At the end of the House debate, many of the parties in opposition to one another found they simply shared a common goal. So after an extended debate, they came together and found what they could agree upon. They cared a great deal about the skyrocketing costs of the Forest Service program, without exception. They agreed then that collaboration and common understanding was necessary to address the problems in a way that would most likely achieve a mutual beneficial solution and it would be better to do that than simply replay the debate. I think that is where we are today, Mr. President. We do not want to replay that debate that unfolded in the House and perhaps would unfold in this body. So Congressman Young has taken the lead from the Speaker of the House of Representatives to work with the conflict resolution center at George Mason University to schedule an all-day workshop with interested Congressmen to review these issues and find where some common ground and consensus could be found. And this is the issue in mind, the Forest Service's Purchaser Credit Road Construction Program. Congressman Young is inviting me and other interested Senators to the workshop. I will support the House effort and urge Members here to do likewise. I do not believe that we can make sound public policy decisions when we disagree on basic facts associated with the issues that come to the Senate floor. This particular issue is ripe for that kind of exposure.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing collaboration on the Forest Service's Purchaser Credit Road Construction Program.
Share
More from Lisa Murkowski
By providing women with the option to voluntarily prevent unplanned pregnancies and to protect themselves from transmission of the virus and have access to clinics, the United States can prevent further deaths of women and the cruel and…
“I am also keenly aware that the Department’s nearly $2-billion dollar slush fund—which likely would have rewarded January 6 protesters—is only off the table because this nomination is pending and the Senate has leverage.”
It’s tough to say that that the agreement is one that leaves Iran in a worse place, and the United States in a better place.
It's only off the table because this nomination is pending and the Senate has leverage.





