Phil Gingrey: “And I hope I won't offend the gentleman, but just as he is pointing out, these earmarks are there but they are selected…”

“And I hope I won't offend the gentleman, but just as he is pointing out, these earmarks are there but they are selected, in this instance, by one person. And as you start enumerating a few, like the ones that you have already mentioned, I have got to also say that the tropical rainforest in Iowa is back at $44.6 million. Now, I don't know how the gentleman feels about that one, but that is the whole point here. A CR is supposed to save money. It is literally supposed to save the taxpayers money, because instead of increasing the amount of spending at a rate of inflation or consumer price index, you go back to the last year and you just continue that process. So, in fact, if we had done that, if we had this year-long CR, we are talking about maybe saving $6.1 billion. But, no, what the Democratic leadership of a committee of one or two decides to do is under that budget cap authority to plus this thing all the way up from 2006 levels to the budget cap, and that is an additional $6.11 billion burden on the taxpayer. As I mentioned earlier, I won't repeat the phrase I used in referencing this bill. But people are going to call it all kind of things in addition to CRomnibus. But really it is a CR on steroids. Maybe we should call it a steroid.”