[COMPLETE] Comprehensive Agriculture Reform Act of 1981

[Gesar]

Is the representative from Missouri implying that the American farmer, the cornerstone of the American economy since before 1776, is in fact a freeloader? I'm sure your constituency would be thrilled to hear that.

[Rising Phoenix]

So instead of bringing up a valid reply to my concerns, you resort to putting words in my mouth. How mature of you, Mr. Wise.

But to be perfectly clear: No, I am not talking about the American farmer. I am talking about people whose companies are inefficiently managed and would go bankrupt without subsidies. Basic economics, Mr. Wise.

[Gesar]

Words that came directly of your mouth, my friend. Your 'basic economics' play directly into the hands of those who advocated the Stassen and Cargo reforms, while you abandon the very people who elected you.

Please, for the sake of the American people, refrain from further insults, unless you wish the Speaker of the House to take action.

[Rising Phoenix]

We are not discussing about Stassen or Cargo, we are talking about your "Comprehensive Agriculture Reform Act". My concern is that these additional subsidies will not be funnelled into the economy in a positive way but will instead benefit enterprises which are not in tune with market operations.

You have, so far, not given me a reason to think otherwise beyond "The Party you claim to support does this".

[Flamelord]

Speaking in my capacity as Representative, I would like to remind Representative Scott that the policies of the Stassen and Cargo Administrations are very much of relevance here, since we must look to the examples of the past when moving forward, and I would suggest keeping on subject rather than making this personal.

As it stands though, the Progressive Moderates find themselves in support of this Reform Act, farmers being the backbone of the MSA economy, and we do not share the concerns that have been voiced at this time, and we find ourselves against the proposed amendment.

10 Progressive Moderate votes IN FAVOR of this Act, and AGAINST the proposed amendment.

[Huojin]

The Socialist Party Workers' Caucus supports this measure as it was originally proposed, and against the amendment.

((4 Socialist-Worker votes IN FAVOR of the bill and AGAINST the amendment.))

[Huojin]

After having spoken with my distinguished colleagues in the House Progressive Conservative Caucus, including Congressman Williams, we have decided to allow a free caucus vote on this issue. Personally, however, I would like to express my support for the bill in its original format, and encourage all those who hold the American farming community in the high regard due to them to join me in doing likewise.

5 Progressive Conservatives AGAINST the amendment and IN FAVOR of the original bill [R. King (P-MO), S. Gilbert (P-IA), S. Hodges (P-KS), A. Patton (P-CO), K. Miura (P-CO)]

1 Progressive Conservative IN FAVOR of the amendment and AGAINST the original bill [K. Williams (P-MO)]

[Gesar]

With the passage of this bill through the House of Representatives, I must first congratulate my good friend Congressman Wise on following in the footsteps of Roosevelt, Wallace, and all other public servants who stood up for the needs of the average American farmer, and on creating a tripartisan initiative to ensure their right to prosperity wasn't stepped on. I wholeheartedly endorse this bill, and encourage my colleagues in the Senate to do likewise.

• Amending current fair practice laws in regards to producer-processor negotiations to provide a list of mutual obligations for good faith bargaining, and granting the Grain, Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration new authority over an "early warning" system to negotiate with those found not in compliance with federal law.
• Instituting a series of new conservation and environmental guidelines enforced by the Department of Agriculture, following a draft of said guidelines by the House Committee on Agriculture.
• Providing for tax breaks and one credit of increased subsidies to all agriculture landowners who follow the new conservation guidelines, and for a one-time expenditure of three credits on those without the income to adapt to the new standards.
• Establishing a Rural Development Administration under purview of the MSDA, tasked with the development and betterment of the quality of life in rural areas, with one credit in the federal budget now allocated to said administration.
• Allocates two credits of the federal budget to the creation, maintenance, and activity of a Department of Agriculture Risk Management Agency, whose administration will include the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, as well as state and county-level crop programs.
• Implements new insurance regulations for the Risk Management Agency, with guidelines based on income, nature of relief, and RMA advisory policy to ailing farmers.

Two Progressive Liberals vote IN FAVOR of Congressman Wise's bill.

[Coin]

I am disappointed Republican questions went unanswered in the House. Representatives Grant and Goodwin, both with a well-grounded knowledge on such matters, had asked for clarity on some parts of the bill, and I would very much welcome a response in the Senate.

I would once again therefore ask the bill's sponsors:

• 1. What obligations specifically would be placed on families, farmers and companies to ensure "good faith bargaining"?
  2. What are the environmental guidelines which will be pushed on farmers, and if they are in fact just guidelines, why does the bill state that they shall be "enforced"?
  3. What powers will the newly created RDA have specifically?
  4. To what extent would the likewise new DARMA require extra oversight and observation of individual farms by the federal government?

As this bill still must go through the committee stage in the Senate, I would urge those members to take these questions into consideration as well.

[OYID]

3 Socialist Votes IN FAVOR.

[Snacks]

2 Progressive Hard Left votes IN FAVOR

[Coin]

Spoiler

Show

Does this not need to go to committee, or be at least okay'd by the speaker before we vote?

From the announcements thread:

[SENATE] Comprehensive Agriculture Reform Bill - Completed House passage. Awaiting committee referral.

[Huojin]

Spoiler

Show

Does this not need to go to committee, or be at least okay'd by the speaker before we vote?

From the announcements thread:

[SENATE] Comprehensive Agriculture Reform Bill - Completed House passage. Awaiting committee referral.

[[Yeah, but people have apparently changed their minds about committee stuff, so in the interest of shit taking less time I've decided to remove committees entirely from the legislative procedure. They still have a role to play in congressional reports, general influence, prestige, impeaching people, and so on.

Sorry I didn't get a chance to tell you, decided last night.]]

[Smyg]

3 Republican Liberal votes IN FAVOR.

[Coin]

The lack of response to our questions I deem a slight to Congressional scrutiny of bills. This legislation is unclear, but the response I shall make is not.

This legislation is irresponsible in the present economic climate. Senators, we must balance the books and take care over spending, and increasing subsidies and spending so massively without any real economic reasoning will only deepen our deficit, imbalance our markets and increase the burden of taxation on every American under this administration.

I am aware that senior figures in the Progressive Party have pushed for this from the beginning of the year - but whatever benefits they believe it might bring to their own party, for the Mountain States of America, this legislation will be a mistake.

3 Conservative Republican votes AGAINST.