Report of the Committee on Agriculture, House of Representatives (together with minority report)

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Report of the Committee on Agriculture, House of Representatives (together with minority report)
Physical Description:
vi, 23 p. : ; 24 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
United States -- Congress. -- House. -- Committee on Agriculture
Publisher:
U.S. Govt. Print. Off.
Place of Publication:
Washington
Publication Date:

Subjects

Genre:
federal government publication   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )

Notes

Additional Physical Form:
Also available in electronic format.
Statement of Responsibility:
to the Committee on the Budget pursuant to the Congressional budget and impoundment control act, March 1976.
General Note:
At head of title: 94th Congress, 2d session. Committee print.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 025781021
oclc - 02216411
System ID:
AA00025934:00001

Full Text
|g;-q

94th Congress COMMITTEE PRINT
2d Session J







REPORT

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
(Together with Minority Report) TO THE

COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET PURSUANT TO THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET AND IMPOUNDMENT CONTROL ACT




LID




N C.**
MARCH 1976 Aft
s





Printed for the use of the Committee on Agriculture


U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
68-177 WASHINGTON: 1976
















COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
THOMAS S. FOLEY, Washington, Chairman
W. R. POAGE, Texas, Vice Chairman WILLIAM C. WAMPLER,1'Virg. .
E DE LA GARZA, Texas Ranking Minority Member
JOSEPH P. VIGORITO, Pennsylvania KEITH G. SEBELIUS, Kansas
WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina PAUL FINDLEY, Illinois
ED JONES, Tennessee CHARLES THONE, Nebraska
JOHN MELCHER, Montana STEVEN D. SYMMS, Idaho
DAWSON MATHIS, Georgia JAMES P. JOHNSON, Colorado
BOB BERGLAND, Minnesota EDWARD R. MADIGAN, Illinois
GEORGE E. BROWN, JR., California PETER A. PEYSER, New York
DAVID R. BOWEN, Mississippi MARGARET M. HECKLER, Massachusetts
CHARLES ROSE, Ncrth Carolina JAMES M. JEFFORDS, Vermont
JERRY LITTON, Missouri RICHARD KELLY, Florida
JOHN BRECKINRIDGE, Kentucky CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa
FREDERICK W. RICHMOND, New York TOM HAGEDORN, Minnesota
RICHARD NOLAN, Minnesota W. HENSON MOORE, Louisiana
JAMES WEAVER, Oregon ALVIN BALD US, Wisconsin JOHN KREBS, California TOM HARKIN, Iowa JACK HIGHTOWER, Texas BERKLEY BEDELL, Iowa MATTHEW F. McHUGH, New York GLENN ENGLISH, Oklahoma FLOYD J. FITHIAN, Indiana JOHN W. JENRETTE, JR., South Carolina NORMAN E. D'AMOURS, New Hampshire RAY THORNTON, Arkansas PROFESSIONAL STAFF

FOWLER C. WEST, Staff Director ROBERT M. BOR, Counsel HYDE H. MURRAY, Counsel JOiN -R. KRAMER, Special C'ounse L. T. EASLEY, Press Assistant
(n)





















CONTENTS

Page
Letter of transmittal ----------------------------------------------- V
Summary of committee jurisdiction with regard to budget matters -------- I Committee analysis of fiscal year 1977 budget:
1. President's budget requests for existing programs which require reenactment or modification of authorizing legislation for fiscal year
1977 (by functions) ------------------------------------------ 'IT
11. A. Natural resources, environment, and energy (300) ---------- 3
President's budget requests for new and expanded programs which
would require authorizing legislation for fiscal year 1977 (by functions) ------------------------------------------------------ 4
111. President's budget requests for reductions in existing programs which
would require amendment of authorizing legislation for fiscal year
IR7 (by functions) ------------------------------------------ 5.
A. Income security (600) ----------------------------------- 5
IV. Legislative initiatives of Congress for fiscal year 1977 (by functions) - 6
A. Natural resources, environment, and energy (300) --------- 6 B. Agriculture (350) --------------------------------------- 6
V. President's budget requests for existing programs which do not require authorizing legislation for fiscal year 1977 (by functions) ---- 8
A. International affairs (150) ------------------------------- 8
B. Natural resources, environment, and energy (300) ---------- 9
C. Agriculture (3-50) --------------------------------------- 10
D. Commerce and transportation (400) ---------------------- 13
E. Community and regional development (450) --------------- 13
Budget reconciliation ---------------------------------------------- 15
Minority report --------------------------------------------------- 17
(M)


















Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2013












http://archive.org/details/repitteOOunit














LETTER OF TRANS;MITTAL

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE,
Washington, D.C., March 15, 1976.
Hon. B3ROCK ADAMS,
Chairman, Committee on the Bua get,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: In compliance with section 301 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and your report request and instructions of February 0, 1976, I am transmitting to you the Committee on Agriculture's Fiscal Year 1977 Report on 'the budget items under its jurisdiction.
I appointed an ad hoc group of 16 Representatives (the Chairman, Ranking Minority Member, the ten subcommittee chairmen, and four other minority members) to make budget recommendations to the full Committee. That ad hoc group convened on nine separate days from February 17 to March 8 to prepare its product. The full Committee, with 39 members present for a substantial part of the time, met for nearly seven hours on March 11 and 15 to complete work on this report.
The Committee's overall recommendations amount to an increase in budget authority over 'the President's budget for fiscal year 1977 of $2,379,167,000 an increase in outlays of $3,335,896,000. If the lower level of the range of food stamp figures is used 'based upon the President's legislative program, instead of current service estimates, those amounts are reduced to $865,635,000 for budget authority and $1,786,480,000 in outlays.
As can readily be seen from the reconciliation table, nearly one-h alf (46%) of the first or higher outlay figure, derives from the Income Security function under food stamps. Another 34% represents increases in outlays by the Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund (16%), by the Commodity Credit Corporation (9%1), and rural water and waste disposal grants (9%/). Thus four program areas contain 80%1 of the requested increases, while three other programs (Public Law 480, Agricultural Conservation Program, and Forest Protection and Utilization) account for another 11%.
The Committee wishes to emphasize that, although it has mnaCl specific..comments on 15 legislative proposals it is considering that will have budget: impact (13 of which it is originating) and 20 items in the President's budget, its silence with respect to the other programs within its jurisdiction (and these are nuieroiis because the Appendix to the Budget devotes 93 pages to the Department of Agriculture, exclusive of the Environmental Protection Agency and the Cornmodi'ty Futures Trading Corporation) should not be construed in any way as reflecting consent to, the 'budget authority or outlay figures proposed by the President for fiscal year 1977.
The Committee also wishes to call the Budget Committee's attention to the desirability Of separating loan programs from grant programs in the budget coupled with the inclusion of appropriate explanatory material to enable the public to understand that loan programs, such as those conducted by the Cornmnodity Credit Corporation in its price support operations, do not involve a loss to the Treasury, since, in time, they are repaid with interest.
Finally, the Committee is seriously concerned about a constantly recurring feature of that part of the agricultural budget that involves commodity and loan programs-the total lack of relationship of end-of-the-year outlays to those proposed several months prior to the start of a fiscal year. In the 1970's, the di1screpancies between the budgeted level of outlays and the usually higher actimid level of outlays, varied by as much as $800 million and rarely, if ever, fell below $300 million, which was a better performance than during the 1960' s when $1 bllion variations were normal.
(V)





VI

This problem is quite understandable because it is based primarily upon administratively uncontrollable factors, such as market prices (which affect the levels of loans as well as the amount of deficiency and disaster payments, interest rates (charged the Commodity Credit Corporation by the United States Treasury), and weather conditions or other natural disasters (which determine the need for disaster payments But it also flows from factors that can be administratively regulated, such as the level of loan resales by the Agricultural Credit Insurance Fund (a major amount is anticipated in fiscal year 1977 in order to create an outlay surplus in the Farmers Home Administration revolving loan accounts of approximately $1.3 billion), the reprogramming of commodities procured for purposes of Title II donations under Public Law 480 (for example, this month's proposals to utilize more dairy products to avoid part of a substantial increase in outlays for the Commodity Credit Corporation in fiscal year 1977 ). andt the use of export credit under the short-term Commodity Credit Corporation export credit program (in fiscal year 1976 this program went from a projection of $400 million, as is scheduled for fiscal year 1977, to $900 million iu tafct).
The Committee realizes that it is very difficult for the De'part!nment to ,piroj.eet outlays with any degree of accuracy in light of this interacting set of fluctuating circumstances. What the Committee fears is the political consequences to agricultural programs of substantial increases in Department projected outlays after the first and second budget resolutions have been reported and passed. Those resolutions encompass an outlay figure for the Agriculture function that may well be surpassed by late winter or early spring, if not revised upward even earlier (as is the case with a $305.6 million increase in Commodity Credit Corporation and Public Law 480 outlaws for fiscal year 1977 already reported to the Committee on March 12, some two months after publication of the budget, but six-and-one-half months prior to the start of the fiscal year). In the past, there have been instances of use of that highly artificial and inevitably ina ccurate outlay figure as a cap on the agricultural budget to defeat proposals for program change.
If that political harm is likely to occur, then the Committee would suggest that the Budget Committee establish a contingency fund for the Agriculture function that would enable it to expand to meet changed conditions without
*throttling needed program revisions. If. Ion the other hand, ithe Budget Comnittee is willing not to restrict programs falling under the Agriculture function unmi)rella because the Department's January outlay estimates cannot harness the market reality that occurs some nine to twenty-one months later, then there is no need to create such a fund. Either a contingency fund of the type described or an understanding of tile type set forth above is necessary, however, to satisfy the Committee that this budget problem is reasonably under control, even though the outlays may not be.
Sincerely,
THOMAS S. FOLEY, Chairman.








SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE JURISDICTION WITH
REGARD TO BUDGET MATTERS
The Committee. on Agriculture was officially established in 1820 and 60 years later, in 1880, the subject of forestry was added to its jurisdiction. For some time the Committee had the authority to receive estimates and report agricultural appropriations, but in 1920 this authority was transferred to the Committee on Appropriations.
The main areas of this Committee's jurisdiction include the consideration of laws dealing with general farm policy. This jurisdiction extends to the adulteration of seeds; control of insect pests; protection of birds and animals on forestry reserves; agricultural and industrial chemistry; a gricult ual colleges and experiment stations; agricult rural education and extension service, agricultural production, marketing, and price stablilization; animal industry and diseases of animals; crop insurance and soil conservation; dairy industry; entomology and plant quarantine; farm credit and security; the national forests, and forestry in general; human nutrition and home economics; inspection and grading of livestock and livestock products; agricultural exports; surplus disposal, plant industry; soils and agricultural engineering; rural electrification; and the improvement of animal breeds.
In addition the -Commititee exercises its jurisdictional responsibilities on several matters not specifically mentioned in House Rule X(1) (a). The more important of these include international trade; foreign assistance; food assistance; flood control; animal welfare; international health; wild areas (in forests) ; pesticides; rural development including rural telephone banks, nonf arm rural housing loans, rural water supply, and water pollution control programs, and loans for rural firehouses, community centers and businesses.
There are also several specific jurisdictional areas that have been created for the Committee by historical reference which include:
(1) The restoration, expansion, and development of foreign
markets for Amencan agricultural 'products and of international trade in agricultural products; the use of agricultural commodities pursuant to Public Law 480, Eighty-third Congress, as amended, except for distribution outside the United States; and the effect of the European Common Market and other regional economic agreements and commodity marketing and pricing systems upon United States agriculture.
(2) All matters relating to the establishment. and development
of an effective Foreign Agricultural Service pursuant to title VI
of the Agricultural Act of 1954.
(3) Matters relating to the development, use, and administration of the national forests, including but not limited to development of a sound program for general public use of the national forests consistent with watershed protection and sustained-yield timber management, and study of the forest fire prevention and control policies and activities of the Forest Service and their relation to coordinated activities of other Federal, State, and private
agencies.
(1)






2

(4) Price spreads between producers and consumers.
(5) The formulation and development of improved programs for agricultural commodities; matters relating to the inspection, grading, and marketing of such commodities; and the effect of trading in futures contracts for such commodities.
(6) The administration and operation of agricultural programs through State and county agricultural stabilization and conservation committees and the administrative policies and procedures relating to the selection, election, and operation of such committees.
(7) The development of upstream watershed projects authorized by Public Law 156, Eighty-third Congress, and the administration and development of watershed programs pursuant to Public Law 566, Eighty-third Congress, as amended; the development of land use programs pursuant to the Food and Agriculture Act of 1962 and the Agricultural Act of 1970.
(8) All programs of food assistance or distribution supported in whole or in part by funds authorized to be used by the Department of Agriculture, including but not limited to the food stamp programs and the commodity distribution program.
(9) The implementation -and administration of the Wholesome M.Neat Act of 1967, the Wholesome Poultry Products Act of 1968, and the Egg Products Inspection Act of 1970, including the establishment and development of inspection services as required by the Acts.
(10) All matters relating to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, as amended, and the Federal Environmental Pesticide Control Act of 1972, as well as all agricultural chemicals registered and regulated under such Acts.
~(11) All matters relating to the implementation and operation of the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act.
(12) Legislation relating to the general operations of the Department of Agriculture, the Commodity Credit Corporation, the Farm Credit Administration, and the administration of the Federal Insecticide, Furigicide, and Rodenticide Act, as amended, by the Environmental Protection Agency.
















C"

M*a.= E C






0 K CA-M


OM
cn owo- 0 :t:

IV M CL CU c> L)'5 CAR o 3.
CD -0 M cC CD V) -.2 C:)

cc C)
0 cn
CU

E E 4-64,
C-1
E
0:5-0 0 E Lj cu Is- Z bo
co 0 c6z "0 5, C,= >

E 0 CCU M
ce- (D :sMr, MAII)
0 E E al
-4 rl 0*2 U: r. E
0 0 cc %0 4) 42) 43 M


LLul cc U
-0
0

< cli
C-> .0
603,

0 m E
ce



uj



-0
Z: =
w co
U.J


cr

CY
LLJ



4n

rr a)


< cr- a)
CD

W 04
cis

00






fj C> cc

co

ui a
=D ui
CY
cc

w


E ui 0
be
<
L'I CD Z:
=t"
0 10
4)
ui be








ui

68-177-76-2




































U.















1,4









CY
LU




C)





tw,

m



C)






< rr
CL 0
x






w CL









CY
w


w ca
w ui

ce)
w a
CL CL






cz CD
















0 52228

B'-- -*a' 41
W
>

C', f 4, >,D, E go
cr- 0 '0 E -3
C:, 0

CD

m Eu
M., .,Paz

U- m E ww.
OUII
a 06
cl
t,4 r %5 tjo 2?c
S- 0 d):= C:, 0
E E. -: j lm 6
cn E'- cL>c-cD2
C.7 0 W E 0uj 0 -cxw w a 6-e -2
M > CD C
0 CL

069' wiz o mg- W -0 a C m
6 .g WS-4- 0 --4
cr (D C) CD a 0
C) -E-c boc> a -0 m
E '04 R E 2' 2 .=c:> wc,
E 0 Ec" Wcc':',:Ej
0 u -a co 4=M
E 0.
a, >- a cool U- C ri
sbw co t-
< 10
4)2 >4)M E= T 0=::,.o (000 wc= c*
U- CLC:)

ca
CD CD 4- cnl w C: C:
C5
00 CD ull
0
Ull) CZ)
< 03
70 ;- 6 Ln
ui C:
cr- 0
E
E +
CX
C:)
cr- (D -= j (=>
a C) CD w
(D W C6 CT r C;p
co ".') cm 0 C's
W qr C=) Z cn
4= ,6
E
00 C.) cvi'
r cn
0 LO


+
C/) C>
cl; C>

0 00
C) Ln
cr- (6
LO

c

ar a)

x CD
U.1

M; 06

co ce
CL. 41 00
(D rbc





c)
C/)
coo)
CD

CY C'-)
LU 6
to
LO
LLJ C=


co
LLJ I
LO

LAJ
LAJ CL f.0
C) 01
-4
Cl.
LU



E











ID



too IV M
to d, (j C.) 4-01 C)
M = *C 0 M 3 :E C C:o AZ
=
CDOO
00 >
C1,603,
cc %8,,
A2 = CLO 0 CL-W to i-
0 CL WOOD 'rZ 0=
w
CZ u-o-o 0 C> z E U- 61, E
a Caw
m _caw MIC WOM.J== cc m 0 4 M =.4a E E
C)
14 v 02. 0 Ow
Lr) M W 0 E
S 3: 0-- = 0- K= =
P.= W *a m "a C M m It" caw W.W 0 CL Maw
E Cl 4- v) >
Ota- w CL 0 00,0
E'S lz w %- S E C)%-Qoo =W CP
M 0 UO
S cOR E
ci 0) 0, '00 W :t'-
.. 0 CL wEa Em---3: 0.4'. = 0 .6
CD'6 wo W=

;1 E C, cn E.S
W I- -M
t,,O CO

E E00=0E 0 0 41-40 0 cl:t-2:5 0
om CL 0 en CL
Eul- 0 m t= a s m 0 E C'.5-0 W C,. ,
sj = 00 %.wuo .U -w vi *.os :3 = = -Z' o -0 0 m C)
cd C3 cGoon 0 WO-Oc CMOOI--M=
Ma Q w:2 > (A M- C::L f- 'a 0 CL-.O 70 (D E CcVc w a
0- C/) S Im 0 C) cn to c s..
4) a > 4) OL 0-0 CD u mom>.-04)
CL- E= -,, %- 6Cr CL.
Ul Ln
ca 0 6-00 coo) (A
W-64-toc."(5 0-,> ctj r c* qr= =v- M"- V) =-- 0 cn
4) 0'0
CD 4
CIO E.0 -%,
cl) M bo
cc C.$, E 4.> -0 cl
C:l L.G)>%OE ww-- '-w v)
0 CL= O.0 CL- W m ?4 W
4) -OCCD C) > c
0 t-0 %- w= tko 0. m
0- W -= CLC
U3 Lw v) E 0
P% M.".- 0 = C'L
tj,2.2 E on (D = = =ho 0 E= CLJ:
W C::, M%.-.Co
C6
03 CL 4) O:t' ..4 CL( 0 O'D
U-j =0
4)
OLn 4) 0 CL a)
CD cz, en"O
E ca. co (7) 4) 1= 45' > 1, -4 0
LLJ 0 (A r,. r = '0 C W: ==
E M., CD tz 4E >
o M-C w= cc:, C, E to
cl CL-0 06 Cm, SE .2 E E'E cm a E
06 cn %-- (A=
3i 6
-%
LA- CD cl CD
C> C) C
CD
CD 4=
Ll- L=) Lr) C:) m C)









C:) CD
CD CD C:p CD cm
CD CD C:) C) CD
C..:> C6
C:) CD CD-4
U-)
CIT MF
Lr)
00
+

LLJ




C/) 42) 40
CD m
0 1
LLJ LL.
cv)
C14 00 ca
I <
C:)

E
C:)
LO
J, CL
UJ CD .6-%-,
z U15 C-i
4=
C) r*l CY)

-4


4= CD
z U-1 U..)
-4
U") E
C5, LU
co



ell
LAJ C14 C.C>
C> LL. 1 w >
4 Ul)
ci m C/)
ui

cd
4) >
> >

W Q CL
V)
C.) >
(D
too)
U
ro Cl)
W C#) 4) 4
4

(D
W CL C', EM

cr















4 gz- cc>, 2 -,g -e -mc 0
5 _2 rea)-- ck
E2 E E cc 2, cr ';B
>1 W.- -'C
E:E .S 'E ca. CD Z "I. it
"I V,
-2 w.22 E (0, 0 E v,) 0 CL
-EE ::-:E uC.-4 t: C"3
ca =< E a, cn-a in Mv
0 --. c,= Iltz 8 a 0 c m 0.0.3 ISE E (D cL > w a) cn w V,
=3 = a) Pz-- =3 E -Z !2
0 0 m =WOO C:F :5 > =a- Q..= a E
L)
Z E "3 -w M-z; m m '0 m w = =.O- c,
a'm : .5-0 =7s 40
C,
LO o) Q) -0 CL cn (D 0
E= E V) (L>
CO CO Z:3 C l Cj IU ,,z; R 5 E CL)
C/> - s 2 C, t E
P; -E _:5 C, (D CL=
U5 Q 0 caw
E >
Lj co cn G)
.0 Z
E al! -o E
E4w > 6- 0
CD (D(D=3 0 0 0 w E
W Wcn- -70 0 W
OL 0 0 V) > -0
-0 (D coj=,*, w-0
E -3 CD
CC) C,:) 0 M cu
6-0.!2 oj a V CD,;
cu E 0 (5 CD Q. CD cu w m co M
m NJ = tj
0.2 = E
w 0 C) 0 3:_ m 0
o CL) =3 5- -I,-- E C) v;"'
w cr = vD, = a) = - co 0 -0 E a) "0 bCL C, oo = (v = 0- 0
.E-= cc --- Cw>,E r- = -0 CQ. 0 C3 0 t! E*Ca
tko M =3 0 (D
< E n Oo-_o ca
03
3: S E E cu _.i:; -0 -0 M
CJ M.4 2
cn,; O-Sw=m 'E;O__ac;3LU C CL
C: 00
=_ = 0._ C>
=M co >,
W;* *=WO040bom 7 ,E*= cc
C z E 0 E E
cu Ca
E -u E__'0 m cc, C CD E C, Tj
cr -lz -r-- 0 Q or rl- c m O'm = C
-O.Le) wr-, m X = 3: C,
w-- = cc., W4, cr;
C:l 43> 0-," 'n cm 601*
0 (n C.0 CD - -1 J-_ - 10 r-r. E_,
qvouc ,_ ->--a= w, 3, m
.= CD c= ca
cr = CD
"OZ E cL> -0 co ca to cc C-5 two
CC
C:l a, "D
CV 4D 3,
E -.21; ="" C>
cn C3 ECJ
ca -:T3 C,3 0 01 x c CA cc n 0
1, &+ w -t- 0 m W 0
< 4- 4 = CL ca.= r= 10 .Q 5- 43 E-E
U), E 01- m 02=0i c
3:
3i
ca
C> c:> CD C> C> C>
CD 4= MI cz C) (m C C CD
CD a) C> C) C) CD CIP C) CD >%
C;C;,C::r ci C; e E
C r e cr 4.C:) in cn
CD LO C C>
C6 C6 LCT
Cj







CD
=1 C> CD MI C5
C) CD C C31 CD C l
(D CD C) (D 4D
ecrc;l CS
co e cr
"I CD c* CD ull LM C:O











C.)
C>
Lril (D
x C*4 cr) < 4D
LLJ LO ca
0 CD


C5 ci
M Q0 06
Ln
Cj C14 C-4 0-0
Cj LO -tr Ln t-I m
ul 00 LA
C*4 C",
CV2 (D
CD
U".)
C V4 -4
I Cp
U-P CD 0
C E C-1 00
> CD
co Cj UI
CC CD
cn I E
to N-0
4
CD CA
E
%=0 <
-6-0

am X
mujuj = e
-6-4- C> 0 4w
,4,0 C.=
0 cc ca CD -W
b... CD
E E
ve
CL
Ln 4
E U") LO
cn" -19 0
= I 1 92.
-4 M CP m C> Z
E CA C>
cm C?
CL co
c I co E'O
?" 10 (D
0 (= Cp X m
ul- #-%
ca
CD C M CL Ul
0 <
ID C> 'Z
Cc LO U.), a cu
L CD= im ;r_ UA
















>>,
Y., >
F

E
CL d'
E
c C6 ^ U CU CL CL Ca V) 0
3: CD 8 a -2
CL CO o (C/O 0, C)
L) a) co
Q m 3: (/) rA
=.W tkom 4) C'J'c a C:) = Ca U
>, S= > MU!"'! i'F- a (D ow CD (j
V) 00 60* ID > _(DD CO
b- r CD C) m.- QE M000

low, m Cj C::, C, (n' E
W 10 04 tko 0 -W > CL
CJ 6- G)"4,4 = (= -M a 0.-- (1) C D (j>
06 00 cx W.- f.4 C-) 0 L) > ca
= en Gogjqd* O
0 = >SCL W"o V) CI-) to
C (D- CD 4- (2)
4):s 40 609' ca. CL w Q Q) 0) W.- 4)
V) or-= -.Q 0 Ln 4) mr-,Z; C)(=) a, (n a
UC) _,= w C,
to =cn= M r, v) c- C:, c, F =3 rxt ,
:3 L) X
E.0 F cj caCD u
0 tO
CD
04 06 cn 0- cn
*) (n CD 0 CIO-r- CCL M ml
-0 Ca M M 0.0 6'*.=. a)- C6 LE -Cu
.- U (" = 0 0 L> =r OA
> .0 CD (4 4) CJ M =3
0 M W CD-;&sl 1 00 V)
en 0,0 cn U- w m no
z 4) 0 (D cc
= 03 ='O (D U-C- co M Cl) a) CU
C) Eb,:E Z ap tw E w co
00 9) .0 .0 I=,-=" o >,
w 0 r,- Coo 0 06 e, M
-cc .04:tQ.- .--== -OW004-0 0.- (A=3:E 060 W.- a) 0 m
,, 0-0 0
M.- =-00-000- o
0 4) C:
0 CD H- Cl
LLJ E u
4)
E 0 E C'
0 va M 16.. CD MCD
E W=w =:- 0 CL E C= M
=0 W=u Los CDCO
CL. R-u c*C!,;;
z E x =Muo 0 r- CD 01 0 = =
000 E 0 &:5 0 ca
> u 0 4 0) 0 004 ;;%0.. O'CJ 0

F

CD C CD
CD C CD CD
=1 CD CD (:),C:l CD cm
C cn CD CD
(9 = 'co C)
C%4 C" 00 r Cl CY) CD
LLJ Im m m to
CJ CD U-)
00 r LO LO +
"o (D +LL-) +
CY C'i +
E
E

0 CJ.
z CD CD Cl CD C l CD
C: p a) CD CD C CD =
C:o CD CD C:) =1 CD C)
w 0 0
LO CD p c4cr cr ar
to C) CD C:) C.0 C3,
(D C:
cc 4=
E C l 00
C., U-)
%.ol +

m


C) C)
CD =

C) 06

0- LC) -cr
cr 06
CA CD CD (D
In LO
609.
cn
X

CD C> CD CD

U- W cr C4 cf
p to m (o
CL cli
cn C 06 ar
ui a) 00 400 CY)
00 4.0
609.
LLJ


LLI
co
(13
LO
co CD
-%, E
Ln 06 LLJ

LLJ > CD m
cn CD
ce
Z;
ui 0
LL- m Ln #
CL UJ Ca 0
C:,
E V) -4
w < LU a)
b- >
tko C-') ui 00
Z
ui
CJ LO
0 CD
co S.01
uj tto
U') CM
cn ui Lncp CD
00 s-ftn CD
z :r c m

W ca
-1 cc IV

UV

CL










1

9*



.0 ca cc

a, CL r= .0 E
ID LZ E W.as 0 0 -0
> =-E E-2 w 0.0=0 MOM
0.= 0 .6-twoc'.,- PC->.E'- Fam
0 M.- "OSLIO
4)= CL" M
4) cc C) 0 4) ot
0 mM= o"oQ)
a).- 0 (D 690 >
0= 0=-u x
E Z. C3 r
CJ'o W I-N E 0 00 m E c 0 c -o
5 W CD a) Cc C, -0
>-M 'C' CD m co CD 11*1
CD tw
W E f SR cc--D'-' r- E 4 C D
-CD CD OOLC (D C::I;a > a
CD -4-a
CC:> W ECD cj 4- V) 0.=40 M-4 M a (D CD 0 w
L) C:, = m tv V) 4 -.- OU') CL 0 CD
MO w E E =4--o =-CDCL (=>--M=O e.00 woqcp
C, 0 = 0"
IJI CC 4- CD K wt) m- o E 0- 4)" CL
E E -GPOU)O
0 0.- =C:)= yo otoc. -Cn =
L)= 0--C:) C M, m E 0-4 0 !: - 0 m-,' 0
r- 0 0 t:,O- M cu >,*- CD 0 603.,- 0 m >,IV 0 0 UM)
G3 V) bo"o M- c a) 1.4 rA
.41 .- WM U*.OOQL 0 W-0
:> C) CD cn (D = V) c in *- GM=W o 0 E.- -M
L- M= tw -- ai- cp c ci m .()Oooo
4- (D= M fn M-0-- 0 v) 0 4) 4) (D-- u)=,. 0-0 M (D 4) 0 -ci'
-Z,- a., E m M 3:,v 0 C) ::- U-) cc I-co m 3:= =*- cD M.- E c C-) 0 uw = E w co (XD m 0= -:5 UG))'0 M C -j
Q =U-)-E W ca r-o = 4)---o
=-0 w 0 b4x D 0 E--o T-,ZoEl-- Eq= tko C6
co 0- > -ow =,- ZMO(0.2 1
Cc r-;Z, 0 W 0 olm-w Q w tj 0
-M. CZ 0 0 -01; M" Scm-m
oocn- OM C* =M M 6,C).
co w > = o cz.- o M >%-- M 0a) 0 MM
(D=.O cz CL-0 co 4= = -4--, 06-0 '0 -*-.w
CD*- CD co.0 C, M L-Lo =M
WOCEE=m- =Mct =M- 0
EZ
'2c>= -0 a (D to 3:
4 W M w 0 w 2=* ; 0- 0 1 Co
(D 4) 4 0 0 M 0 0 CD 4 C o o =C=6 =m mcn
0 tw E ed' E ci 0 C=6 ci
U. -0 CD Q.- Cc M Q =M-=Wo CD" cn
CD 0 -4=
>
0) 4M Ckj 4cn 11+ (D E- 0 m 0 -44"t* = -' =-= OCD
0 0 -- CLO W, 2 -- L- 4- (D 60rm ce -0 = U- co 00
cn Ca. 0.= m 0 0 CD 0 ='='
V) I WM=oWcQCmw W,>%C:)O.-6o9, -4)
mo CL G) 4- =- W4-- --W 1%.e- &;;6 =cn
Z m w 0 w 43 c E=O 0 W'o -I
7- 0 =.,- ci 0 CD '-CD W
cn 6.4 tw V E (DO E
W r- o to a W-0 0, (m 0 a)
a) a cn E- =E 0 0
C.) gE 5-2 M 0 M
c-) 12.2=--c E CO) 4v:o tX' E V'm
E en ca = 0 4 4(D ID M E (D
0= M;=Z xCLE moo w 'n >'C'j
0 ="o cn Q 0 cn 4) ca
cncw--MOQ =,- f.> CL C;, w ".-M M<-= ME mam" 'd%= 0
In


C,
CDP CD C)
C: = Cp CD CD =p
CD LO U-1 CD CD C:) cl,
C CD or) C)
C:) C:) m CD r., cn Ul) Lm 00 CD
Ln to CD -W 0004 -W
C14 Ul) Lo
Ul -4 Cj + CD CY5 al"--4
1-4-4 + + to --I m -4
+ I-oo + +


lo
CD C:o CD C) cn cn C:) C:o C: CD C CD
CD CD I=> r r.. = C> C:, C <=) CD
CD CD 0000 LO LEI CD CD CD CD
CD CD c6a: 0646 o6c;
Q C l CD C:l rl M In .a Ln C o r
cz CD CD C r Cj CM CIJ P
ec4oo C
IM al C-4 --4 C14 + ""M-4
+ + cy)
+ + +



CD CD
C CD CD CD
CD CD CD CD CD
cm CD C p C)
ci,
Ln -mr
-dr D 00 .14"
ke -4, ts
-4 Cl C.0
'mr C-4




CD CD C=
CD CD 4= CD
CD CD CD
C:o oc ce te
CD 00

L6 co r-I
C14 C" 00
C-4








--4
00
r- CD
LO
C-4 CD E
en 00
I m en

CD E ull E
E E CL
cc
00 Cj

C)

0 LO
ca
> 4
E m
ca m
ca C6
to 4)
c 4-1

0A

C.) CY)
ci C*4 C14

w 0
w U.











10



.!E .!2 ba -S.S.40 0-0 s CV .0
0) ==: = C6
a, E CD w CD
(n Ln
0-0 m = >% T >
02-- m 0.! CF)
> C)
> CJ
-CC E 04 > ca
-4 CL a Ln a) a in
-0 ca Cc E
Cu T C ;.!! *' t,* _C M -C=) m rr
0- CZ U-;
Co
C.2
_a M
06 -0 W C..)
CL V) C08 W) =
w (-1.) 8 Q3 n- -Z5 E B LOA c:k"Lo' CID 'n C, -L C:)
>% tv Ln r- r- 4n m = 16' V) I-- m
03 om 0 C, 0.- 00 cr) M Ln o
V;
-6 CL) CL E -u m Lca a W M
w co Ca Cu m
Q 0 M 0 M W W E
C4 lac 0 CL M tv 0 (D
o.) = = CL
In 0 0 -W
o
-W 4) CL
wk. W.-C)C) ul =3 C
tw 0 CL=
C.cn -C30 CZ)
4 cc C)
CD Cv 0 nc)
.--2 CL toc) o C) Ga EG- C:1-604c -m'SC) M7
> S 0 ra
ci C: 0 U 0 C.,
4= ,, W- V) en 69(= -W two cc-*- CL- 0 C%3 cc
:3 nt &- 0 >N 0 -i-- W
W V) Cj
C rOm
U- 00 0 W 40 0 M <&E cc::,
Co In 0 COW, w ej
= 00 m
r=
am -0 0
LA- 7-0.2- E
c:, &cD E In
a
C5"-, C::, m 0
4) tn
00--, W 4, to W.W, C4 E
C>:= M-0 W--- 4, 1W.= = E m
W--o C= 0 en 'n m
W-4 -a.- 4 0) 0 C -0 CL = %- 4= .E ) a a
w o Comm 5,miE.=01-0 o:w:Ecu"0"m Q v w W
--7 = 0 -_C 7
C, CLM40 to CIO C; S E CC=m MO 5- 0 C) oxE fl-.Q 0 Cn
*09.
&9
cl; U 4
I-% ooCD CD C11 al C CD C> C)
C> al C c) C), C) =1 C C> C:D CD
C) CD CD cz C CD C CD

CD M CI,_., 0000 CD
0> ,*fo mr 0000 c, c. C) C>M
cee F.4, Lr V r -.;W;, .6C)
P. m,-# Cj 01)
+ + 1-4
< + +
ui E
C. E

101-1
C:0 C) 01 CD C> C
Lu 0 =1 CD c> C) C> CD C:l C) CD C; r-> CD w
Q> CD ao C), C) C> CD Cno C> C> C
0 L)
a
06 C64* ee ea 00
m C) (n 00 CD c> C;) CD
CD C) cc f..O in C) U-1 00 C> C C: C)
E cevil a;.:F rl:p.:
0 to + + c' -4-4
+
tic + +

C.) 00


CD C) CD CD CD
C) C:) C 40 C)
Ct cl Ct C
Ul CD CDI C) CD
CD C14
W cli C.2 C r
00 -Rr CD C) -zr
06 Lc.;,
Cl) LO
Cn





CD CD =1
4) CD C) C),
CD
cl
4) 0'r CT 06 C4 m
ot 00
0 CL
U



LLJ
=D

uj
L0

L&J C14

W C> IC",
m -4
E
> -4 C:,
CIO *0 1 1 IT
CD (.0
(D I m 0-% LO
0 = Ln Cn C r -,
Cn Ul)
U-)
CD
C/) 0 UJ -0
ui 10 T
LO

CD
ui C:l 0
E CJ
00
4L) w
CL
C7)

V7 m
4) >
ui 0
Cr

cc
U. CL



cli cle)










I I



E
,

E
*9
C) to
2.
cc t* 0 coo a Ol
E Cw-;; CL Co 0 Motf 0,;; 0 C m := C -0
.2- -0 a-0
-= cc w O-u cu a.- a 2 p m 72 Im, --Jc,=
01 = .10 0) E
,0 = C"-= co -0
( -0: X w .2,v ,Zcm
Lo CU w E m i rZ T.S c:r; 0 f w:S
V-) -0 ;
wm w w 0
-0 0 Cg
= f
co 69, 22 ,-E 4n 5 u E 2: g,
031- E o*7z W.C: m -rc w C.> cn=(D CC M2 11 CD -0 X
XC) C CD
=> 2! 2 ') >, 4) Co L> Cc, (2
;r-= cc >
r- C-3 C=)- -2-2 -4) 23
C" m Q) CD cc -.-0 0 W

E.5i M6.,
E-0 w a;
(D
L E
00 P CD cl) a
77 E -0 2*1 m 21- Z -co m
tn -01 10
E C cE 0- ot: ez cl.-O = >1
C: .- co 10
co 0- (D--o
ma-2.cja
C >
1.0 > co=
c:'E a o 0 (6 "5 w cc (::,Ul >W* 0 E -C -0
c:o (D bo
Cj CDL Cc 0 CD -.E I-) CD 0 E W 8
5 UM -0 (n (o 5= wo
CLOZ -a; m'- E.E Z3
LS E -0. w 0 7S "0 CD W a C;
0-4) C>.2 =
C; C 3: Wc> bo':
x ZS C: w E
-ua- 2 U cr;
DOW to 0 C> *;a : =0=
mw C) 0 4E42 a E cD 8--Ln ;E, CU C j 4--2= 5
C9 >, (=) -0 VI m
W) lu E -:;t cj 00
-CD m cc
C, co- W 5
C3. (D Co a) E >" cc LE;,D Cl c, 15 7= o
cc M E
co cn 8 Coq"&m&, 6.
m Q> to tw 0 CD m CD= to CO CD Cc m cn
o cm c5k E cc,= C" cn
C's 3 z > E,"32 O'D L-= W7E 0
CD a
V) '00


CD
C l CD CD C> CD CD
C l
C:l C$ CD Co
U-ilacr &&
O)CO C o M
co Ci co

M-4 +
M
-.;-+ I-0



CD CD CD
CD C M CD
C:) CD CD CD
r..:Qe C% C
C 00 CD
-cr 00 t
ce-; C6
+






CD CD CD
C; C:) C)
cn
co


00 cli





CD
CD C),

c:o
-4 OIL
m
mr
M cli






C 4
LO LO
cn
cn
CD
to CD
CD
cn
IT C-1
C14 co
-71

CD


>
to



to



C.>
cc











12





: O E t >


c 0.
(v cz
C/)



m
V cc 0 CD
w.5 E
E>

no 2p
7 CL -.,a o: > 0
C:l
C:3 0
w,
C) -0
ct q .0 t7 tv -3 V)
toc'tl a- 8 8 -.E -g w U7 =M
c mr 2 --S- =
ta 6,3 am w 'a- u -0
cc E 0 W= = > 8 :3 2 .-- &
0 Cv M, 2 2,n :5 M ; w *: M"ao rup co 0
ov), Q m Jo 4, C w .2"613 Ln Q
0 E-=
01


Coo
ICR
ct 4 0 -, CA
IV -00 h-.2
-0 0 6n.s Cc,=
W"o C:) W..
E=
4w moo E
oo CO
tw =%
5 Et
-=,kr
P 006 7g 0 10 0 0 *,;.;9 0=0
E E -5

C.V Q
CD
>1 CD C--.3 CD
0 c:> C= C CD C: CD
CD CD
CD CD
c (D
0 U-.) CD
Cy) co
rl
eq + Ln M


cr


CL> C
ce- rMp (n CD CD C),
C> C)
c:l CD C=
CD
c6al C) CD
E = C:, C m <
m r CIJ r,
E 4-.- 00-4



C-)


CD
C) CD
CD

LO
Ln

cc: Cj Cj
-4 CN
cr d)


co C
(D cnl CD
CD
LLJ 0 CD C

CD cc Ln -4
U. c1l; 06
Ci -4
--4

m





LLI C?

C)
LO Ln


C'i
Lcll C14 CID
Ul) C=)
cn co


CD cn
cr
CY3 I L .
CD CD
uj tn 1-1.1
to CD
>

0 4) ul J
cr- C o



06
03





en
0 x
C.) LU












13




42
:5- Z;o cc



0 00 CL
10 E

> CL E CO E=
00 m
0 =
!2
C., '00-0 CD
w W 0 CD
4m) E wo CL (.)
6e.- a 0 4) CD cz;
CL 4) *= &,=
q 0 2
C)
uw E Cc 4) CD
E r- C;
m ci 0 CD
a 0 0 C'j O-s
4- w 0 CL "0
o CD w -C3 CA CL-0
-0 E cn = = m 4) w 'm a 0
>0
OUO, ca.
M-0 0 CO m E
C",= 0 E tv
W-, =Cn
M 4) tO 0
'OM oc: cL, E mc OWOM 0
o 0 C,
=E w,-) 04-0
0 0 c --0
(j CD--'-O
-0 -0
co cz) 0)
W W
>
cko*-*- 0 0 bo-O U) 4)
69). CA I
4- e, 0 W t,4 M
> in 4- W.!2
I=- 4- W
0 =
0 MOM wma)cno=
to) M- E w C

0 CA 0 W C5
w
Z E m W m cn,
0 w CL u 1-01= C/) W 1-1 cc = I 44 U co )
4= CD CD
C a) 609lo
CD CD = (D -CD
C, t= C CD C:l C j CD t* 4,
CD CD CIC5 C'100 'm
CD
Ln C) ak C:)
C LO C) vQ CD C;61> O w
CD r- CD C &9-UIC5 4- 0.
00 CD C> +.,:, Ln 70
Ln W
m C LO to >,4-4 CD
+ cr
000
+ C'j= +
--1 0 m Cka
603, U -'6- 0
tio CL
Cno -MjO M 43
C:) C) CD
C CD
C:) C:O CD
C) CD
-C:> CD CD
00 CD (D
00 4
LO fl, CD C> C=)
CD
C C:)
CD CD cc
+ cn M +
1-0 +


W= E A

CD cn
C) C CD W-= 4)
=1 CD CD > 0 >
t6 m cc m E
Cj = 0 4-=
LM 4) L- tw
00
Lei, W
00
Woo
OL
0
00 E E T
0
CD C> CD
-j
UT
a) >,M
to E= E

co
C.) E Z
cl-ccr> E
0
= a)
t3a


4LO
-4 CD
C14 W
CIO I o
CL= >1 Iz
cn LO C cr m
I C14 M-U C)
MI I =mm=E cD
m ul
%-, C=) r = 07 0 E
10 MCD c:l
= EtCL c
0 0"0.- 4=
W M
%- CD
to m -0 W:5 t*6w Zw
Ln m
gr 0+
cL E m
00 m
E 400 ba 6e.
0 m
< Cd z z co (C=:> E +
LU a 0 C) go =
cc: CL -10 -w-m
to C.) wl= ;;0 04C
W CD 0 = C:
m
z UJ C j 00
>. (a CL V) .- -,4
fn UJ m 69- EA.- m
r

M mw
ui
E044
M M E
m
E W 0 CL 0 w w
c w E= CL
0 U'3 E
Cl CD -mr 0
4u LO to m
E'T W = = 0 tw 06
m w m
Ci E C6 "T
0
C.> Cc b- IWO
















RECONCILIATION OF PRESIDENT'S BUDGET REQUESTS WITH COMMITTEES RECOMMENDATIONS
[In thousands of dollars]

President's budget request Committee budget recommendations
Authority Outlays
Budget function Authority Outlays (difference) (difference)

International Affairs (150) ------------------------ 1,169,255 1,117,910 1,249,255 1,246,822
(+80,000) (+128,912)
Foreign economic and financial assistance (151)-- 1,169,255 995,910 1,249,255 1,124,822
(+80,000) (+128,912)
Natural Resources, Environment and Energy (300)- 804,752 871,521 1,151,930 1,234,132
(+347,178) (+362,611)
Water resources and power (301) ------------- 160,719 187,763 217,419 244,463
(+56,700) (+56,700)
Conservation and land management (302) ------ 1,170,085 1,2091959 1,460,563 1,515,870
(+290,478) (+305,911)
Pollution control and abatement (304) --------- 41,207 41,207 41,207 41,207
(None) (None)
Energy ------------------------------------- 21,409 21,260 21,409 21,260
(None) (None)
Receipts --------------------------------------- -588,668 -588,663 -588,668 -588,668
(None) (None)
Agriculture (350) ------------------------------- 2,262,079 1,912,643 2,391,563 2,898,627
(+129,484) (+985,984)
Farm income stabilization (351) --------------- 1,258,999 900,587 1,258,999 1,760,087
(None) (+859,500)
Agricultural research and services (352) -------- 1,055,795 1,064,771 1 85,279 1,191,255
(_ I.
1 29,484) (+126 4RAN Receipts ------------- --------------------------- -52,715 -52,715 52,715 -52:715
(None) (None)
Commerce and transportation (400) --------------- 11,615 11,726 13,588 13,699
(+1,973) (+1,973)
Other advancement and regulation of commerce- 11,615 11,726 13,588 13,699
(403) (+1,973) (+1,973)
Community and Regional Development (450) ------- 357,602 348,513 664,602 655,513
(+307,000) (+307,000)
Community development (451) ----------------------------- 115,534 300,000 415,534
(+300,000) (+300,000)
Area and regional development (452) ---------- 347,625 218,002 354,625 225,002
(+7,000) (+7,000)
Disaster relief and insurance (453) ------------ 10,000 15,000 10,000 15,000
(None) (None)
Receipts --------------------------------------- -23 -23 23 -23
(None) (None)
Health (550) ------------------------------------ 232,498 231,329 232,498 231,329
f None) (None)
Prevention and control of health problems (553)- 232,498 231,329 23Y498 231,329
(None) (None)
Income Security (600) --------------------------- 4,785,802 4,749,918 4,785,802 4,749,918
to 6, 299, 334 to 6, 299, 334 (None to (None to
+1, 513, 532) +1, 549,416) Public assistance and other income supplements 4,786,468 4,750,584 4,786,468 4,750,584
(604). to 6, 300, 000 to 6, 300, 000
(None to (None to
+1, 513,532) +1, 549,416) Receipts --------------------------------------- -666 -666 666 -666
(None) one)
Revenue sharing and general purpose fiscal assist- 36,640 36,640 36,640 3V, 640
a nce (850). (None) (None)
Other general purpose fiscal assistance (851) ---- 36,640 36,640 36,640 36,640
(None) (None)
Interest (900) ----------------------------------- -194 -184 184 -184
(None) (None)
Other interest (902) ------------ 7 ------------- -184 -184 -184 -184
(None) (None)
Grand total ------------------------------- 9,660,059 9,280,016 10,525,694 10,760,896
to 12, 039, 226 to 12, 615, 912 (+865,635 (+1, 786,480
to +2,379,167) to +3,335, 896)


(15)













MINORITY HE PORT
It is unfortunate but necessary that we, must file this dissent to the work of the Committee regarding the FY 1977 Budget.
In general we believe the Committee has done a credible job of examining and articulating a reasoned projection of suggested expenditures for FY 1977 on eight of the nine functions of government that are within the partial jurisdiction at least of this Committee.
But on the ninth function, "Income Security," the Committee majority has utterly failed to come to grips with the issue at hand.
On eight functions the Committee has given its definitive recommendations on what FY 1977 spending ought to be.
On the ninth function it has ducked the issue and has chosen instead to "Pass the food stamp buck" to the Committee on the Budget.
Our concept of the new budget law is that each legislative committee should search and find a reasonable and actual expenditure level that re-flects its expertise and experience. Certainly the Budget Committee will be held to that standard.
On a 22-10 rollcall vote the Committee chose to prevent the consideration of Mr. Wampler's amendment to set the Committee's food stamp recommendation at the level proposed by the President's budget. By adopting instead an amendment to Mr. Wampler's amendment to set a range of $4.8 billion (the President's budget) and $6.3 billion (the CBO and ITSDA. projections of expenditure if no changes are made) the Committee has simply not faced up to its full responsibility.
The $4.8 to '$6.3 billion range recommendation of the Committee majority for the Food Stamp program assumes the Budget Committee will decide what program level should be funded. The $4.8 to $6.3 billion recommendation for FY 1977 is advocated because the Budget Control Act generally prohibits floor consideration of entitlement legislation prior to May 15, and because there are unspecified uncertainties wit!, respect to pending legislative and regulatory reforms.
If the upper figure of the range is adopted the FY 19774 funding level will be $649 million higher than actual FYT 1976 program costs and $1.514 billion more than the $4.786 billion Administration request for FY 1977.
We contend there is little likelihood that the Committee will report legislato prior to May 10. In additional, the Administration request i based on specific legislative and regulatory reforms which have been in process for some months. In particular, on February 26, 197 6, the IT S. Department of Agriculture published proposed regulations which if fully implemented would reduce FY 1977 outlays by an estimated $ 1.2 billion. That action combined with further reform legislation should brings FY 197~7 Food Stamp program costs into line wvith the Administration's recommended $4.786 inlion. In addition the Cogr-ess in P.11. 94-157 has already directed the Secretary to promulgate, regulations whlichl will correct program abuse and reduce program costs by $1.4 billion.
(17)






18

In recognition of pending food stamp reform measures as well as the intent of the Budget Control Act to place a realistic limitation on overall Federal spending, it is urged that the Administration's recommendation be followed. A more detailed discussion is contained in Appendix A to this report.
In summary, we feel the Committee majority has only "bitten the marshmallow" on food stamps, when in reality it should have settled on a reasonable figure consistent with the badly needed reform.
WILLIAM C. WAMPLER. 1KEITH G. SEBELIUS. PAUL FINDLEY. CHARLES TONE. STFvEN D. Synis. EDWARD R. MADIGAN. RIcHARD KELLY. CHARLES E. GRASSL Y. TOM HAGEDORN. W. HENSON MOORE.











APPE-NDIX A

On March 11, 1976, the Committee on Agriculture voted not to make a budget recommendation for the Foo d Stamp program during Fiscal Year 1977. Instead, the Committee by a record 22-10 vote put forward a $1.5 billion range of $4.8 billion to $6.3 billion, leaving it up to the Budget Committee to decide what level should be funded. This approach, if accepted as general practice, would undermine the budget process by eroding the very discipline and fical responsibility intended by the Oongressional Budget Act of 1974 (Public Law !3-344).
The $6.3 1illion component is derived from current services estimates, prepared independently by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Congressi-onal Budget Office, which assumes no change in the program rules in operation as of March 5, 1976. If unaltered during the course of subsequent Congressional action on the budget, this level of funding will represent an increaseC of $649 million over actual food stamp expenditures during Fiscal Year 1976. and an increase of $1.514 billion over the $4.786 billion requested in the Administration's 1977 budget proposal.
The Administration's request is based on legislative and regulation reforms which have been in process for several months. In particular, on February 26, 1976, the U.S. Department of Agriculture published a sweeping series of proposed changes to Federal food stamp regulations in the Federal Register. As stated in the proposed regulations package, the comment period will last until March 29, 1976, after which date any final changes or refinements may be made by the Department prior to implementation. The schedule contained in the regulations package stipulates 'that all changes will be implemented prior to the beginning of Fiscal Year 1977. Given U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates of savings under the proposed regulations, it is anticipated that Food Stamp program costs during fiscal Year 1977 will be in line with the Administration budget recommendation. Additional legislative reform provisions also are pending in the Congress which, if enacted, could reduce Food Stamp program costs even further during Fiscal Year 1977.
In following the Administration's recommendation for Food Stamp program funding during Fiscal Year 1977, two questions must be answered. First. does the necessity exist for food stamp reform? Second, is it likely that food stamp reform will be achieved?

THE NECESSITY FOR FOOD STAMP REFORM
The Food Stamp program, which began in the early 1960's as a small pilot program to improve the nu tritional levels of the poor, has grown into one of the Nation's most expensive and certainly its most controversial social program. During Fiscal Year 1961 the Food Stamp program was in operation in six local jurisdictions nationwide, with a total caseload of 50,000 recipients. Today, food stamps are being distributed in 3,046 locations nationwide, including Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands.
In April 1975, the food stamp caseload peaked at a staggering 19.3 million recipients. This fact alone was a signal to many that the program had gone far astray of its legislative purpose of raising levels of nutrition among the Nation's poor; that, as suggested a year earlier (April 15, 1974) in a report of the Subcommittee on Fiscal Policy of the Joint Economic Committee. "the Food Stamp program has been transformed into the country's only universal income guarantee available to families of able-bodied men as well as to other needy persons."
The opponents of food stamp reform often could be heard insisting that program growth stemmed flatly and plainly from its geographic expansion to new locations, the termination of the commodities distribution program, and the high unemployment rates experienced during the economic recession. It was argued that nationwide application of the Food Stamp program was complete, and that as unemployment decreased, the food stamp caseload also would go down. In support of their view, the last county entered the program in March
(19)







20

1)975. Also, as the unemployment rate went down by 0.3 percent from 8.9 percent to 8.6 percent between May 1975, and Sep)tember 1975, the food stamp caseload dropped by 727.000 recipients.
Just as in March 1975, 3,046 local jurisdictions now are participating in the Food Stamp program. The unemployment rate also has gone down by another 0.8 percent from 8.6 percent to 7.8 percent since September 1975. Yet, the food stamp caseload, which now stands at 19.1 million recipients, has gone up by 493,000 persons during the same period.
According to Congressional Budget Office and U.S. Department of Agriculture officials, the major factors in the size of the food stamp caseload are food prices and(l per caplita disposable income. Both agencies expect unemployment to continue to go down -on into 0977, food price inflation to ease and per capita disposable income to increase. Yet, the U.S. Department of Agriculture now predicts an average food stamp caseload of 19.9 million persons during Fiscal Year 1977 if nothing is done to reform the program.
There is no question that the geographic expansion of the Food Stamp program and the recession have had a significant impact on Food Stamp program growth. What is disturbing is that significant internal program growth now is occurring seemingly in spite of these factors. With studies showing that up to one-fourth of our entire population may be eligible 'to receive food stamps, the prospects of continued uncontrolled growth are startling.
From a financial perspective, the outlook without immediate food stamp reform also is dim. During Fisval Year 1965, direct Federal expenditures for the Food Stamnip program totaled $35 million. During Fiscal Year 1975, just ten years later, direct Federal expenditures totaled $4.7 billion. According to Administration estimates, the Food Stamp program will cost $5.7 billion during the current Fiscal Year-an increase of $1 billion, or 20%, over 1975. According to Congressional Budget Office and U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates which are based on the most recent economic data, the cost of the Food Stamp program will go up another $600 million to $6.3 billion during Fiscal Year 1977 without reform. As stated earlier, as economic conditions continue to improve, the Food Stamp program continues to grow.
It is well known by those who support a humane and reasoned approach to the Food Stamp program that the causes of the continued unexplained growth are rooted largely in the basic rules governing food stamp eligibility and benefit levels. At present, these rulesPI'lace absolutely no limitation on the gross incomes of food stamp households.
Penalize the truly needy residing in small households--particularly the
aged-and make it easier for larger, high income households to get food stamps by allowing a dizzying maze of deductions from income before eligibility and benefits are determined.
Subvert the intent of the "Poage work registration amendment" to the
Food Stamp Act by not requiring food stamp recipients to actively seek gainful employment and by superimposing certain "suitability of employmnent" provisions which allow unemployed recipients to legally refuse gainful
employment when it is offered.
Increase error rates and subsidize the temporarily unemployed who have
sufficient resources to remain fully self-supporting by basing food stamp
eligibility and benefits on anticipated future income.
Allow food stamp recipients to have virtually unlimited real and personal
property by generally placing a dollar limitation only on tangible liquid
assets.
Aggravate inequities with the near poor, who either marginally do not
qualify for food stamps or have too much pride to participate in the program, by establishing food stamp purchase requirements at artificially low levels.
Provide special inducements to college student participation by exempting
them from the work registration requirement and permitting special deductions for educational costs.
Permits strikers-including illegal strikers according to a recent court
decision-to obtain food stamps.
Allow minors and runaway children to obtain food stamps as independent
households.
Allow welfare recipients to remain categorically eligible for food stamps
even though they may not meet income and resource standards for the
program.







21

Do not contain any mineaningful provision for the nutritional education of
recipients to insure that food stamp benefits actually are used to improve
their nutritional levels.
It also is well known by those who support a humane and reasoned approach to the Food Stamp program that illegal abuse is a serious problem. AcLording to the latest Quality Control statistics, 46.6 percent of all food stamp cases are processed in error, and one food stamp dollar in four is misspent either because of administrative inefficiency or cheating. Recently, we have been informed that at least $19 million in Federal funds has been issued or stolen by food stamp vend(lors who sell food stamps to recipients.
Finally, as recently as February 21, 1976, U.S. Department of Agriculture officials testified before the Coimmittee on Agriculture that they do not know how much fraud and cheating ii going on. However, the logical solutions to these problems are wxell established:
Strioter ,rules and procedures with respect to cash and coupon accoiuntability.
A system of phioto-identification cards and countersigned food sTamp warrants to insure that the use of food stamps is restricted to those who are
legitimately entitled to have them.
A retrospective accounting period and honthly income reporting system
to insure that income and resources are accurately obtained and that changes
in circumstances affecting eligibility 'and benefits are promptly reported.
A system ,of earnings ,and benefit verifications to further enhance program
integrity.
Unfortunately, and tragically so, as the Food Stamp program has continued to swell as a general subsidy for certain middle-class Americans, the truly needy increasingly have been short-changed on benefits Ito which they ame rightfully entitled. As mentioned earlier, this problem is especially acute with respect t) our aged citizens. Aged food stamp recipients frequently iare from one- or twoperson households for which aggregate benefit levels are the lowest. But because they often are forced to subsist on low fixed incomes, their living expenses also must be kept to an absolute minimum. In terms ,of current program rules, thi;'S translates to fewer deductions firoin income for eligibility and benefit purposes: and this in turn translates to lower benefits, higher purchase requirements and reduced eligibility for food stamps.
The need for immediate reform of the Food Stamp program is apparent if the Federal Government is to regain control 'of spiraling costs and, at tihe same time, insure that available resources are focused upon the 'truly needy in a humane and generous way.
TIHE LIKELIHOOD OF FOOD STAMP REFORM
Efforts to reform the Food Stamp program have been underway for several m ,ths. A number .of bills now pending in the Congress contain the elements of a legislative solution to the p.r oblein. However, the Congress and the Administration also have recognized that many of the needed changes can be achieved within existing provisions of 'the Food Stamp Act. In December, the Congress approved the Supplemenital Appropriations Act of 1976 (P.L. 94-157) which reduced the Administration's request for 'additional food 'tamnp funds and earmarked $100,000 for ithe revision of food stamp regulations. As stated in House Reiort 94-645 on the supple mental appropriations hill:
"In recommending an additional appropriation for the food stamp program for that part of fiscal year 1976 from February until June 30, 1976 of $1,750,000,000, the Committee has made $100,000 of such funds available only to revise regulations as authorized by existing law. This should pult an end to many existing violations. In this eonneotion the committee takes note of section 5(a) of the Food 'Stamp Act which authorizes Ithe Secretary ,of Agriculture to establish eligibility 'standards and specifically provides:
"* * participation in the food stamp program shall be limited to those household whose inc-ome and other financial resources are determined to be substantial limiting factors in permitting them to purchase a nutritionally adequate diet."
The House report restates and further clarifies the legislative intent of 'the supplemIental food stamnip appropiation, as follows:






22

"These and other suggested changes must be made in the regulations immediately if the program is to be preserved for he legitimate retpient. The Committee has earmarked $100,000 of the fiscal year 1976 appropriation for the specific purpose of revising program regulations so as to minimize existing misuse and unwarranted expnditures. The Department has indicated its willingness to try to bring the abuses in this program under control. The Department can and should immediately start to revise their proceed res to bring them in line w-i-th the law. 'Since approximately three months remain before these funds are needle the Department should have in full force and effect such changes and revisions ns are necessary on or before February 1, 1976. In view of this, the $1,750,000,000 reommended by the Conmittee together with carryover funds, should provide for the program level eofntempla'.eQ by the Congres for fiscal year 1976. Available also is the $3,453,000,000 appropriated by Public Law 94-122 for the period June 30, 1975 to Janary 30, 1976, and approximately $586,000,000 in unobligated funds carried over from fiscal year 1975. Testimony before the Committee revealed that the Administration's request was overstated due to the recent decline in program participation, because of improvements in the economic condition of the country as well as the availability of carryover 1975 funds which were not anticipated at the time the request was prepared. Therefore, the Committee is able to recommend a reduction in the fiscal year 1976 request of $1,387,095,000.
"With the new regulations, the $1,039,117,000 previously appropriated for the transition period, plus carryover funds, should be adequate. Therefore, the Committee does not recommend the appropriation of any additional funds for the transition period at this time. Should a need develop, the matter could be dealt with in subsequent appropriation bills."
The Department moved to comply with the intent of the supplemental food stamp appropriation on February 26, 1976, when proposed reform regulations were published in the Federal Register. Given a period for comment and refinement of the proposed regulations in line with the Administrative Procedure Act, the Department of Agriculture anticipates implementation of these provisions prior to the beginning of Fiscal Year 1977.
The Department of Agriculture's regulation changes will not provide a total solution to food stamp reform. They are, however, a significant step in the right direction, by1. Establishing uniform national income standards of eligibility for food
stamp recipients, using the official government poverty level as the basis
for eligibility;
2. Tightening the accountability of food stamp vendors to prevent misuse
of stamp funds; and
3. Requiring able-bodied applicants for food stamps to actively seek employment as a condition for eligibility.
As stated by the Department of Agriculture, the objective of these regulations is to eliminate abuses in the food stamp program, to control costs and to increase benefits to persons who are truly in need. Under these standards, nearly 5 million persons would receive increased benefits, virtually all of whom are either elderly or the poorest of the poor in this country. Approximately 5 million persons would be excluded from the program in favor of those truly in need, particularly the elderly. The net effect of these reforms will be to save taxpayers $1.2 billion a year.
This action combined with further reform legislation should bring Fiscal Year 1977 Food Stamp program costs into line with the Administration's recommended $4.786 billion.
FOOD STAMPS AND THE BUDGET
In spite of the demonstrated need and reality of food stamp reform the Committee has recommended that a funding range be set at $4.8 billion to $6.3 billion for Fiscal Year 1977-a nonsolution that is totally inconsistent with the intent of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. Further, the $6.3 billion upper limit is based on what will be necessary with absolutely no reform either by the Congress or the Administration. Finally, the $6.3 billion upper limit represents a $649 million increase over actual food stamp expenditures during Fiscal Year 1976 and an increase of $1.514 billion over the $4.786 billion requested by the Administration.
This year the Congress is facing the difficult challenge of fiscal responsibility on many fronts. One such front is a runaway Food Stamp program which now accounts for nearly half of the entire USDA budget, but which still misses







23

the target in providing linmane and generous food -assistance to Vie trulv needy. If one fact has become apparent during recent years, it is that government no longer can solve problems by throwing more money at them. Congress scarcely has control over food stamp costs because it is an entitlement program. The solution is rooted in basic program reforms. which are under way both legislatively and administratively. Rather than ignore the President's initiative, the Congress should applaud it. We should then move to work closely with the Administration in completing reform with the necessary supplementary legislation. The Committee on Agriculture has faced its first test of good faith and re;;,olve and has failed on both counts.
In a larger sense, the Committee's vote on food stamps has serious implications with respect to overall government spending. We now are in the first year of a new budget process,, which is aimed at controlling overall spending levels and placing the relative costs and priorities of individual programs into perspective with each other. If the Congress is to act responsibly, it can no longer opt for the status quo-or worse, make no decision at all-when change is essential. Uncontrolled backdoor spending, based strictly on annual increases for inflation and artificially raised public service expectations can no longer be the path of least resistance. The issues must be confronted and resolved on their own merits if the Congress is to ease the burden of taxes and a growing national debt on our constituents; if economic recovery from the recent recession is to be further stimulated with a balanced budget; if public confidence is to be restored in our ability to focus assistance on those who legitimately need government assistance.
It is for these reasons that we urge the Committee on the Budget to overcome the Committee on Agriculture's lack of resolve on the Food Stamp program and approve an amount of $4.786 billion in line with the Administration's proposal.




UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 3 1262 09113 1143