Out. Elps everybody its a sad situation. Thank you for taking my call. We join the speech by rand paul. Headed to thei am white house. Does anyone have a message i can carry to the president . In a toyota prius, so im not sure if i can take all me. The supporters with if you need a ride back to the white house, we do have a prius, well take you along. Today i want to talk about something that is serious. Today i want to talk about a war the main stream media is ignoring. Boston to zanzibar, theres an attack on christianity. Christians are being attacked around the world, but you wont ear about it, its not convenient. It doesnt fit the narrative about radical islam. Talks about whos attacking the muslims, the media the christians as sectarian. Ut the worldwide war on christians is being waged by a islam. Al element of every since 9 11, commentators pointing to avoid fingers at islam, which is somewhat fair, its fair to muslims are t most not committed to violence against christians, but its not truth. Ole the whole truth is and we shouldnt let political orrectness stand in the way of this truth, the whole truth is theres a minority of muslims who condone killing of but unfortunately, that minority numbers in the of millions. Pugh research did a poll and it that 21 of egyptians, 5 of jordanians, many jordanians are our friend, but muslims of pakistani find terrorism acceptable, if not laudable. A minority to be sure. But if you add up the numbers in thats over 40 million muslims sympathize with violence against christians. Shouldnt be understated. A Daily Telegraph survey there were 100,000 muslims in britain who fully upported the london subway bombings. 400,000 said they had some sympathy for these bombings. This is not a little problem. Its not going away quickly. Theres an ancient christian city called melula they still speak aramaic, the language jesus suppose. Christian since the time of christ. Theyre a small final outpost in christians. East of the town was recently overrun by islamic rebels. Swarmed to the town and demanded everyone convert to islam or die. Up and el zakem stood answered them, he said if im a christian and you want to kill do so. Use i am, words. Were sarkezes last sister carmel of damascus said sarkeze, his death is true martyr dom, a death in the hate faith. Make no mistake. This is about your religion. Syria, islamic rebels have filmed beheadings of captives. Theyve filmed themselves eating the heart of their enemy. Christian bishops have been kidnapped and one priest was recently killed. Rebels are allies of the islamic rebels that the is now arming. Islamic rebelsng that are allied with al qaeda that attacked us on 9 11. Any sense at all . No dollars should never be spent to prop up a war on christianity. Ut thats whats happening now across the globe. S christians, we should take a stand and fight against any of your tax dollars funding any persecution of christians. Zanzibar, a tiny island off priestcoast of africa, a was shot in the head going to muslims. Y two ourokesperson said we thank young men killing the infidel. Many more will die. Finished. T at easter, be prepared for disaster. Motorcycle assailants hurtled bombs into a christian hurch injuring 15 people and breaking the legs of the pastor. N indonesia, the worlds most populous muslim nation, three girls were beheaded on the way christian school. Make no mistake, theres an lement of radical jihad in this. In guinea this year, a muslim 95 attacked and killed christians and injured 130. In egypt recently, 82 churches attacked leaving hundreds dead and wounded. Earlier this year, i forced the vote, to defund the brotherhood and every democrat [ applause ] democrat voted to continue sending your money to the muslim brotherhood. Tell you one thing, though, as long as im in the fight against sending any money to the muslim brotherhood. [ applause ] in cameroon recently, two from ians that converted islam were murdered. Sayeed , american pastor abidini is detained indefinitely facing physical and psychological torture. They asked him to renounce his thing they asked sarkeze before he feels killed. Resolution to the senate and says and calls for and says we should do everything power within our voice from the white house, from he state department, from our overnment, to release sayeed abadine. Until pastort rest abadini is freed. Are s the globe christians under attack, almost as if they as if n the middle ages they lived in early pagan urban rule. Early martyr, the disciples of christ. Its like its happening again the middle east. This administration does nothing to stop it and it can be argued giving aid and comfort to those who tolerate these crimes. In libya, the country we freed from oppression . That apparently were guarding our ambassador, have raided a Christian Church ounding up hundreds of christians, accusing them of eing missionaries, accusing them of being the crime of having the cross or a bible. Any were tortured and one christian was recently killed by the same militias. N pakistan last week, 75 christians were killled. Several hundred more killed in the bombing of a church. Abibi, a pakistani christian. Row for bras ath femy. He said it began when she drew water from muslim well. Of he was filling a bowl water, a crowd formed and chanted, death, death to the christian. She pleaded for her life. She was pelted with stones, punched in the face, drug streets. The the local imam interceded to say, if you dont want to die, to islam. Onvert the crowd descended on her, with sticks. Finally the Police Stopped the attackers only to arrest her. Shes now been on death row for blasphemy. Of what i say is until asia bibi is one dollar of u. S. Aid should go to pakistan. [ applause ] many have heard of melala, the was cious 13yearold who shot in the head for the crime of wishing the girls could go to school. Shes not a christian, but even cannot adical islamists tolerate the 14yearold girl who seeks nothing more than an tocation and the right to go school. If you havent listened to her, pull up one of the youtubes and amazing, her, shes this young woman, her poise, her elegance. Bizarre distortion of religion, someone who would to makegirl in the head a religious point. I asked wheres the rest of islam. Why dont they stand up and condemn this . Urdu poet wrote, they insist fly in theg the fire daylight. The children of our age from grown clever. Radical islam will end only when begins to police itself. When islam allows her children like melala to examine fly in the daylight. Only then will knowledge, begin to glowwill and grow and religious violence will recede. For that day pray to come sooner rather than later. We send billions of dollars to helped pakistan, weve put new islamic regimes in afghanistan and iraq. Obama now sends arms to islamic rebels in syria. Egypt, the mob attacked their embassy, climbed on top of the burned our flag. I dont know about you, but ive enough. [ applause ] one penny more to any would burn the american flag. [ applause ] to ensure that our country, our policies, our tax ollars are on the side of ending this violence rather than encouraging those who perpetrate it. On christianity is not just abroad, it came to boston the year, just in time for marathon. Two islamic radicals blew up civilians. I guess they thought somehow and children would make a religious or political point . Ou might argue saying maybe they werent targeting christians. But they certainly didnt target a mosque. Motive, if they can perceive one, is not against our overnment, but against us as a people, a christian people. That meone can believe killing innocent people could further ones cause is beyond me. The attack, i met policemenf the boston who was there, one of the first responders. He described the feelings, the this war he witnessed zone. His sadness as he raced to apply stop quets and try to bleeding and the death and arnage of what he saw when he showed up. He described his anger as he islamic radicals through the streets. He described he felt it was justified. Shootout, one was killed. If youre going kill innocents, youre going receive the same. After we captured the last one, after we captured last bomber, he said he also described a special appreciation for american justice. After the bomber was apprehended, he said we didnt drag him through the streets and beat him to death with tire irons. A lawyer, he will get a trial. Its what makes us different from them. [ applause ] hen i talk to our young soldiers, my wife and i helped to build a home for a young limbs in o lost three one of our neighboring towns in kentucky, i asked him, what are you fighting for . It mean to fight for your country . Wey said the essence of what fought for was our freedom, our bill of right, our constitution. We have to believe and preserve those. Thats what were here for. Thats what were here to fight for. Men and at our young women have put their lives on the line for. Now some politicians say this on christianity means that we must fight a large war against all radical islam. Well, part of my point here is theres 50 million, 100 million. This isnt going to be fought war. A conventional its going require islam to islam. But there will be times and we will have to defend ourselves. Were right no go to war after 9 11. There are times when military justified and necessary. I believe we must be willing and able to defend ourselves against the jihadists. Must also reexamine our policies because military action can at times actually enable and empower radical islam. Syria could to possibly enable al qaeda. It could make things worse. That. Ve to be clear about in egypt, libya, and syria, its still unclear whether the war or changes or the new regimes are going to be more friendly or less friendly to america. Me, it doesnt make any sense to send american arms, american or american troops to aid Syrian Rebels or the muslim rotherhood for goodness sakings. We should stop it. [ applause ] future, ive seen less and less conventional wars. Dont see how they can be defeated. They have to be contain and we have to defend ourselves. No mistakes, he should actively defend ourselves. Comes as theanswer rest of islam thats not radical has to police radical islam. [ applause ] the islamic republics, they see infidels. Ders and they wont accept us through force of arms. Omehow they must be made to understand that they must root ut and destroy the sadist and killers amongst them. The ones who distort and contort justify killing of civilians and children. Islam needs to remember and recreate the good in their history. Centuries, the middle east is home to cultural and of the tual centers ancient world. Math and science flourished in the middle ages. And sophistication were the norm at one time in the middle east. Great medieval physician measles. Ed smallpox and the great persian mathematician algebra. Ancements in there was enlightenment at one time in that part of the world. Islam carried the light for many centuries, they paved the way for our enlightenment. This history needs to be brought back to life again. Innovation in muslim communities compass, the magnetic pens, printing. T was said that at one time books were printed in cairo, in baghdad. The world really at one point in the time in the middle east was something that was very amazing. Come back. They need to figure this out. The policing has to come to them. As late as the 1960s, books were ritten in cairo, read in baghdad. There was a time in our history when islam was policing itself. A peacefulscribed as and tolerant religion. T one point, they prized inquiry over the heads of infidels. Ofelieve islam contains some the roots of these classical traditions and can return to them. We must defend ourselves, make no mistake about it. We need to understand that the christianity is not being waged by a rare anomaly, but by significant minority that numbers in the millions. Christians should be prepared for war, bull actively seek peace. Reagan said we should strive for peace through strength. Too often weve lost sight of peace as the goal. Gospels is not war. Hopefully the message of christianity if listened to can an eventual peace process. N the meantime, take action, pray for a solution. Politicians accountable for standing up and protecting life and standing up christianity. R on thank you and may god bless you. Thank you, senator paul . Keep it going . Faith in peakers americas promise was shaped early on by his parents who left under the castro regime. Raised in miami, he learned the alue of diligence and hardwork through his godly parents. The early trading paid off bigtime as he came from a huge underdog in his 2009 campaign to win the senate seat for his home of florida. His mission among other things build a tor, is to Strong America that our children their erit to reach dreams just as he has reached his dreams. Es become a leading voice for values voters all across america. Ladies and gentlemen, please marco rubio. Or right here right now theres no other place i want to be thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I hope all of the protesters who came here to scream at us left with ted. He did a good job with them. And so anyway, i appreciate it. All of the fighting going on in my biggesttoday that fears are were losing focus on the biggest issues facing our country. Thats the growing sense of so many across this country, were losing control of it. Losing control of our nation and more importantly were losing what weve come to American Dream. Why do people feel this way . Well, because millions of them a job for ut of months and maybe years at a time. Because millions more are jobs that quite frankly dont pay enough to live off of. By the way, when these people hear on the news that the economy is recovering, when they hear on the news that unemployment is down. 1 somewhere, it makes them angry. Because maybe wall street has ecovered, but for millions of americans, theyre still stuck with jobs that do not pay enough ends meet. And making all of this worse by the way is while the paychecks and going down, their bills keep going up. Working e parents and families how much theyre paying every month for child care. Ask the thousands upon thousands of students who are saddled with student loan death . I know that. And i had over 100,000 in Student Loans which i paid off last year with the book, now my available on paperback in case youre [ laughter ] so how do people make it through when they face this stuff . Know, i faced the rough patch like that after jeanette married. We faced a difficult moment. We got rid of a car, we move in months . Car for six sound familiar . From time to time, weve had to do that, but weve done that temporarily. Now you have millions and millions of people who feel like may have to do that as a new way of life. Themselves, is this the new normal. Is this the way things are going to be in this country from now on. Thats what people are wondering these days, that maybe the American Dream will never be what it used to be. Why is this ves, happening . Theres a lot of reasons. Its changed the nature of our economy. All of the jobs have gone cheaper because of labor costs. Millions of jobs have been replaced by machines. Grocery store, less cash years, more of the selfcheckout counters. People never got the education or the skills needed that the jobs that the new creating. S and Big Government is keeping our economy from creating the middle class jobs people desperately need to live the of dreams they want. All of this is contributing to the challenges. One of the major causes of it i think does not get enough attention. Fundamental truth that you cannot have a Strong Economy if it is not built on strong values. No one is born with these values. Values have to be taught. The government has to teach them. Reenforced by institutions like churches, synagogues, coaches, mentors, by society. But we have countless children that are untry today not being taught these values. Because the society is breaking down. The families are falling apart. Our country is paying a terrible, terrible price. Answer to all of this is just how the government spends more money. Ook, theres a role for government. No matter how much money the government spends, it will never e able to take the place of parents and strong families. Amen broken families and culture by a popular that glamorizes violence and irresponsibility, these children are going to struggle to succeed matter how much the government spends. And this is a serious problem. Are goingf our people to be left behind if we do not fix this. What can those of us in Public Service do about all of this. Thing we must do is we must empower parents and empower civil society. And thats why i believe as most of you do that every single america has the right and should have the opportunity to the their Children School of their choice. Second, we need to make sure Government Programs encourage work, not dependence. Yes we look, we have to we to serve safety net those who cannot help themselves. To serve those who have fallen up on can stand back their own two feet and try again. But our people want jobs, they net as a waysafety of life. Thats why these programs need reformed. So that these programs encourage work, encourage education. They need to be reformed to make sure that they do not punish if they decide to get married. By this point, i had hoped someone could heckle me so i water, but all right. That should get me through. The third thing i think we eally have to do, and this is perhaps most important is our leaders have to stop ignoring is impact that culture having on our nation. Now, let me tell you the reaction i get to that from some. Some say this is nothing more than an effort to impose mine or religious bodys values on the others. Its not about imposing values. Work unless dont you really believe them. Lectured as many of you have that we need to stop issues if ut social we want to win elections. Ut if were serious about saving the American Dream, we cant stop talking about these issues. Stop talking about the importance of our values and our culture. We cant stop talking about them ecause the moral well being of our people is directly linked to the economic well being. See a rising tide of intolerance in america. Intolerance towards those who cherish these values. Have s country, we still millions of people who try to live by these values. Hey the traditional values they cherish hard work, responsibility, selfcontrol, not elief that life does revolve around us. Whos harmed by these values . Who how does promoting these values hurt anyone . The millions of americans who values are tired of being constantly told that they eed to keep their opinions to themselves. Thats right. On issue after issue. Are sue after issue, they expected to be tolerant of others. Increasingly, our culture is intolerant of them. Imposings our ut religion on anyone. In america, you have the right way you choose. Thats why virtually every faith and denomination on earth has a land. Ce in our you have a right to not believe in god at all. I believe jesus christ is god. I i believe applause z [ applause ] every single oves human being that has ever lived, no matter what they have done, they dont believe in him. Hats why he suffered a brutal death and he resurrected from the dead, to erase the sins that him. Ate us from i respect the rights of those who do not share my beliefs. But to teach my faith to my and to share it with nyone who will listen, that is my right too. [ applause ] n this country in this country of ours, we have the right to our beliefs and the responsibility to respect the views of others. But if you want to save our realize we must all that the breakdown of our culture is trapping millions of poverty andcycle of dependence, and together we have to do something about it. Close by saying that this better life that we all share, its really the people l hope of everywhere. For much of human history, most the e were trapped in circumstances of their birth. Whatever your parents did for a living, thats what you were do. Wed to picture that for a moment, living in a society where what in life wasng to be determined for you before you were even born no matter how were willing to work and no matter how much talent you had, it didnt matter. Society, you were only allowed to go as far as the family before you. Living in aa moment place like that. As american, thats unimaginable us. Thats been the condition for almost all of human history. But america is special. Because here, this nation was founded on a powerful and single truth that every li f us has the godgiven right to life, to liberty, and to the pursuit of happiness. [ applause ] and thats why my parents came here. Came here. My parents it was the only place on earth where people like them born poor disconnected from power could achieve a better life. To be rewarded for your work and be able to leave children better yourself, this is what we call the American Dream. Its our identity of the people makes this country excepti exceptional. Because i know so many of you are discouraged. I know people around this country is discouraged by the nation is headed. I know so many of you are deeply disappointed with the way the turned out. Yes. Yes understatement know that many of you increasingly scared that maybe we have lost or are losing country. But you cannot give up on america. On the ot give up American Dream. We cannot allow to let our fears leave us ointments to to silence and inaction. The country that god blessed us with it is worth fighting for. This this special place that worth saving. Its and i want you to know omething, despite everything thats going wrong in our country today, i believe with my heart that god is not yet. With america i believe with all my heart that god still destines for us an future and the opportunity to continue to serve as an inspiration to the world. So i would just close by saying we need to continue to pray that the wisdom and the strength we will need to this nation and to save the American Dream. Thank you very much. Thank you. Right here right now all right, wow. Really powerful. Got another senator for you. This has been another powerful lineup. We had enough senators here to pass legislation this morning if we wanted to. The next speaker was sworn in just this year from the great state of South Carolina. Years of ing two distinction in the house of representatives, hes working fiscal ly to restore responsibility to washington, promote job creation and conomic growth, and to better provide for the veterans that risk so much to protect our nation. First year, he has ntroduced an amendment empowering federal coworkers to choose whether they want their union dues to be taken out of which i think , is a pretty good idea. Welcome to the podium, senator tim scott. Dont stop believing hold on the that feeling thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you to the Family Research council. What, were in good company this morning. Yall make me want to preach. I tell you what. Im getting kind of excited over here how about over here. Can i get an amen all right. Mama ve to realize my wanted a preacher, she got a politician. Pray. Us you know, there is a song that i think is so important. Yall familiar with the grace . F amazing i once was lost but now im found. I was blind, but now i see. Thank the lord he saved my soul, yes, he saved a soul like me. Those words never meant more to than on september 22, 1983. Was on a Little College football scholarship at presbytarian college and they had this thing called the fca fellowship of christian athletes. [ applause ] this young man named john rickenbatcher, j. R. , he gave an call. I walked down the aisle, got on so nees as a person who is selfish, but when i rose back up, the lord has become the life. Of my [ applause ] and i have never been the same. I have never been the same. News for all of us. God is not finished with me yet. Finished with you yet. But perhaps the best news is god not finished with america yet. Im excited about that. Course. Ourselves off can anybody say amen to that. Way off course. I wonder why. Think of some of the things that are happening here in washington, d. C. , i guess there is a potomac fever. Too many have been drinking the water. Beenusly the president has drinking that water too. How our president is today picking and choosing wants to enforce. To erode the rd notion of the rule of law. Cannot have a president who picks and chooses. He says i dont really like the law, so he doesnt enforce them. He said i dont like the mmigration law, ill go around them. He said i dont like the obama care law, so ill delay a part of it. Whats that . Whats that all about . I get it too. It. Get when obama care started off at went to ann, then it 1. 8mate two years later of trillion. 2011. And now it could easily exceed 3 trillion. And the worst part is that we tarted with 15 of americans without insurance and were oing end by 2023 with 10 of Americans Still without insurance. Trillion, were going o insure 5 of americas population. We deserve better. We can do better. I think about simple math. I went to Charleston Southern university, the home of the bucks. Education. How many of yall are from South Carolina . Oh, yeah. People from the palmetto state. The palmetto state, you can add, if you bring in the dollar, you should not spend the dollar. Everybody i want to make sure yall understand that. I know this is washington, but make 1, you shouldnt spend the whole 1. Ou should give at least 10 to the church, right . But here here washington, for someway, n, somehow, we keep buying things we cannot afford. Have spent 5 trillion 5 trillion in the last five years more than we in. Ught we have to give back to fiscal sanity to save america. Lost our wayink he because we forgot the why. Why are we here . Here. E we i think its good news, though. Im a big believer that even in a storm, the word works. The word works. A scripture, romans 8 28. E know that all these things Work Together for those who love god and are called according to his purpose. A unique call as on america and i believe that we survived the storm that we are in. Not going to be easy. But ive been through crisis. Been k most of you have through crisis. I can recall back when i was in high school. I was a 17yearold. I was a Student Government president in high school. Star. A football at least in my own mind. And i were sharing one car. Toyota ugly Brown Corolla hatchback. 1982. Bought it its the first new car. Call a ctually what we newsed car. It was on a budget. 10,000 miles on it. It was brand new to her. I had to drive her downtown to 40 minute drive. I do my three a day football practices. Her orning, i was driving to work, 5 30, 6 30 in the morning so i could get back to practice at 7 30. Iopped her off, driving back, got a little sleepy. Down. Rolled the windows please note i said rolled the windows down. Then i rolled the windows up. And i rolled them down again. I turned the a c on. On. I turned the heat in august in South Carolina thats when you know youre desperate, by the way. Now, i turned the radio up. And i turned the radio down. The next thing i knew, i oke up driving down the interstate at 70 Miles Per Hour asleep. On the side of the road woke me up. What any 17yearold young man would do i panicked. I slammed on the brakes and i at thethe Steering Wheel exact same time. Does anyone know what happens you slam on the brakes and jerk the Steering Wheel at 70 Miles Per Hour . Your car flips. Back into traffic. And i remember my body going all around that car. Went through the windshield. Nd i held on to the Steering Wheel. I remember doing one thing and only one thing in that car. Yelled for help. I yelled, jesus as a miracle, i believe in in cles i believe miracles. Now, a miracle is going to need like right looks now. But i believe the miracle work of god. And i found myself in the i was going we dont know direction in South Carolina. Going this way. And i ended up going back that theon the side of the road, car was on the side, glass everywhere, blood everywhere. People yelling and screaming running towards my vehicle, someone yelled, i think hes dead, i think hes dead. I yelled back im dead im dead, im dead say i was smart, by the way. I just said i was alive. And they laid me on the side of highway literally, the police came and the ambulance the the fire truck was first. Thank god for emergency responders. [ applause ] thank god for our emergency responders. Them. They laid me on the side of the road. Ill remember for the rest of my highway patrolman, he kneeled down, he looked at me said, son, your mama is going to be so happy youre alive. Said, d up at him and i you dont know my mama. Shes going to kill me. You see, when the officer was me was that my vehicle,why wasnt the it was her kids. John maxwell, a friend of mine me that if when you find your why, you can find your way. America, we have to find our we can find our way. You see, i believe that our why declaration of independence. [ applause ] nd its a very, very simple concept. It says we hold these truths to e selfevident, that all men are created equal. Hat they are endowed by their creator, not their government, with certain unalienable rights among these life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Life, im k about 100 committed to being involved Prolife Movement because we must stand up for the unborn. Have a responsibility all to stand up for our children. It is our right. Responsibility. No. Cannot say million, more than 50 million theicans have never touched soil. More than 50 million americans never touched a soil. Thats a travesty. Challenge for r us, that means that there are unborn s of parents of children who carry the scars and the challenges of what they thought was a choice. ve talked to way too many of them. We must protect life because right from ienable god. We must protect life. Think i think as i about liberty, louisiana, the has come to siana the conclusion that liberty is notion parcel with the of education. And our federal government is the state of louisiana because they believe in school choice. I believe in school choice. Louisiana louisiana believes us to create for more liberty, we have to have a better education system. And if you cant get in the schools, you should be able to go to the private school, and if you cant get it in the private school, you home school e to your children. To have to have the right educate your kids. To have it. Opportunity and of if our parents are not in education. School choice is a necessity. When parents have a choice, the kids have a chance. I know this firsthand. By the time i was in the fourth grade, i had gone to four elementary schools. Poverty, its very difficult to find the right school. Ometimes you have to fund the child and not the school. We cant let unions, teacher nions stand in the way of educating kids. Cannot we cannot we cannot allow a National School board through legislation washington to n dictate what education the kid or in louisiana greenville, South Carolina or columbia, South Carolina. Up even against common core. We must take a stand. Cannot allow the federal government to tell us how to kids at home. Pursuit of d the happiness. I have a mentor. Flunked yearold kid, out of high school. My mom believed love comes at the end of a switch. She loved me a lot. I had a mentor come along who taught me you have to earn success. It cant be given to you. Get it because youre entitled to it, you have to earn success. Believe that the pursuit of happiness is earned success. To think my way out of poverty. He taught me that in america all possible. Let me leave you with this life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Our right that comes from god. Theres one other thing that i must do. E theust as a nation pray for peace of jerusalem. We must stand strong, we must tall. We must be on the side of israel. What the bible says. The bible s us is clear. Is it clear. Y good friend would agree with me. The bible in psalms 122. The peace of israel and those who do shall prosper. Bless america, god bless you. Thank you very much, god bless you. Dont stop believing hold on to that feeling street lights people on the next washington talk about the continued Government Shutdown with star parker, the founder of president for the center urban renewal and education. Shell discuss the debate between congressional house, cans, the white and democrats and the upcoming deadline to raise the debt ceiling. Smith dewahl will look at the impact of food of across the united states. Shes the food safety director interest. C science and washington journal live with your cause every morning at 7 00 a. M. On cspan. 9 30 a. M. Gavels in at eastern. The house votes on which measures of the farm bill each focuses on in conference. Today the house voted in favor of going to conference to work the farm ences in bill. The Senate Returns at 11 00 eastern. Theyll be voting to move a debt ceiling bill introduced early in the week by harry reid. Extend the debt ceiling by one year. The vote on the measure is noon. Ed to be held around house republicans, senate democrat, and the president ontinue as they try to reach the agreement to end the federal shutdown and how to move forward on the debt ceiling. Live on cspan and the senate on cspan 2. How the Government Shutdown affecting you. Please send us. Make your short video message upload it shutdown and from your mobile device at out the. Com cspan and see what are touting about. This sunday, part two of our josh bolten. With what rt off by giving us you saw with the press, the media, and that world . Did you view them . Hostility, with some which is just the natural state affairs. The white house and the press corps because thats the nature of what the press needs to do. Need to try to catch the white house out on whatever is on. G more with Bush Administration administration chief of staff sunday night at 8 00 on cspans q a. On tuesday, the u. S. Supreme the Campaign Finance case of mccucheon versus federal eLection Commission. It challenged the limit on the total amount of money one individual can contribute in cycle. Ection the Republican National committee and shawn mcp the donors, e of urged the court to strike down total contribution limits. Currently can contribute up to 123,000 every twoyear election cycle. Strikes preme court down the limits, individuals could donate more than 3. 6 candidates and olitical parties every two years. Well hear argument first 0536, orning in case 12 mccucheon versus the federal eLection Commission. Ms. Murphy . Mr. Chief justice, may it court, the aggregate contribution limits are an impermissible attempt to limit ndividuals ability to participate in the political modest base in the limit congress imposed, these limits simply seek to prevent from engaging in too much First Amendment activity. Justifiedts cannot be on circumvention grounds because f concerns the government hypothesizes have already addressed by more direct circumvention measures. How is that . Bicker imposes numerous measures, ear marking for earmarking candidate, s for a coordination restrictions, there restrictions ion on creating multiple pacts that are designed. These were there but for one were there at the time, fileo. Y versus and i guess the court thought omething could happen like the following candidate smith. You can only give him 2600. Has a lot of supporter else. And they each 40 of them gets brainstorm. And each of the 40 puts on internet, a little sign that says sam smith pact. This money goes to people like smith. Great people. Now, we can give each of those 40 5,000. Coordinated, established by a single person. Each is independently run. Pretty well that times tal of that 5,000 40 will go to sam smith, okay . What does that violate . Of problems couple with that hypothetically, your honor. First of all, base limits both what can be given to a pact. 5,000. Pact can give act to a candidate. 5,000. 5,000 going my to the pact. There happen to be 400 pacts. 5,000 times 4,000. 400. Times 40, five times how much is that. Im not good at math. Without doing the math. Will tell youre marking and proliferation. No earmarking, earmarking rights that you write on a check or a Company Letter that you want the money go to something. Does not. The earmarking regulations are broader than that. Pact thats going to contribute to one candidate only. Theyll contribute to several because theyll get more than one contribution. At that point, you dont have he kind of traceability that you rear talking about because theres more money coming to the act than can find its way to any one particular candidate. If you name the pact after a as the ar candidate hypothetical assumes, i would be surprised if the federal Lection Commission wouldnt come after you for earmarking. Thats exactly ms. Murphy, lets say this one. Of have 100 pacts and each them thats not right. Each of them are going to five candidates in the most contested senate race, heyre really only five very contested senate races and 100 i would say that i think the after all, the well hear line is that there is this proves that several years ago. Aggregate limits were nacted in bicker, the same statute to which the legislative record pertains and it does go problem and therefore it bears upon it and its ample evidence that would upholding the aggregate limits and i would strongly urge the court to do so. Thank you. General. You, ms. Murphy, you have three minutes remaining. Thank you mr. Chief justice. Few quick points. First, we havent heard the that muchgeneral talk about circumvention today and i think thats because the circumvention argument doesnt work. Its addressed by all of the prophylactic measures that to. Er contains the extent those arent ufficient, there are much more narrowly tailored ways to get at this as the chief justice pointed out. Were hearing a corruption argument. As the corruption revealed, once the corruption theory that the government is putting forward here, there isnt a way line tinue to draw a between independent expenditures and the 3. 1 million check to of the different individuals that are in small base limited amounts because theyre going be much gratitude to the individual who spends 3. 6 illion directly supporting one candidate through ads on that candidates behalf. So what we have is a system out of the ng money most transparent way possible to make contributions which is to the candidates and the parties and the pacts. If theres no further questions, thank you. Thank you, counsel. The case is submitted. Well hear argumentings. Limits are regate enacted ways to get at this as the justice and chief justice out. Ted what were hearing is a corruption argument. But as the questioning once you accept the corruption theory that the government is putting forward here, there really isnt a way continue to draw a line between independent expenditures and the 3 million check in all f the individuals that is in small base limited amounts because theres going be just as gratitude who spends 6 million to ads on that candidates behalf. So we have a system thats forcing money out of the most to makeent way possible contribution which is is directly to the candidates and the parties and the pacts. Questions. No further thank you. Counsel. You, the case is submitted. Hear arguments. Well hear argument first this 12536, mccucheon versus the federal eLection Commission. Murphy. Mr. Chief justice and may it please the court. In the case today. We did the briefs on what have of the Republican National very pleased are with the results with the argument this morning. Its apparent that the court used the aggregate limits that candidatesy how many particular donor can support o nine candidates and one National Party as way too blunt of an instrument causing too harm to be mendment ustained under the current decisions of the u. S. Supreme court. Were encouraged by the argument today. We along forward to a decision will help t that restore balance in our political system. Ight now, the parties and candidates are limited in what they can accept. He result is donors are being forced to give money into super pacts and not for profits and 527s that are much less accountable, much less ransparent than candidates in Political Parties. And by preventing by forcing direction, we have a less Healthy System. With these aggregate limits struck, well see more parties money. More thats a more Healthy System than in our Current System of forcing money d to independent spenders rather in by the candidates Political Parties themselves. Thank you. Wirthheimer from democracy 21, one of the mikai in this case supporting the aggregate limits. Points i f important would like to make. Scalia all, justice asked the question of how much money went to candidates and to ies and how much went outside groups. Lets be clear here. Parties with these aver all limits spent 5. 2 billion in these elections. Outside groups spent 1 billion. They spent 83 of the money the 2012 elections. And the parties spent as much as outside groups. So the candidates and parties were dealing with billions of overall under the limits. This case is about 1 million and 2 million contributions. Its not about whether a few contributions can be made by mr. Mccucheon to a few more candidates. About whether Speaker Boehner can set up a joint Fundraising Committee and and mr. Mccucheon give them 2. 4 million. Ts about whether president 70,000n 2012 who raised contributions for joint Fundraising Committees could 1. 2 million. About precisely the kind of contributions that the 20 eme court has ruled for years create opportunities for limited. N and can be now facing the court is the question of whether theyre out 40 years of Supreme Court precedent and unconstitutional a contribution limit that prevents corruption. And we see no basis for the Supreme Court to knock down contribution limits. Raised by r question justice scalia, it was quite interesting the Supreme Court limits on outside groups unconstitutional because risk of corruption. Appears to scalia think well, theres just as much isk of corruption with outside spending as there are with contributions. Hats not what the court said in Citizens United. United, outside groups can make unlimited notnditures because they do corrupt they dont create opportunities for corruption. Repeatedly court has said that contributions to candidates and parties do create for corruption and they can be limited. Facing the issue court today. This is a corruption case. If the Supreme Court were to strike down the limits, we ribution are bound to see milliondollar 2 million contributions solicited by the most powerful holders in washington creating onors and opportunities for the kind of quid pro quo corruption that the four decades for can be limited. Thank you. Mr. Wirtheimer, the chief justice, what seemed to be the tick is the individual limits, the number that they can give to a number of candidates. To disallow the ggregate limits for just that category . Or is it like taking a brick out of a house and a whole thing in. Ls i understand the chief want es point was if you number ofore than the candidates you can give 250 to, shouldnt a few more give a few more contributions. A couple of answers to that. Of all, mr. Mccucheon can every ntributions to republican candidate to congress. They could not give 250 to each of them. In earlier Court Decisions has distinguished between the First Amendment a donor which is indirect, and the First Amendment rights of a spender, expression. Ect by his is a line drawn congress. Congress can certainly change that line. Rid of cannot get aggregate limits for candidates creating the e opportunity for Speaker Boehner democratic leader pelosi to join a Fundraising Committee and solicit a 2. 4 million check from individuals. Thats not true. Thats not true. Let me finish and then you can come in. Ill be happy. But thats not true. A joint Fundraising Committee can be created for all contributions, and the 2 million and more range solicited. En and and as was pointed out in this Justice Kennedy in the the nell case supported prohibition on soliciting large he said ions because they create the opportunity for quid pro quo corruption. I go back. Aggregate limit for parties, president obama could 1. 2 million a contribution. Without this aggregate limit for candidates, huge contributions could be solicited for a joint Fundraising Committee. Thats the danger here. Has hat is why this court no grounds for striking down the contribution limits in this case. Im the president of the center for politics. We get counsel here . Murphy spelled the usual way, murphy. Thank you. I we thought the court was well prepared today. We thought we had a great chance o make the arguments that we wanted to make. And as we told the court in a system like this one where allowed to make nlimited expenditures, it doesnt make sense to continue to have the aggregate limits on how much people can contribute transparent ways possible, which is to the candidates and to the parties and to the pacts. When we told the court as well, it doesnt make sense to continue to have limits where to nine can contribute candidates but when they contribute to the tenth candidate, theres something impermissible about that. And we thought we had a great chance to make those arguments asked some t wonderful questions today. Ms. Murphy, at the end of the Justice Kennedy said to mr. Verilli, are you saying go along with this system just because its the law . Almost 40 years, by the Supreme Court, it is the law. Do you want buckley reversed . We dont think that buckley we dont think that buckley needs to be reversed to we are getting in this case. We think that these limits are under the ional Current System because in this they impose impermissible burdens to candidates o ten instead of nine. O i dont think you need to change the entire system to hold these limits constitutional. Think to take questioning today revealed that there are some questions about itself. Em so if if if the aggregate limits are unconstitutional because they number of people you can give to and the way in which give to them, why not the limits themselves. The case is not about the ase contribution limits, those limits have been justified on different grounds, grounds have that that have to do with the relationship between candidates and people giving them contributions. If youre talking about an limit, youre not talking about how much someone can contribute to one candidate. Impose restrictions on how many candidates someone can support. There doesnt seem to be a for that as a constitutional matter. If this is about free speech, i guess it is, can you it at the end of the day, if you win on this, allowing people with more money to have more free speech . Have allow everybody to more free speech. And you allow people to speak in the ways that they find most effective. And the ways that are also the most transparent within this system. Forcing people to make independent expenditures, you allow them to speak by the people with whose values they share and who can put those values forward on behalf. And coordination. Can you sort of explain what you believe is the correct argument of congress, house, and senate, coordinating between to affect an election. There are restrictions on the can coordinate in giving money to each other. Hose restrictions address what the government was talking about today because they prevent candidates from giving large other of money to candidates and serving with the onduit that the government was suggesting. Whats the answer to what some of the justices said here means more n, it money from people who have more money. Those whothe voice of dont have money. We just want more speech from everybody. Its not a question of who gets to speak. They can speak in the ways they ways they find more effective. By getting rid of the limits, we can make sure theyre doing that and theyre doing it in the most transparent way possible within he system that we have Disclosure Rules and Everything Else that the public knows whos peaking and whos supporting whom. Thank you. Thank you. Im reverend dr. William here from thecome moral monday campaign in North Carolina. Grassroots s as organizations. Attorney al mcshirley is here with me because many of the speaking to the issues but one of the things we wrant the grassroots to make clear is that when we look at equal justice under the law, the in all of its majesty, wants to ensure constitutionally that he homeless person has as much free speech as a wealthy person. Undermine that. We have seen this course put in by overturning shelby, a ruling that allows people unlimited ways to roll back rights and only be challenged from the back end. m from the south and we were seeing what is happening. As soon as shelby was passed, in fact, weve seen the worst restrictions in the country. Now, they want to allow of money to unts influence politicins. North seen that in carolina when we see the influence of art pope, we look what direct evidence of happens when money influences who gets in our state capitals in our governors office. We see a direct connection amounts of obscene money being spent in an attack on people who need medicare, the on public education, the attack on voting rights, the unemployed. He the attack on fair tax policies. The so for those of us at Grassroots Level, we are deeply, concerned that this mccucheon case shouldnt be mccucheon versus the fec, it should be money versus the people. Be a democracy where we have equal justice . Will this be a at the mock are a si sold piecebypiece to highest bidder. As clergy person, the moral issue in this also from a standpoint is found in isaiah chapter 1 where it says leaders chase after gifts and chase after bribes and do for the poor and the fatherless in their public olicy and those on the margin, they, in fact, undermine the nation. The Supreme Court, when it rules in favor of the mccucheon, it our be undermining democracy and allowing it to be bought and paid for by the will t bidder and that undermine the very majesty of the law which was designed to ensure that the homeless person had as much has as much free speech, as a wealthy person. Thank you. Thank you. Say your name . William barber, the president of North Carolina naacp and the leader of the monday moral movement in North Carolina. Im the president of the center of competitive politics. Filed an amicus brief in this case. Say first about this case and correct the record of wirtheimer sailed earlier. Politicians in Congress Want to from having ngers the funds necessary to mount an Effective Campaign against them. All is what this law is about. Now as far as this idea that joint Fundraising Committees can dollars, the of law already allows the speaker, president , to ask for over 4 million from Political Action competes and it doesnt happen. The second thing is in the bill, theres a limit on how much can be olicited by an elected official. Thats not challenged by this case. We think theres a good chance limit will survive. In other words, they will not be ble to ask for these multimillion dollar contributions that as he alleges. How this explain helps the incumbents. Studies showecause hat challenges rely on their funding from people like mr. Mccucheon. And e who like mcmccucheon left leaning as well like to support challengers. In hischief justice said questions, what about someone who wants to support candidates to support environmental regulations or gun regulations . A donor must choose between giving to the environmental giving to the gun control candidates. He cant support all of them. About the you say current scheme as a bar against corruption . There are if we need to have laws to restrict large we need to have laws are a scalpel that aim at that problem and not a meat ax congress takes. For example, the scalpel approach would be, you would say couldnt askficial for more than the current limit today of the 123,000. Think the law requires that now. But if it doesnt, a law could be passed just to target that and not to target the mr. Ty of people like mccucheon and others to support the candidates they believe in. Im asking whether the corruption me bars or not. The current scheme may help keep corruption in. Because the way to get get rid of the people that are corrupt. If you cant give enough to the rid of the to get corrupt people, thats going to help them stay in office. Hats why we have the First Amendment. The First Amendment is to allow speech and speech is what ultimately is the check against corruption. Its all speech by the press and speech by the people. Careful aboutvery limiting either. Thank you. Amicus in the case today. Its about corruption pure and simple. As real people understand it which is to say is the system going to be more millionaires and billionaires. Its corrupted as the supreme defines it, quid pro quo. Its a certainty that the Supreme Court decides this case mccucheon, that we kruchgs more corruption, more legalized bribery will be the norm. If theres doubt of how this the ability of billionaires and trillion nairs at the limits, look at the freedom partners, withe have pooling together 250 million in a purported trade to funnel it through secret organizations that fund ther secret organizations to fund influence over election outcomes. This case is about corruption precedent in this case suggest that the court may uphold the existing rules, to decision means overturning core preaccepts of via valeo. We can only hope the court today will decide not to do that. Doesnt this put more money back to the Political Parties. That was an issue that was case. In this the case could potentially put more money back in the hands of rnc, and other democratic and Republican Party organizations instead of outside groups. Its a certainty that as the mccucheon, there would be more money for the Political Parties. Its not certain it will be less money for the outside groups. The billionaire spenders seem to to write as big a check as they need to. More. Eds to be just its not going deprive people advantage theyre taking. Im council at dimo. We also filed an amicus brief organizations representing almost 9. 5 million americans who came together from and some of the largest membership and constituency groups in the naacp, such as the greenpeace, sierra club, aft, all coming together to say that americans are outraged dominance of big money on the current government, politics, and policy. Seeing that six in ten americans say their elected representatives are more money donors big than to voters or to the public interest. Ten americans saying Large Campaign contributions are blocking preventing our from focusing on fixing the Current Issues that affect our lives, such as to the climate change, such as upward mobility issues like fair taxation. Is something that is causing the American People to have the lowest current Opinion Congress in historical record. Uphold it cal that we from more dominance by big money. We see 84 of the candidates el Congress Last year raised more money from the 1 of the 1 than from all of their small donors combined. Rebut some of the information being spread about the incumbents versus challengers. In our report, 1 billion find that a big money system is already benefitting incumbents over with the house incumbents raising 1. 7 million to a mere 300,000 from challengers and senate incumbents, 7 million, senate challengers, 1. 6 million. Also, as some of the justices trying to say today, we must understand as the american eople do that these decisions do not get made in some kind of vacuum, separate and aapartment from the other governing structures that we have. An zens united led to explosion of dark money fixing regulations after the fact. The ability to circumvent the limits and how all of those limits would play together. It was absolutely accepted by the lower court that million ions of 3. 5 would be able to be solicited and received and that would cause a corruption risk. Fact, the court wants to look with such detail which we consider the to real world impact of their ecisions, then they perhaps should question that in a trial court where they could build an a point that justice briere was making today. Really, this case is whether our politics, policy, and democratic government will be open for sale further captured by private economic interests policy distorting our and are causing the voices of the average americans to be public bsent from the policy debate. Our brief shows that government responsive to their big donors than the lower income its actually blocking majorities of the Africanamerican Community and the latino ority of Community Finding themselves in the bottom third of the income the therefore not government has been found not at all to be responsive to their preferences. This is a real crisis in confidence in our American Time that theits Supreme Court make good decisions for the American People. Thank you very much. Nonpartisan a Research Organization that does work in this area. Here was a fair amount of confusion in the court today about the mechanics of some of this process, about the Movement Money can occur between different kinds of organizations without much restriction and the therefore, on these very large contributions that would be allowed if this decision if this part of the law is reversed. We have a lot of experience over any years with that kind of innovation, with the way in which that process works, and we those transfers can be done. Were happy to discuss that in detail if youd like to know how process would evolve over time if this part of the law is overturned. Secondly, there was a question of whether the system that we currently have really disadvantages the parties. And, in fact, theres a lot of experience with those kinds of as well. Ver time mccainfeingold allegedly would partys aint the to raise lots of funds because they lost their abilities to unlimited funds. But the party innovated very well and were active in raising small contributions from lots of americans and theyve been able to raise more money under the restrictions than they were beforehand. And theres no reason to think this provision needs to be overturned in order to protect those parties that have ucceeded in the system as it exists today. But were happy to have longer conversations about some of the etails if we need to to clear up some of the confusion that was in the court this morning. Thank you. Hello. My name is tara milloy. I teem senior counsel at the Campaign Legal center. Center has been involved in this court case every since the District Court. The court friend of brief in the District Court and again in the Supreme Court explain the real world consequences of striking down the aggregate limits. Notable things about oral argument a is how abstract and hypotheticals were imposed the Supreme Court justices, exposing how little they are versed in the realities of and the realities of Campaign Finance. So we tried to point out in our below and here, what would happen in the absence of the aggregate limits and came numbers that were an ied about, such as individual could give over 1 million to a party of their choice. Over 2idual could give million to the candidates of the their choice. Whats extraordinary is the numbers were in dispute. Expressed skepticism of whether it would really happen. It was discouraging when we have why do we lia saying worry about this contribution when we have super pacs. Citizens united decision that unleashed super dent spending and pacs and hes using citizens nited and the independent spending that Citizens United created as striking down another projection against big money in politics. The oral argument really exposed the justices are willing to go to deregular later money in politics. Happy to explain urther if there are further questions. Thank you. Good morning, everybody. Spalding. N staff counsel at common cause here in washington, d. C. Common cause signed on to a the court brief that was authored by the campaign up for nter standing average ordinary americans who are tired of their voices being drowned out by big money. Have a lot of problems in our politics today, a lot of dysfunction. Look at whats going on across the street with the Government Shutdown. Who are some litigants think one of the problems in our politics is too little money in politics. That is something in a we rejected common cause and at the upreme court, by the way, has rejected for over 40 years. The only thing that stands our the integrity of our Representative Democracy and utter tem of pure and legalized bribery are these contribution limits. Limits ascontribution we just heard Justice Ginsberg ay, promote the First Amendment. Contribution limits ensure that democracy ibrant where folks are able to express themselves on the basis of their by the depths of sites ockets and by the of their bank accounts. On congress to adopt a constitutional amendment to make clear once and for all that property, money is not speech. That corporations are entities economy but do not have the constitutional right to spend unlimited amounts of money politics. Talk to e happy to anybody about this about whats happening at the Grassroots Level across the country. Thank you. Before she was first lady, she taught at the clark for the deaf. And throughout her life, she helped to raise awareness about needsing the deaf and the of the disabled. Watch our program on first lady saturday, 7 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan and live monday night, our series continues. Here at the Lou Henry Hoover house. This ignificant because was the primary residence of the and its significant as it relates to lou hoover because it. Was the one who designed she had such a strong grasp of design and how she wanted the look even though shes not an architect. Were lucky to have a lot of the drawingings and documents related to the onstruction of how she wanted the house to work. Her influence came from the southwest of the united states. Pueblo architecture and her africa when she travelled with herbert hoover. A great legacy because she she created house, it. It was inspired by her ideas, had very close involvement in all aspects of the houses creation. First Lady Lou Hoover 9 00 eastern on cspan and cspan 3 and cspan cspan. Org. As the shutdown continues, the members of the house debated the farm bill. And voted to set up a committee to resolve differences. Instructed debate farm bill conferees to support the bill, ersions of including funding snap and other programs. This is half an hour. The house will come to order. Minnesota may om continue. The second is to support the a fiveyear on if program. The assistance to be clear, this keeps intact he Longstanding Alliance needed for a strong farm bill. The two largest farm bureau tion, the Farm Federation and the Farmers Union wrote in the opposition of original s consideration of hr 2642, the farm bill. President wrote its frustrating the passage of the complete farm bill appears pushed aside in favor of the interest that have no real snake this farm bill, vitality and the jobs of agriculture provide in the country, the consumers, customers ranchers and farmers serve. Farm bureau joined a broad of 532 agriculture conservation, rural development, finance forestry, energy, that expressed their opposition of title ng the nutrition from the farm bill and urged the house leaders to pass a fiveyear farm bill. When such a large group of organizations most with different if not conflicting priorities can come together and agree on something, we should listen to them. Opposite of what everyone with a stake in this make ecommends does not sense and it is not the way to my opinion. Ess in i ask unanimous consent to insert both the farm bureau and Coalition Letters into the record. The farm bills nutrition be on the same timeline as the bills other provisionings. Decouple o sense to farm and food programs. They go hand in hand. Worry that separating the two of them sets us on a path to the future. In the Senate Farm Bill preserves andpartnership between farm food programs and we should defer to that approach. S Farmers Union president Roger Johnson wrote, repealing permanent law would remove the which would e bill force congress to act on a piece of legislation that provides a and y net for Farmers Ranchers and food and security ourhis country and protects nations natural resources. Ask unanimous consent to insert the Farmers Union letter record. Without objection. Its important to ensure that revisit programs every five years. These are farm laws of 1948 and 1949 if congress does not pass a new farm bill would go into effect. Have not passed a farm bill at this point it were on october 1, operating on the permanent law right now. Obviously, farming has changed a since then. And Everybody Knows these programs dont make a lot of sense today. Thats the point of law. Its the reason we Work Together pass a new farm bill because the alternative is not very acceptable. Compromise. Re a there are things that some eople like, some things that people dont like. That law encourages both groups no one together because wants to go back to the outdated of unworkable farm programs 1938 and 1949. Make changes, to improvements, and reforms over time as we discover that they needed. Mr. Speaker, i urge my colleagues to vote yes on the motion to instruct. I recertain the balance of my time. Oklahoma tleman from is recognized. I yield myself as much time as i might consume. Is recognized. Thank you, mrk. Overjoyed to rise today to be at this point in the are bill process where we on the verge of sitting down with our friends in the other put the beginning to final bill together. This has been a long and challenging process for both mr. F, the Ranking Member, peterson, and all members of the House Agriculture Committee. Weve touched on many subject matters. We have had the most amazing markup us and committee almost beyond belief. Twice weve been across the in this great body considering literally hundred plus amendments almost every it seems. From that process, we are now ready to go to conference with toer body. Thatdressed several things were decided on the floor of this house. Hile i appreciate mightily the opportunity to reassess the judgments of the body, i would this looking at the various points my good is nd, the Ranking Member exactly right. 1938 otion would restore and 1949 law as the Permanent Base farm bill. I suppose the average dairy were 40 cows. Hey were put in place on the assumptions of parity and production controls and production nd history. A lot of things that have long faded away in subsequent farm bills. I know my friends and a number good faith advocate and 1949 ep that 1938 law in place. My i would suggest to colleagues, the open process weve been through, the open about to have in conference, if we can come up good language that a can ity of both bodies agree on that a fellow down at he white house will sign if its good policy, maybe the conference should be given the option, as is now the case language ofarm bill using the 2013 farm bill as base. Senate retains the old permanent law from 38 and 49. At present, we dont do that in the house draft. To e have the ability discuss it, we have the ability to work on it. I personally think thats a good thing. The other portion of this and this reflects sincere differences of opinion both on he committee and on the floor ant how to address the fundamental nature of the nutrition title. House decided that the eauthorization should be for three years. Instead of what would be the concurrent onal authorization with the rest of the farm bill. I think every member has to vote in that conscious issue. The motion as tructured would take away the potential option for moving from the roosevelt the N Administration to present day and it would also that fiveyear authorization on the Nutrition Programs. Have to ght colleagues take into consideration factor. With that, mr. Speaker, i eserve the balance of my time and note to my colleague, i am my only speaker on this issue. From oklahoma n reserves. Recognized. N is i yield two minutes to our subcommittee member from california. The gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. Thank the gentleman from minnesota as well as the chair from oklahoma. Toise to support this motion instruct and let me tell you farm bill traditionally been one s place has of the most bipartisan efforts in. T we engage unfortunately, for over the last seemed that way. I think the importance of permanent law of 938 and 1949 is not to suggest that farming today is as it was then. Of course, its not. The fact is that it has always provide in the past in 2008 and back in the last three or four decades, sort of incentive necessary bipartisangether on a fashion to put together a bill that reflects not just current needs throughout this great country of ours today, but the necessary importance of the Nutrition Programs that go to so many of that are in society need. That brings me to the second point thats reflect in the enate motion thats relate flekted in this motion to nstruct, and that is bifurcating the Nutrition Programs. It makes no sense. Theres been a tradition here in i think has worked well maintaining the incredible food we cornucopia produce in this nation and never forgetting those in our society that are most in need. Marriage between the utrition programs, which is benefitted from the food that and armers and ranchers dare men produce to those who need a helping hand has worked well. Therefore, why should we separate it. Why should we have a threeyear Nutrition Program instead of the that marries an complements the ongoing farm programs . Those reasons, i support this motion to instruct. And let me finally say that the time has come. The time has come to put away the posturing, go to work, go to conference, and pass a farm bill that reflects americas needs. Gentleman from oklahoma reservings. Minnesota . An from im pleased to yield one from to the gentle lady ohio, the subcommittee Ranking Members. Gentlewoman from ohio is recognized for one minute. Mr. Speaker, the farm act, hr 2642, reauthorizes federal farm Rule Development and trade programs through fiscal year 2018 or five hr 3102, the , nutrition reform and work last unity act passed month reauthorized Nutrition Programs for three years. Problematic on is and it needs to be addressed. And feeding go hand in hand. A comprehensive farm bill connection. This we can restore this connection by ensuring a fiveyear for all programs that come under the farm bill. Recognizecolleague to the link between nutrition and farm communities. Support the farm bill that meets needs of all americans, i yield back. The gentleman yields back. Gentleman from oklahoma reserves. The speaker is recognized. Pleased to yield three to the gentle lady from washington. Mr. Speaker, i rise in strong support of this motion and thank the lieder for his work. Reauthorizing the programs for five years is sound policy and the right thing do. Farm bill has been built on a successful coalition of Rural Communities and members of congress who come together in a bipartisan way to foote responsible farm and policy. By authorizing farm policies for years but extending Nutrition Programs for three years were leaving with working families, seniors, and children, with great uncertainty when they need our help the most. Honest, changing the authorization of Nutrition Programs reduces the thered p of Congress Passing ha bipartisan farm bill that works producers,mers, food and families. So, too, does repealing farm law. For the last two years, congress has failed to act. Why are we making i want even to pass a final farm bill. Snap helps 47 million americans 22,000 in my district fford critical nutrition and nutritious food and not go hungry. Its proven to be efficient and with error rates at historic lows. It prevents them from falling and lifting them up through job training and education programs. To include was able a snap employment and Pilot Training program modelled after from my home state of washington in the nutrition bill that will go to congress. Ven at the height of the recession, 60 of those in washingtons programs found than half and more were off assistance in two years. Policy tocommon sense increase education and job training while decreasing the snap. R of people who need this bill has been hijacked long enough. To the bipartisan cooperative process in which the House Agriculture Committee farm bill. Lets not make things more difficult than they need to be. Jobsre sent here to do our to govern and pass policies that will grow our economy. Weve been failing at this responsibility. I urge my colleagues to both farm and Nutrition Programs for the full five years. Lets get to work and pass a bill. Year farm i yield back. The gentlelady yields back. Gentleman from minnesota is recognized. Im pleased to yield one gentleman of minnesota who i noel. He was a member of the 70s of the ag committee. One minute. The gentleman is recognized for one minute. I rise in support of the work thats been done here in this bill. I want to commend chairman lucas and Ranking Member cullen for the tireless work that both of you and your staffs and your subcommittee chairs put writing this legislation. Of manyits the product ears of a wealth of experience that has brought consumers and producers together, thats and rural people together. And is produced an abundant of food for people here over theountry and all world. American agricultural is one of the wonders of the world. This motion helps to keep that Great Success and forward. Moving and last but not least, i want o say how refreshing it was to be a part of that committee markup. Ou know, i was on a 30year, a 32year hiatus, the longest in history gentleman one additional minute. The gentleman is recognized additional minute. Ive been asked time and time again how things are different then. He way they were and believe me, theres a lot of differences, big and small. Refreshing the most things was to be a part of that committee open bipartisan, where eeling, mark up anybody and everybody got their moment, got the opportunity to offer their resolution. An opportunity to have a vote on it. Chairman,mend you, mr. For that kind of a sphere. Thats the kind of a spirit that country and s accounted for so much of our Great Success over the years. Our nk you and i thank Ranking Member and urge adoption of this motion. Thank you very much. Gentleman yields back. The gentleman from minnesota is recognized. The eased to yield to entle lady from connecticut, miss delaurel, three minutes. Gentle lady from connecticut is recognized for three minutes. I rise in support of this otion to instruct the Conference Committee to reauthorize americas nutrition and antihunger programs for years. At the moment, the majoritys farm bill extends Crop Insurance agricultural programs for five years. But the nutrition portion only reauthorizes food stamps and years. Programs for three thats two years for all kinds shenanigans the next time the programs are up for debate. We should stop that from happening now. When this majority severed the nutrition title from the farm longstandingoke a bipartisan compact on antihunger initiatives that decades, correcting farmers ams that help produce and to help poor hunger. S escape this arrangement separates farm programs from Nutrition Programs a permanent basis. They break the coalition that this bill. And quite honestly, its being at risk. Ut food stamps indeed, this is a shell game. Antihunger programs have been supported by epublicans and democrats all across the country, east coast, est coast, the heartland, because hunger is not a partisan issue. Interest ina vested ending hunger in our country. But with this farm bill, the House Majority has betrayed this fight. Cutting 40 billion from food stamps, the most mportant antihunger program, theyre telling over 4 million of our most vulnerable citizens, veterans, theors, disabled, they are saying to hem, you may not know where your next meal is coming from. Making this 40 million cut robbing poor while s of food, even continuing to dole out twice as in crop million subsidies. Thats taxpayer dollars to some of the nations wealthiest and agribusiness. In the Crop Insurance program, there that is the inequity we are talking about here. Condemnationbe a of what this House Majority is trying to do to the hunger and Nutrition Program. It has been near universal. Nutrition, home us, seniors, health care, even republican leaders
vimarsana.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.