tv [untitled] July 12, 2012 7:00am-7:30am EDT
violating provision of the commodity title, but alas, it was something that was no longer defendable in the body and changes had to be made and we are dramatically, dramatically changing the commodity title in that regard. now we come to the nutrition side of the equation. many of the same reasons that i'm sensitive about foreign policy, i'm also very sensitive about the nutrition policy. many of you heard me point out they represent a district that was the subject of mr. steinbeck's book back in the 1930s where the conditions, of course, by economic policy conditions both ag and otherwise went com plealy awry and what my parents and grandparents' generation went through. many of the descendants of what had been my neighbors at the time are your constituents in other places and i got out of college in the 1980s just in time to watch bad energy and ag
policy once again, crater the economy of my district and of my region. so i'm very sensitive about trying to address good ag policy, but we have jurisdiction in this committee, good commodity title policy and good nutrition policy. i sincerely believe the language we have in front of us now, those individuals who buy income and buy asset who will qualify for the benefits you automatically receive in many occasions with the categoric eligibility circumstance will have to -- who once they qualify under the regular process will receive the help they need. that is my intention. it's not my intention to be part of an effort to make anyone who qualifies suffer, but by the same token we are trying to achieve savings here and we are trying to compel reforms here
that touch all areas of this comprehensive farm bill. >> i think that the nutrition title achieves that, and i say very respectfully to my friends who have the strongest of emotions, the strongest of passions, i hope you are wrong. but i believe this is the direction you must go in order to restore confidence in these programs to our fellow citizens across this whole country. i sincerely believe that, so with that i ask my colleagues to oppose amendment number 21 and yield back the balance of my time and ask if there are any other requests for recognition, seeing none we'll now proceed to vote on amendment number 21 by mr. mcgovern. all those in favor of amendment number 21 signify so by saying
aye. >> all those in opposition to amendment 21 signify so by saying no. >> no! >> by my tin ear i believe the nos have it. mr. gentleman ask for a recorded vote? >> a recorded vote is ordered. the clerk will call the roll. >> mr. goodlat? >> no. >> mr. goodlat, no. mr. johnson? >> no. >> mr. johnson, no. >> mr. king? >> no. >> mr. king, no. >> mr. nagbower. mr. conaway? >> no. >> mr. conaway no. >> mr. fortenberry? >> no. >> mr. thompson, no. mr. rooney, mr. rooney no. >> mr. stutsman, no. >> mr. gibbs? >> no. >> mr. gibbs no. mr. austin scott? >> no. >> mr. austin scott, no.
>> mr. tipton? mr. tipton, no. >> mr. sutherland, no. >> mr. crawford, no. >> mr. crawford, no. [ inaudible ] mr. gibson? >> mr. gibson, no. >> mr. hol green, no. >> mr. hol green no. >> mr. schilling? >> no. >> mr. ribbel? no. mr. peterson, mr. peterson, no. >> mr. holden? no. >> mr. holden, no. >> mr. mcintyre? >> no. >> mr. bosswell, yes. >> mr. bosswell, yes. >> mr. baca. >> yes.
>> mr. baca, yes. mr. cardoza. >> yes. >> mr. cardoza, yes. >> mr. david scott, yes. >> mr. david scott, yes. mr. kwaar, yes. >> mr. costa? >> yes. >> mr. costa, yes. mr. wallace? >> yes. >> mr. wallace, yes. mr. schrader? >> no. >> mr. schrader no. >> mr. kissel? >> yes. >> mr. kissel, yes. >> mr. owens? >> mr. owens no. mrs. pingry? >> yes. >> mr. pingry, yes. >> mr. courtney? >> yes. >> mr. courtney, yes. >> miss fudge? >> yes. >> miss fudge, yes. >> mr. sublime. >> yes. >> mr. sublime, yes. >> miss sewell? >> yes. >> miss sewell, yes. >> mr. nagbower? >> no. >> mr. nagbower, no. mr. chairman?