Washington, DC – The House of Representatives is scheduled to vote on an appropriations bill today that is riddled with unnecessary provisions. In some cases, Congress has asked for millions of dollars above what the President has requested for the coming fiscal year. The House Committee on Appropriations has already passed the bill. Taxpayers for Common Sense, an independent watchdog against government waste, is calling for a reduction in spending, and in some cases, the termination of projects in this bill.

Here are some of the amendments to the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, for FY2000 Taxpayers for Common Sense supports:

DeFazio (D-OR) -Bass (R-NH) -Morella (R-MD) Amendment:  This amendment seeks to reduce funding for Wildlife Services lethal predator control program by about $7 million, taking the appropriation back down to the Administration request of $28.7 million.  About half of the funding for USDA's Wildlife Services predator control program is little more than a taxpayer handout to the Western livestock industry.  Instead of improving their own techniques, ranchers rely on a taxpayer-funded program to protect their livestock from predators.  This expensive subsidy to the western livestock industry continues despite the fact that is has been proven ineffective.

Chabot (R-OH) Amendments on the Market Access Program:  Two separate amendments on the Market Access Program (MAP) will be offered by Rep. Chabot (R-OH), seeking to scale back and eliminate the program.  A perennial target of fiscal conservatives, this program is too often simply corporate welfare for big agribusinesses that do not need taxpayer handouts.  MAP is designed to encourage the export of different agricultural products by funding consumer related activities that promote these products, such as trade shows, advertising campaigns, and other marketing tactics.  In theory, MAP has been reformed to benefit only small businesses, farmer cooperatives and trade associations.  But corporate agribusiness often ends up receiving benefits at taxpayer expense.  Moreover, many beneficiaries can afford their own advertising and promotion without digging into taxpayer pockets.

The second amendment would strike a provision from the bill that would again allow the mink industry to receive benefits through MAP.  The FY99 Omnibus Appropriations bill effectively eliminated the subsidy to the United States Mink Export Development Council or any mink industry trade association.  However, this year's Agriculture Appropriations bill would allow this subsidy to return, wasting millions in taxpayer dollars.

Miller (R-FL) Amendment:  The USDA's sugar program subsidizes sugar producers and processors through price supports, non-recourse loans, and severe restrictions on imports.  The 1996 Farm Bill also guarantees sugar prices at 18 cents a pound, regardless of the world market price.  As a result, the program has helped generate a huge surplus and can no longer guarantee these unrealistically high prices.  The solution the USDA has proposed is to buyback hundreds of thousands of tons of sugar in an effort to stabilize prices – all at taxpayer expense.  Recently, the USDA purchased 132,000 tons of sugar at a cost to taxpayers of more than $54 million, and more buybacks could cost taxpayers upwards of $100 million.  Representative Miller's (R-FL) amendment would limit the amount of money used to purchase excess sugar cane and sugar beets to the $54 million that the USDA has already spent. 

Sanford (R-SC) Amendment:  This amendment would eliminate $10 million in payments to wool and mohair farmers authorized in the recently passed crop insurance bill.  The entire wool and mohair program was originally phased out by Congress and the Administration beginning in 1994, but was revived in the FY99 Omnibus Appropriations bill.  The payments proposed in the crop insurance bill would simply make up for low market prices, and would not be for natural disaster assistance.