On the recordApril 12, 1994
I would just make the point that this is certainly a matter of controversy, but I have been on the Budget Committee both in the House and now in the U.S. Senate and there is a fund. It is not treated like a fund, and there is an argument about it, that is clear. Some of us think it should be treated as a fund, and others feel it should just stay in and offset the deficit. Yes, it is an accounting procedure. But when those taxes were laid on, they were laid on for a specific purpose of acquisition. So the Senator and I have a disagreement on how this fund is viewed. Obviously, USA Today agrees with this Senator in terms of the way they interpret it. It is a debate, however, for another day. But I read that out of USA Today because they are of the view that there is a fund there and literally can and should be used to expand acquisition. I know the Senator from Louisiana, from time to time, presses that issue, and I happen to agree with him that we ought to spend for park acquisition.
Source
govinfo.gov




