The critical issue before us is the level of spending, since the level of spending automatically sets the combined level of current and future taxes.

The greater restraint in spending, the greater overall economic growth these nations have had.

But even factoring that out, just in nominal terms, 60 percent increase in Federal spending in 4 years is rather breathtaking.

Coolidge, Truman, Kennedy, Reagan, Clinton all cut spending relative to GDP.

My previous district included the Klamath River. When I was first invited up there to take a look at it, the Administration is pushing to tear down four perfectly good hydroelectric dams because of what they describe as a catastrophic…

My point is that fish hatcheries, appear to me, to play an absolutely central role in assuring abundant populations of all species, including those regulated under Magnuson-Stevens.

The problem is we don't include them in the population counts, and then to add insult to insanity, when they tear down the Iron Gate Dam, the Iron Gate Fish Hatchery goes with it, then you do have a catastrophic problem.

What we are suggesting is supplementing the populations with hatchery born fish to assure abundant populations.

If we do decide to reauthorize this Act, I would hope that a principal component of the reformed act would be the promotion of hatchery production of all the species regulated by the Act.

So it is voluntary, then, in the sense that it is imposed upon you without consultation.

And it doesn't bother you that the Federal Government is producing a designation that could well end up banning your activities?