This part sets aside $50 million for the farm crops part of this law. The money stays there until it is spent. Some of it goes to named uses. That includes $9 million for dairy surveys.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Secretary of AgricultureHow: statuteSec. 10314 in the PDF
What the document says
“The Secretary shall make available to carry out subtitle C of title I of the Act entitled `An Act to provide for reconciliation pursuant to title II of H. Con. Res. 14' (119th Congress) and the amendments made by that subtitle $50,000,000, to remain available until expended, of which--”
The section adds a new paragraph (5) to section 1614(c) of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (7 U.S.C. 9097(c)) making $50,000,000 available to carry out subtitle C of title I of this Act and the amendments it makes, to remain available until expended. Within that sum, at least $5,000,000 goes to paragraphs (3) and (4) of subsection (b), $3,000,000 to activities described in paragraph (3)(A), and $3,000,000 to activities described in paragraph (3)(B).
What the document actually says
“The Secretary shall make available to carry out subtitle C of title I of the Act entitled `An Act to provide for reconciliation pursuant to title II of H. Con. Res. 14' (119th Congress) and the amendments made by that subtitle $50,000,000, to remain available until expended, of which--”
That sentence, in plain words
The Secretary must put up $50 million. It pays for the farm crops part of this law. The money stays there until it is spent.
What this is about
Parts of the sum are set aside for named uses. Money that stays available does not lapse at year end. The list that follows gives each share.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Secretary of AgricultureHow: statuteSec. 10314 in the PDF
What the document says
“to carry out mandatory surveys of dairy production cost and product yield information to be reported by manufacturers required to report under section 273 of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1637b), for all products processed in the same facility or facilities; and”
The section earmarks $9,000,000 for mandatory surveys of dairy production cost and product yield information reported by manufacturers already required to report under section 273 of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1637b), covering all products processed in the same facility or facilities, and for publishing the results of those surveys every two years.
What the document actually says
“to carry out mandatory surveys of dairy production cost and product yield information to be reported by manufacturers required to report under section 273 of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1637b), for all products processed in the same facility or facilities; and”
That sentence, in plain words
The money pays for surveys of dairy plants. They cover what it costs to make a product. They also cover how much a plant gets out of the milk.
What this is about
Plants that already report to the government must take part. The surveys cover every product made in the plant. The results are published every two years.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Secretary of AgricultureHow: statuteSec. 10314 in the PDF
What the document says
“$1,000,000 shall be used to conduct the study under subsection (d) of section 359k of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 (7 U.S.C. 1359kk).”
The section earmarks $1,000,000 for the study of refined sugar imports required by the new subsection (d) of section 359k of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, which section 10312 of this Act adds.
What the document actually says
“$1,000,000 shall be used to conduct the study under subsection (d) of section 359k of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 (7 U.S.C. 1359kk).”
That sentence, in plain words
One million dollars is set aside for a study. It is the sugar study set up elsewhere in this law.
What this is about
That study asks whether new rules on refined sugar imports are needed. It is ordered by another part of this same law. This part just pays for it.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
Each distinct thing the section does: the $50,000,000 made available to carry out subtitle C of title I of this Act, the earmarks within it, the mandatory dairy surveys and their publication, and the money for the refined sugar study.
The three smaller earmarks of $5,000,000, $3,000,000 and $3,000,000 are carried in the summary rather than recorded one by one.
The section works by adding a paragraph to section 1614(c) of the Agricultural Act of 2014, which is not indexed here. The reporting duty it points to sits in section 273 of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, which is also not indexed here.
