On the recordMay 26, 2010
Madam President, the Senator from Oklahoma has proposed two amendments, both of which are designed to offset the cost of the supplemental bill before us. He argues that the Nation needs to find ways to use existing funds to meet these needs. He even argues that some of the items were not unforeseen and, therefore, do not qualify as emergencies. I would respond, do not tell the people of Rhode Island and Tennessee that the floods in their States are not emergencies. I would say any of us watching television are aware of the emergency which is occurring now on the gulf coast. I would even say those in Oklahoma whose forests and towns have been damaged by tornadoes are aware of what an emergency is. The Senator suggested we should not declare the cost of war as an emergency since we have known about the costs of war since September 11, 2001. I would remind the Senator and my colleagues that the current administration did its best to foresee the costs of war and included funding for those costs as part of its budget request, and the Congress acted to meet these needs. But circumstances change. The deteriorating conditions in Afghanistan led our military leaders to recommend, and the President to conclude, that we needed to increase our forces in Afghanistan. The funds in this bill are that unforeseen portion of the cost of war. For someone to argue they do not qualify as an emergency is most unfortunate. The Senator suggests we should cut unobligated balances.…





