Coming up next on cspan, newsmakers with agricultural secretary tom vill sack vilsack. Tom vilsack joins us. Two reporters to help us with them from we have bloomberg years news. This week the House Senate Farm bill to go shooters held their first session. House let me what backup a little bit, the treasury secretary said it was important to have a farm bill. Is the white house going to negotiations,he to help settle that issue . The senator has repeatedly said he wants the house to help solve that issue. Is important to not focus on numbers, which in washington dc, we focus on and try to figure out what is the right number, i think that is the wrong question. I think the right question is what is the right policy . Theusda will be engaged to extent that the committees need us to be engaged to try and make sure that the policy is right. Theres obviously some concern on the part of some about the and requirements in snap whether they need to be more stringent or more strict. I think it
Scenes, and helping them out policywise. What does the house want to do ultimately, because they separated the farm bill from the food stamp bill, and tackle them separately. The houseot know what is going to do, because we have a very factionalized house of representatives. They say keep the food stamps and the farm bill separate raid separate. A lot of the institutions on capitol hill see themselves as them again the world. Against the world. Trying tosswoman is be a good soldier, and the democrats are trying to get a bill through, but they know that the snap program is very important. If they had for different figured out how to bridge these gaps, we would have progress. The house and Senate Conferees are trying to negotiate some sort of deal on what they call on the ground common ground. Does the farm bill get thrown in that . Could be part of the budget agreement, and that is a good and bad thing for the senate committee. It is good because it is part of the bill, but then they lo
Can model and maybe i can go to an example. It works and it works really well. It is a profit maker. It is a government arm, but a phenomenal example of how all things government are not bad, right . We need to figure out how we do that for infrastructure. We need to have a summit approach to that topic alone, because i think ports and rail and airports and all that, this is becoming a bottleneck. The Positive Side is the reason our Energy Market has become what it has become is because we have infrastructure. This countrys pipeline and Storage Networks and energy, which is why it is so important that we do not disable that that is why we have a Domestic Energy sector that is so competitive, to make a point. There is Proof Positive to why your question is something we ought to tackle. We move products all around the world, and our supply chain is world class. It rides on infrastructure, and and we see infrastructure across the world, and we have opportunities to improve the infrastruct
Is important to not focus on numbers, which in washington dc, we focus on and try to figure out what is the right number, i think that is the wrong question. I think the right question is what is the right policy . The usda will be engaged to the extent that the committees need us to be engaged to try and make sure that the policy is right. Theres obviously some concern on the part of some about the work requirements in snap and whether they need to be more stringent or more strict. I think it is important for folks to recognize we have work requirements in the snap program, and those really only apply to a bout eight percent of the participants in the program. The reason they have not been utilized recently is because governors and state legislators around the country have chosen to weight those waive those requirements during a tough economy. If they need our assistance, we are ready and willing, and ble. Doesnt the white house inc. Needs help think it needs help . I think the rankin
The speaker pro tempore the gentlewoman is recognized. Ms. Brown mr. Speaker, i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks in strong opposition to the farm bill rule and the underlying bill because it hurts the children of america. The speaker pro tempore without objection, the gentleman from massachusetts. Mr. Mcgovern mr. Speaker, i the i yield to gentlewoman from wisconsin, ms. Moore, for unanimous consent request. The speaker pro tempore the gentlewoman is recognized. Ms. Moore mr. Speaker, i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks in strong opposition to the farm bill rule and the underlying bill because it hurts americas children. The speaker pro tempore without objection, the gentleman from massachusetts. Mr. Mcgovern mr. Speaker, i yield to the gentleman from North Carolina, mr. Butterfield, for unanimous consent request. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman is recognized. I butterfield mr. Speaker, have a parliamentary inquiry. Mr. Speaker, i have fin