The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“SQUARING RHETORIC WITH THE BUDGET” mentioning the U.S. Dept of Agriculture was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H2603-H2604 on April 3, 2017.
The Department is primarily focused on food nutrition, with assistance programs making up 80 percent of its budget. Downsizing the Federal Government, a project aimed at lowering taxes and boosting federal efficiency, said the Department implements too many regulations and restrictions and impedes the economy.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
SQUARING RHETORIC WITH THE BUDGET
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney) for 5 minutes.
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, perhaps the most powerful moment on Inauguration Day when the President gave his speech was when he reminded his supporters and the people who were assembled there that there were too many in America who were forgotten by the Federal Government; and that it was his promise that he would, in fact, remember them in terms of how he developed policies and programs during his time as President. It is a message which obviously he used quite effectively on the campaign trail. I think personally it is what propelled him into the White House.
Fast forward to where we are today, Mr. Speaker. It is hard to really square that rhetoric with the budget, which was submitted a couple of weeks ago by the Trump administration. The one agency which probably has the closest connection to rural America, that part of the country which he was addressing in his comments on Inauguration Day, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, was cut by 20 percent in terms of what came over from the White House.
Again, that was the third largest hit of any Federal agency of the entire Federal Government, the U.S. Department of Agriculture. It does so much in terms of helping farmers, small town America, and rural America in terms of dealing with the challenges which, again, I think, were just a huge, powerful undercurrent in last November's election.
In particular, the budget proposes eliminating completely the USDA Rural Development for drinking water and wastewater programs, which, again, for so many communities, is desperately needed.
Again, the property tax base of small town and rural towns across the country really cannot, by themselves, pay for sewer plants, pay for drinking water upgrades. I know because I come from one of those districts.
Even in Connecticut, the eastern half of the State, the Second Congressional District is small town, rural America for which the USDA Rural Development programs have been the lifeblood of making sure that community facilities and, again, a decent quality of life are possible.
So, for example, in towns like Vernon, Connecticut, where I am from, the Bolton Lake sewer plant was just finished a couple of years ago through USDA Rural Development. In the town of Putnam, $28 million over just the last couple of years, they just built a new fire station, the north Putnam fire station, with USDA Rural Development.
Stafford, Connecticut, there was a sewer plant upgrade. Windham, Connecticut, there was a new community health facility, which was a community facilities program, through USDA Rural Development. There were projects in Thompson, Connecticut, $2.4 million for water and sewer; Brooklyn, Connecticut, $1.3; Killingly, and the list goes on and on.
This budget, let's be clear, doesn't just give this program a little haircut or tailor it back. It eliminates it. It eviscerates this type of help which, again, rural communities, with their own resources, are incapable of accomplishing on their own.
Mr. Speaker, a budget is more than just a collection of numbers. It is a statement of your priorities. It is about what is important to you as an executive or as a legislator, and this budget fails that test for rural America, for the forgotten Americans which the President addressed on Inauguration Day.
I am confident that, in this Chamber, there is potential for a bipartisan group of Members to push back on this type of really just backwards budgeting and backwards priority.
Again, in terms of what my father told me a long time ago: Talk is cheap. Put your money where your mouth is. Put your budget where your rhetoric is.
On that score, this administration has failed that test. It has also failed it with the Sea Grant program for fishermen in America. Again, 90 percent of seafood that is consumed in this country is from overseas.
Even though we are a great maritime country, the Sea Grant program helps fishermen deal with all the complexity of the maritime domain in terms of regulations. I have seen it in Connecticut.
Again, my district borders on Long Island Sound. We have seen shellfish growers coming back to life because of the Sea Grant program administered through the University of Connecticut Avery Point Campus that has given these really hardworking, inspiring entrepreneurs the tools that they need to again give America a domestic seafood industry. It is just ridiculous when you look at the disproportion of imported seafood that is consumed on the tables of Americans all across the country.
Later today, 100 House Members, on a bipartisan basis, will be releasing a letter of support for the Sea Grant program. Congressman Zeldin, Republican from Long Island, and myself led that letter. Again, this is where our focus ought to be in terms of this country.
If you really care about making America great again, it is about giving people out there in the great heartland and in the coastal sections of this country the tools that they need to grow, thrive, innovate, and succeed. This budget fails that test.
____________________
