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.
“SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2019--MOTION TO PROCEED” mentioning the U.S. Dept of Agriculture was published in the Senate section on pages S1972-S1976 on March 26, 2019.
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:
SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2019--MOTION TO PROCEED
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the motion.
The bill clerk read as follows:
Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 15, H.R. 268, a bill making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2019, and for other purposes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nebraska.
Flooding in Nebraska
Mrs. FISCHER. Mr. President, I rise to speak to the historic flooding that has devastated hundreds of communities throughout my home State of Nebraska.
After a long, cold, and snow-filled winter, the catastrophic storm known as a bomb cyclone struck Western Nebraska with extreme blizzard conditions, while the central and eastern portions of the State were ravaged by record-setting floods. What were small streams became raging rivers, pouring over the banks, and breaching levees to flood towns and farmland.
The floods, which carried car-sized blocks of ice in some areas, isolated entire communities and deposited sand, mud, and debris over large areas of our land.
Homes have been destroyed, roads and bridges ripped apart, businesses and schools forced to close for an uncertain period of time. It is with a heavy heart that I say that three Nebraskans have lost their lives as a result of this storm: James Wilke, a farmer from Columbus; Aleido Rojas Galan of Norfolk; and Betty Hamernik of Columbus. I send my sincere condolences to their families. Their loved ones will not be forgotten.
Cities like Fremont and farms across the State became islands, leaving people and livestock stranded. The bomb cyclone has demolished thousands of acres of family farmland and ranchland, resulting in a devastating number of livestock deaths and demolished farms, grain bins, hay supply, and farm equipment.
One farmer recorded that he lost 700 of his hogs after 7 feet of floodwater swept through his land within minutes. A top concern for our ag producers is how do we replace ruined feed and the countless miles of washed-out fences.
The Nebraska Department of Agriculture initially projects that the damages will total a loss of $440 million in crop losses and another
$400 million in cattle losses. The devastation continues to grow as our farmers and ranchers across Nebraska assess lost land use and more livestock deaths.
I heard from ranchers in Central and Western Nebraska who fought through this blizzard during calving, and what I heard most was that even though they suffered losses, they knew of others who were worse off.
Farmers stood looking at once fertile land now covered with sand, mud, and unimaginably huge slabs and chunks of ice. They are worried what the future will bring.
I agree with Gov. Pete Ricketts, as he has called this catastrophic weather ``the most widespread disaster we have had in our state's history.''
Water from the Missouri River and Papio Creek has overwhelmed the southeastern side of Offutt Air Force Base and rendered some parts of the base as inoperable. I welcomed Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson to survey the flood damage at the base. Some buildings were filled with nearly 8 feet of water. Offutt leadership provided us with a preliminary damage assessment and discussed the response efforts that were successfully taken by the airmen.
At the flood's peak levels, one-third of the base was affected, causing tens of millions of dollars in damages. I will continue to work closely with Secretary Wilson to ensure that Offutt receives the funding to meet the needs of the base and to restore one of America's most important national security assets.
According to the Nebraska Emergency Management Agency, 81 of our 93 counties, 98 cities, and 5 Tribes have declared states of emergency. This covers over 59,000 square miles, which is about 76 percent of Nebraska.
To put this in perspective, well over 1.7 million Nebraskans are affected by this storm. That is more than 95 percent of our State's population.
The Governor has estimated that more than 2,000 homes and 340 businesses are damaged or destroyed. Significant damage to Nebraska's critical infrastructure is still being assessed at this time, but the Nebraska Department of Transportation released a preliminary estimate of $200 million that is needed to reconstruct hundreds of miles of roads and to repair or replace 15 bridges throughout the State.
Nebraska is hurting. However, as our Nation has seen the sheer power of this storm, I want America to understand the courage, strength, and resiliency Nebraskans have shown in response. Overwhelming loss and grief have been met with stories of bravery and heroic efforts of our neighbors and first responders. Ordinary Nebraskans, without any prior training, grabbed their personal boats, jet skis, trucks, and planes to save their neighbors who experienced life-threatening situations.
There have been countless stories of heroes who disregarded personal risk to help their neighbors in need--Nebraskans helping Nebraskans, neighbors helping neighbors.
Hundreds of volunteers in Fremont stepped forward to fill sandbags and create barriers to protect the city from floodwater. Local pilots in affected cities across Nebraska have flown their personal planes to deliver and evacuate people who have been surrounded by water.
In Boyd County, firefighters continued to stay on the job and rescue those in need, even after their own homes were flooded.
In the Nebraska Panhandle, one State patrol officer even scaled a barbed-wire fence to rescue a calf that was frozen to the ground.
Last week, a staff sergeant with the Nebraska Guard was helping lead rescue efforts in Fremont, where the town was left without fresh food and water for 2 days because of the surrounding floodwater. She said:
As we approached the town, I saw people coming out of their houses, standing on street corners, waving and clasping their hands in joy. . . . As we began carrying bottled water into the store, an elderly lady, who had been waiting for hours hugged me and was overcome with emotion. . . . She was so thankful and relieved knowing that even in difficult and trying times, there are Nebraskans doing things ``the Nebraska way'' by watching out for our most vulnerable citizens.
That is who we are. These stories are inspiring, and they speak to the character and integrity of my fellow Nebraskans.
I have been traveling across Nebraska to see the impact of this disaster firsthand.
In Omaha, I joined Governor Ricketts at the Nebraska Strong phone-a-
thon for relief and support for flood victims. The event, sponsored by the Nebraska Broadcasters Association, raised nearly a half million dollars to benefit the American Red Cross in Nebraska and Southwest Iowa.
In Winslow, I met with families and residents of the area who had been hit hard by the floods. Every structure in that town was flooded. I spoke to a mother of three who told me she had just 15 minutes to gather her children and her family's belongings before the floodwaters entered their home.
Winslow Volunteer Fire Chief Zachary Klein, informed me that his team was able to get boats to help with their recovery efforts. Chief Klein and his team saved 29 local residents from their flooded homes.
In Plattsmouth, the town's water treatment facility is currently powered down and inaccessible. Like many affected communities across Nebraska, their main concern is being able to gather the facts and to make decisions about how they can move forward with their lives.
In Valley, I toured the devastation in the community with Mayor Carroll Smith and Councilwoman Cindy Grove. Large piles of wreckage can be found everywhere in town as people begin that cleanup process, but the people of Valley are resilient. Residents have started a donation center where people in need can get clothes, equipment, and other supplies as needed. More than 150 people have signed up as volunteers.
I also spent some time with local residents and city and county personnel in North Bend. The community is understandably concerned about how their community will rebuild their lives, but it also warmed my heart to listen to stories of how the town is pulling together to support one another.
Time and again, I heard of how proud the North Bend community is of their volunteers who are managing donations and distributing food and supplies to those in need.
I want all Nebraskans to know that my office stands ready to help in any way that we can. Recently, I led the Nebraska delegation in a letter to President Trump outlining the extent of damage to our State and the projected cost of recovery. I want to thank the President for his rapid approval of Governor Ricketts' expedited request for Federal disaster assistance.
Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue and I discussed the crisis that ag producers are facing. He assured me that USDA is committed to assisting our farmers and ranchers in any way they can. I also visited with Secretary of Transportation Elaine Chao by phone to share with her how this historic storm has damaged our critical infrastructure. The Secretary and the Department of Transportation, as a whole, are ready to help Nebraska.
I spoke with Major General Bohac to discuss the Nebraska National Guard's flood response, the ongoing state of emergency, and ways my office can assist with their relief efforts. In the coming days and weeks, I will continue to work closely alongside Governor Ricketts to assist in coordinating Federal relief efforts for our State. I have spoken to President Trump and shared with him the needs of our State as we recover. He reassured me that Nebraskans will receive the help we need.
I take great pride in the way our State has pulled together in this disaster. To know communities like Fremont, Plattsmouth, Columbus, Ashland, Norfolk, Spencer, or Niobrara is to know the definition of strength in unity and an unwavering pride in your State and country. Above the floodwaters, you will still see the American flag waving proudly in all of these communities. If you know Nebraska as I do, you know our State is filled with towns like these from one side to the other.
I am proud to represent our great State every day in the U.S. Senate. Though much is uncertain for the victims of this disaster, our communities are rallying to endure and recover from these historic weather conditions.
I close by offering my sincere thanks to our State and local officials, our emergency responders, and National Guard, who are working around the clock to provide lifesaving assistance to our citizens in need.
We have much work to do, but Nebraskans are resilient, we are tough, and we are compassionate. Hour by hour and day by day, we will get through this difficult chapter in our State's history, and we will remain Nebraska Strong.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. McSally). The Senator from Iowa.
The Green New Deal
Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, I appreciate the majority leader's bringing the Green New Deal to a vote today so that every Senator had an opportunity to go on record. I voted no.
Some of my Democratic colleagues may argue that a vote against the Green New Deal demonstrates an unwillingness to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and to tackle serious environmental issues of the day, but nothing could be further from the truth.
Contrary to popular belief, the United States is not a bad actor on the world stage. The United States has reduced its carbon emissions by 758 million metric tons per year since 2005. This is the largest decline of any country in the world.
Meanwhile, China's and India's carbon emissions have grown. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, U.S. consumption of biofuels and other renewable energy has more than doubled from 2000 to 2017. The United States will only continue to increase renewable energy consumption through 2050 as we see more investment in wind, solar, biomass, geothermal, and other alternative energies.
Let's be very clear. A ``no'' vote on the Green New Deal is a vote against a government takeover of our economy that would stifle economic growth, bankrupt our Nation, and endanger the prosperity of all Americans. A ``no'' vote is a vote in favor of continuing an open and free economy that has made America the richest country in the world. We find that the best way to make environmental improvements is to use the wealth of a nation to accomplish that goal, and as a nation becomes more wealthy, the more apt it is to have the ability to protect the environment.
The fact is that the Green New Deal is wholly unrealistic in its goal of obtaining net-zero carbon emissions within 10 years. We are not going to be successful at reducing our dependence on fossil fuels and lowering our carbon emissions through virtue signaling. That is all the Green New Deal boils down to--virtue signaling. It is all lofty goals and aspirations with no concrete plan or concern as to its feasibility.
It is easy to support a vaguely worded, nonbinding resolution calling on the Federal Government to accomplish certain goals, but guess what. That is us--we, in the Congress. Congress is part of the Federal Government with the responsibility under our Constitution to write the laws. If Members of Congress have concrete ideas about what the Federal Government should be doing, they should introduce real legislation detailing who should do what to accomplish these goals.
Instead of a ``green dream,'' as Speaker Pelosi called the Green New Deal, we need to focus on commonsense, bipartisan approaches that have an actual shot at making a difference. In other words, a resolution is a resolution; it is not a law. It doesn't accomplish anything. It states these goals that we ought to seek, but nobody has come forth with a concrete plan to accomplish those goals.
Cutting taxes is an effective way to encourage positive, environmentally conscious ways to produce electricity and fuel. This is what I have sought to do as a leader on renewable and alternative energy production for decades now. I was the original author of the production tax credit for wind energy in 1992. It won me an award as the father of wind energy, and now, I suppose, 25 years later, I am the grandfather of the wind energy approach.
During my leadership on the Senate Finance Committee during the early 2000s, I oversaw the establishment, enhancement, and renewal of numerous tax incentives that promote clean energy from sources such as wind and solar to renewable fuels like biodiesel, to energy efficient buildings, homes, and appliances.
Unlike the aspirational goals of the Green New Deal, these proposals I have been a part of are real, proven, bipartisan actions that I helped shepherd into law to make the United States more energy independent and, at the same time, improve our environment.
Renewable energy is a very smart investment and the fastest growing source of electricity generation in our country. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, utility-scale solar power is expected to increase by 10 percent in 2019--that is in 1 year alone--
while wind power is expected to surpass hydropower for the first time. As prices continue to fall, the economic benefits from these clean energy investments will obviously increase.
Already, Iowa leads the Nation for its share of renewable energy. Iowa's wind generates nearly 37 percent of the State's electricity from wind, and the State's largest utility in America is set to generate 100 percent of its electricity within just a few years. Iowa ranks first in the Nation in the production of ethanol and biodiesel. Iowa alone accounted for over 26 percent of the entire U.S. ethanol production and over 17 percent of the U.S. biodiesel production.
The solar industry in Iowa continues to mature and ranks 17th nationally. The bottom line is that renewable energy helps diversify Iowa's economy. It creates jobs in rural America and strengthens U.S. energy independence. As far as the jobs are concerned, I believe there are about 7,000 just for wind energy and 43,000 for biofuels.
Instead of trying to build on these and other proven policies, the authors of the Green New Deal are more concerned with trying to correct all the ills they see in the U.S. economic system and even our broader society.
So it is not just about environment. Here is a list of the grievances they want to attack in the name of an environmentally sustainable economy: life expectancy, wage stagnation, economic mobility, income inequality, systemic injustices, the oppression of indigenous people, the unhoused, and the list goes on and on and on. Just in case I might be taken as a person who doesn't care about all of those things I just listed--in other words, don't get me wrong; these are important issues that deserve our attention as a nation, but it is simply not realistic to believe that they can all be solved through a plan that targets environmental sustainability.
Of course, since no crisis should be allowed to go to waste, every aspect of the progressive agenda must be implemented to fend off the threat of climate change. According to an analysis by the American Action Forum, a portion of the so-called Green New Deal plan focuses on eliminating carbon emissions. That program, by itself, would cost between $8.3 and $12.3 trillion. Of course, that is assuming it is followed up with actual legislation that attempts to implement the goals it lays out, and I have pointed out that all of that legislation is not being brought forward.
Those figures account for only a fraction of the Green New Deal's cost. The portion of the progressive economic agenda that includes enacting universal healthcare, free college tuition, a Federal jobs guarantee program, and much more is estimated to cost somewhere between
$43 and $81 trillion. So that would put the total cost of the Green New Deal at somewhere between $51 and $93 trillion over the first 10 years.
Now, $93 trillion--that is kind of hard to imagine. Can you imagine that? That is more money than the U.S. Government has spent in its entire 230-year history. How would we even go about paying for it?
Several Democrats have floated ideas or introduced bills that have gone along the lines of taxing the wealthy. That, I assume, may make up some of their possibilities. Earlier this year, the House author of the Green New Deal suggested imposing tax rates of 70 percent or more on earnings over $10 million. Here in the Senate, Senator Warren has proposed an annual wealth tax of 2 percent on assets of $50 million and 3 percent on assets of over $1 billion. Not to be outdone, Senator Sanders has introduced legislation to supercharge the death tax with rates as high as 77 percent of estates exceeding $1 billion. More recently, Representative DeFazio reintroduced his proposal to tax securities transactions.
Think about this. Even if we assume that these proposals would not have detrimental economic or behavioral effects--and we all know they would--these taxes would not come anywhere close to covering the price tag of the Green New Deal. The Washington Post reported that a 70-
percent tax rate on incomes over $10 million could theoretically raise
$720 billion over 10 years. Senator Warren's own estimates suggest her annual wealth tax proposal could raise as much as $2.75 trillion in a decade. According to Senator Sanders, his death tax proposal would raise $315 billion over a decade. Congressman DeFazio's transaction tax is estimated to bring in $777 billion. So adding up all that, even under the rosiest assumptions, these Senators' proposals combined would only cover between 5 and 10 percent of the Green New Deal's cost.
The fact is, there are not enough millionaires and billionaires in the United States to cover the price tag, so eventually they start taxing the middle class. These socialist ideas remind me of former United Kingdom Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's wise observation that
``the trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.''
Many of the Green New Deal backers appear to realize this and have even suggested that offsetting its cost is unnecessary. According to these authors of the Green New Deal, it can be paid for simply by printing more money. Yes, you heard me right--printing more money. Their solution is the same as what has been tried by every bankrupt third world country around the world--just crank up the printing presses.
The poster child for this fantasy in the world today, at least, is Venezuela, a country rich with great economic vitality in the 1970s--
probably even earlier than the 1970s--but that economy has been driven into the ground by socialist policies, financed in large measure by churning out currency, leading to multimillion percent inflation rates.
Now that Senators have had an opportunity to go on record in support or opposition to the resolution, I hope the nonsense that is the Green New Deal will be put to rest. Hopefully, we can all now rally around sensible, proven policy to secure our energy independence and to improve the environment. From my point of view, that is the United States continuing on the success we have already had but standing as an example for China, India, Indonesia, Brazil, and other countries.
Affordable, clean energy is key to moving the United States forward. A good starting point would be to enact tax extenders legislation that I introduced last month with Ranking Member Wyden. This legislation would extend nearly a dozen separate practical and proven incentives for renewable energy and energy efficiency. Investing in alternative forms of clean energy is good for the environment, good for national security and energy independence, and good for job creation, particularly in rural America. It is good for economic development and surely good for the taxpayers, and it is obviously good for attacking climate change.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. PERDUE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
H.R. 268
Mr. PERDUE. Madam President, I rise tonight to talk about something we don't see very often in this body. We saw a bipartisan effort today to move to regular order, to actually put a bill on this floor, to debate its merits, to make amendments to it, and to try to find a compromise position to do the right thing for the people across many States in our country that have been devastated by untoward disasters just in this last year.
As many of us know all too well, our country suffered a series of unprecedented natural disasters over the last year. Actually, it is a trend that has gone on over the last couple of years. We have had a series of unprecedented disasters.
In July, August, and November 2018 alone, wildfires in California displaced hundreds and even thousands of people and destroyed thousands of homes in a very short period of time. These fires were the deadliest and most destructive in California history.
In August 2018, Hurricane Lane dropped 52 inches of rain over 5 days, causing heavy flooding and mudslides. It ranks as the second wettest tropical cyclone in U.S. history, behind Hurricane Harvey in 2017.
In September of 2018, Hurricane Florence caused catastrophic damage in North and South Carolina. It flooded homes, schools, and businesses. A week after the hurricane, major highways were still underwater.
In November 2018, a 7.0 magnitude earthquake hit Alaska and damaged highways and buildings and displaced hundreds, if not thousands, of individuals.
Earlier this year, an EF-4 tornado flattened Lee County, AL, and took 23 lives, including 3 children, and injured hundreds of others.
Today, our friends in the Midwest are suffering from devastating flooding. Roads have been washed away, fields look like lakes, and many cattle have been drowned. As a matter of fact, this flood happened just at the wrong time--during calving--and we know that thousands of calves have been lost.
My home State of Georgia has not been immune and is indeed at this moment reeling from a natural disaster as well.
On October 10, 2018, Hurricane Michael made landfall on the Florida Panhandle with a category 4 hurricane. It was one of the strongest storms to ever hit the United States. Over the next few hours, Hurricane Michael barreled through Florida, tore through southwest Georgia, and moved on to North Carolina and South Carolina, doing immense damage. In a matter of hours, homes were flattened, tracts of timber destroyed, crops were ruined, and people's lives were radically changed forever. This hurricane hit exactly at a time when most crops were ready to be harvested. Cotton, peanuts, pecans, timber--it was devastating. Nothing was spared.
Today, agriculture is Georgia's top industry and our No. 1 economic driver. Before the hurricane, farmers in my State were expecting a record harvest in many commodity categories. Instead, just at the time when harvesting was starting, Hurricane Michael hit, and crops were completely destroyed across most of our State.
Our farmers are resilient, however. They have weathered droughts before and low-yield harvests and poor farm economies. They suffered through several years of low commodity prices as well. But they never ever faced anything quite like this before. The strength and magnitude of this hurricane indeed was unprecedented.
Shortly after the hurricane hit, President Trump, Vice President Pence, and the Secretary of Agriculture all came down to Georgia with Senator Isakson and me to view the damage. Together, we toured the State, saw the devastation, and heard directly from farmers about the tough road to recovery. It was interesting that these farmers were not asking for anything; they were actually praying for their brethren in other parts of the country who were also being ravaged by these disasters.
The scene we saw that day is something I personally will never forget. We visited one of the largest pecan farms in the world--
certainly in Georgia--and saw the damage in their fields. At this one farm alone, these two brothers who started from nothing had 800 acres of beautiful pecan trees. These maturing pecan trees were completely uprooted at the very time when the heavy harvest was sitting right there on the trees. In fact, when I was there, you couldn't walk on the ground; it was just a solid carpet of pecans on the ground, literally ruined.
Crop insurance will help with this year's losses somewhat, but agriculture insurance only covers part of the loss. What it won't cover are the trees that were damaged, particularly in this 800-acre tract that we personally saw with the Vice President.
Here, there is no insurance. Today in the agriculture industry, there is no way to insure this machine called a pecan tree that produces pecans. You can insure part of the crop, but you can't insure the trees. It takes about 10 years--some varieties, a little less, but about 10 years to start getting a crop from those new trees. So you can see for them that this is truly a generational loss.
When they saw the devastation, the Trump administration told Georgia farmers and other farmers around the Southeast from this particular hurricane that they would have their backs, and they have moved to do just that.
President Trump said: ``Farmers really got hurt, especially in Georgia, but we're going to get it taken care of.'' Vice President Pence said: ``We will rebuild these crops and these communities. We will restore southwest Georgia. We will restore the Sunbelt region bigger and better than ever before.'' They have acted consistently since October of last year.
The State of Georgia immediately stepped up and offered tax credits, short-term financing, bridge loans, and other forms of direct assistance to those impacted. The Federal Government has been a little slower to act. It has been 5 months since Hurricane Michael ravaged the Southeast, and this Congress has done very little to help people who are barely hanging on right now. That is shameful. It is time to do something about it. This aid should have been funded as soon as we had an estimate of the damage, which was really a mere few weeks after the hurricane came through in October. Instead, disaster aid got caught up in a partisan spending battle here in the Senate, and in typical Washington fashion, Congress kicked the can down the road.
It is totally unacceptable that Washington's intransigence continues to threaten the livelihood of the very people who sent us here to represent them. If we don't help these people right now, they may lose their businesses, their farms, their livelihoods, and, in some cases, their families through no fault of their own. That is the reality we are facing here.
Every night, farmers in my State get on their knees and pray that help will soon come. They pray their lenders will show compassion when their bridge loans are maturing, as they are, literally, today. They pray they will not go bankrupt. They pray they will be able to provide for their families. And yes, they are praying for other people around the country who have been devastated just like they have.
Senator Johnny Isakson has been a workhorse in this entire effort. He and I, along with several other Senators from southeastern States, have introduced this stand-alone supplemental disaster relief bill that we just had a vote on merely an hour ago. This bill passed the motion to proceed 90 to 10. I am very proud to be a Member tonight of a body that has agreed to put this on the floor and to do what the Senate is supposed to do, and that is to debate a bill, amend it, and then vote on its passage.
This particular bill, among other things, for States like California and other parts of the country, includes $3 billion for agriculture. This is specifically disaster relief for our farmers and ranchers around the country. These funds are for States like Georgia, Florida, Alabama, the Carolinas--that is North Carolina and South Carolina--Alaska, Hawaii, California, Iowa, Nebraska, Missouri, and Kansas, which are all battling natural disasters right now and over the past year.
I would also add that our colleagues from the upper Midwest have really moved very quickly and have been very reasonable so that we can include in the language here flexibility to make sure their needs are met, as well.
I also want to take a moment to thank our colleagues here for being very reasonable about needs in other parts of our country.
I really think that what the President has done with Puerto Rico needs to be called out. The Trump administration has been resolute in their support of the people in Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria and Hurricane Irma hit the island. To date, $40 billion has already been allocated, and another 50 is potentially going their way--depending on how things happen in the next 5 years or so--to help Puerto Rico recover from recent hurricanes. That is a potential of over $90 billion.
To ensure Puerto Rico continues to have the resource it needs to recover, this disaster relief bill includes $600 million in additional nutritional assistance for the most vulnerable families in Puerto Rico since that relief, that aid, actually runs out this week.
Some Members of this body argue we should allocate more funding for Puerto Rico. I would remind them that this is the same level of funding that they have previously supported. In addition, Puerto Rico's own representative in Congress, Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon, supports our bill. She said this ``bill puts my constituents one step closer to receiving the assistance they need to continue the long path toward recovery, and I look forward to its swift passage.''
This bipartisan disaster relief package is a win for our farmers. It is a win for families and businesses who were devastated by historical hurricanes in the Southeast and wildfires in the West. It is a win for the people in Puerto Rico, whom the President has previously helped.
Every day we continue debating this issue is a day that people across the country face crippling uncertainty. Today, I call on each of us to put our individual political interests aside and do the right thing for these people who are depending on us right now. Time is of the essence. People back home are counting on us to get this done.
In conclusion, this discussion reminds us of a bigger issue. The funding we are debating here today is, by definition, borrowed money. Because of Washington's intransigence over the last 4 years and its inability to get its financial House in order over the last few decades, coupled with this debt crisis we have today, we are losing the ability to do the right thing, whether it is medical research, infrastructure, education, or responding to national disasters. Moving forward, we will not be able to continue dealing with these emergencies and crises if we don't have a functioning Federal Government that can pay its bills and keep its financial house in order. Today I ask each of my colleagues here for their individual support on this disaster relief package.
I also ask that going forward we have a serious debate about tackling this debt crisis and responsively funding the Federal Government on time every year so we can help the American people when they are counting on us the most.
I yield the floor.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. PERDUE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
