Mr. Chairman, I rise today, not in support of the amendment, the substitute offered by the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Mfume], but to say that it is an intellectually honest one and it is a good faith effort. It is one that clearly deserves to be debated because of the effort that it makes here today. But the primary reason that I would oppose it is because of the cuts it makes in the budget. Mr. Chairman, despite what the gentlewoman from Colorado [Mrs. Schroeder] said, the $175 billion additional cut below the baseline of the Clinton plan, and that is on top of the cuts that the Clinton plan would make, would be devastating to national defense. Well, is there an alternative to the Clinton budget? Yes, there is. There is one that will be debated next, and it is that plan that is offered by the Republicans on the Committee on the Budget led by the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Kasich].
Editor's note · Context
Discussing budget cuts and their impact on national defense during a committee debate.
Share
More from Jim Kolbe
I rise in opposition to the Farm Security Act conference report (H.R. 2646). I appreciate the work of the Agriculture Committee to bring a bill to the floor, but this effort falls short of real reform for our farm programs and seriously…
I want to commend both the chairman and the ranking member and this committee for keeping the committee focused on the importance of U.S. global leadership, effective partnership, and good development practices.
Mr. Chairman, I am not really in opposition to what the gentleman is certainly attempting to do. Let me just say that the gentleman has very eloquently laid out the case I think for microlending programs. I have had an opportunity, as I…
It is a great pleasure to be able to testify today especially with this distinguished panel who are really the practitioners of public-private partnerships.





