The House on July 11 voted 339-82 to pass the FY2001 agriculture appropriations bill (H.R. 4461). The House was unable to complete work on the bill prior to the July 4 recess (see The Source, 6/30/00).
Members defeated, 182-187, an amendment that would have prohibited the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from using funds to test, develop, or approve any drug that was solely intended to chemically induce an abortion. Saying that the FDA’s mission was to “provide safety and efficacy for life and health,” Rep. Tom Coburn (R-OK) argued that “there is nothing about the chemical inducement of an abortion that is safe.”
The amendment, sponsored by Rep. Coburn, was similar to an amendment approved by the House during consideration of the FY1999 and FY2000 agriculture spending bills but dropped during a House-Senate conference. In an effort to appease opponents of his amendment, Rep. Coburn narrowed the language. The amendment that passed the House in 1998 and 1999 would have prohibited the FDA from using funds to test, develop, or approve drugs that may chemically induce abortion. Opponents argued that the language could be interpreted to include important life-saving drugs, such as cancer therapies.
The House also defeated, 59-323, an amendment by Rep. Mark Sanford (R-SC) that would have prohibited the use of funds by the Department of Agriculture for a pilot project aimed at studying the provision of free school breakfasts to all students regardless of income. The bill would provide $6 million for the pilot program. Seven million dollars was appropriated last year.
Arguing that the amendment was “not about the merits of the program,” Rep. Sanford stated, “It does not take $13 million to tell us that young folks do better in school after breakfast than without breakfast.” Additionally, he argued that “we have to take aim at helping folks,” adding: “I think that those in need absolutely should be given a free breakfast. But if one is a lawyer, does one need to have a free breakfast for one’s children?”
Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) opposed the amendment, saying, “More and more parents are out the door on the road early in the morning with no time to sit down to breakfast. That does not mean they cannot afford breakfast. It means those children do not eat breakfast because there is nobody there to insist that they do.”
The Senate Appropriations Committee approved its version of the bill (S. 2536) on May 9. Consideration by the full Senate has been delayed pending House approval of its bill.
