On the recordJuly 9, 2013
The bill before us today cuts significant amounts from a number of programs which I have traditionally targeted for spending reductions. Now, I commend my friends, the full committee chairman, Hal Rogers, and the subcommittee chairman, also a good friend, Mr. Frelinghuysen, for these cuts, and I congratulate them on such. That being said, we're at a time of a real fiscal emergency. Congress has allowed the sequester to happen, and we can see some of the effects of the sequester in this underlying bill. I opposed the use of the sequester from the get-go because I believe that governmentwide, across-the-board cuts are not a wise way of cutting spending. I believe that it's bad policy. Instead of furloughing civilian DOD employees and cutting our military, we ought to make targeted cuts where there's room to do so. This amendment, Mr. Chairman, would do just that. It would trim just a small additional 1 percent, or about $9.8 million, from programs relating to renewable energy and energy efficiency, and put that amount toward spending reduction. The committee report for the underlying bill notes that funding for these programs prioritizes reducing gas prices and supporting American manufacturing. And absolutely, we must be doing those things. Yet, these funds are focused on technologies which are still emerging, like new vehicle technology, hydrogen and fuel cell technology, and bio- energy. Mr.…





