On the recordJuly 9, 2013
A few moments ago, I talked about priorities; $7.6 billion plus for nuclear weapons. We just heard the gentleman discuss the issue of locks and levees and ports, projects in my district for the ports, for deepening the channels, for rebuilding and expanding. The economic activity in this Nation is not going to be funded. Do we really need to spend an additional $7.6 billion-plus on nuclear weapons when we have over 8,000 of them--Russia 7,000, China 250--do we really need to spend the money there, or do we need to spend it on our economic activity, as the gentleman just said? There is not enough money in the Corps of Engineers' budget to provide for all of the ports, all of the improvements that are needed, so that our ports on the west coast, the east coast, gulf coast can be competitive. Apparently, we have enough money. Why don't we take some money out of this program and put it where it will be immediately beneficial? It's a matter of priorities. Where your money is is where your heart is. Okay. That's not where my heart is. You talked about all-of-the-above energy. We ought to talk about all- of-the-above energy. Yet, ARPA-E, where we create the new science, the new technology, the new programs that will provide us with new energy sources, improved energy sources, and the improvement of all energy sources--gutted, gutted; an 87 percent reduction.…
Source
govinfo.gov