I appreciate the chairman's great work on the appropriations bill and have great respect for him, but I would like to respond to some of the comments. This is not a cut to the EPA's budget. This is a redirection of funds away from a militarized division of the EPA. There is no effort at all here to diminish the EPA's ability to carry out its core functions. If there is a problem where armed agents or armed personnel are involved, they need to rely on people who are trained to deal with such situations. Actually, I think this would allow the EPA to redirect its funds to make sure that our environment is protected. So with all due respect, I want to make sure that it is understood that this is not a cut to the EPA's budget. This is a redirection of resources and a demilitarization of a Federal agency that, frankly, I have seen in my own State of Alabama where they showed up at a city water system in full body armor, bulletproof vests, carrying AR15s--at a city water system. It was totally uncalled for. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this, and I reserve the balance of my time.
On the recordSeptember 7, 2017
Source
govinfo.govShare
More from Gary Palmer
Jul 24, 2024
I think it is interesting that my colleague believes the EPA is now a law enforcement agency and wants them fully funded, particularly in light of the fact that so many of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle were for defunding the…
Sep 23, 2024
the only Federal agency in the country that has failed to pass an independent audit, they remain on the GAO's High-Risk List for waste, fraud, and abuse for 34 years.
Jun 13, 2024
Thank you, Brad, for giving us this opportunity to reflect on the events of June 14, 2017. Regardless of what we do the rest of our lives, that day will bind us together, those who were there that day. The interesting thing is, the day…





