I oppose this amendment. I do so reluctantly with my colleague on the committee. But the committee bill contains no mandatory funding in the rural development title. This amendment would take savings achieved in the bill from 23.4--used to be 26.3--now we are down to 23.4. That would take it down to 23.2 and redirect $150 million mandatory spending into a few rural development programs. Nothing against them, but if we are going to achieve savings in this bill, we have to hold the line. I reluctantly oppose the amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
Kevin Roberts: “I oppose this amendment. I do so reluctantly with my colleague on the committee. But the committee bill contains no…”
Share
More from Kevin Roberts
I thank all of my colleagues and especially Senator Daines for pointing out what is happening in rural and smalltown America. As a matter of fact, most of my colleagues-- Senator Hoeven, Senator Capito, Senator Daines, Senator Boozman…
I thank Senator Young and Senator Collins, who have just preceded me and set the tone, as only they can do, with regard to honoring Memorial Day. It is truly an honor to stand on the floor of the Senate and speak about so many who have…
my colleagues, first, I thank the leadership on both sides for this opportunity to give a Pat Roberts ``adios, amigos'' speech. The story of how I got into politics is a pretty straight family path. As a fourth-generation Kansan, my…
Linda McMahon has basically given 4,000 institutions plus foreign schools the green light to waste, abuse, and create fraud with Federal Financial Aid dollars with zero oversight.