Interior, Environment, Financial Services, and General Government Appropriations Act, 2019

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I call up the following amendments and ask unanimous consent that they be reported by number: No. 3464, No. 3522, No. 3524, and No. 3402.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, as we near completion of the fiscal year 2019 appropriations bill for Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies, which has been included in the appropriations package before this Chamber, I wish to thank all of my colleagues for working collaboratively with us.

The managers' amendment incorporates 14 T-HUD amendments, which adds to the deliberations that produced the bill that we brought to the floor. In drafting this bill, the ranking member, Senator Jack Reed, to whom I am very grateful for his bipartisan collaboration, reviewed more than 800 requests and input from 70 Senators from both sides of the aisle. This truly is a bipartisan product. I also want to thank the staff for their diligence and commitment throughout this process.

Our Transportation-HUD bill makes important investments in our infrastructure and housing programs that will benefit communities and vulnerable families, seniors, young people, homeless veterans, and so many others across the Nation. Improving our infrastructure is also essential for economic growth, personal mobility, and the creation of jobs.

I am pleased that we were able to bring this spending bill to the floor so that Members have a full opportunity to analyze and debate this legislation rather than the past practice of moving all the appropriations bills in one enormous, 1,000-page omnibus. That is a great credit to the Senate, to the Appropriations Committee, and particularly its leaders, Senator Shelby and Senator Leahy, and to the majority and minority leaders as well. All of them worked together and made it a goal for us to report all 12 appropriations bills from the Appropriations Committee and bring them to the floor for full and open debate. That is how the process is meant to work. I want to thank my Members on both sides of the aisle and urge my colleagues to support the bill.

Mr. President, I wish to also speak about clarifying FDA regulations on ``added sugar'' labeling requirements. It is very important to our pure maple syrup and honey producers in the State of Maine.

I rise to thank my colleagues, including Chairman Shelby, for including in the managers' package an amendment that I offered with Senators King, Sanders, Hoeven, Shaheen, and Leahy to help protect our pure maple syrup and honey producers from labeling requirements that could create widespread consumer confusion and negatively affect these industries.

Although FDA's ``added sugars'' labeling requirement is intended to help educate consumers about a product's contents, complications arise when it is applied to single-ingredient sweeteners like maple sugar or honey. The rule would require the label to state that all sugar in these products as ``added sugar.''

The Maine Maple Producers Association, along with the individual producers it represents, believes that the term ``added sugar,'' when used with a single ingredient sweetener, will confuse consumers and misrepresent the product's standard of identity.

Consumers may assume that high fructose corn syrup or cane sugar has been added to the maple syrup, which directly conflicts with the pure and natural image of the product.

Our amendment would ensure that no funds are used to enforce the ``added sugars'' requirement on any single ingredient sugar, honey, agave, or syrup that is packaged for sale as a single ingredient.

I am grateful that FDA has acknowledged the serious concerns expressed in the public comments and by Members of Congress, by declaring its intent to ``swiftly formulate a revised approach.'' While we are committed to ultimately achieving an exemption for single- ingredient sweeteners, passage of this amendment is another signal of strong bipartisan, bicameral opposition to the requirement.

This is a commonsense solution to avoid harmful unintended consequences of a well-meaning rule, and I thank my colleagues for their support.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source