I agree with the gentleman that current law regarding public lands must be followed. There is nothing in this bill that contradicts that. We are not going to be getting rid of public lands in this bill. As such, there is no purpose or relevance for this, so I would oppose this. I think this is trying to get people all excited that we are going to be getting rid of public lands in this bill, which is not true. I encourage my colleagues to oppose this amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.
Ken Calvert: “I agree with the gentleman that current law regarding public lands must be followed. There is nothing in this bill that…”
Share
More from Ken Calvert
This amendment strikes all funding for the Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid account. The funding is used by DOD to assist during humanitarian disasters. The funding is also used when specialized DOD experience is needed, such…
The amendment strikes $15 million for HIV prevention education activities undertaken in connection with the United States military training exercises and the humanitarian assistance activities conducted primarily in African nations. This…
This is the final point I would make. The dud rate on the Russian cluster munitions exceeds 30 percent where the dud rate of the U.S. munition is extremely low. It is a terrible weapon. War is a terrible thing. These weapons are necessary…





