On the recordMarch 16, 1995
after much thought and analysis, I have decided to oppose this bill. I have made this decision for one simple reason: on balance, I believe this bill is bad for California and bad for the Nation. I support the supplemental appropriations contained in this bill, which cover the costs of unbudgeted contingencies in Somalia, Bosnia, and Haiti. However, I believe that these unplanned operations should have been treated by the committee as emergency requirements, as requested by the Department of Defense. Having elected to recommend supplemental funding without the emergency designation, the committee was obligated to find offsetting rescissions. Regrettably, the committee has recommended for rescission in this bill programs that are vital to the defense of our country and to the economic security of the State of California. The cuts made in environmental cleanup programs and in research and development programs like the Technology Reinvestment Project, or TRP, are wrong for this country and wrong for California. I cannot support these reckless cuts, Madam President, and I will not. This bill contains a $300 million rescission for DERA, the Defense Environmental Restoration Account--twice the cut passed by the House. What would this rescission mean for the State of California? At the Marine Corps Logistics Base in Barstow, efforts to clean contaminated groundwater could be delayed.
Source
govinfo.gov




