Fw: DeLauro on the Subcommittee Markup of the Fiscal Year 2011Agriculture, Rural Development, FDA Appropriations Bill

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

---

From: "Richards, Kaelan" <Kaelan.Richards@mail.house.gov>

Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 14:59:45 -0500

To: Richards, Kaelan<Kaelan.Richards@mail.house.gov>

Subject: DeLauro on the Subcommittee Markup of the Fiscal Year 2011 Agriculture, Rural Development, FDA Appropriations Bill

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                              CONTACT: Kaelan Richards

June 30, 2010                                                                      (202) 225-3661

Statement of Chairwoman Rosa DeLauro

Subcommittee Markup: Fiscal Year 2011 Agriculture,

Rural Development, FDA Appropriations Bill

Washington, D.C. – Congresswoman Rosa L. DeLauro (Conn.-3), chairwoman of the House Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, marked up the subcommittee's fiscal year 2011 bill.  The Chairman's Mark includes $23 billion in total discretionary spending – $204 million below the FY2010 enacted level and $27 million below the President's request.

·       USDA is funded at $20.2618 billion – which is $81.7 million less than the administration's request.

The Food and Drug Administration is funded at $2.571 billion – $55 million above the budget request.
The Commodities Future Trading Commission is funded at $261 million – meeting the budget request.  

Below is DeLauro's opening statement (as prepared for delivery).

Thank you. Today I am proud to present the subcommittee's recommendations for the 2011 Agriculture FDA Appropriations Committee Markup. I look forward to working with all of you today and as we move forward on this important legislation in the weeks ahead. While we will no doubt have our differences, as we do every year, I know we can and will work together to do what is best for the American people.

Before I begin, I want to thank Ranking Member Kingston and all of the Subcommittee Members here today for all of their hard work, patience and dedication in moving this legislation forward.  Over the course of over a half-dozen hearings, I believe the Members of this committee have done an exemplary job in performing their oversight duty by asking the hard questions. 

And of course, thank you to Chairman Obey for his steady hand and clear vision at the helm of this important process.  Chairman Obey, we are going to miss you.

As in years past, we have approached this agriculture appropriations knowing that we must do everything possible to fulfill our responsibilities to the American people. That means protecting public health, supporting domestic agriculture, improving nutrition, strengthening rural communities and conserving the environment. 

These are the same goals that were embodied in the Recovery Act we passed last year, which provided funding to programs in the Department of Agriculture to help restart our economy, create jobs, reinvest in the nation's infrastructure, protect  and support families, farmers, and communities across America.

I do not need to tell anyone in this room about the importance we have all placed on living within our means. And by investing in innovation and making careful choices among competing priorities, this $23 billion FY 2011 agriculture appropriations bill we present today stays $204 million below the FY2010 enacted level and $27 million below the President's request. We have taken a long and careful look at last year's appropriations, made cuts where possible, and made sure that all of our resources are wisely invested in programs that work and that pay real dividends for the American people.

         

          This has resulted in some hard choices along the way. I will tell you that, due to the tough economic situation, I agreed to something that I had not previously wanted to do, which was a proposed fee increase from 2 percent to 3.5 percent in the 502 guaranteed home loan program.  We are protecting low and very low income borrowers from the fee, but we are still saving about $120 million there.  Combined with some careful cuts here and there, this gave us some money to address our other important needs. Among these cuts are the following:

·       $27 million from USDA buildings and facilities and $13 million from the USDA APHIS Avian Influenza Program as compared to FY 2010.

·       $15 million from the FNS SNAP employment & training program, because the program will not utilize all available funds.

·       $18 million and $17.5 million cut from the FSA and NRCS Common Computing Environments, based, on program redundancies and continuing problems with IT infrastructure. In last year's bill, we included language to ensure we can "benchmark" USDA's use of these and other IT funds in the bill. Now we are following through on those benchmarks.

·       We cut $476 million from the administration's request from WIC, which was a particularly hard cut, but is justified in that food costs did not increase as much as predicted and participation has come down.

·       And we have zeroed out funding for the voluntary National Animal ID System (NAIS). We have spent over $147 million on this program since 2004. And six years later, we still have not seen a clear plan from USDA on successful implementation, even after they shifted to a more fragmented system in 2010. While the administration asked for $14.2 million for this program, we do not feel it is a good use of resources to fund NAIS until the agency develops a clear plan for a mandatory system with measurable goals, long-term funding levels, and a plan for successful implementation. 

So we have gone through last year's bill with a close eye, and tried to trim the fat wherever possible. And as a result, we believe that this bill moving forward is now both leaner and stronger. And we also believe that we have crafted a bill that helps our government to better serve the American people. It is our task to do the people's business, and we are all here – Republican and Democrat – to fulfill it. Let me now explain some of the important funding choices we have made in this bill, and why.

          FDA: The Food and Drug Administration is always one of the most important agencies under our purview, particularly given that more than 20 cents of every dollar spent by American consumers is on an FDA-regulated product. Our legislation gives the agency $3.773 billion for oversight of foods, drugs, medical devices, pet food, cosmetics, tobacco products, vaccines, and more.  That is approximately $214 million above last year's bill, and $535 million when you factor in user fees.

I believe there is strong leadership at the FDA under Commissioner Hamburg. But I remain concerned about the existing structure at the agency, especially as it pertains to drug safety.

 So we have included targeted resources to help make a difference in this area, including an additional $65 million for staff to review generic drug applications, drug company ads targeted at consumers, and, for the first time to my knowledge, an increase specifically for review of drug company ads to doctors.  We are also funding more safety reviews for drugs already on the market, more inspections of foreign drug facilities, and providing more funds to safeguard clinical trials and improve the oversight of imported foods. For example, the bill includes:

·       A $15 million increase over the request for the office of generic drugs

·       A $3 million increase for the review of direct consumer ads

·       A $2 million for the review of communications to medical professionals in the Division of Drug Marketing and Communication

·       A $7 million increase over the request for the Center for Devices and Radiological Health

·       A $16 million increase over the request for the center and field activities in the Center for Food Safety and Applied nutrition related to imported food safety.

In addition, we have included report language that we worked on with Sen. Grassley and Congressman Hinchey that outlines the need to create an independent office on post-market drug evaluation.  Thank you Congressman Hinchey for your leadership on this issue.  As we learned from the hearing the subcommittee held about the Avandia case, there may be an inherent bias when those that approve drugs continue to play a role in determining their safety in a post-market environment.  

We have also included report language that we worked on with Congresswoman Emerson that directs FDA to provide a report on the status of developing standards for a track and trace system for prescription drugs, one that would document all parties involved in the prior sale, purchase, and trade of a given prescription drug beginning with the manufacturer.  This is critical to improving the security of the drug supply chain from counterfeit or other substandard products and to protecting consumers.  Thank you Congresswoman Emerson for your work and leadership on this.

FSIS: The bill also fully funds the President's request at $1 billion for the Food Safety Inspection Service, which, as you know, is responsible for the safety of our meat and poultry.

In this area, I want to highlight the language which will establish a science-based panel that is supported by a wide range of stakeholders to analyze the food safety system at FSIS and develop recommendations on how to modernize it.

As we all know, this modernization is both desperately needed and a long time coming. To develop the language on this process, we worked with a wide variety of stakeholder groups, including leading members of industry such as Cargill, Perdue, Sara Lee, and Tyson; consumer groups such as the Center for Science in the Public Interest, Consumer Federation of America, Safe Tables Our Priority, and Food and Water Watch; and key unions such as the American Federation of Government Employees and the United Food and Commercial Workers.

To get all of these groups in one room together several times and on the same page together is no small task, and to have them working together to craft a responsible and well-thought-out reform process is a particular achievement. I want to especially thank Mr. Kingston for his leadership on this.

Nutrition. In addition, this legislation makes significant investments in improving the nutritional status of all Americans.  Of course, we are fully funding participation in SNAP ("food stamps"), WIC and the child nutrition program:

·       SNAP is funded at over $68 billion with a $5 billion reserve. This is just over the administration's request, and 17% or nearly $10 billion increase above 2010.

·       WIC is funded at $7.1 billion (2% below last year), including infrastructure, evaluation, and actual distribution. As I said, we were able to fund WIC at two percent below last year's level without cutting the benefits received, mostly due to the fact that food prices and participation did not increase at the expected rate.

·       And the child nutrition programs, including the National School Lunch program receive $19 billion, on par with the administration's request. This includes a reserve fund of $1 billion to support the pending and crucially important reauthorization of our child nutrition programs.

After all, millions of American families rely on these crucial programs, particularly in the current economy. To take just one example, one in eight adults, and one in five children, now receive food stamps, with an additional 2.7 million more participants in the coming year. So underfunding these areas would not only be irresponsible and inhumane, but deeply and negatively impact millions of American families struggling to get by, and make it that much harder to achieve the economic recovery we really need right now.

In addition, to confront both the double-edged problem of hunger and obesity now facing our nation, the bill provides an increase over fiscal year 2010 of $95 million for nutrition research, outreach and education efforts. 

The First Lady's new Healthy Food Financing Initiative, which aims to reduce the number of food deserts in urban and rural areas and increase the supply of healthy foods available to people that live in those areas, is included here at $40 million.

For a number of structural reasons, such as lack of capital and high development costs, 23.5 million people nationwide live in low-income communities that do not have access to a large grocery store within one mile of their home. My district became acutely aware of this problem earlier this year when a major grocery store in the center of New Haven closed. Efforts to address these "food deserts" are underway in several states, and the Pennsylvania Fresh Food Financing Initiative in particular has been cited by the First Lady as a model for her program.

Created in 2004 as a public-private partnership, the FFFI has helped build or improve 83 supermarkets and fresh food outlets in underserved rural and urban areas in Pennsylvania, providing more than 400,000 residents with improved access to healthy food and creating or retaining more than 5,000 jobs.  In addition, the FFFI was designed to be flexible enough to support a variety of food retailers, including full-service supermarkets, small stores, and farmers markets. 

The $40 million we have put in here for the Healthy Food Financing Initiative represents a down payment for taking this successful program nationwide. These funds will be distributed by USDA as loans and grants to provide financial and technical assistance. They will focus on access to healthy foods in underserved communities, demand and retail outlets for farm products, and the availability of locally and regionally produced foods. Simply put, this is exactly the sort of innovative and already proven successful new program we have tried to make investment priorities in this bill.

Also in the nutrition area, I want to briefly mention another new initiative, the Farm-to-School Tactical Teams, which are funded at the administration's request of $2 million. A joint effort of the Agricultural Marketing Service and Food and Nutrition Service that was developed as part of the recent Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food initiative, these teams will help interested school administrators transition to purchasing more locally grown foods – by facilitating communication between stakeholders, assisting schools in accessing local markets, providing technical assistance in the development of Farm to School activities.  This is a win-win for both our farmers and our children.

International food aid.  Moving to the issue of food access overseas: In keeping with the growing importance of food security efforts in our diplomatic and national security strategies, as underlined by the State Department's new Feed the Future initiative, we have also increased funding for another vital nutrition program – the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program. 

As many of you know, this is a highly successful program of school feeding and related programs to children in poor countries around the world. We have allocated $266.5 million for McGovern-Dole, $57 million over the President's request, 27% over the FY2010 funding, and 167% over the FY2009 appropriation of $100 million.  This is another area for which I want to thank Ms. Emerson for her leadership.

We are also providing funding for our own Food and Nutrition Service at USDA to provide technical assistance to support McGovern-Dole.  We have also fully funded the Food for Peace program, PL480 Title II, at the request and 2010 level of $1.69 billion. And, to encourage agricultural innovation here and around the world, we have raised funding for the Borlaug Scholarship, an educational fellowship program for international agricultural scientists, by $2 million to $4 million in total.

Research.  Speaking of which, we know for a fact that neglecting basic research is never a smart or sustainable path to prosperity. So, we have continued to make sound investments in agricultural research.

 Perhaps most notably, we have provided $312 million, a 19% increase over last year's level, for the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative, which promotes competitive research on agriculture issues.

That is part of a total budget of $1.36 billion for the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, a 1% increase over 2010 and the request. Along with AFRI, this money, as you know, covers a wide range of important programs, including the Forestry Research Program, Improved Pest Control Research, Sustainable Agriculture, the Sun Grant Program, and the Hatch Act.

We have also funded the Agricultural Research Service at $1.2 billion, a 3% decrease from FY 2010, and the coming Census of Agriculture, taken every five years for data on the agricultural economy, at the administration's request of $33 million.

Rural development.  In terms of our investment priorities closer to home, one of the innovative new ideas we have included in this legislation, at a funding level of $176 million, is the administration's Regional Innovation Initiative proposal. 

In order to increase the economic viability of rural communities, this Initiative seeks to promote a regional outlook in the planning and coordination of rural development programs at USDA. While USDA Rural Development is expected to provide leadership for this initiative, the Agricultural Marketing Service is also expected to participate. And some of the supporting programs include the Business & Industry Guarantee Loan Program, the Rural Business Enterprise Grant Program, and the Intermediary Relending Program.

Just as the First Lady's HFFI has its roots in successful programs in Pennsylvania and other states, this Regional Innovation Initiative is a proposal that Secretary Vilsack has spoken of very highly, based on his experiences with a similar state initiative as Governor of Iowa. And like HFFI, it is a successful state idea that we are proud to take national in this legislation.

Conservation.  In an approach similar to the Regional Innovation Initiative, we are also providing $12.5 million for the new proposal by NRCS for Strategic Watershed Action Teams.  The idea here is to maximize the cost effectiveness of NRCS technical and financial assistance by doing concentrated work in high-priority watersheds. 

For APHIS, which deals with our ever growing list of plant and animal pests, we are providing $880 million.

Also in the conservation area, we restored funding for the Resource Conservation and Development Program, which operates in more than 375 counties around the country.  Even though it was proposed to zero out the program, NRCS, to its credit, did come up with a fairly strict set of criteria for each RC&D council, including annual work plans, biannual audits, five year plans and so on.  We are asking NRCS to keep us apprised of the implementation of these reforms and of any deviations from the plan laid out by NRCS.

Commodity Futures Trading Commission.  And to ensure that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission can continue to fulfill its role in overseeing the commodity markets, we are providing the President's full request for $261 million.  This will give CFTC the staff and the resources to carry out both its ongoing work and the new mandate of financial reform. 

Oversight. Finally, one area that we all have a keen interest in on the subcommittee is oversight.  I have often said that the Inspector General at USDA is our eyes and ears. And something I have learned is that while it is sometimes easy to get an agency to agree to reforms and cost-savings proposed by the IG, it is quite another thing to get them to actually implement what they agree to do. 

We asked the USDA OIG to look into what has been happening on implementation of their recommendations and they found that there are 557 recommendations that have been pending for a year or more after agencies agreed to implement them.   The agencies with more than 50 are: RD (84); Risk Management (70); NRCS (66); and FSIS (52).

We call out these agencies by name in the report and direct them to give us a plan to close these open issues by September 1^st.  And we specify that we reserve the right to call before us any agency that does not submit its report on time.

So, taken in full, I am proud of what we have come up with this year. I believe this is responsible legislation that emphasizes affordability, rewards innovation, reflects our national priorities, and will work to create the conditions for a robust economic recovery.  I look forward to working with all of you today to move this bill toward full committee.

Each subcommittee member and their staff has been fully briefed on the contents of the bill and each of you has a copy of the mark up notes including details about funding levels.

At this time, I would like to recognize Ranking Member Kingston to make comments if he wishes, after which, I will recognize Mr. Obey and Mr. Lewis for their comments.

Thank you.

###

www.delauro.house.gov

__________________________________

Kaelan Richards

Press Secretary

Office of Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro (CT-03)

(202) 225-3661 (office)

(202) 225-1599 (cell)

Fw: Lincoln Opening Statement at Senate Agriculture Committee Farm BillHearing

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

---

From: "Rowe, Courtney (Agriculture)" <Courtney_Rowe@agriculture.senate.gov>

Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 08:38:48 -0500

Subject: Lincoln Opening Statement at Senate Agriculture Committee Farm Bill Hearing

 

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

June 30, 2010

Contact: Courtney Rowe, (202) 224-2035

 

 

 

Opening Statement of the Honorable Blanche L. Lincoln, Chairman

 

Hearing on Expanding Our Food and Fiber Supply through a Strong U.S. Farm Policy

 

June 30, 2010

 

 

As prepared for delivery.

 

"Good morning, the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry will now come to order.

 

"This is the first in a series of hearings to help this Committee prepare for the next farm bill.  We will be taking an inventory of what we have and ensuring that it is working properly, but doing so with our eye on the future of farm policy. 

 

"I want to thank my very good friend, Senator Chambliss, for helping me organize this hearing; for being a great partner on this Committee; and for being a steadfast advocate for our nation's farmers and ranchers.  America's producers are blessed to have such a great friend in their corner.

 

"I also want to thank my other distinguished colleagues for their attendance today and for all the work that they do on behalf of rural America.  This has always been a bipartisan Committee where we put problem-solving and people above partisan politics. 

  

"We are privileged to have some excellent witnesses today.  I very much appreciate Secretary Vilsack, Dow Brantley from my home State of Arkansas, and all of our witnesses for being here to offer their unique perspectives.  I look forward to hearing from each of you. 

   

"I am honored to be the first Arkansan to serve as Chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee.  Agriculture provides a job for 1 out of every 4 Arkansans… and contributes more than $15 billion each year to my state's economy. 

 

"I expect that each and every one of my colleagues around this table has a similar story to tell about the importance of agriculture to their State's economy and jobs, both on and off of the farm.

 

"Of course, the farm bill is one of the most important pieces of legislation that Congress considers on behalf of rural America and our nation's farmers and ranchers.

 

"In the 2008 Farm Bill, we made some significant new investments in nutrition, energy, conservation, rural development and other priorities while maintaining the integrity of the farm safety net. 

 

"In the next Congress, we will be writing the 2012 farm bill.  In this process, we will have the opportunity to build on the good things that we have accomplished. 

 

"This first hearing will focus on how well the current safety net is working for our nation's farmers and ranchers.  As we begin our discussion, I want to share five points that will guide me when deliberating the next Farm Bill.

 

"First, I am proud of our farmers and ranchers.  They work hard.  They put food on our table, clothes on our back, and fuel in our cars and trucks.  But, today, our farmers and ranchers not only have to cope with unpredictable weather and unfair global markets, but they must also suffer from abuse on TV and in the newspapers from folks who really ought to know better than to bite the hand that feeds them.  Our nation's farmers and ranchers need to know that they will never have to apologize to this Chairman or this Committee.  We appreciate the work you do every day and we are on your side.

 

"Second, these Farm Bill deliberations should not be a Washington command-and-control, top-to-bottom approach to policy.  President Reagan used to say that ordinary people see things that work in principle and wonder if they work in practice, but economists see things that work in practice and wonder if they work in principle.  In the same way, we in Washington may know what policies work in principle.  But, it is our farmers and ranchers who know what works on the ground.  The good Lord gave us two ears and one mouth.  So, it is important that we use them in that proportion.  And, it is also vitally important that the safety net features of the 2012 Farm Bill come from the kitchen tables of places like Stuttgart, Arkansas and Cando, North Dakota rather than tables like this one. 

 

"Third, we need to look before we leap.  More than anything else, I think most American farm and ranch families simply want steady, predictable, supportive policies coming out of Washington… and for us to otherwise get out of their way.  Huge policy fluctuations, mixed signals coming out of Washington, and the uncertainty that these things create make it very difficult for our producers to compete, invest, and plan for the future.  So, rather than start from scratch or from some new fangled idea cooked up in Washington or in some college professor's office, we need to reassure our farmers and ranchers that we will start where we left off:  the 2008 Farm Bill.  If we can do better by our producers in 2012, great.  But, if not, current law serves as the benchmark from which we will work.

 

"Fourth, we need to get more creative.  The safety net provided under the 2008 Farm Bill is not perfect.  It can and should be strengthened.  But Congress does not even have to wait for 2012 for that to happen.  In fact, Congress does not even have to act.  For instance, back in 2000, Congress provided USDA with very broad authority to develop and approve new tools to help producers of all crops and from all regions better manage price, production, and revenue risks.  We need to use this and other authorities to their absolute fullest.  For example, if we could get every farmer in this country to 85% revenue insurance that is affordable, we would go a long way in filling the holes of the current safety net.  I know my rice farmers are working toward this goal and I suspect farmers from other States are doing the same thing.  Let's make it happen.

 

"Finally, I was reading an article the other day about the OECD and rethinking its objective to move away from promoting policies that discourage food and fiber production toward policies that help us meet the needs of a planet that will one day in the not too distant future host 9 billion people.  I believe that this consideration needs to be our overarching objective as well.  Too often, it takes a crisis to remind us of the essentials in life, basic as they may be.  But I do not believe it is wise for us to wait for a crisis to value our domestic food and fiber production. 

 

"Mike Rowe, the host of the popular TV program, "Dirty Jobs," had this to say about the importance of production agriculture:  "All jobs rely on one of two industries—mining and agriculture. Every tangible thing our society needs is either pulled from the ground, or grown from the ground. Without these fundamental industries there would be no jobs of any kind. There would be no economy. Civilization begins with miners and farmers, and polite society is only possible when skilled workers transform those raw materials into something useful or edible."

 

"It is from this perspective that I will approach the 2012 farm bill.

 

"Again, I look forward to hearing from Secretary Vilsack and all of our distinguished witnesses, and I now yield to my good friend, Senator Chambliss, for any opening remarks he may have."

 

--30--

 

 

Courtney Rowe

Communications Director

Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee

Chairman Blanche L. Lincoln

202.224.2035 

 

 

Fw: NEWS: Restaurant Industry Outlook Softened in May as RestaurantPerformance Index Fell Below 100

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

---

From: Nat'l Restaurant Assn Media <media@restaurant.org>

Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 08:59:11 -0500

To: Nat'l Restaurant Assn Media<media@restaurant.org>

Subject: NEWS: Restaurant Industry Outlook Softened in May as Restaurant Performance Index Fell Below 100

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, June 30, 2010

CONTACT: Annika Stensson (202) 973-3677 astensson@restaurant.org or Mike Donohue (202) 331-5902 mdonohue@restaurant.org

National Restaurant Association on Twitter and Facebook.

Watch a video of the RPI.

Restaurant Industry Outlook Softened in May as Restaurant Performance Index Fell Below 100
Restaurant operators remain optimistic about sales growth and the economy in the months ahead, though same-store sales and traffic levels softened in May

 

(Washington, D.C.)  The outlook for the restaurant industry softened in May, as the National Restaurant Association's comprehensive index of restaurant activity fell below 100 for the first time in three months.  The Association's Restaurant Performance Index (RPI) – a monthly composite index that tracks the health of and outlook for the U.S. restaurant industry – stood at 99.7 in May, down 0.7 percent from April's level of 100.4.  The RPI's May drop came after strong index growth earlier this year and amid sharply increasing wholesale food prices.

"Although the sales and customer traffic indicators softened in May, capital expenditure activity rose to its highest level in nearly two years," said Hudson Riehle, senior vice president of the Research and Knowledge Group for the Association.  "This, along with a continued positive outlook for sales and the overall economy, signals that restaurant operators remain optimistic that business conditions will improve in the months ahead."

 

Watch a video of Riehle providing an industry update, including the RPI.

The RPI – a monthly composite index that tracks the health of and outlook for the U.S. restaurant industry – is constructed so that the health of the restaurant industry is measured in relation to a steady-state level of 100.  Index values above 100 indicate that key industry indicators are in a period of expansion, and index values below 100 represent a period of contraction for key industry indicators.  The RPI consists of two components, the Current Situation Index and the Expectations Index.

The Current Situation Index, which measures current trends in four industry indicators (same-store sales, traffic, labor and capital expenditures), stood at 98.7 in May – down 0.3 percent from its April level.  The Current Situation Index remained below 100 for the 33rd consecutive month, which signifies contraction in the current situation indicators. 

 

Restaurant operators reported a net decline in same-store sales for the second consecutive month in May.  Thirty-five percent of restaurant operators reported a same-store sales gain between May 2009 and May 2010, down from 39 percent of operators who reported higher sales in April.  In comparison, 46 percent of operators reported a same-store sales decline in May, up from 41 percent of operators who reported negative sales in April.   

Restaurant operators also reported softer customer traffic results in May.  Thirty-three percent of restaurant operators reported an increase in customer traffic between May 2009 and May 2010, down from 37 percent who reported higher customer traffic in April.  Meanwhile, 43 percent of operators reported a traffic decline in May, up from 39 percent who reported lower traffic in April.

Although sales and traffic results softened in May, restaurant operators reported an uptick in capital spending activity.  Forty-five percent of operators said they made a capital expenditure for equipment, expansion or remodeling during the past three months, up from 40 percent last month and the highest level in nearly two years.

The Expectations Index, which measures restaurant operators' six-month outlook for four industry indicators (same-store sales, employees, capital expenditures and business conditions), stood at 100.8 in May – down 1.0 percent from April's level of 101.8.  Despite the decline, the Expectations Index remained above 100 for the fifth consecutive month, which represents expansion in the forward-looking indicators. 

Although restaurant operators remain optimistic about sales growth in the months ahead, their optimism slipped somewhat in recent months.  Forty-three percent of restaurant operators expect to have higher sales in six months (compared with the same period in the previous year), down from 47 percent who reported similarly last month.  In comparison, 18 percent of restaurant operators expect their sales volume in six months to be lower than it was during the same period in the previous year, up from 12 percent who reported similarly last month and the highest level in four months.

 

Restaurant operators are also not as optimistic about the direction of the overall economy.  Thirty-three percent of restaurant operators said they expect economic conditions to improve in six months, down from 41 percent who reported similarly last month and the lowest level in four months.  In comparison, 15 percent of operators said they expect economic conditions to worsen in the next six months, up from 10 percent last month. 

Restaurant operators' plans for capital expenditures held relatively steady in recent months.  Forty-six percent of restaurant operators plan to make a capital expenditure for equipment, expansion or remodeling in the next six months, roughly on par with the levels reported in the previous three months. 

The RPI is based on the responses to the National Restaurant Association's Restaurant Industry Tracking Survey, which is fielded monthly among restaurant operators nationwide on a variety of indicators including sales, traffic, labor, and capital expenditures. The full report is available online.

The RPI is released on the last business day of each month, and more detailed data and analysis can be found on Restaurant TrendMapper (www.restaurant.org/trendmapper), the Association's subscription-based service that provides detailed analysis of restaurant industry trends.

 

National Restaurant Association's Restaurant Performance Index

Values greater than 100 = expansion; Values less than 100 = contraction

 

Source: National Restaurant Association
                                                                                ###
 
Founded in 1919, the National Restaurant Association is the leading business association for the restaurant industry, which comprises 945,000 restaurant and foodservice outlets and a workforce of nearly 13 million employees. Together with the National Restaurant Association Educational Foundation, the Association works to lead America's restaurant industry into a new era of prosperity, prominence, and participation, enhancing the quality of life for all we serve. For more information, visit our Web site at www.restaurant.org.
  
View this news release online:  http://www.restaurant.org/pressroom/pressrelease/?ID=1975

Subscribe to news release RSS feeds:  http://www.restaurant.org/pressroom/rsscategories/

More news and information from the National Restaurant Association: http://www.restaurant.org/pressroom  
 
To be removed from our mailing list, reply to this e-mail with "unsubscribe" in the message.

Fw: News from Center for Produce Safety

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

---

From: "Fernandez-Fenaroli, Bonnie" <bfernandez@cps.ucdavis.edu>

Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 11:03:25 -0500

Subject: News from Center for Produce Safety

 

News and Announcements Davis, Calif., June  30, 2010 - The Center for Produce Safety's (CPS) first-ever research symposium brought the private fresh produce supply chain together with researchers and government officials June 23 to learn about and discuss the real-world business applicability of the center's produce-specific food safety research.   CPS's first Produce Research Symposium attracted 300 attendees from the private produce and food safety communities, including growers, packers, processors and commodity groups, retailers and restaurant operators, as well as representatives from government and academia. They convened at the Mondavi Center for the Performing Arts on the campus of University of California, Davis, on June 23 to hear the results of 11 produce-specific food safety research projects and discuss their immediate production and business applications.   "The projects presented, as well as on-going research being sponsored by CPS, represent a focus on near-term research with real-world applications that can quickly generate results to help answer the industry's most pressing questions," said CPS Executive Director Bonnie Fernandez-Fenaroli. "This symposium was the culmination of two years of intense work by CPS and volunteer leaders and scientists who are passionate about enhancing the safety of fresh produce."   Research findings were presented on topics related to assessing the actual survivability of E. coli in the field, previewing the next generation of pathogen tests, and assessing the risks of pathogen transfer posed by livestock and harvest practices. Researchers hailed from a broad range of agricultural research universities and government agencies, including UC Davis, Louisiana State University, Oklahoma State University, Clemson, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service. After a brief presentation by each researcher, the real-world implications of each project were discussed by panelists from across the supply chain and the public sector, including the Food and Drug Administration, Taylor Farms, Darden Restaurants and Wegmans Food Markets.   "The information that I can take home to my business has great value, and it was equally impressive to see the broad array of people that CPS has been able to bring together in service to our industry," said Tim York, president of foodservice distributor Markon Cooperative, and chair of the CPS Advisory Board. "CPS is already returning great value to the industry it serves."    In opening York noted, "Our industry has come together as never before - not just to react to events, but to debate, initiate and lead changes that will improve the safety of our products and, by extension, improve public health."  In his closing remarks, he acknowledged the generous contribution of the public and private partners that have provided critical funding support. "CPS is a shining example of the public and private sector working together toward a common goal: increasing the safety of fresh produce."   "The symposium reflected the efforts of so many dedicated stakeholders, and it is great to see the broad and sincere interest in our mutual challenge to raise consumer confidence in our healthy fresh fruits and vegetables," said Alec Leach, president of Taylor Farms, a founding partner of CPS and one of the symposium's sponsors. Presenting researcher Dr. Xiuping Jiang of Clemson University also noted the unique nature of the symposium from a researcher's perspective, reporting, "This meeting is by far the most interactive meeting I have participated in. The format of the meeting created an environment to promote dialogue among the presenter, panel members, and meeting participants.  I was able to meet so many people from the produce industry, government, and universities to discuss produce safety, and get information on the real-world practices and research needs in the area of composting."    Since Fernandez-Fenaroli was appointed executive director in March 2008, CPS has invested $3.8 million in 24 produce-specific food safety research projects. The members of the center's technical committee -chaired by PMA Chief Science & Technology Officer Dr. Bob Whitaker and composed of representative from academia, industry, and government - will soon announce the results of the center's 2010 call for proposals.   "The center's Advisory Board and Technical Committee have come together to fill priority food safety information gaps and get information into the hands of the people who need it most," said Whitaker. "It has been tremendously exciting to join in this effort, and to be part of the interaction between industry and the research community that CPS is fostering."   The June 23 symposium was sponsored by: platinum sponsor Produce Marketing Association (PMA); gold sponsors iGPS and Taylor Farms; and silver sponsors Castellini Group of Companies, Chiquita Brands International/Fresh Express, C.H. Robinson Worldwide Inc., Ecolab, Florida Agricultural Experiment Station at the University of Florida-IFAS, Florida Fruit & Vegetable Association, The Giumarra Companies, Microsoft Dynamics and UC Davis College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. About Center for Produce Safety   The Center for Produce Safety is focused exclusively on providing the produce industry and government with open access to the actionable information needed to continually enhance the safety of produce.  Established by public and private partnership at the University of California, Davis, CPS funds original research; has created a searchable database of global produce safety research; and is developing industry training and outreach programs.  Initial funding for CPS was provided by the California Department of Food and Agriculture, the University of California, Produce Marketing Association and Taylor Farms. For more information, visit http://cps.ucdavis.edu     Center for Produce Safety University of California, Davis  279 Cousteau Place, Ste 100 Davis, CA 95618 Phone (530) 757-5777 website http://cps.ucdavis.edu  Platinum Sponsor         Gold Sponsor       Silver Sponsor

 

Fw: Agriculture Committee Witness List: Thursday, July 1st - 10:00 a.m.

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-----Original Message-----
From: AgPress <AgPress@mail.house.gov>
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 09:28:57
To: Ahead Distribution<ahead@aglist.house.gov>
Reply-To: "ahead-request@aglist.house.gov" <ahead-request@aglist.house.gov>
Subject: Agriculture Committee Witness List: Thursday, July 1st - 10:00 a.m.

Thursday, July 1st - 10:00 a.m.
1300 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC
Subcommittee on Conservation, Credit, Energy, and Research--Public Hearing
RE: To review the administration and delivery of conservation programs.

Witness List:

Panel I

Mr. Dave White, Chief, Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.

Mr. Jonathan W. Coppess, Administrator, Farm Service Agency, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.

Panel II

Mr. Steve Robinson, President, National Association of Conservation Districts (NACD), Washington, D.C.

Mr. John Lohr, Vice President, National Association of FSA County Office Employees (NASCOE), Norvelt, Pennsylvania

Mr. Ron Leathers, Public Finance Director, Pheasants Forever and Quail Forever, St. Paul, Minnesota

Dr. Scott Manley, Director of Conservation Programs, Ducks Unlimited, Ridgeland, Mississippi

Dr. Robert T. Burns, Assistant Dean for Agriculture, Natural Resources and Rural Development, The University of Tennessee Extension,
Knoxville, Tennessee

Mr. Steve Dlugosz, Certified Crop Adviser (CCA), Lead Agronomist, Harvestland Cooperative, on behalf of the International Certified
Crop Adviser (ICCA) Program and the American Society of Agronomy, Indianapolis, Indiana

Mr. William L. Braford, Consulting Forester, Bluechip Forestry, Natural Bridge Station, Virginia

The House Agriculture Committee web site http://agriculture.house.gov has additional information on this and other subjects.

To *un*subscribe from the meeting schedules mailinglist, simply send a *new* message with "unsubscribe" in the Subject field.

To: ahead-request@aglist.house.gov
Subject: unsubscribe

U.S. Sen Tom Coburn presses Kagan on the reach of congressional power

http://www.newsok.com/u.s.-sen-tom-coburn-presses-kagan-on-the-reach-of-congressional-power/article/3472437?custom_click=headlines_widget


U.S. Sen Tom Coburn presses Kagan on the reach of congressional power

Republican Senator Tom Coburn's questions of Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan appear to reference new health care law.

BY CHRIS CASTEEL Oklahoman Comment on this article 5
Published: June 30, 2010

WASHINGTON — Sen. Tom Coburn questioned Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan on Tuesday about the reach of congressional power and whether she would be able to doff her "political hat” on the high court.



Senate Judiciary Committee member Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., question Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan during her confirmation hearing before the committee, Tuesday, June 29, 2010, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)


Questioning Kagan during the second day of her confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Coburn started by suggesting Kagan hadn't been forthright with other senators about her liberal views.

"I don't apologize for my social conservatism or my fiscal conservatism,” Coburn, R-Muskogee, said. "I think you're a liberal; I think you're proud to defend that. You have a different belief system than most of the people where I come from.”

Kagan said her political views wouldn't shape her opinions as a jurist. Coburn asked how she could take off her political hat to be an impartial judge.

"That hat has not been on for many years,” said Kagan, who has been serving since last year as solicitor general, who is the chief advocate for the president before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Kagan said that she had spent four years of her 25-year legal career in the White House working for former President Bill Clinton. The majority of her career, she said, has been spent working as a legal scholar and teacher.

Fruit, veggie law
Coburn spent a portion of his time making an apparent veiled reference to the new health care reform law and asking Kagan why Congress was allowed to legislate so broadly under the Constitution's commerce clause. He gave her a hypothetical question about Congress passing a law that would require all Americans to eat three fruits and three vegetables a day.

"Sounds like a dumb law,” Kagan said.

Coburn responded that it wasn't as dumb as one that he would refrain from mentioning.

With the acquiescence of courts, Coburn said, Congress had expanded the use of the commerce clause in ways the nation's founders had never envisioned.

Coburn's questions related directly to congressional objections, and now legal challenges, to the new health care law, particularly its requirement that most people buy health insurance.

"What if I said eating fruits and vegetables would cut health care costs by 20 percent?” Coburn said. "Then we're into interstate commerce.”

Kagan said the Supreme Court has long given deference to Congress in regard to the scope of the commerce clause.

She said it has been broadly interpreted to include anything that would substantially affect interstate commerce but that Congress can't use it to regulate non-economic activities.

Coburn also asked Kagan about whether she would consider foreign law in making decisions. She said she didn't think foreign law was appropriate to refer to "in the vast majority of legal cases.”

Coburn pressed Kagan about when justices should consider court precedents and when they should consider the original intent of the framers of the Constitution.

Kagan said it required a pragmatic, case-by-case approach.

"But that's a judgmental decision,” Coburn said.

"I don't disagree with you that judging requires judgment,” Kagan said.