On the recordJune 14, 2012
Mr. President, I will do so, but I wish to speak with respect to an amendment on the farm bill for when we get back to that. I wish to call to the attention of my colleagues the fact that in 2008, the farm bill's conferees inserted a provision that transfers authority of the regulation of catfish, but only catfish--it was the only particular item singled out to be transferred--from the Food and Drug Administration to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The provision was not debated in either body. It is one of those things that, as we all know, people have increasingly gotten incensed about in the public as well as around here, in the Congress itself. Because it was transferred over to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the USDA subsequently published a proposal in order to carry out the new mandate it had been given to regulate catfish. But that proposal has remained, and properly so, stalled in the regulatory process. I say ``properly so'' because it serves no public interest, it is costly for taxpayers, and it is duplicative and confrontational with other entities that are engaged in that kind of oversight. As a result, it will invite trade retaliation abroad and put us on a train wreck, if you will, of sort of excessive regulatory conflict. Senator McCain and I have joined together, along with a bipartisan group of our colleagues, to offer an amendment, amendment No. 2199, to repeal the 2008 catfish language.…





