It is an interesting article. It is like a lot of other things. Just because we in Washington think everybody in America ought to have high-speed Internet access tomorrow doesn't mean they will take it, even if we give it to them. So then why should we give the telecommunications industry another big subsidy to offer high-speed Internet access to people who are already getting it free and won't take it? Finally, just in case Congress should, in its wisdom, decide to grant an additional subsidy to high-speed Internet access, the first thing we should do is make sure Congress pays for it and doesn't send the bill to State and local governments. The House bill and the Allen-Wyden bill, S. 150, which this motion to proceed is about, expressly violate the Budget Act which was amended in 1995 by the Republican majority, enthusiastically. And President Clinton signed it. Sixty-two Senators now serving in this body voted for it, and 300 Republicans stood on the Capitol steps in late September, early October, right before the election that produced the Contract with America and the first Republican Congress in a long time, and this is what we said: Our party, no money, no mandate. If we break our promise, throw us out. This is about the Congress keeping its promise.
Douglas Alexander: “It is an interesting article. It is like a lot of other things. Just because we in Washington think everybody in America…”
On the recordApril 26, 2004
Said by
Douglas Alexander
Labour Party
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of subsidies for high-speed Internet access during Senate debate.
Share
More from Douglas Alexander
Jul 15, 2026
Be assured, I wish our friends, our neighbours, and our sometimes-rivals well this evening at 8 o'clock.
Jan 12, 2009
those who have been listening and watching for the last few minutes got one good lesson on why Senator McConnell has been here for over 24 years. This is a day to honor him, but he spent virtually all of his time honoring someone else. It…
Jan 22, 2009
The DeMint amendment would take away from States the right to decide whether they want to be a right-to-work State or a State that allows for an agency shop or a union shop. Now, on this very Senate floor, in 1947, after World War II, Mr…





