The purpose of this letter is to provide the Administration's
views on the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug
Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, FY 2000,
as reported by the House Committee. As the House develops its
version of the bill, your consideration of the Administration's
views would be appreciated.
The allocation of discretionary resources available to the House
under the Congressional Budget Resolution is simply inadequate to
make the necessary investments that our citizens need and expect.
The President's FY 2000 Budget proposes levels of discretionary
spending that meets such needs while conforming to the Bipartisan
Budget Agreement by making savings proposals in mandatory and other
programs available to help finance this spending. Congress has
approved and the President has signed into law nearly $29 billion of
such offsets in appropriations legislation since 1995. The
Administration urges the Congress to consider such proposals.
The Administration appreciates efforts by the Committee to
accommodate certain of the President's priorities within the 302(b)
allocation. However, the Committee bill is nearly $600 million, or
four percent, below the program level requested by the President.
The FY 2000 Budget would increase spending within the discretionary
caps for agriculture and other programs in the bill by 3.6 percent
over comparable FY 1999 spending. We urge the House to consider the
over $600 million in user fees proposed in the budget in order to
fund high-priority programs. Given the current period of financial
stress in the agricultural sector, now is not the time to reduce
assistance to farmers, ranchers, and rural residents.
The Administration would strongly oppose an amendment that may be
offered that would prohibit FDA from using funds for the testing,
development, or approval of any drug for the chemical inducement of
abortion. Such a prohibition is unacceptable. The determination of
safety and effectiveness is the cornerstone of the consumer
protection established by the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act
and must continue to be based on the scientific evidence available
to FDA. Prohibiting FDA from reviewing applications for particular
products could deprive patients of new therapies that are safer and
more effective than those currently approved. Additionally, this
provision could conceivably put women at risk because it might allow
clinical trials of such drugs to proceed without FDA supervision.
Below is a discussion of our specific concerns with the Committee
bill. We look forward to working with you to resolve these concerns
as the bill moves forward.
Food Safety Initiative
The Administration appreciates the Committee's support for the
President's Food Safety Initiative through increases provided in the
Food Safety and Inspection Service and the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA). However we are concerned that the Committee
has provided only $35 million of the $62 million increase over FY
1999 levels requested in this bill for the Initiative. American
consumers enjoy the world's safest food supply, but still too many
Americans get sick, and in some cases die, from preventable
food-borne diseases. The President's requested increase would
provide critical resources to expand USDA's food safety research and
risk assessment capabilities. We strongly urge the House to provide
full funding at the requested levels for these activities.
Women, Infants, and Children Program
The Committee bill would provide $4 billion for the Special
Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children
(WIC), $100 million below the President's request of $4.1 billion.
The Committee's mark would support a participation level of 7.3
million women, infants and children. Based on FY 1999 year-end
projections, this would mean cutting over 100,000 needy participants
off the program. The President's FY 2000 Budget would support an
average monthly participation level of 7.5 million, fulfilling the
bipartisan commitment to fully fund WIC. The Administration strongly
urges the House to fund WIC at the President's requested level.
Food and Drug Administration
While the Administration is very pleased that the Committee has
provided the largest single-year budget increase in the history of
the FDA, we are disappointed that the Committee has not funded the
full amount for tobacco programs and the seafood inspection program
transfer.
- The Administration is committed to Youth Tobacco Prevention
activities and urges the House to provide the requested increase
of $34 million for these programs. Every day, three thousand young
people become regular smokers. Reducing young people's tobacco use
would improve public health for generations to come. This is
particularly important in light of the recent decision of the
conferees on the Emergency Supplemental to permit states to retain
the entire amount secured from tobacco companies without any
commitment whatsoever from the states that those funds be used to
reduce youth smoking.
- The Administration urges the House to approve the proposal to
consolidate Federal seafood inspection activities. The House is
encouraged to fully fund the requested $3 million for training,
education, and other costs associated with the program's transfer.
Common Computing Environment
The Administration is extremely concerned by the Committee's
failure to fund the Common Computing Environment. Some in Congress
have criticized the Department of Agriculture (USDA) this year for
delays in providing the crop loss assistance funds to farmers that
were provided in P. L. 105-277, the FY 1999 Omnibus Consolidated and
Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act. Yet this bill would not
provide the funds needed to address the very problems that have
contributed to the delay. At a time when the farm community is under
financial stress and the demand for farm credit and other programs
is soaring, the need for timely and efficient service to producers
and rural residents has never been greater. Without the proposed $74
million in funding, progress to modernize the technology in USDA's
local field offices, create "one-stop shopping" for rural customers,
and promptly deliver the programs that Congress enacts with
available staffing levels will not be possible.
Conservation
The Committee bill would cut spending on key USDA conservation
programs by over $200 million from the President's request. The $26
million reduction in the Environmental Quality Incentives Program
(EQIP) would mean 13,000 farmers and ranchers not receiving needed
financial and technical assistance to stop soil erosion, improve
waste treatment in animal feeding operations, and implement other
voluntary conservation measures critical to protecting our natural
resources. To further advance this important work, including
addressing the significant backlog of farmers' requests for aid, the
Administration requested a $100 million increase in the EQIP
program.
Lands Legacy Initiative
The Committee has failed to fund the $78 million request for the
Farmland Protection Program, which is part of the Administration's
Lands Legacy Initiative. USDA needs these funds to help keep farmers
on their land by permanently protecting 130,000 acres of prime
farmland from development through easement purchases. We urge the
House to provide the $50 million in discretionary funds requested
for the program and to redirect savings from the Conservation Farm
Option to this program, as well as to the Wildlife Habitat
Incentives Program to assist over 3,000 farmers in protecting and
restoring wildlife habitat.
Environment
Several valuable environmental programs would be severely
underfunded by the Committee bill, and we urge the House to restore
funding for them. For example, the bill would limit enrollment in
the Wetlands Reserve Program to 120,000 acres, 80,000 acres less
than assumed in the budget. This limitation would mean that over 400
farmers would not receive assistance they desire to restore and
protect high-value wetlands on their property. In addition, the
Committee has not provided $12 million requested within the
Conservation Operations program, which would be used to assess soil
management's effects on carbon sequestration, and $5 million for
USDA's initiative to help communities make use of geospatial data to
make more informed land use decisions and promote smart growth.
Outreach For Socially Disadvantaged Farmers
The Committee bill does not provide the requested $7 million
increase for the Outreach for Socially Disadvantaged Farmers
program. This program has proven effective in mitigating the decline
in the number of minority farmers by increasing their participation
in agricultural programs, assisting them in marketing and
production, and improving the profitability of their farming
operations. USDA loan default rates have also improved in areas
where this program operates. The requested increase is needed to
expand this program beyond the limited areas it now operates, to
further these farmers' equal access and opportunity for success, and
to continue USDA's work to improve its civil rights performance.
Rural Development
The Administration appreciates the increases provided for various
rural development programs, such as for single-family housing loans
and water and wastewater loans and grants. However, several priority
programs have been underfunded, which would have a severe impact on
low-income rural residents and on progress in diversifying the rural
economy. For example, the $57 million reduction in the Rental
Assistance Program would mean that over 1,300 expiring rental
assistance contracts would not be renewed. This would leave over
1,300 very-low and low-income residents, most of whom are elderly
women or single mothers, facing a very difficult search for
affordable shelter. In addition, no funds are provided for rental
assistance in newly-constructed farm labor and other rental housing,
which would dramatically diminish the ability of newly constructed
units to target those most in need of housing.
The Committee bill would also slash guaranteed loans under the
Business and Industry program from the enacted and requested
guarantee level of $1 billion to $482 million, resulting in 20,000
fewer jobs created or saved in rural America through the program. In
addition, the Committee has blocked spending from the Fund for Rural
America, which would cause further reductions in high-priority rural
development and research projects.
Agricultural Research The Administration objects to the
deep cuts in competitive research grants and the large number of
earmarked, lower-priority research projects funded by the bill. The
Committee bill would reduce competitive grants funded through the
National Research Initiative by $14 million from the FY 1999 enacted
level and by $95 million from the request. When coupled with the
Committee's elimination of the $120 million in mandatory research
funding and other competitive grant funding, the bill would reduce
competitive research grants by over $275 million, or 66 percent,
from the requested level. These programs fund much of the most
important research needed to keep American agriculture competitive
into the 21st century and to improve the quality of life for all
Americans, such as research on food safety, new uses for
agricultural products, developing new markets for agricultural
trade, and improving the environment through efforts such as finding
alternatives to methyl bromide. We urge the House to increase funds
for competitive research and to reduce earmarks for lower-priority
programs.
Kyoto Protocol
The Committee has included a general provision that would prevent
funds provided in the bill from being used to implement the Kyoto
Protocol that was adopted in December 1997. As the Administration
has no intention of implementing the protocol prior to ratification,
we believe this language is unnecessary.
Food and Nutrition Service Research/Other
The Administration strongly objects to the provision of the
Committee bill that would provide funding for research on nutrition
programs only within the Economic Research Service. To address
program integrity and performance issues properly, it is crucial
that research on nutrition programs also occur in the context of the
program's administration. We urge the House to provide funding for
these activities within the Food and Nutrition Service.
The Administration also objects to the Committee not including
the President's request to provide funding for the school breakfast
demonstration programs and for Nutrition Education and Training.
We urge the House to approve the collection of $17 million in
additive user fees targeted to support the FDA's Pre-market
Application Review efforts for new medical devices, food and color
additives, and food contact substances. The proposed user fees would
allow the FDA to work with its regulated industries to reduce total
product development time and meet statutory review requirements.
Delays in getting new products to the market can postpone new
technologies that have the potential to save lives and save billions
of dollars in health care costs. The Administration would like to
work with Congress to make this proposal a reality.
Language Issues
The Administration objects to section 723 of the bill, which
represents an infringement on Executive authority. The provision
would require Congressional approval before Executive Branch
execution. The Administration will interpret this and other such
provisions to require notification only, since any other
interpretation would contradict the Supreme Court ruling in INS
vs. Chada.
Section 733 of the bill would effectively require the President
to provide legislative guidance to Congress by identifying the
legislation he would propose if a given recommendation were not
accepted. Such a requirement that the President spell out for
Congress his fallback position in the budget negotiation process
conflicts with the Constitution's separation of executive and
legislative powers, and specifically with the President's
constitutional authority to recommend to Congress legislation that
he deems appropriate.
|