I rise today to express shock in the way this spending bill has been written and dumped into our laps, sight unseen, except by a few members of the Democratic Leadership. This supplemental bill has been crafted without the input of rank and file members, completely circumventing the committee process. There have been no hearings, no debates, no amendments allowed and about 18 hours to review this enormous bill. We now have a few members of the house, substituting their judgement on serious wartime funding issues, for the other 430 Members of both parties. Think about that for a minute. You and your colleagues have had no say in this bill--none. Again, members will have had 18 hours to review this 250 billion dollar spending bill. This is very troublesome to me as a member of the people's house and I know, for a fact, that it's troublesome to members from both sides of the aisle. Today, the 3 million citizens of my State of Iowa, and millions of other Americans--which, by the way, include soldiers serving overseas and their families waiting for their safe return--will have no say in how their tax dollars are being spent for our military. Whatever your position is on the war, or any Federal spending in this bill, the Speaker has set a terrible precedent for this institution. To the extent that we value precedent around here, this is not the type of bad precedent we should be allowing. Both democrats and republicans deserve better, and we deserve a voice.
Tom Latham: “I rise today to express shock in the way this spending bill has been written and dumped into our laps, sight unseen…”
Editor's note · Context
Addressing concerns over the process of a supplemental spending bill for military funding.
Share
More from Tom Latham
I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill and, therefore, violates clause 2 of rule XXI. The rule states in pertinent part: ``An amendment…
I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill and, therefore, violates clause 2 of rule XXI. The rule states in pertinent part: ``An amendment…
I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment. The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved. The gentleman from California is recognized for 5 minutes.
I thank the gentleman. As we move forward to conference, we will work with the gentleman to ensure that any project ready for full funding grant agreements will receive funds under our conference allocation.





