Sam Gejdenson: “we have a job here and the job is to make a decision as to what the proper method to proceed is. Now, we are going to go…”

“we have a job here and the job is to make a decision as to what the proper method to proceed is. Now, we are going to go back and see our constituents over this next recess. The question as constituents meet us on the street, whether we are on this side of the aisle or the other, is can we explain to them an $8 million slush fund. That is the real question here. Are we going to vote for a process, adding all of the other issues about fairness, about how the investigation ought to proceed? Should we not really be looking at campaign finance reform and not just more partisan battles? Putting all of that aside, the question is, do we want to walk down the streets of our hometown and have them ask, should Congress have a slush fund? We do not do that for other agencies. If we think this investigation warrants $8 million more, then put it in the committee of the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Burton]. My colleagues on the other side do not have guts enough to do that. Frankly, I do not think we should support that kind of process. Let us vote this rule down, because we were not given any opportunities to amend it; let us vote the rule down, let us continue the regular order. We can either have an extension tonight by unanimous consent, our side is ready to do that, or we can stay here tomorrow and do it. A lot of Members have plans. I think we can come back here on April 8 or 9 and deal with this properly.”