this has been a very vigorous and informative debate, in my judgment. I have no parochial interest in that our State does not grow tobacco. We have no program for tobacco, for any of the producers of agricultural commodities in our State, but I am persuaded by the arguments that have been made by the Senator from Kentucky about the economic consequences of this amendment, and that is bolstered by the letter the distinguished Senator from Kentucky [Mr. Ford], mentioned that had been received by me today from the Secretary of Agriculture which points out the detrimental effect that the amendment offered by the Senator from Illinois would have on agriculture producers in the United States if it were to be passed by the Senate. So I am constrained to oppose the amendment of the Senator from Illinois, but I am also troubled very much by the second-degree amendment that has now been offered by my good friend from Kentucky which limits the application of the crop insurance program to farmable acreage of less than 400 acres. And that is troubling because so many of our farmers in my State and elsewhere throughout the country have more than 400 acres under cultivation, and this would be discriminatory in a different kind of way. So I am troubled by that amendment and I do not want to see that passed. So I am in a position and I think the best course of action for me as manager of the bill is to move to table the underlying amendment.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the economic impact of amendments related to agriculture and crop insurance during Senate debate.
Share
More from Thad Cochran
the language in section 148 of the continuing resolution is included exactly as requested by the administration. It is consistent with language that has been adopted many times in past continuing resolutions. The appropriation for missile…
I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. FAREWELL TO THE SENATE
I ask unanimous consent to proceed, but before I begin, I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from California, Mrs. Boxer, be recognized following my remarks. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
I am concerned that the 22 percent funding cut proposed for NIH could negatively affect longstanding research endeavors.





