I think this is more of a question/comment. One of the statements at the end talked about how this was held up. We passed a bill out of here--a continuing resolution--in which we cut, on an annualized basis, $70 billion. We didn't compromise. We took their number. Let's make sure we are clear. We negotiated starting back in July, reduced and reduced, and then we went with their number, a $70 billion annualized reduction. The body passed it, and nothing passes out of this body unless we get a motion to proceed with some sort of unanimous consent or bipartisan, and that was 99 to 0--people forget that--to move us to the bill. Then we moved it and sent it over to the House, where it has sat since the day we sent it over there. That would have kept this budget operating. Again, it had a $70 billion annualized reduction. I think that was the point toward the end of the Senator's comment, that a simple vote over there would put everyone back to work--these permits we just talked about, cleaning up the legacy wells. The timber we have in southeastern Alaska is now in jeopardy because our Federal lands are now at risk. Is that a fair assessment?
Share & report
More from Mark Begich
Thank you for giving me a moment to ask those questions. I rise to address an important issue--just as we were asking some questions back and forth--that would help 49,000 Alaskans, raising the minimum wage. The bill before us would…
The vote on adoption of the motion to proceed to the compounding bill is expected to be a voice vote. ____________________
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 294, submitted earlier today by Senators Landrieu, Inhofe, and others. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the resolution by…
Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it adjourn under the previous order. There being no objection, the Senate, at 6:38 p.m., adjourned until Tuesday, February 11, 2014, at…





