I will take exception with respect to a characterization concerning my amendment in that there is some inconsistency between what we did in the 2005 BRAC recommendations, which we all supported, and this particular amendment. The fact is, the BRAC, in its findings, said we would move the additional brigades into Fort Carson, that there was sufficient capacity to provide all the training that was required there at Fort Carson, and that is because Fort Carson has over 100,000 acres on its own site and 235,000 acres of additional land. Now the Army wants to acquire land that is going to make the Army's holdings at Pinon Canyon greater than the size of the entire State of Rhode Island. My question is, What has changed from January of 2005 until today? What has changed is that all of a sudden the Army has decided that it needs all this additional land. I go back to my initial argument, which is, if we care about private property rights, if we care about the ranchers in southeast Colorado, if we care about national security and making sure we are investing taxpayer dollars wisely, then it is important we do a timeout, which is all that my amendment does.
María Elvira Salazar: “I will take exception with respect to a characterization concerning my amendment in that there is some inconsistency…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing an amendment related to military land acquisition and its implications for property rights and national security.
Share
More from María Elvira Salazar
there are many people on this floor who have seen the horrors of communism. They have been to Cuba. They have been friends with Fidel Castro. They have seen the jails full of Cuban prisoners. They have seen people preparing rafts to die in…
History is clear: from Stalin’s gulags and Cambodia’s killing fields to Castro’s firing squads in Havana, socialism has always ended in misery, suffering, and death.
Every generation of Congress faces moments that test our commitment to justice, and today is one of those moments. I rise today to urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on S. 146, the TAKE IT DOWN Act. The Senate has already done its job…
the reasoning is because Barbara Lee, who I know is a distinguished member of the Democratic Party, is friends with the oppressors and not with the Cuban people.





