On the recordSeptember 27, 2007
I find it ironic, actually, that this amendment, which has its merits, is being advanced, but that other amendments that are sort of similarly situated weren't placed in order. For example, this amendment says that in 9 months the GAO is going to be charged with the responsibility, essentially, of looking back for the past 9 months and looking at the impact on State insurance programs. Great. Really no argument there. But if looking back is a good idea, isn't looking forward a good idea too? Isn't a prospective look forward at the possibility something that we ought to be doing? I just find it concerning that we're willing to put a potential program, put the brakes on a potential program and be reflective, when we, at this very moment in time, as we sit here today, as we stand here today, we have the opportunity to accomplish this task by asking the GAO to look forward and look at the impact of this.
Source
govinfo.gov
