Mr. Chairman, I want to ask the author of the amendment if he would explain to me what is different from existing laws. As I understand it, we have always required that every President, going back as far as I can remember, reimburse part of the cost of any trip that involves any kind of political activity while he is on an official trip. What the gentleman seems to be saying is that any political activity automatically makes the entire trip a political trip, even if there is a great deal of official duty and activity taking place. Would the gentleman give me some sort of an answer?
Victor Fazio: “Mr. Chairman, I want to ask the author of the amendment if he would explain to me what is different from existing laws.…”
Editor's note · Context
Questioning an amendment regarding presidential trip reimbursements during a committee discussion.
Share
More from Victor Fazio
As we get closer to the time the session comes to an end, and the election is not too far beyond that, is it possible we will take another crack at fast track before the session is ended?
Now, Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will continue to yield, as I remember the gentleman's comments from that earlier debate, he was also talking about people who were taxpayers, as many legal residents are, who are not citizens.
Does this make them permanent in their status if they served and then leave the service, or do they lose their right to vote after they have left military service?
In addition, if I could ask of the leader, the Speaker has promised a vote on campaign finance reform by the end of March. I note that we have what appear to be four individual bills; I do not know the content of all of them. But is this…





