  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 54 offered by Mr. Stenholm:
       In section 167(a), strike paragraphs (4) and (5) (page 119, 
     line 9, through page 120, line 2), and insert the following:
       (4) Options for obtaining loan.--A marketing assistance 
     loan under this subsection, and loan deficiency payments 
     under subsection (e) may be obtained at the option of the 
     peanut producer through--
       (A) a designated marketing association of peanut producers 
     that is approved by the Secretary; or
       (B) the Farm Service Agency.

  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, this amendment authorizes both the Farm 
Service Agency, FSA, and designated marketing associations of peanut 
producers that are approved by the Secretary to make marketing 
assistance loans and loan deficiency payments. The amendment deletes a 
provision that would allow the Secretary to approve other loan 
servicing agents. In addition, it would make a conforming amendment to 
delete the provisions that would require loan servicing agents to 
provide storage to other loan servicing agents and marketing 
associations.
  The purpose of this amendment is clearly stated here. We are making 
some drastic changes in the manner in which our peanut program works 
for purposes of making our peanuts more competitive in the marketplace. 
We believe that this amendment is necessary in order that our producers 
are given the best option of increasing their pricing capabilities 
under a more market-oriented program which is what we are doing with 
the peanut section of this bill this year.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. STENHOLM. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I would like to state for the record that 
CBO has determined that there is no cost associated with this 
amendment. I would like to tell the gentleman from Texas that I support 
his amendment and would be happy to accept it.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm).

[[Page H6226]]

  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Boswell

  Mr. BOSWELL. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 13 offered by Mr. Boswell:
       At the end of title IX, insert the following new section:

     SEC. __. RENEWABLE ENERGY RESERVE.

       (a) Purposes.--It is the purpose of this section to create 
     a reserve of agricultural commodities to--
       (1) provide feedstocks to support and further the 
     production of the renewable energy; and
       (2) support the renewable energy industry in times when 
     production is at risk of decline due to reduced feedstock 
     supplies or significant commodity price increases.
       (b) Establishment.--During fiscal years 2002 through 2011, 
     the Secretary shall establish and administer a government-
     owned and farmer-stored renewable energy reserve program 
     under which producers of agricultural commodities will be 
     able to--
       (1) sell agricultural commodities authorized by the 
     Secretary into the reserve; and
       (2) store such agricultural commodities.
       (c) Name.--The agricultural commodity reserve established 
     under this section shall be known as the ``Renewable Energy 
     Reserve''.
       (d) Purchases.--The Secretary shall purchase agricultural 
     commodities at commercial rates in order to establish, 
     maintain, or enhance the reserve when--
       (1) such commodities are in abundant supply; and
       (2) there is need for adequate carryover stocks to ensure a 
     reliable supply of the commodities to meet the purposes of 
     the reserve or it is otherwise necessary to fulfill the needs 
     and purposes of the renewable energy program administered or 
     assisted by the Secretary.
       (e) Limitation.--Purchases under this section shall be 
     limited to--
       (1) the type and quantities of agricultural commodities 
     necessary to provide approximately four-month's estimated 
     utilization for renewable energy purposes;
       (2) an additional amount of commodities to provide 
     incentives for research and development of new renewable 
     fuels and bio-energy initiatives; and
       (3) such maximum quantities of agricultural commodities 
     determined by the Secretary as will enable the purposes of 
     the renewable energy program to be achieved.
       (f) Release of Stocks.--Stocks shall be released at cost of 
     acquisition, and in amounts determined appropriate by the 
     Secretary, when market prices of the agricultural commodity 
     exceed 100 percent of the full economic cost of production of 
     those commodities. Cost of production for the commodity shall 
     be determined by the Economic Research Service using the best 
     available information, and based on a three year moving 
     average.
       (g) Storage Payments.--The Secretary shall provide storage 
     payments to producers of agricultural commodities to maintain 
     the reserve established under this section. Storage payments 
     shall--
       (1) be in such amounts and under such conditions as the 
     Secretary determines appropriate to encourage producers to 
     participate in the program;
       (2) reflect local, commercial storage rates subject to 
     appropriate conditions concerning quality management and 
     other factors; and
       (3) not be less than comparable local commercial rates, 
     except as may be provided by paragraph (2).
       (h) Commodity Credit Corporation.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall use the funds, 
     facilities, and authorities of the Commodity Credit 
     Corporation to fulfill the purposes of this section. To the 
     maximum extent practicable consistent with the purposes, and 
     effective and efficient administration of this section, the 
     Secretary shall utilize the usual and customary channels, 
     facilities and arrangement of trade and commerce.
       (2) Reduction in fixed, decoupled payments for funding 
     offset.--Notwithstanding section 104, the Secretary shall 
     reduce the total amount payable under such section as fixed, 
     decoupled payments, on a pro rata basis across covered 
     commodities, so that the total amount of such reductions 
     equals $277,000,000 in fiscal year 2004, $93,000,000 in 
     fiscal year 2005, $80,000,000 in fiscal year 2006, 
     $88,000,000 in fiscal year 2007, $96,000,000 in fiscal year 
     2008, $95,000,000 in fiscal year 2009, $96,000,000 in fiscal 
     year 2010, and $97,000,000 in fiscal year 2011.

  Mr. BOSWELL. Mr. Chairman, first off I would like to compliment, as 
many others have done, and justly so, Chairman Combest and Ranking 
Member Stenholm for the manner in which they have worked on this bill. 
In my years in the legislature and in the years I have been here, I 
have never seen a better effort. They deserve a lot of appreciation for 
their hard work.
  As we all know, America has a long established strategic oil reserve 
in the event of a petroleum shortage or supply interruption. The 
creation of this reserve is a responsible policy that has protected our 
country and its industrial foundation from potential instability in oil 
and fuel markets as well as from disruption of foreign oil supplies. 
Since the inception of the reserve, our energy needs have become more 
diverse, and our capacity to develop and produce large amounts of clean 
burning renewable fuels has been tested and proved.
  Consumers, car manufacturers, commodity processors and farmers 
recognize that renewable fuels are quickly becoming a vital and 
integral part of our national supply of clean-air transportation fuels. 
The time is right to establish a strategic renewable energy reserve. 
Farmers can help America's energy security by dedicating a renewable 
commodity reserve to emergency renewable fuel production.
  For these reasons, I am offering a renewable energy reserve 
amendment, using product grown from the land that can be repeated year 
after year and give us some independence from OPEC and a chance to show 
the country and the world we are serious about alternatives.
  I am offering the renewable energy amendment to, one, establish a 
government-owned and farmer-stored renewable energy reserve containing 
an amount of farm commodities equal to 4 months' production of ethanol 
and biodiesel. These commodities will be stored on-farm in corn and 
soybean base and will be designated solely for the production of 
renewable fuels.
  Two, create a renewable energy reserve that will complement all bio-
based fuel initiatives and add to America's emergency energy 
preparedness plan.
  Three, shift some of our national energy consumption away from high-
priced imported oil and towards renewable energy products grown on our 
Nation's farms. This strategy is compatible with our national 
environmental objectives and will strengthen our economy and our 
national security.
  And, lastly, create a renewable energy reserve that will ensure a 
steady supply of feed stock for energy production in the event of a 
national emergency, crop production shortfall, increased commodity 
prices or a gasoline/diesel shortage.
  The cost of this amendment will be approximately $650 million over 10 
years. The funding for the renewable energy reserve will be taken from 
the commodity title through an across-the-board percentage reduction in 
the overall funding of less than 1 percent.
  According to USDA estimates, as the U.S. moves toward banning MTBE 
and increasing the use of ethanol as a transportation fuel, the 
tripling of demand for ethanol would increase U.S. farm income by an 
average of $1.3 billion each year and would save the country over $4 
billion annually in imported oil and hundreds of millions of dollars 
annually in taxpayer outlays for farm programs.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in the support of this amendment.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, let me, first of all, say there is no one on our 
committee who works harder in behalf of his farmers than the gentleman 
from Iowa (Mr. Boswell). There is no one on our committee that I have 
more respect for than the gentleman from Iowa.

                              {time}  1300

  But I do rise in opposition to the amendment, Mr. Chairman, basically 
for two reasons. Number one is the most critical.
  As I have indicated, one of the words you are going to hear 
throughout the discussion of this farm bill for the next however long 
is going to be balance. The maintaining of that balance is important 
because that is what has been brought together as far as a broad base 
of support.
  Now, granted, the gentleman in making some changes in the fixed 
decoupled payment does not greatly rob that account, but I am also 
aware that there are numerous amendments that, bit by bit by bit by 
bit, begin to attack that. I am concerned about going down that road, 
because if this balance becomes undone, I think this thing may go into 
free-fall.
  Secondly, in terms of what the amendment does, we discussed this 
subject in the committee during markup of this bill. I can appreciate 
where the gentleman is coming from, but I have concerns about a program 
which sets up reserves of commodities.

[[Page H6227]]

  History historically has shown us that reserves can result in large 
quantities of commodities that eventually may become government stocks. 
I think it creates the removal of commodities from the market in order 
to put into storage, which I think gives a false market signal; and I 
think it can have some impact on production. Under current law, and I 
think most of us agree, the government is not and should not be in the 
business of managing supply. Eventually, with stocks as they build up, 
it leads to lower prices, therefore, I think potentially costlier 
program payments in order to keep the farm economy going. I am not 
questioning the intent, but I think what this does is it establishes a 
precedent for reserve programs of the past that have not worked well. 
They have been tried, and they have failed.
  Finally, I think what it does is it takes from again a balance that 
reaches across-the-board and it shifts that balance into only dealing 
with and providing assistance for a much smaller number of people.
  For that reason, Mr. Chairman, I would oppose the gentleman's 
amendment.
  Mr. BOSWELL. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent for one additional 
minute to make a response.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Iowa?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BOSWELL. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Chairman 
Combest) for his comments. This reserve will not hang over the market. 
These commodities are designated specifically for energy reserve. 66.2 
million annually for 300 million gallons of renewable fuel seems like a 
reasonable request.
  I appreciate the gentleman's comments and concerns. The gentleman 
mentions all the other amendments. This just happens to be the most 
important one.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Boswell).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. BOSWELL. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings 
on amendment No. 13 offered by the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Boswell) 
will be postponed.
  Are there further amendments?


              Amendment No. 26 Offered by Mr. Hall of Ohio

  Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 26 offered by Mr. Hall of Ohio:
       In section 307, insert after paragraph (7) (page 188, after 
     line 22) the following (and conform the subsequent paragraphs 
     accordingly):
       (8) by striking section 206 (7 U.S.C. 1726);
       In section 307, insert after paragraph (11) as redesignated 
     (page 189, after line 21) the following (and conform the 
     subsequent paragraphs accordingly):
       (12) in section 407(c)(1) (7 U.S.C. 1736a(c)(1))--
       (A) by striking ``The Administrator'' and inserting ``(A) 
     The Administrator''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       (B) In the case of commodities made available for 
     nonemergency assistance under title II or III for countries 
     in transition from crisis to development or for least 
     developed, net food-importing countries, the Administrator 
     may pay the transportation costs incurred in moving the 
     commodities from designated points of entry or ports of entry 
     abroad to storage and distribution sites and associated 
     storage and distribution costs.


      Modification of Amendment No. 26 Offered by Mr. Hall of Ohio

  Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to modify the 
amendment with the modification that has been placed at the desk.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will report the modification.
  The Clerk read as follows:

      Modification to Amendment No. 26 Offered by Mr. Hall of Ohio

       The amendment as modified is as follows:
       In section 307, insert after paragraph (7) (page 188, after 
     line 22) the following (and conform the subsequent paragraphs 
     accordingly):
       (8) by striking section 206 (7 U.S.C. 1726);
       In section 307, insert after paragraph (11) as redesignated 
     (page 189, after line 21) the following (and conform the 
     subsequent paragraphs accordingly):
       (12) in section 407(c)(1) (7 U.S.C. 1736a(c)(1))--
       (A) by striking ``The Administrator'' and inserting ``(A) 
     The Administrator''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       (B) In the case of commodities made available for 
     nonemergency assistance under title II for least developed 
     countries that meet the poverty and other eligibility 
     criteria established by the International Bank for 
     Reconstruction and Development for financing under the 
     International Development Association, the Administrator may 
     pay the transportation costs incurred in moving the 
     commodities from designated points of entry or ports of entry 
     abroad to storage and distribution sites and associated 
     storage and distribution costs.

  Mr. HALL of Ohio (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous 
consent that the modification be considered as read and printed in the 
Record.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Ohio?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the amendment is modified.
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hall) is recognized for 5 
minutes on his modified amendment.
  Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, my amendment makes a slight technical 
change to the Food for Peace, P.L. 480 Program. This is one of our 
primary food aid programs, along with section 416(b) and Food for 
Progress. These vital programs allow the bounty our farmers produce to 
go to feed the least among us. America is great because America is 
good, and this is the best America has to offer the world.
  This modified amendment further defines the poor countries that would 
be able to receive U.S. commodities and the transportation costs to get 
them to the hungry. It is supported by the World Food Program and 
private aid organizations.
  I am pleased that the gentleman from Texas (Chairman Combest) 
supports this amendment. I thank the gentleman and his staff, 
especially Lynn Gallagher, for all of their assistance. I also 
appreciate the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) and his concern for 
our food aid program.
  This amendment is a very small step towards my larger hope that the 
United States would increase our food aid for the poorest nations of 
the world. While we donate more food than any other country, to whom 
much is given, much is expected. In reality, we provide only one-half 
of one percent of our budget for humanitarian aid, and this should be 
much higher.
  I spoke earlier of the good will our food aid buys around the world. 
My travels to poor countries around the world have convinced me that 
our enemies and allies respect us because of our compassion and our 
generosity. We are a compassionate and generous country, and our food 
aid programs are a terrific example of this.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HALL of Ohio. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I 
thank him for his courtesy in discussing his amendment process with us 
prior to offering it.
  I would say that there is no one in the House who can stand taller 
than the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hall) in his concern about hunger 
around the world. I respect him for that, and am very happy to accept 
the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment, as modified, offered 
by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hall).
  The amendment, as modified, was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. Are there further amendments?


                Amendment No. 53 Offered by Mr. Stenholm

  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 53 offered by Mr. Stenholm:
       At the end of title I (page 133, after line 13), insert the 
     following new section:

     SEC. __. REPORT ON EFFECT OF CERTAIN FARM PROGRAM PAYMENTS ON 
                   ECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PRODUCERS AND FARMING 
                   INFRASTRUCTURE.

       (a) Review Required.--The Secretary of Agriculture shall 
     conduct a review of the effects that payments under 
     production flexibility contracts and market loss assistance

[[Page H6228]]

     payments have had, and that fixed, decoupled payments and 
     counter-cyclical payments are likely to have, on the economic 
     viability of producers and the farming infrastructure, 
     particularly in areas where climate, soil types, and other 
     agronomic conditions severely limit the covered crops that 
     producers can choose to successfully and profitably produce.
       (b) Case Study Related to Rice Production.--The review 
     shall include a case study of the effects that the payments 
     described in subsection (a), and the forecast effects of 
     increasing these or other decoupled payments, are likely to 
     have on rice producers (including tenant rice producers), the 
     rice milling industry, and the economies of rice farming 
     areas in Texas, where harvested rice acreage has fallen from 
     320,000 acres in 1995 to only 211,000 acres in 2001.
       (c) Report and Recommendations.--Not later than 90 days 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
     shall submit to the Committee on Agriculture of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, 
     and Forestry of the Senate a report describing the 
     information collected for the review and the case study and 
     any findings made on the basis of such information. The 
     report shall include recommendations for minimizing the 
     adverse effects on producers, with a special focus on 
     producers who are tenants, on the agricultural economies in 
     farming areas generally, on those particular areas described 
     in subsection (a), and on the area that is the subject of the 
     case study in subsection (b).

  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, this amendment requires USDA to review 
the effects that decoupled payments under the Agriculture Market 
Transition Act have had on the economic viability of farmers and 
farming infrastructure, especially in areas where conditions limit the 
program crops that can be grown.
  The review must include a case study of the effects that decoupled 
payments, increases in decreases payments, for example, disaster 
assistance, and other countercyclical decoupled payments, will have on 
rice producers and the rice industry in Texas. USDA has 90 days from 
enactment to report its findings and recommendations on ways to 
minimize adverse impacts on rice farmers and the rice industry to the 
Committee on Agriculture.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. STENHOLM. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's yielding, and 
want to also indicate again for the record that this is a no cost 
amendment. There are a number of people in rice-producing areas of 
Texas that share the gentleman's concerns, as I do; and I would be 
happy to accept the amendment.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I would point out the 
relevance of this study in that we are also, in the bill before us, 
going to have similar situations perhaps develop in other regions of 
the country; and I think the relevance of this study may be very 
helpful to us to avoid some of the problems that have already occurred 
in portions of rice country, namely in Texas.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. Are there further amendments?


                Amendment No. 55 Offered by Mr. Stenholm

  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 55 offered by Mr. Stenholm:
       Page 213, line 6, strike ``$10 million'' and insert 
     ``$9,500,000''.
       Beginning on page 214, strike line 13 and all that follows 
     through line 6 on page 215, and insert the following:
       (f) Puerto Rico.--Section 19(a)(1) of the Food Stamp Act of 
     1977 (7 U.S.C. 2028(a)(1)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A)--
       (A) in clause (ii) by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (B) in clause (iii) by adding ``and'' at the end; and
       (C) by inserting after clause (iii) the following:
       ``(iv) for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2011, the 
     amount equal to the amount required to be paid under this 
     subparagraph for the preceding fiscal year, as adjusted by 
     the percentage by which the thrifty food plan is adjusted 
     under section 3(o)(4) for the current fiscal year for which 
     the amount is determined under this clause;''; and
       (2) in subparagraph (B)--
       (A) by inserting ``(i)'' after ``(B)''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(ii) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A) and clause (i), the 
     Commonwealth may spend up to $6,000,000 of the amount 
     required under subparagraph (A) to be paid for fiscal year 
     2002 to pay 100 percent of the cost to upgrade and modernize 
     the electronic data processing system used to provide such 
     food assistance and to implement systems to simplify the 
     determination of eligibility to receive such assistance.''.
       (g) Territory of American Samoa.--Section 24 of the Food 
     Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2033) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``Effective October 1, 1995, from'' and 
     inserting ``From''; and
       (2) by striking ``$5,300,000 for each of fiscal years 1996 
     through 2002'' and inserting ``$5,750,000 for fiscal year 
     2002 and $5,800,000 for each of fiscal years 2003 though 
     2011''.
       Page 216, line 18, strike ``(h) and (i) shall take effect 
     of'' and insert ``(g), (h), and (i) shall take effect on''.

  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, this amendment adds two provisions 
regarding Puerto Rico and American Samoa in the nutrition programs. For 
Puerto Rico, the amendment would allow Puerto Rico to spend up to $6 
million of the 100 percent Federal funds in fiscal year 2002 on 
upgrading and modernizing the electronic data processing systems used 
to provide food assistance and to implement systems to simplify the 
determination of eligibility.
  For American Samoa, the amendment decreases the amount available for 
simplified application and eligibility determination systems in section 
405 from $10 million each year to $9.5 million each year. The amendment 
raises the amount available for American Samoa in section 406(g) from 
$5.75 million in fiscal year 2002 to $5.8 million in each of fiscal 
year 2003 through 2011.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. STENHOLM. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I also want to indicate this is a no net cost provision 
of the amendment. I am glad to accept the amendment. I appreciate the 
gentleman's introducing it.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I would point out to 
the House that the delegate from American Samoa and the delegate from 
Puerto Rico have agreed to this. This is done at their request, as well 
as ours today.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. Are there further amendments?
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, we are in the process of trying to work through a 
number of amendments in which we have had an opportunity to deal with a 
variety of Members, and I think that the process is moving potentially 
somewhat more expeditiously than was anticipated.
  But I want to take just a moment, if I might, Mr. Chairman, to expand 
somewhat on a comment that I made in my opening statement relative to 
the amount of work that has gone into this committee print that we have 
before the House today.
  The people who do so much of the hard, heavy lifting in our 
committees are those people who do not sit around the dais or who do 
not cast votes, but who sit in those offices sometimes three or four 
deep and literally, as the case was in the development of this farm 
program, spent all night. That happened on the majority and the 
minority side, working in concert.
  My friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm), has numerous 
times mentioned the bipartisanship of this committee. This goes well 
beyond just Members. This goes to the staff as well.
  Certainly there are, from time to time, some philosophical 
differences. That is the nature of the process. That is the nature of 
the legislative process. But there is a recognition of the bigger goal, 
and that bigger goal is to try to achieve something in a manner in 
which we are seeing an extension of handshakes across the aisle.
  I have personally never felt that we can pass a farm bill that only 
receives Republican support. Number one, it probably would say a great 
deal about the inadequacies of that farm bill if it in fact was a 
partisan bill.
  It is also many times difficult. Of the 51 members on the committee 
whose service on that committee is requested and whose service on that 
committee is

[[Page H6229]]

asked for and who have deep interests in agriculture, we have many 
varying opinions from time to time. But all of that is finally put 
aside when we have the opportunity to come together and to look at the 
interests of agriculture as a whole, recognizing there are some 
regional differences, recognizing that there are differences in 
philosophy, recognizing there are differences in weather, recognizing 
there are differences in cropping habits, that corn grown in the 
chairman's district of Illinois is substantially different than corn 
grown in the ranking member's district or this gentleman's district. 
Yet, it is a program which we have to try to develop that fits all of 
it.
  Without adequate input and without taking into consideration those 
people who produce that, those people who market that, those people 
whose livelihood depends upon that, we, in fact, would not be able to 
write a farm bill that has such a broad base of support.
  Not enough can be said about the people who work for us on that 
committee. I might just mention if the statistic still holds true to 
this day, Mr. Chairman, I believe it is the only full committee of the 
House in which the Members exceed the number of staff. So it does, I 
think, show how much work that is dumped upon them from time to time. I 
will say that we could not be better served than we currently are.

                              {time}  1315

  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, we are now having another demonstration of what has 
been so frustrating to the House Committee on Agriculture as we have 
moved to get to this point. We had 60 amendments notified and here we 
are, none of the Members who felt compelled to make amendments and 
change are here to offer their amendments. Under House procedure, what 
we should do is we should move to final passage of the bill, because 
obviously, all of those who have felt so compelled to argue and to 
offer amendments are nowhere to be found. So we feel compelled now to 
take 5 minutes to talk about whatever we are going to talk about. 
Really, I guess we have the Boswell amendment, we could vote on it; but 
I understand that is not what they want to do.
  So let me make a comment or two. I did not get recognized on the 
Boswell amendment a moment ago. Let me take just a moment and talk 
about the energy section of the bill that is before us.
  Mr. Chairman, it was not but about 2 years ago that we had a 
depression not only in the corn and cotton patch, but also in the oil 
patch. At that point in time, since I represent the cotton patch and 
the oil patch, I was concerned about low energy prices, I was concerned 
about energy and energy policy as a national security; and that concern 
is still there. But one of the things that we recognize is that we 
cannot produce food and fiber without oil and gas; we cannot produce 
oil and gas without food and fiber; and, therefore, it is time for us 
to start working together, which is exactly what we have done in this 
bill.
  In fact, something happened when we had hearings on the energy title 
that I did not believe I would ever see. We had independent oil and gas 
producers testifying in behalf of bioenergy, biodiesel, ethanol, 
because those in the independent oil industry began to realize just as 
we today are making our, we hope, compelling argument on behalf of the 
remaining farmers and ranchers in this country, that we have to work 
together, and that we do need to produce more energy. I had looked for 
ways to be supportive of an energy reserve today, because I think the 
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Boswell) is on the cutting edge of what we are 
eventually going to need to do.
  But as we looked into it and we got into, as the chairman pointed 
out, the trade-offs that have to occur, this fine balance that we are 
talking about and with some of the divisions that we have within the 
bioenergy industry regarding the merits of such, I do not and cannot 
support his amendment today. But I will point out that we have in the 
bill emergency loans for sharply increasing energy costs. We have loans 
and loan guarantees for renewable energy systems. We have biomass 
derived from conservation reserve program lands. We have wind turbines 
on conservation reserve program lands. We have the reauthorization of 
the Biomass Research and Development Act, which gives us the road map 
to get to where the gentleman from Iowa wants to be, and I want to be 
with him in getting there. We have the requirement of the Secretary to 
give priority to improved energy efficiency on farms and farm energy. 
We have the hazardous fuel reduction grants in this bill, and we also 
recognize the role of bioenergy in promoting the industrial consumption 
of agriculture products for the production of ethanol and biodiesel. We 
expand the program by directing the Secretary to include animal fats, 
agricultural by-products and oils as eligible commodities under 
existing bioenergy programs.
  Now, the USDA is already carrying out the CCC bioenergy program and 
$150 million is being provided for fiscal year 2002, the same as fiscal 
year 2001. So it is certainly not without sympathy for the gentleman's 
amendment. It is there, but it is the question, as we have already 
talked about, and the precise balance, and I understand that it is very 
important to him.


               Amendment No. 62 Offered by Mr. Traficant

  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 62 offered by Mr. Traficant:
       At the end of title IX (page ----, after line ----), insert 
     the following new section:

     SEC.   . COMPLIANCE WITH BUY AMERICAN ACT AND SENSE OF 
                   CONGRESS REGARDING PURCHASE OF AMERICAN-MADE 
                   EQUIPMENT, PRODUCTS, AND SERVICES USING FUNDS 
                   PROVIDED UNDER THIS ACT.

       (a) Compliance With Buy American Act.--No funds made 
     available under this Act, whether directly using funds of the 
     Commodity Credit Corporation or pursuant to an authorization 
     of appropriations contained in this Act, may be provided to a 
     producer or other person or entity unless the producer, 
     person, or entity agrees to comply with the Buy American Act 
     (41 U.S.C. 10a-10c) in the expenditure of the funds.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--In the case of any equipment, 
     products, or services that may be authorized to be purchased 
     using funds provided under this Act, it is the sense of 
     Congress that producers and other recipients of such funds 
     should, in expending the funds, purchase only American-made 
     equipment, products, and services.
       (c) Notice to Recipients of Funds.--In providing payments 
     or other assistance under this Act, the Secretary of 
     Agriculture shall provide to each recipient of the funds a 
     notice describing the requirements of subsection (a) and the 
     statement made in subsection (b) by Congress.

  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. LaHood), who always seems to be in the chair at the right 
time and does a fine job.
  I want to commend the chairman of this committee and the ranking 
member. I want to spend just a second talking about the ranking member. 
He has shown bipartisanship in this House for all of the years I have 
been here; and he has exemplified that, I believe, as well throughout 
everything he has done. Even when his principles are in opposition to 
that being offered by others, he has always been a gentleman and tried 
to find that common ground.
  This amendment is well known by all. It is the right thing to do. If, 
in fact, there is money made available under this bill, the recipients 
of it shall get a notice that the Congress of the United States would 
like to see those funds expended for the purchase of American-made 
goods. I think the farm community understands it and may be one of the 
biggest supporters of this legislation.
  We have very few trade surpluses in America. I believe agriculture, 
if I am not mistaken, is still a trade surplus. I am not sure of that. 
But we are now beginning to average over and close to $300 billion a 
year in trade deficits; and if it was not for our farmers, God forbid.
  But my second amendment will deal with an issue that concerns the 
cattle and animal husbandry industry of this Nation. Ground beef was 
coming across our border, beef that originated in Australia coming 
across our border, uninspected, and being sold as ground beef in 
marketplaces throughout the United States of America. So the first one 
is a Buy American amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr.

[[Page H6230]]

Combest), the chairman of the committee, to ask for his support on the 
amendment.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, absolutely, I am happy to support the 
gentleman's amendment and appreciate his tenaciousness in this area.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. TRAFICANT. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I would point out that the preliminary 
data for 2001 show that we are exporting $5.5 billion and we are 
importing $39 billion. That leaves us a trade balance of $14.5 billion.
  Mr. Chairman, I have no objection to the gentleman's amendment. I 
enthusiastically support it, and I thank him for his kind remarks.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I would like to say that the reason we 
have that trade surplus is the result of the leadership we have had 
from gentlemen like this.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) 
will be postponed.


 request To offer amendment not preprinted In The congressional record

  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to offer at this 
point a second amendment I have at the desk that was not printed 
October 3.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Ohio?
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I object.
  The CHAIRMAN. Objection is heard and the Chair would object as being 
precluded by the order of the House from entertaining the request.
  Are there further amendments?


           Amendment No. 52 Offered by Mr. Smith of Michigan

  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 52 offered by Mr. Smith of Michigan:
       At the end of section 183 (page __, beginning line __), 
     insert the following new subsection:
       (d) Payment Limitation Regarding Marketing Assistance Loans 
     To Cover All Producer Gains.--In applying the payment 
     limitation contained in section 1001(2) of the Food Security 
     Act of 1985 (7 U.S.C. 1308(2)) on the total amount of 
     payments and gains that a person may receive for one or more 
     covered commodities during any crop year, the Secretary of 
     Agriculture shall include each of the following:
       (1) Any gain realized by a producer from repaying a 
     marketing assistance loan for a crop of any covered commodity 
     at a lower level than the original loan rate established for 
     the commodity.
       (2) Any loan deficiency payment received for a loan 
     commodity.
       (3) Any gain realized by a producer through the use of the 
     generic certificate authority or through the actual 
     forfeiture of the crop covered by a nonrecourse marketing 
     assistance loan.

  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I think this is a very important 
amendment if we are going to keep public support for agricultural 
programs. The amendment puts an absolute limit on all benefits derived 
from price support programs of the Federal Government.
  I am a farmer. I have spent time as chairman of the ASCS committee in 
Michigan administering farm programs. I help write them in Washington. 
If anybody has read the papers, they know that there have been many 
stories from AP and other news sources about the millions of dollars 
that are going to some of the big landowners. I think that we are 
hoodwinking the American people if we say that there is a limit of 
$150,000 in this case; and by the way, up until last year, the limit 
was only $75,000; but we now have a limit of $150,000. If you have a 
wife, you can go to the USDA office and have that spouse also included 
as an additional producer, making it $300,000.
  I think we are hoodwinking the American people if we lead them to 
believe that there is any limit on benefits that can be derived from 
Federal programs on price support. That is because in a rather 
complicated program, we have nonresource loans, which means that even 
if one does not get the marketing loan payment, even if one does not 
get the price support from a loan deficiency payment, one always has 
the opportunity of forfeiting a crop or, in many cases, the Government 
says instead of the forfeiture, we will give a certificate.
  So in reality, there is no limit. What we are faced with is people 
like NBA star Scotty Pippen, billionaire tycoon J.R. Simlot, and 20 
Fortune 500 companies receiving Federal checks from the programs.
  The President, the administration said today, one problem he has with 
this farm bill, and allow me to read the statement that came out this 
morning from the statement of administration policy: ``This bill fails 
to help farmers most in need. While overall farm income is 
strengthening, there is no question that some of our Nation's producers 
are in serious financial straits, especially smaller farmers and 
ranchers. Rather than address these unmet needs, H.R. 2646 would 
continue to direct the greatest share of resources to those least in 
need of government assistance. Nearly half of all recent government 
payments have gone to the largest 8 percent of farms, usually very 
large producers, while more than half of all U.S. farmers share only 13 
percent of the payments. H.R. 2646, without this amendment, would 
continue this disparity.''
  I call on my colleagues to do something that helps farmers, and we 
help farmers because we are going to be inundated. Anybody that read 
the Wall Street Journal today knows that, again, they criticized this 
program because it goes to the big producers. Let me suggest to my 
colleagues why there is momentum to not have any limitations on price 
support benefits. It is because of the grain dealers, the grain deals, 
the car deals, the Purinas, the Archer Daniel Midlands. Every grain 
operator profits by their volume. They have so much income for every 
bushel, every hundred weight; and so there is that momentum, plus the 
huge farmers. We have an 80,000-, 130,000-acre farmer that controls 
130,000 acres down in Florida where he lives, ended up with something 
way in excess of $1 million. Mr. Chairman, 154 recipients, in total, 
quoting the AP story, collected more than $1 million and wealthy 
recipients are doing it.
  We need to home in on this program. One way to do it is to say that 
there is going to be a real limit of $150,000 that includes not only 
the LDPs and the marketing loans, but also includes if you will, the 
end run that these huge landowners exercise to get benefits from 
forfeitures and so-called certificates.

                              {time}  1330

  My amendment would save, according to the CBO, $1.2 billion in 
benefits, or what is the figure, $1.3 billion.
  So this amendment, by limiting it to these giant producers, saves 
$1.3 billion. The giant producers are located, many of them, in cotton 
farms in Texas, and of course, rice in Arkansas.
  Mr. Chairman, I include for the Record a Dear Colleague letter on 
this matter.
  The document referred to is as follows:


                                               Washington, DC,

                                                  October 3, 2001.
     ``There's a lot of medium-sized farmers that need help, and 
         one of the things that we're going to make sure of as we 
         restructure the farm program next year is that the money 
         goes to the people it's meant to help.''--President 
         George W. Bush, August, 2001

       Dear Colleague: Few people are aware that many of our farm 
     commodity programs, for all of their good intentions, are set 
     up to disburse payments with little regard to farm size or 
     financial need. Often in our rush to provide support for 
     struggling farmers we overlook just where that support is 
     going:
       This amendment only limits price supports, not AMTA, 
     conservation, or any other type of farm payment.
       The largest 18 percent of farms receive 74 percent of 
     federal farm program payments.
       In 1999, 47 percent of farm payments went to large 
     commercial farms, which had an average household income of 
     $135,000.
       The bulk of benefits over $150 thousand paid out on the 
     2000 harvest went to cotton and rice farmers--in fact, two 
     large rice cooperatives in Arkansas collected nearly $150 
     million between them.

[[Page H6231]]

       Unlimited government price supports for program commodities 
     disproportionately skews federal farm aid to the largest of 
     producers while encouraging overproduction and allowing the 
     largest producers to become even larger. Let's do more to be 
     fair to small and moderate size family farm operations by 
     establishing meaningful, effective payment limitations.
           Sincerely,
                                                       Nick Smith,
                                               Member of Congress.

  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, let us talk about this amendment for a moment. This 
amendment was offered in committee; and after USDA was called upon for 
comment, the amendment failed by voice vote. This is not just a 
limitation amendment. What this does is it dramatically changes the way 
that the loan program works.
  Following the farm crisis in the 1980s, the marketing loan program 
was created. Its purpose was to aid a producer in marketing commodities 
to minimize the government accumulation of stocks, to minimize the 
potential loan forfeitures, and to minimize the cost.
  The information which the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith) put in 
the committee report in ``additional views'' talks about the imposition 
of this limitation would only affect the largest one-half of 1 percent 
of farmers. It claims that the average acreage harvested to reach that 
loan limitation would be, for example, 1,950 acres of cotton for 1,700 
acres of rice.
  In reality, it would take 701 acres of rice in Arkansas or 432 acres 
of cotton in California, and I do not think that a 432-acre farm is in 
the top 1 percent in size.
  Let me give an example of how this would work, in reality. Today, a 
cotton farmer in California with 432 acres and an average yield would 
be affected by this amendment. Let us assume that the farmer put all of 
his cotton from the 432 acres in the loan. With a 19 to 20 billion bail 
crop, the loan deficiencies would continue downward to 30 cents.
  Even though the farmer could have forfeited the cotton to the 
Government in the past, this amendment would limit the amount which 
they could forfeit, which would therefore then force that farmer to 
take that loan out when he could have gotten 50 cents and a market 
price of 30 cents.
  It is a dramatic change in the way that a non-recourse loan program 
in the past has worked for the past 50 years, and it is not simply a 
matter of concern about the largest one-half percent of the farmers. 
Again, I want to reiterate, a 701-acre rice field in Arkansas or a 432-
acre cotton field in California is not an exceptionally large 1 percent 
of the top farms in the country. That is a very average-sized farm. It 
is not simply a limitation on the payments; it is a dramatic change in 
the way the program operates.
  I would strongly oppose the gentleman's amendment.
  Mr. MILLER of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the 
amendment offered by my colleague, the gentleman from Michigan. It just 
makes common sense that we try to make this a more fair and equitable 
type of bill, because it really does help very, very wealthy people.
  I was kind of embarrassed, a newspaper article on the front page of 
my Sarasota paper, unfortunately it was back on September 11, on the 
front page showed President Bush waving upon his arrival the night 
before.
  The other big article was an AP wire service story about how most 
farm subsidies go to a few. It talks about how 1,200 universities and 
government farms and State prisons get money. It talks about how Ted 
Turner gets $190,000 from it, Scotty Pippin, the basketball player 
making $14 million a year, gets $26,000. It talks about people after 
people who get $1 million, hundreds of thousands of dollars.
  All that the amendment of the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith) 
does is try to make a little more equity and tries to make a little 
more fairness in this program.
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. MILLER of Florida. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding.
  Just to respond to the gentleman from Texas (Chairman Combest), we 
have a recourse loan program, so we do not glut the program, available 
to these farmers as a recourse loan. That means we do not have to sell 
the product at harvest time, so this does not diminish the effort we 
have made over the years to allow orderly marketing. It is still there.
  Let me also say that according to the Congressional Research Service, 
averaging the last 2 years, we would have had to have had 6,142 acres 
of corn to reach the $150,000 limit; 6,600 acres of soybeans; 13,000 
acres of wheat; 13,000 acres of sorghum; 1,951 acres of cotton; and 
17,000 acres of rice. Prices vary over the years, so the acreage is 
going to vary over the years. These are all huge farmers.
  There are 80,000-acre landlords that are sucking in a lot of the 
benefits that could go to small farmers. Again, scored, this saves $1.3 
billion. At a time when we are desperately looking for finance, at a 
time when we are desperately looking for fairness, I would ask my 
colleagues to consider something that takes the great advantage away 
from the big farmers, slows down the motivation of those big farmers to 
get even bigger, buying up the small farms. It is not the kind of farm 
policy we should have in the United States.
  Mr. MILLER of Florida. Mr. Chairman, just in conclusion, one of the 
concerns I have about this total bill, it has 70-some billion of new 
spending over and above what has been spent over the past year. It is 
supposed to come out of our non-Social Security surplus. Now, not only 
do we not have a Social Security surplus, we are going to be into 
deficit spending.
  Anything we can do to reduce that 70-some billion of new spending 
that was put in the budget back in May of this year, that I supported, 
that was expecting these $300 billion surpluses. Now that we do not 
have these huge surpluses, it makes it very difficult for us fiscal 
conservatives to support a bill like this.
  So anything that can reduce the total cost of this bill by $1 billion 
I would hope would be supported by this House.
  Mr. POMEROY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I strongly favor the underlying bill; but as I 
mentioned in my opening comments in general debate, the underlying bill 
is not perfect. I believe one of the more visible imperfections is its 
failure to address payment limits.
  I think, as an advocate for family farmers, that our ability to 
sustain the Nation's commitment to farm programs depends upon the 
American public feeling like their taxpayer dollars are supporting 
family farmers, not large corporate enterprises that simply do not have 
the same compelling case to make for the Nation's resources.
  The GAO has reported that one-half of all farm payments went to just 
7 percent of all farms, the largest farms. This is misdirected policy. 
By passing the Smith amendment, we place a limit that actually works, 
that limit $150,000 in Federal payments, a significant amount of 
Federal support. I believe it would work.
  I recognize that there are economic differences in the production of 
various commodities and that the production of rice and cotton, 
Southern-based commodities, requires larger economic operations.
  At the same time, by moving this payment limit from where it was just 
2 years ago, from $75,000 up to the $150,000, I think much has been 
done to accommodate the different scale of economics undergirding 
production in that part of the region.
  Make no mistake about it: in the end, payment limits make sense. We 
devote our resources to keeping the family commercial operations in the 
business; we do not divert half of all money in the bill to the largest 
7 percent of the farms; and we have a program that going forward, year 
after year, will be one less likely to be attacked for squandering 
Federal resources.
  This is about bringing integrity and common sense to farm programs. I 
urge support of the amendment.
  Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment; and I would take 
issue with my friend, the gentleman from Florida, who mentioned some 
folks by name who are getting payments.

[[Page H6232]]

  He mentioned Scotty Pippin. According to the figures he mentioned, 
this provision, this amendment, would not apply to that individual 
because he does not reach that payment limitation.
  Mr. Chairman, what we are asking to be done here with this amendment 
is to change the rules in the middle of the stream. We have got farmers 
who have been operating under the current law for years and years and 
years, and they have structured their farming operations within the 
confines of the law.
  That law now seeks to be changed in the short term. We could have 
farmers reconstruct their farming operations; but if they did, the tax 
consequences to the American farmer would be huge. That would be enough 
to put the farmer out of business.
  I take issue with my friend, the gentleman from Michigan, that this 
does not have anything to do with the marketing loan provision. It 
absolutely does. We have to look at the payment limitation and work it 
in coordination with the marketing loan provision. That is why we have 
the payment limitation and why we have the marketing loan provision.
  But more importantly, I was up here a little bit earlier. I had an 
example of the Walker farm that we used in Alabama, where it was deemed 
to be, by a lot of people, a corporate farm. What it is is a 7,000-acre 
operation that is operated by seven families, all of whom, seven of 
whom, qualify as producers, as actively engaged in farming, who have 
money at risk in the operation.
  Those are the folks who this amendment would seek to really hurt. 
That provision would really destroy that operation; and if those folks 
have money at risk, then they ought to be able to come under the 
payment limitation rule and not be excluded.
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. CHAMBLISS. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, each one of these individuals is 
eligible, if they go to the local FSA office, to be a separate producer 
entity, each available to that $150,000 limit.
  Mr. CHAMBLISS. They are now. That is my point.
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. This would not touch that.
  Mr. CHAMBLISS. Yes, it would, too. It would limit that operation.
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. No, sir, this is a limit per individual 
producer. Excuse me.
  Mr. CHAMBLISS. The limit is there now. We have the certificate 
provision to take care of it, over and above that.
  But we would destroy the current structure of the way farms are set 
up if we changed the payment limitation at this point in time. I would 
urge a no vote on this amendment.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number 
of words.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment is an example of how we can today at 
least take a system that was designed two-thirds of a century ago and 
attempt to make it a little better, a little more relevant.
  I strongly support the amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Smith) and am proud to associate myself as a cosponsor of 
it.
  Mr. Chairman, we have heard on this floor how narrowly channeled our 
support is. Seventy-four percent of the total subsidies go to 18 
percent of the producers; two-thirds of the farm support goes to just 
10 percent. The last speaker pointed out that half goes to just 7 
percent.
  George Bush has, as recently as this last month, pointed out that 
there are a lot of medium-sized farmers that need help; and one of the 
things that we are going to do is make sure that we restructure the 
farm program to make sure the money goes to the people it is meant to 
help.
  I think what the gentleman from Michigan has done is to attempt to 
give a dimension to the words of our President. The numbers of the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith) have indicated, and we have all 
received the reports from CRS that talk about how much acreage is 
necessary to trigger that limit. I think this is a modest step in the 
right direction.
  I know the gentleman from Michigan has some further thoughts on this, 
and he has my strong support for the amendment.
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding.
  This is going to come back to harm the average farmer in the United 
States. We have farm organizations that support it, and some of the big 
ones do not support it; but we are looking at a situation where the 
President has indicated to us this morning that this overpayment to the 
big farmers is a problem.
  Let me read a quote that he made last month. The President said: 
``There are a lot of medium-size farmers that need help, and one of the 
things we are going to make sure of as we restructure the farm programs 
is that the money goes to the people that it is meant to help.''
  I hope we consider doing this, because, number one, we encourage more 
production, overproduction, if we say the big farmers that already have 
a lower unit cost of production are getting that fixed payment, so they 
tend to get bigger. They tend to buy out other farms, the medium-sized 
farmer that is struggling to make a go of it and tries to buy out the 
smaller farmer. So we are perpetuating the large, corporate-type 
farming operations.
  Maybe that is what some people want to call a family farm. I do not 
think that is what the public policy of the United States Congress 
should be, supporting and expanding with the kind of farm program that 
does not have some real limits on farm payments.
  This does not apply to the average sized farm, which is a little over 
500 acres. One has to have 6,000 acres of most any of these crops to 
reach the $150,000 limit.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the gentleman's framing the words of our 
President. I could not have said it better myself.
  This is an opportunity for some bipartisan support to take an 
important step for making these important programs work a little 
better, inspire more confidence from the American public, save some 
money, and be able to target it where it is most needed. I strongly 
urge support for this amendment.

                              {time}  1345

  Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, I can assure the gentleman from Michigan that the 
average size farm in Idaho is larger than 500 acres, substantially 
larger than 500 acres.
  The Smith amendment seeks to include marketing certificates under 
established payment limits on the farm program benefits, but would 
effectively limit the use of marketing certificates and inhibit the 
following benefits: Marketing certificates enhance competitiveness of 
U.S. commodities. Marketing certificates enable the marketing loan 
program to work effectively when commodity prices are low, thereby 
making U.S. commodities available at market clearing prices. This 
enhances demand and market share and maintains the entire agricultural 
infrastructure.
  Marketing certificates prevent stock overhang. Without certificates 
there will be a larger stock overhang going into next year, weakening 
next year's prices, making it more difficult for farmers to secure 
operating loans. Large farmers will hold stocks depressing prices for 
small and medium farmers.
  Marketing certificates prevent loan forfeitures. Without marketing 
certificates, producers would place their crops into the commodity 
credit corporation loan and would likely forfeit the commodity, tying 
up storage and leaving the government to market commodities almost 
certainly at a substantial loss and at competition with the private 
sector during the following year's harvest. Merchants would buy from 
the government, and the farmer would receive less for his crop.
  Mr. Chairman, I get interested in this talk about large corporate 
farms versus family farms. So far I have never really been able to 
figure out what is a large corporate farm versus a family farm. I know 
individuals in Idaho that are corporations. Four brothers together. 
They own a very, very large farm, probably 30,000 acres

[[Page H6233]]

 or so. The USDA, as I said earlier, said $250,000 of gross sales makes 
you a large farmer. It does not take a large acreage farm to create 
$250,000 of gross sales.
  Actually, 99.5 percent of those large farms are family-owned; 99.5 
percent of those are family-owned. Of those farms, those large farms 
that we say are large, somehow bad corporate farms or whatever, and 
sometimes families create corporations for tax purposes, they create 53 
percent of the crop value but only get 47 percent of the payments. They 
get less than the value of the crop that they produce compared to the 
small farmer. We are already tilting it toward the small farmer.
  When it comes to Scotty Pippen, we always throw those names out there 
because they are great in the paper. Here we have a guy making a ton of 
money playing basketball. He would receive this payment even if this 
amendment passed because he got it under the forestry program. It is 
forest land that he has. If you limited this payment to zero, he would 
still get his $26,000 under the forestry program.
  Mr. Chairman, I would urge my colleagues to reject this amendment and 
stay with the underlying bill.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment and 
would like to ask the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith) his source of 
the savings.
  The gentleman from Florida made the allegation that this is saving 
$1.3 billion. I am asking the gentleman as to what is his source of 
that number.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith).
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I would tell the gentleman from 
Texas it is the Congressional Budget Office.
  Mr. STENHOLM. There is a CBO estimate?
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Yes.
  Mr. STENHOLM. The gentleman's amendment is the one that deals with 
marketing certificates?
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. The $150,000 now only applies to the marketing 
loans and the loan deficiency payments. This would expand it to also 
include the other benefits from price support of the forfeitures and 
the certificates. This is a new CBO estimate that they just gave us 
this morning. The old CBO estimate said that it was going to be 
something like $600 million. They gave us the new estimate this morning 
of $1.33 billion.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Reclaiming my time, I would love to see that 
information because that certainly is contrary to anything that I have 
seen.
  Marketing certificates, which I believe this is aimed at limiting, 
have been around for 14 years. They have been used for a very good 
purpose, and that is to avoid building up CCC stocks. The effect of the 
gentleman's amendment would simply be to build-up stocks, because to 
equate the loan with a price support cash payment is totally 
fallacious. This is not the way that marketing certificates work. What 
we try to do is avoid CCC build-up of stocks.
  If we are going to make it ineligible, if we want to make them 
ineligible for loans, that is one thing, but that is not what the 
gentleman is attempting to do. I do not believe that that is what his 
intent is; but the amendment before us does not do that, which I 
believe the gentleman is saying that it does.
  Market certificates avoid market disruptions caused by payment 
limits. When you run up against that payment limit, then we have one 
choice. We put it into the loan, and then the government pays us for it 
or we then market it.
  Under the theory of the Freedom to Farm Act of which as we held the 
hearings last year, farmers loved the Freedom to Farm, but they do not 
like the results, the price.
  This is a fundamental change in the direction of farm programs. 
Fundamental. If one wants to go down that route, then vote for the 
gentleman's amendment. I would think though that the gentleman would be 
better served by his intent if he went back through the committee 
process, looking ahead to another year, and saying that if we want to 
limit the size of operations, then let us do it in a predictable way, 
not in a retroactive way.
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. STENHOLM. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I just want to say that what 
USDA suggests on implementing this amendment, it would be simply, 
instead of a nonrecourse loan that means you can forfeit, it would be a 
recourse loan. So you can still borrow the money, but eventually you 
will have to pay it back at the lower interest rate.
  Mr. STENHOLM. Reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman for his 
explanation. I, even more enthusiastically, oppose the gentleman at 
this stage of the game.
  Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, I will try to be brief. I, too, want to rise in support 
of the gentleman from Michigan's (Mr. Smith) amendment. I think 
basically what it is saying is when is enough enough when it comes to 
the subsidy payments that direct Federal payments to some of the 
biggest producers in the country? We all know that the producers do not 
operate in a vacuum. They are making economic decisions day in and day 
out.
  Unfortunately, when I talk to a lot of the economists and those that 
study agriculture policy, they are fearful and very concerned that most 
of the economic decisions that are made is not based on what the market 
will support and what would drive market forces, but rather, for the 
government paycheck, and that is why I think we have seen an explosion 
of growth in various commodity producers around the country because 
they are looking at certain largess coming from Washington and these 
Federal payments and making their economic and business decisions 
accordingly.
  The Members have heard this from many, many different people. They 
are saying the same thing on the Senate side. Even the administration, 
in their policy statement they released this morning, is making the 
same exact point. So the Members do not have to believe the gentleman 
from Michigan. The Members do not have to believe me and what is being 
said about it. Look at our own administration right now and what they 
say. They are very clear in their statement of policy when they come 
out in opposition to the base bill.
  One of the reasons they do so is because it encourages overproduction 
while prices are low and I quote, ``A direct consequence of American 
farm policy for many decades has been excessive production and low 
prices. This policy began to change in the last farm bill. The 
administration believes strongly that our national farm policy should 
not distort market signals, thereby directly or indirectly depressing 
farm prices. H.R. 2646 would continue to contribute to overproduction 
caused partially by increased production-based payments to farmers per 
bushel grown at above-market prices.''
  They go on to say that the approach under the base bill also fails to 
help the farmers most in need, and again, I quote the administration's 
policy statement in which they said, ``While overall farm income is 
strengthening, there is no question that some of our Nation's producers 
are in serious financial straits, especially smaller farmers and 
ranchers. Rather than address these unmet needs, H.R. 2646 would 
continue to direct the greatest share of resources to those least in 
need of government assistance. Nearly half of all recent government 
payments have gone to the largest 8 percent of farms, usually very 
large producers, while more than half of all U.S. farmers share in only 
13 percent of farm payments. H.R. 2646,'' again according to the 
administration, ``would only increase this disparity.''
  So I think the point the gentleman from Michigan is making is the 
point that many of us are making, and some of the amendments that we 
are planning on offering in the course of this farm bill debate, is 
that at some point we have to start making some decisions in regards to 
that farm policy, seeing what the overall economic impact is going to 
be based on the business and economic decisions that many producers are 
making throughout the country.
  So I rise in support of the gentleman's amendment. I think he has 
support from both the administration and

[[Page H6234]]

 also the work that is currently being conducted in the U.S. Senate in 
regards to their farm policy. I think it is a reasonable approach in 
order to put a check on the unbridled increase in production which 
leads to oversupply. It leads to a limiting of commodity prices and 
invariably leads to multibillion dollar farm relief bills coming out of 
this United States Congress over the last few years.
  We are caught in this vicious cycle right now, and I think the 
gentleman from Michigan's amendment is trying to address that and break 
us out of this cycle that we find ourselves in.
  Mr. BERRY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  This is the best fed country in the world. All you have got to do is 
walk around the streets to see that. We are all doing pretty good. I 
certainly get more than my fair share of it, but all the rhetoric on 
this floor today fails to realize that.
  I have heard just in the last few minutes over and over again how we 
have an oversupply. These people that are talking about an oversupply, 
how do you check what the stocks to use ratios are in this country? We 
have got the lowest ending stock projected for next year that we have 
had since 1973. There is not any huge supply of grain built up here or 
anyplace else in the world. I do not know where this imaginary supply 
is. I do not know where this overproduction is. It does not exist.
  Freedom to farm let people plant for the market. They did plant for 
the market. The supplies are not there and we actually have some risk 
if we do not continue to produce at that level. We could run out of 
food in this country. It is not a social program. Farm programs are not 
designed to protect small farmers or large farmers or create some kind 
of social condition or recreate a Jeffersonian democracy. That is not 
what they are for. They are to make sure that America has enough food 
and fiber to be self-sufficient and be secure. That is what this is all 
about.
  If we are going to start limiting government programs in the way that 
has been mentioned here today, then we should limit the airlines to 
$150,000. We just passed big bucks last week. Let us just limit the 
airlines, give them all $150,000 and cut them off at that. You cannot 
make it, buddy, tough luck.
  That makes just as much sense as what this amendment does. If this is 
such a profitable deal and everybody that is involved in agriculture is 
standing at the government trough, why are not there more people lined 
up out there to do it? Boy, I tell you what, if you want to get rich, 
just go to Arkansas, buy you a big rice farm. You will find out how 
big, how wealthy you can get. There is not anybody down there wanting 
to do it right now. Once we create a situation in this country where 
people just do not want to farm anymore, we are at risk with our food 
supply.
  This talk of overproduction is just simply not true. We need to pay 
attention to the situation and not kill the goose that laid the golden 
egg and make sure that our farmers are able to stay in business and do 
the wonderful job that they have done for this country since it was 
founded.
  Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, the President of the United States said there are a lot 
of medium-sized farmers who need help, and one of the things we are 
going to make sure of is that we restructure the farm program, so that 
the money goes to the people who need it the most.

                              {time}  1400

  Mr. Chairman, on every occasion that Congress has taken up a farm 
bill or an agricultural appropriations act there is one argument that 
is as predictable as a football game on Thanksgiving: pass this bill, 
we are told, or it will mean the end of the family farm. Well, today, 
we have an opportunity to literally put our money where our mouths are.
  The Smith amendment is very simple. It establishes--actually, it 
enforces--a reasonable limit on the amount farmers can receive in 
deficiency payments. And if I may say so, a limit of $150,000 is not 
only reasonable, it is plain generous. Our current farm programs 
already include this cap, but the larger farms have exploited a 
loophole that allows them to bypass it through the use of commodity 
certificates.
  This amendment will not reduce government subsidies on a single small 
farm, unless of course a small farm is defined as 20,000 acres of 
cotton. What it will do is restore some sanity to the way we 
appropriate government price supports. Consider the following: the 
largest 18 percent of farms receive 74 percent of Federal payments. In 
1999, 47 percent of farm payments went to large commercial farms; and 
in that same year, a single farmer received more than $1.2 million in 
government handouts.
  If my colleagues think that is the way our government programs should 
operate, by all means vote against this amendment. Those who think a 
single farmer should receive more than $1 million in government 
subsidies, while small farmers are barely making ends meet, vote 
against this amendment. But if my colleagues think it is time large 
farms stop fleecing American taxpayers, support this modest amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I helped end welfare in my urban areas. It is about 
time we started to reduce welfare for rich farmers.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith) 
will be postponed.
  Are there further amendments?


                Amendment No. 20 Offered by Mr. English

  Mr. ENGLISH. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 20 offered by Mr. English:
       At the end of subtitle B of title I (page 66, after line 
     3), insert the following new section:

     SEC. __. PRODUCER RETENTION OF ERRONEOUSLY PAID LOAN 
                   DEFICIENCY PAYMENTS AND MARKETING LOAN GAINS.

       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary 
     of Agriculture and the Commodity Credit Corporation shall not 
     require producers in Erie County, Pennsylvania, to repay loan 
     deficiency payments and marketing loan gains erroneously paid 
     or determined to have been earned by the Commodity Credit 
     Corporation for certain 1998 and 1999 crops under subtitle C 
     of title I of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform 
     Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7231 et seq.). In the case of a 
     producer who has already made the repayment on or before the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the Commodity Credit 
     Corporation shall reimburse the producer for the full amount 
     of the repayment.

  Mr. ENGLISH. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the distinguished 
chairman of the Committee on Agriculture for considering this amendment 
and, through it, the plight of a group of farmers in Erie County, 
Pennsylvania, in a truly unique situation in the Nation.
  My amendment rights a wrong that left many of our local farmers 
holding the bag because of a clerical error by the Federal Government. 
Last year, the Department of Agriculture ruled that our farmers were 
ineligible for the Federal Loan Deficiency Program payments because 
their applications were filled out improperly, notwithstanding the fact 
that they carefully followed the instructions of the local farm service 
office.
  Erie County farmers were told by the Department that they needed to 
repay the thousands of dollars with interest to the Federal Government. 
The catch is that the farmers would have qualified for the payments by 
all understandings if they had simply filled out the forms correctly.
  This amendment, which was scored by the CBO to cost $2,000, would 
therefore round to zero. This amendment does not affect budget 
authority, only outlays, meaning it is clearly not in violation of rule 
302(f).
  This amendment simply waives the debt for those farmers who did not 
repay the money, while refunding those who have already submitted their 
payments.
  We must ensure that not one of our farmers is held responsible for 
the Federal Government's mistake. The money

[[Page H6235]]

these farmers received under this program is vital to the local farm 
community. Agriculture is the number one industry in our State, our 
region, and in Erie County. Farming is a vital part of our local and 
national economy, and we cannot allow a clerical error caused by the 
supervision of the Federal Department of Agriculture to cost many 
farmers their livelihood and impose on others such a Draconian burden.
  Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest) and the 
committee for their willingness to work with me to ensure that our 
local farmers are not punished for a bureaucratic mistake.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ENGLISH. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I want to tell the gentleman that I 
appreciate the difficulty he has been going through in Erie County, 
Pennsylvania. He has been trying to get this issue resolved, and we 
think we can do it legislatively in the bill.
  CBO would not score this at a cost, and so I am glad to accept the 
amendment and appreciate the gentleman's willingness to try to work 
with us on this issue and hope it comes to now a positive resolution.
  Mr. ENGLISH. I thank the chairman.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. English).
  The amendment was agreed to.


          Sequential Votes Postponed In Committee Of the Whole

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings will 
now resume on those amendments on which further proceedings were 
postponed in the following order: amendment No. 13 offered by the 
gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Boswell), amendment No. 62 offered by the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant), and amendment No. 52 offered by 
the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith).
  The Chair will reduce to 5 minutes the time for any electronic vote 
after the first vote in this series.


                Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Boswell

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on amendment No. 13 offered by the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Boswell) on 
which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes 
prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 100, 
noes 323, answered ``present'' 1, not voting 6, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 363]

                               AYES--100

     Bartlett
     Bereuter
     Blagojevich
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (OH)
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson (OK)
     Clayton
     Condit
     Conyers
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Ehlers
     Evans
     Farr
     Filner
     Frank
     Gephardt
     Grucci
     Gutierrez
     Hall (TX)
     Herger
     Hoeffel
     Holt
     Honda
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     Langevin
     Leach
     Lee
     Lewis (GA)
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Moore
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Nadler
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rivers
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Serrano
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Solis
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Thompson (CA)
     Thurman
     Udall (NM)
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Weiner
     Woolsey
     Wynn

                               NOES--323

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Allen
     Andrews
     Armey
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett
     Barton
     Bass
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (SC)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Carson (IN)
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Clay
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Collins
     Combest
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crenshaw
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cunningham
     Davis (FL)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hart
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Isakson
     Issa
     Istook
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Kanjorski
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kerns
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kleczka
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Largent
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Maloney (CT)
     Manzullo
     Mascara
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mink
     Moran (KS)
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Napolitano
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Ose
     Owens
     Oxley
     Pastor
     Paul
     Pence
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reynolds
     Riley
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Roukema
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Schaffer
     Schrock
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stump
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watkins (OK)
     Watson (CA)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wolf
     Wu
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                        ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--1

       
     Otter
       

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Engel
     Houghton
     Millender-McDonald
     Mollohan
     Reyes
     Weldon (PA)

                              {time}  1431

  Messrs. WALSH, GORDON, TOOMEY, BOEHNER, McKEON, CALLAHAN, HYDE, 
TIBERI, GREENWOOD, OXLEY, BARTON of Texas, BECERRA, Ms. KILPATRICK, Ms. 
HART, and Mrs. NORTHUP changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Messrs. HOLT, BROWN of Ohio, SANDERS, RAMSTAD, STRICKLAND, LEWIS of 
Georgia, MOORE, OLVER, FARR of California, HALL of Texas, WEINER, 
DICKS, Ms. DeGETTE, Ms. WATERS, and Mrs. JONES of Ohio changed their 
vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated against:
  Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 363, I had a 
hearing/press coverage with the Ambassador of Pakistan re: Women and 
children refugees migrating from Afghanistan. Had I been present, I 
would have voted ``no.''


                      Announcement by the Chairman

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, the Chair announces 
that he will reduce to a minimum of 5 minutes the period of time within 
which a vote by electronic device will be taken on each additional 
amendment on which the Chair has postponed further proceedings.

[[Page H6236]]

               Amendment No. 62 Offered by Mr. Traficant

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) on 
which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes 
prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 418, 
noes 5, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 364]

                               AYES--418

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown (SC)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Flake
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Frank
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Grucci
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hart
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Israel
     Issa
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kerns
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kleczka
     Knollenberg
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Largent
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Mascara
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mink
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Ose
     Otter
     Owens
     Oxley
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reynolds
     Riley
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Schaffer
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrock
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watkins (OK)
     Watson (CA)
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NOES--5

     Armey
     Dreier
     Kolbe
     McDermott
     Stark

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Engel
     Houghton
     Millender-McDonald
     Mollohan
     Reyes
     Saxton
     Weldon (PA)

                              {time}  1440

  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated for:
  Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 364, I was 
detained due to a hearing/press coverage with the Ambassador to the 
U.S. from Pakistan re: Women and children refugees migrating from 
Afghanistan. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''


           Amendment No. 52 Offered by Mr. Smith of Michigan

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith) on 
which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes 
prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 187, 
noes 238, not voting 5, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 365]

                               AYES--187

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Armey
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldacci
     Baldwin
     Barcia
     Barrett
     Bartlett
     Bass
     Becerra
     Berman
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Blumenauer
     Bonior
     Borski
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (OH)
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Chabot
     Clay
     Clayton
     Conyers
     Cox
     Coyne
     Crane
     Crowley
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis, Tom
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Dicks
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Fossella
     Frank
     Frelinghuysen
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gilchrest
     Gilman
     Goode
     Goss
     Green (TX)
     Harman
     Hart
     Hefley
     Hinchey
     Hoeffel
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley
     Hostettler
     Inslee
     Israel
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Johnson (CT)
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kind (WI)
     Kleczka
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larson (CT)
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lee
     Lewis (GA)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Markey
     Mascara
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McInnis
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Ney
     Obey
     Olver
     Owens
     Pascrell
     Paul
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pomeroy
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rivers
     Rohrabacher
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sawyer
     Schakowsky
     Sensenbrenner
     Shadegg
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Simmons
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Solis
     Stark
     Stearns
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Tancredo
     Tauscher
     Thune
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Towns
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Velazquez
     Wamp
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Woolsey
     Young (FL)

                               NOES--238

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barr

[[Page H6237]]


     Barton
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berry
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (SC)
     Bryant
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Castle
     Chambliss
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cramer
     Crenshaw
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Davis (FL)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Deal
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Emerson
     English
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gibbons
     Gillmor
     Gonzalez
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Grucci
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hansen
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Herger
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Horn
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Isakson
     Issa
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kerns
     Kilpatrick
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Largent
     Larsen (WA)
     Latham
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Manzullo
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     Meek (FL)
     Millender-McDonald
     Mink
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Ose
     Otter
     Oxley
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Phelps
     Pickering
     Pombo
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Reynolds
     Riley
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Sandlin
     Saxton
     Schaffer
     Schiff
     Schrock
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shaw
     Shimkus
     Shows
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Smith (TX)
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stenholm
     Stump
     Sweeney
     Tanner
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Thurman
     Tiberi
     Traficant
     Turner
     Upton
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden
     Walsh
     Waters
     Watkins (OK)
     Watson (CA)
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wolf
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Engel
     Houghton
     Mollohan
     Reyes
     Weldon (PA)

                              {time}  1451

  Mr. Blagojevich changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mr. Tiahrt and Mr. Green of Texas changed their vote from ``no'' to 
``aye.''
  So the amendment was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Mr. COMBEST. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Simpson) having assumed the chair, Mr. LaHood, Chairman of the 
Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that 
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2646) to 
provide for the continuation of agricultural programs through fiscal 
year 2011, had come to no resolution thereon.

                          ____________________