Ken Calvert: “I want to commend my colleague for her consistent work to protect taxpayer dollars, and I certainly support her in all…”

“I want to commend my colleague for her consistent work to protect taxpayer dollars, and I certainly support her in all of the endeavors that she has done over the years to do that. But this is not the type of approach that I can support. I certainly like the idea of challenging the agencies, and I believe that the agencies are going to meet that challenge to cut spending in a responsible way. This bill has made some very tough choices, within a subcommittee allocation, that adheres to the current law. The Budget Committee asked us to meet certain budget caps, and we have done so in this bill, while asking that we increase spending for our national security, which is in woeful shape. So we had to make some very difficult tradeoffs. This bill, in its current form, balances our needs, those tradeoffs carefully weighed for their respectful impacts. We prioritize funding for fire suppression, PILT, national parks--maybe the most popular agency in the United States Government--and meeting our legal and moral obligations in Indian Country. Unfortunately, the process that the gentlewoman proposes--an across- the-board cut--would cut all those programs, including Indian health, national park programs, and other programs, which already are taking significant cuts. This amendment makes no distinction between where we need to be spending to invest in, say, energy independence, or to limit spending to meet our deficit controls. Mr.…”