An amendment to HR 1.349 Freedom in Agriculture Act has been proposed by Mr. Plawinski and is as follows:

The highlighted portion of Section 3.1 shall instead read:

Debate on this amendment shall end on Sunday, December 12.

Madam Chairwoman,

This amendment is little more than window dressing on a bill which refuses to address some key areas. I urge the members of this committee to vote no. This legislation has too many loopholes and we are handing the Judiciary a field day if we pass this bill.

Rep. Dave Anderson
Republican
11th District
New Jersey

Madame Chair,
I do not fully understand the remarks of my colleague. The bill if anything, by removing federal funds from the marketplace will ease the matter in a judicial sense, for no longer wil anti trust issues be a concern.

This is truly amove to free markets, yet gives the agribusiness sector a time frame within which to plan.

If the gentleman's concerns arise from other areas, I remain unclear as to where.

I yield.

Madame Chair,

I concur with the gentleman from New Jersey.

The amendment makes sense, but the bill does not.

The wording of this bill could, and more than likely would, be intrepreted in the legal environment as making any kind of payments to farming illegal, whether they be for research purposes or drought relief or any other type of payment.

Congress should know better than write lazy legislation. The United States deserves better.

If Congress wishes to eliminate farm subsidies, the best way to do so is to not include the subsidies in the federal budget, not by passing a haphazard law that was written in haste.

I yield.

This post has been edited by HenryBrooks on Dec 7 2004, 06:36 PM

Madame Chair,
I stand aside to the expertise of the gentleman from Nebraska on these issues as to the big picture.

I was assuming that the bill would pass this committee, and that the amendment would at least provide for transition time in agribusiness.

I have no vested interest other than to assure that we take the best action that we can here to avoid the situation on subsidies described by Mr Brooks in the hearing, which was decidedly weighted to only certain crops, and favors larger businesses.

I shall follow the lead of the learned gentleman on this bill's fate.

I yield.