In order to accommodate the ranking member, who was very supportive of this legislation, as you know, and in order to accommodate both sides, majority and minority, we made those changes. I am very, very intent on doing so. I told the ranking member that I do not wish to have included in this bill anything that both the majority and minority do not support. Therefore, I think most of the objections that Members will have upon reading this will be about things that they wish were included that are not in it, not what is in that is not acceptable to them. I apologize for that and I apologize to the gentleman from Minnesota, but I thought that it was worthwhile to try and accommodate those concerns.
TJ Cox: “In order to accommodate the ranking member, who was very supportive of this legislation, as you know, and in order to…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing changes made to aviation security legislation during a House floor debate.
Share
More from TJ Cox
We cannot afford a death spiral of disinvestment and declining service for the transit system that gets our federal workforce to work each day.
I regretfully must oppose this spending legislation, which commits taxpayers to foot the bill for dozens of special-interest items having nothing to do with disaster relief. First, the House-Senate compromise bill costs $200 million more…
I thank the gentleman, and appreciating fully the arguments just advanced by my colleague from Massachusetts and former law school classmate, if there is just one Federal district judge that has ruled here, then we ought not to listen to…
That interpretation is the correct interpretation. As the gentleman knows, that section of this resolution, section 7, is taken essentially verbatim from the rules of the House concerning the procedures for the Permanent Select Committee…





