Norman Mineta: “the devastation caused by the earthquake in Los Angeles may be hard for many who sit here, 2,500 miles away, to fully…”

“the devastation caused by the earthquake in Los Angeles may be hard for many who sit here, 2,500 miles away, to fully grasp. But I can tell you from having spent days on the ground and in the air over the devastation that it is immense. It has destroyed lives and livelihoods, and it has damaged a significant part of our national economy. It is, depending on which estimates you believe, either the costliest or the second costliest natural disaster in our Nation's history. We cannot sit idly by. This is not just an issue of suffering and devastation in one area, it is a national issue with national impacts. We are all diminished if we do not repair and restore as much as we can. I want to address here two issues in particular. First, some have said that expenditure for this disaster should not be allowed to proceed unless equal cuts are made in the budget we have already adopted. Nothing in this rule would deny those who want to argue that proposition from doing so. But I want to make it absolutely clear that we have never before required offsetting cuts when making a supplemental appropriation for a disaster. Never--not for Andrew, not for Iniki, not for the Midwest floods, not for Hugo, not for Loma Prieta--never. To now require that we go through that exercise before providing assistance in this one case would be highly unfair and discriminatory.”