If I could take back my time, I agree with the gentleman, but I think it is also important to have the facts on the table. The facts on the table, according to the report I have gotten back, is the increase in defense expenditures we put in this year, along with making the country more secure, provides an additional 200,000 plus jobs above and beyond the level that the President was talking about in California. I think it is important to have a complete record, and I might remind my friend that the President did not make that speech to the Joint Chiefs of Staff or to a security group. He made it to workers who were concerned about their jobs. He was plainly making a pitch to aerospace workers to the effect that the Clinton administration is going to maintain aerospace jobs. We say fine. We would also like to put on the record exactly how many jobs are created by this defense bill.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the impact of defense expenditures on job creation during a debate.
Share
More from Andrew P. Hunter
I think anytime that you have a situation where academic freedom is being constrained, that has real implications for national security.
Just one other point, and that is in the U.N. Security Council Resolution, under which our troops operate now, which provides for how they are treated in Iraq, expires in December. That is why we need to have a Status of Forces Agreement…
The government needs to be very discriminating about how it approaches and how it invests its R&D dollars.
I respect the gentleman who just made the statement who has been in Iraq. But my son was in Iraq, also, and on two missions, two tours, and Afghanistan. And one important fact that I think comes out when you talk to folks who have been…





