I again rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. There are some factors that we need to take into consideration. For one thing next year, next fiscal year, we have an additional compensable day which has to be paid for. We have GSA that has raised rents. We have already cut $14 million out of salaries and expenses, so we would not be able to meet our requirements. We are not giving Federal employees raises, but there are additional costs that come into play because of rents, because of the additional day that our Federal workers will be working next year. And for those reasons--and again, I want to reiterate, we have cut $14 million out of this account--I would just urge a ``no'' vote. I yield back the balance of my time.
Tom Latham: “I again rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. There are some factors that we need to take into consideration.…”
Share
More from Tom Latham
I appreciate the gentleman's attention to this important safety issue and for highlighting the promise of this research initiative. I look forward to working with you as our bill moves through the legislative process to make certain DADSS…
I really appreciate the gentlewoman bringing this issue to our attention. I know the authorizing committee has looked into the issue of voice communications on flights and unanimously voted out a bill out of the committee addressing the…
Reluctantly I must rise in opposition to the amendment. I share the gentleman's concern, and that is why we have included language in our committee report directing HUD to review instances of payments for housing that exceed 120 percent of…
I have great appreciation for the gentleman's point. The report was very shocking as far as the transparency and how some of these grants have been given. I am in a position where I must insist on being consistent in opposing all…





