I would like to respond simply by pointing out two things. One, I think in retrospect that that was a mistake. Second, the gentleman knows full well, because he has told me on many occasions, he does not agree with the decision to abolish these agencies. He thinks the U.S. Information Agency has a purpose independent from the State Department in communicating a message to the captive countries of this world that agency from the government to government relationships of that State Department. He knows there is no underlying sense in the abolition of these agencies; that is why we are supporting the President's veto. That is why it is the right thing.
Howard Berman: “I would like to respond simply by pointing out two things. One, I think in retrospect that that was a mistake. Second…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the decision to abolish certain government agencies and supporting the President's veto.
Share
More from Howard Berman
I would also yield 5 minutes of my time to the gentleman from Ohio and ask unanimous consent that he be allowed to control those 5 minutes. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from California? There…
But those visas would only allow workers to remain here for a period of 18 months even if they have been here for decades and have spouses and children in the United States.
I have no further requests for time, and I'm prepared, if you're prepared to close, to yield back the balance of my time, and I will yield back the balance of my time.
I thank the gentleman for yielding. Madam Speaker, that is also my understanding. The intent of Congress is to place people in the classified annex only if the President determines and justifies to the relevant committees that it is vital…





