I concur completely with what my colleague from Massachusetts has to say. Under the amendment by the Senator from Kansas, this would be a 3-year authorization. And it really, you know, takes a little while to get a program up and going. Secretary Riley and Secretary Reich are eager on this, so I think this one is going to move fairly quickly. If this were a cutting back from 8 years to 6 years, something like that, I think that could be considered. And I have spoken to my colleague from Massachusetts about that. But a 3-year authorization, I do not think is realistic. I would be happy to join the Senator from Kansas at any point she wants to hold a hearing to see how the thing is going. Let us review it. It does not need just to be the Appropriations Committee that takes a look at this. But I think we have to have more than a 3-year authorization.
Editor's note · Context
The speaker discusses the need for a longer authorization period for a program.
Share
More from Sen. Paul Simon
Find compassion in your heart for our most vulnerable and sweetest citizens, our children.
The National Taxpayers Union just released a poll done of 1,000 Americans asking about this constitutional amendment: Favoring it, 67 percent; opposing it, 18 percent. That is almost 4 to 1. That simply underscores it. Then, in terms of…
first, two points made by my friend--and he is my friend--from Nevada, Senator Reid, on the language of our amendment. We have gone over this carefully in all kinds of hearings. The only language change is the Danforth language on judicial…
I have indicated already I think it has just massive loopholes in it, in what is called capital expenditures, and the fact that it has no enforcement mechanism. My staff has checked out the loophole for periods of low economic growth and…





