Imagini ale paginilor

Chairman GILMAN. Mr. Bereuter, we will try to work out a procedure for taking it before the Rules Committee. At this point, we don't have a bill that has been introduced yet, but we will take it


Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, may I ask further-I would like, if I may, to continue.

Chairman GILMAN. Please proceed.

Mr. BEREUTER. I would like to ask you this question. Would the Chairman agree that my amendment, if adopted, strengthens your amendment with respect or vis-a-vis the HPSCI?

Chairman GILMAN. If it were adopted on the floor, yes.

Mr. BEREUTER. If it was adopted here, wouldn't it improve your bargaining power?

Chairman GILMAN. We have had a lengthy discussion with the HPSCI Committee. We had agreed that we will try to work out something together with HPSCI.

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, I think deference is due a chairman. I was unaware of that agreement. I will defer to the Chairman's decision. I hope you will convey to Mr. Goss that I am doing this

Mr. GEJDENSON. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BEREUTER. I would be pleased to yield to the gentleman.

Mr. GEJDENSON. Maybe what we ought to do here is accept the gentleman's amendment. And then if we have between now and Rules to work something out with the Intelligence Committee, hopefully, or go to suspension. So if we accept the gentleman's amendment, we can make that decision at a later date.

Mr. BEREUTER. Would that be acceptable to the Chairman?
Chairman GILMAN. I would have no objection to that.
Mr. MANZULLO. I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Chairman GILMAN. State your inquiry.

Mr. MANZULLO. My understanding is that, when this bill was passed, it was adopted upon motion that it go on the suspension calendar. Is that correct?

Chairman GILMAN. That is correct.

Mr. MANZULLO. Then the bill was opened up for the purpose of amendments only. Therefore, there has already been a vote on how the bill proceeds to the floor.

Chairman GILMAN. The Chair will discuss that with our Parliamentarian.

I would ask the Parliamentarian to respond.

Mr. WEINBERG. Mr. Chairman, if I understood the question correctly, the import of the unanimous consent request that was agreed to earlier was to vitiate the action of the Committee, in the motion that was made by Mr. Bereuter, which was that when the bill is introduced-and it hasn't been introduced yet-that the Chairman would move, without further action of the Committee, to move it on suspension. If I could add, I think the anticipated point is that we can't actually move the bill to the floor under a motion to report at this point because we don't have a bill that has been referred to us at this point. We only have the committee print. Chairman GILMAN. Mr. Manzullo.

Mr. MANZULLO. We are proceeding on the committee print here,

Chairman GILMAN. That is right.

Mr. MANZULLO. Is this the difference between up and down or what? I don't understand. Maybe you could explain that to me. Chairman GILMAN. Mr. Weinberg.

Mr. MANZULLO. This looks like a bill to me. It says a bill.

Mr. WEINBERG. If you notice, it has not been referred to the Committee. The practice of the Committee-it is not universal but it is something that has occurred here certainly in prior years—is that we would operate with a committee print. Then at the conclusion, at some point, the bill would be introduced; and we would come back and have a

Mr. MANZULLO. We are going to have a second markup of the full bill?

Mr. WEINBERG. If the rule of the Committee is to order it reported, that would have to be what we do. That is why, if I may, Mr. Chairman, at the end of our proceedings on these motions, when we move to ask the Chairman to suspend the rules, and we suspend further proceedings. Because we could come back and make a different disposition of the bill at that point.

Chairman GILMAN. I recognize Judge Hastings.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
Chairman GILMAN. The gentleman is recognized.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Chairman, like my colleague from Nebraska, I would defer to the will of the Chair with reference to all matters as well as the fact that the Ranking Member has asserted that it may be in the best interest for us to pursue, as the gentleman from Nebraska said, this Committee's position by having appropriate leverage as offered by his amendment. I would ask the gentleman, however, to revisit that as well as the Ranking Member.

While I bring no special expertise to the table, coincidence has it that I am the only Member that serves on the House Intelligence Committee and the International Relations Committee; and I do know that a considerable amount of work has been done by the Chair and the Ranking Member along with the Chair and the Ranking Member of House Intelligence. I really do trust that they will cover the jurisdictional concerns that the gentleman has raised. I think to embed that in legislation is to repudiate in some respects what the Chair and the Ranking Member have already accomplished. That would be my position.

Mr. BEREUTER. Will the gentleman yield?


Mr. BEREUTER. That sounds very logical except HPSCI moved ahead without consultation and put into the authorization bill something that eliminates something we began as a Congress in 1991. That shows a lack of good faith or a failure to communicate. Mr. HASTINGS. Reclaiming my time, I certainly take the gentleman's point. However, I think that that is exactly what the Chair and Ranking Member have been about, and that is what you suggested we should do, and that is aggressively pursue the jurisdictional confines of this Committee. I thoroughly agree. I just think that, as a matter of course, we are going to be back to the other committee counterparts and now saying something different than what had been pretty much negotiated in good faith today.


Mr. BEREUTER. Just to clarify my position, I have accepted the assurances of the Chairman and the Ranking Member. Therefore, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.

Chairman GILMAN. The amendment is withdrawn. I thank the gentleman.

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I have a parliamentary inquiry. Chairman GILMAN. The gentleman will state it.

Mr. MANZULLO. Is it my understanding that this Committee draft as amended is going to be considered by the Intelligence Committee and then come back here in the form of a bill?

Chairman GILMAN. No.

Mr. MANZULLO. Could you state exactly the procedure that is going to happen?

Chairman GILMAN. Mr. Bereuter, you want to state what you would like to see accomplished now?

Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, any involvement of the Intelligence Committee with this bill has been set aside by my withdrawal of the amendment. We are simply faced with what action this Committee should take to advance this legislation.

I think what the Parliamentarian said a minute or two ago is that, by opening up the bill and taking further action on it, our previous action to give disposition to the bill has been set aside because we have now introduced and passed an amended amendment which, of course, changes the status of the legislation as far as some Members are concerned. But whether or not it changes the status by introducing a new amendment which in fact passed and changed the nature of the bill, that now it is up to the Committee to decide how it will dispose of the bill, because the bill is ripe to move or to be defeated.

Mr. MANZULLO. So we are at a point now

Mr. BEREUTER. The only further problem is that we have no bill before us. We have a committee print. Therefore, the previous motion was simply what the Chairman was authorized to do, to take the committee print in bill form and move it on suspension calendar.

Mr. MANZULLO. I appreciate the response. However, I still don't know where we go from here.

Chairman GILMAN. Mr. Smith.

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chairman, I move that after introduction of the pending bill that the Chairman be requested to seek its consideration as amended on the suspension calendar.

Chairman GILMAN. The question is the motion of the gentleman from New Jersey. Those in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye. Those opposed, say no.

The ayes have it. The motion is agreed to.

Further proceedings on the motion are postponed. In the interim, we will have further discussions with HPSCI to try to work out our



We will now move to H.R. 4002, to improve provisions relating to famine prevention and freedom from hunger. The Chair lays the bill before the Committee. The clerk will report the title of the bill. Ms. BLOOMER. H.R. 4002, to amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to revise and improve provisions relating to famine prevention and freedom from hunger.

Chairman GILMAN. Without objection, the first reading of the bill is dispensed with.

The clerk will read the bill for amendment.

Ms. BLOOMER. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, Section 1. Short Title.

[The bill appears in the appendix.]

Chairman GILMAN. I have an amendment in the nature of a substitute at the desk that I am offering on behalf of myself, Mr. Gejdenson and the bill's sponsors. The clerk will report the amend


Ms. BLOOMER. Amendment Offered by Mr. Gilman:

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the followingChairman GILMAN. Without objection, further reading of the amendment will be dispensed with.

[The amendment appears in the appendix.]

Chairman GILMAN. Without objection, the bill will be deemed to be original text for the purpose of amendment. The amendment makes several technical changes that as I mentioned have been agreed upon. I will withhold my comments and recognize the sponsor of the bill, Mr. Brady.

Mr. BRADY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have asked unanimous consent to present my full statement for the record so I can be very brief here.

Mr. Chairman, I support your amendment in the nature of a substitute. It contains mainly technical changes. I introduced this legislation on behalf of the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Davis, who is the lead Democrat, on behalf of the gentleman from Nebraska, Mr. Bereuter, who was the other original cosponsor. Their staffs as well as the majority and minority staffs of this Committee deserve our thanks for the hard work they have done on this.

I also want to thank one of my constituents, Dr. Ed Price from Texas A&M University, who came in with the framework for this legislation. He is overseas and could not be with us. Without his help, we would not be here today.

The Famine Prevention and Freedom From Hunger Act was enacted in 1975. It had two goals-to increase world food production and then to deal with nutrition problems for our developing countries. The good news is that we have reached the goal on increasing world food production, but we still have a way to go on making the food healthy and nutritious. We address this in this bill by updating that title, title XII.

It is a win-win situation. It is a win for developing countries because we tap the resources of our universities to address nutrition and food problems in those countries. It is a win for our agricul

tural community here in America, because we are both doing extension and we are learning lessons from development in those countries of our products. We help create new markets for U.S. farm products. Finally, it is a win for our universities because they are able to apply the resources that they have invested a great deal of time and money in.

I would at this point encourage support.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Brady appears in the appendix.] Chairman GILMAN. Mr. Davis is recognized on the bill.

Mr. DAVIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Given the lateness of the day, I will be brief as well.

As Representative Brady has explained, let me also commend him for his hard work and leadership on this bill. The bill updates title XII of the Foreign Assistance Act and provides more flexibility for universities around the country that are interested, particularly those who would like to have partnerships with NGO's, in finding creative and more successful ways to meet the food and nutrition problems that still exist in developing countries and plague many of those countries.

I would like to yield the balance of my time to Representative Gejdenson.

Mr. GEJDENSON. Mr. Chairman, I just want to commend Mr. Davis, Mr. Bereuter and Mr. Brady. As someone who has a land grant college in Connecticut in his district, this is the kind of thing that I think will be a great addition to our authority.

Chairman GILMAN. Thank you, Mr. Gejdenson.

This bill introduced by Mr. Brady and also Mr. Davis amends the Foreign Assistance Act to authorize the President to establish programs in title XII of the Act encouraging the formation of partnerships between land grant universities and nongovernmental organizations to promote sustainable agricultural development projects in the world's poorest and neediest counties.

My amendment in the nature of a substitute corrects technical language in the bill. I want to thank our Ranking Member, Mr. Gejdenson, as well as Mr. Brady and the bill's other sponsors for their assistance in the formulation of this amendment.

Although significant strides have been made to increase world food production in recent years, it is clear that more needs to be done to modernize agricultural practices in the developing world and to make certain that sound environmental and conservation practices are going to be applied in rural areas of the world's poorest countries. As in the case in other development fields, it is sounds policy to encourage the formation of partnerships among the public, private and academic sectors. In the agricultural arena that makes particularly good sense as American technology produces the world's greatest grain yields and can, with the provision of state-of-the-art technical assistance, be applied in developing nations. Moreover, as an added bonus, the lessons learned from these experiences and projects can be brought back home and applied to strengthen our own country's agricultural production.

Accordingly, I commend the bill's sponsors for their efforts to encourage the formation of partnerships between the land grant, uni

« ÎnapoiContinuă »