I see Ms. Granger, who is the ranking member on the full committee, might be seeking recognition, so I reserve the balance of my time. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Granger) will now control…
Peter Visclosky
The Public Record
Most widely reported
by number of sources- I rise today in solemn memorial to the estimated 1.5 million men, women, and children who lost their lives during the Armenian Genocide. As in the past I am pleased to join so many distinguished House colleagues on both sides of the aisle in ensuring that the horrors wrought upon the Armenian people are never repeated. On April 24, 1915, over 200 religious, political, and intellectual leaders of the Armenian community were brutally executed by the Turkish government in Istanbul. Over the course of the next 8 years, this war of ethnic genocide against the Armenian community in the Ottoman Empire took the lives of over half the world's Armenian population. Sadly, there are some people who still deny the very existence of this period which saw the institutionalized slaughter of the Armenian people and dismantling of Armenian culture. To those who would question these events, I point to the numerous reports contained in the U.S. National Archives detailing the process that systematically decimated the Armenian population of the Ottoman Empire. However, old records are too easily forgotten--and dismissed. That is why we come together every year at this time: to remember in words what some may wish to file away in archives. This genocide did take place, and these lives were taken. That memory must keep us forever vigilant in our efforts to prevent these atrocities from ever happening again.4 sources2001govinfo.gov
- I appreciate the chairman yielding, and would join him in his opposition to the amendment. I would make a general observation. The gentleman's amendment would cut $10 million from the Office of Science. When you look at a $4 billion budget, your first impression might be it is of little consequence as far as the overall scientific research in this country. But I would point out that in fiscal year 2010 the account was for $4.904 billion. In fiscal year 2011 it was reduced to $4.842 billion. For, prospectively, 2012 it's reduced another 43. The gentleman's amendment would increase that reduction by almost 25 percent for the coming fiscal year. And I do think it is time to say ``no,'' and let us apply ourselves to serious scientific research. I oppose the gentleman's amendment, and appreciate the chairman yielding.3 sources2011govinfo.gov
- I appreciate the gentlewoman yielding. Madam Speaker, at the beginning of my remarks, I want to acknowledge that I have made a mistake and that I have been wrong for the nearly three decades I have served in the United States Congress. I regret to have to admit that. But this morning, in anticipation of today's debate, I took a look at article I of the Constitution and realized in article I, section 9, paragraph 7, I have been misreading it all of these years as a member of the Appropriations Committee. The paragraph reads: No money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in consequence of a continuing resolution. The Constitution says nothing about appropriations, apparently. Because since fiscal year 2007, this Chamber and the United States Senate, the Congress collectively, should have enacted--made discrete decisions, thought about legislation--84 appropriations bills. We have individually enacted nine. I am appalled that in late July, early August, the last couple of weeks, every Member I have talked to in this Chamber on both sides of the aisle, senior and new, have said, if we can only do a continuing resolution, we can prevent the shutdown of the United States Government. Today, in the United States Congress, we consider it a success if all we do is pass a continuing resolution to do what we did in fiscal year 2013, if we did what we did in fiscal year 2012, if we did what we did in fiscal years 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008, and 2007.…3 sources2013govinfo.gov
- I do rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. While I have some sympathy for the issue that the gentleman has raised, I believe that more consistency should be brought to the way we evaluate wetland impacts, not less, as this amendment would ensure. The Charleston Method has been utilized for two decades in various Corps districts. The Charleston Method is a quick, inexpensive, and consistent methodology--I think that's very important to note, a consistent methodology--for use by the regulated public and the Corps. The gentleman suggests that it doesn't work. If it doesn't work, I do not know why in 2006 and 2007 the New Orleans District worked with its Federal and State partners to modify the Charleston Method so that it better reflected the unique conditions found in southern Louisiana resulting in the Modified Charleston Method. The use of the Modified Charleston Method is longstanding in many Corps districts. Many regulatory customers use the tool to assess their potential mitigation requirements for their impact site as well as credits required at mitigation banks. This transparency in Corps mitigation requirements has helped the applicant prepare a complete application package and determine mitigation costs up front.…2 sources2012govinfo.gov
- I appreciate what the gentleman from Florida is putting forth and the position he has taken. I certainly believe there is merit, if you would, in the technology. As you may know, we have included some very encouraging language in the report for this bill, noting our pleasure with the Air Force incorporating this type of technology into their nonkinetic counterelectronics analysis of alternatives. However, we have carefully refrained from prejudicing the Air Force's analysis of alternatives by adding funds from one program to another. I would like to work with the gentleman further to ensure, again, that the technology is given consideration, without prejudicing the study undertaken by the Air Force. I do think we ought to give them a full breadth of options, so that the best choice can be made on behalf of this country. I reserve the balance of my time.2 sources2014govinfo.gov
- I appreciate the gentleman's yielding. Using the same rationale as to my opposition for the previous amendment, I would support the gentleman's because what he would do is remove the limitation, if it is making sense, to allow us to reduce, convert, decommission, or otherwise move to nondeployed status these silos. I don't suggest, while standing here on the floor today, what we should or should not do, but we should allow the administration of this country those options. I appreciate the gentleman's offering his amendment.2 sources2014govinfo.gov
I simply ask our colleagues to support the continuing resolution, and I, too, yield back the balance of my time.
I have no further requests for time on our side, and I reserve the balance of my time.
I do have requests for time, but no one is here, so I reserve the balance of my time at this moment.
I want to thank the chairwoman for her very kind remarks. I also want to thank Nita for her friendship over the years. As I am going to again mention in my prepared remarks, the gentlewoman's life of service to not only her constituency…
Before I begin with my remarks on the fiscal year (FY) 2021 bill, I would like to briefly discuss some concerns I have as a longtime member of the House Appropriations Committee. The Committee has a unique responsibility. It is charged…
I appreciate the gentleman yielding, and I do appreciate the gentlewoman's concerns. Mr. Speaker, I would begin my remarks by saying the United States military is a very special place. Only about 30 percent of young Americans between 17…
Today, April 23, 2020, I missed roll call votes 103 and 104. Had I been present for roll call 103, on Agreeing to H. Res. 938, Providing for the adoption of the resolution (H. Res. 935) establishing a Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus…
my reason for submitting this testimony is to discuss the vital importance of preserving and promoting Section 219 Environmental Infrastructure authority...
We can't afford to lose the strong cooperation we had with our neighbors in the south, and we must do all we can to continue this partnership.
I appreciate the emphasis on working on the culture and stigma, so people do--if you have got a problem, please, we are here to help.
Unfortunately, I remain deeply skeptical that this agreement will enable the United States to depart Afghanistan in a responsible fashion.
What assurance after 19 years of failure in our drawdown that they are going to be able to do this?
Arms control is not a product of starry-eyed idealism, but of hard learned lessons from the cold war.
I believe that our Nation's military operations in Afghanistan should wind down.
I must also stress my concern that the administration has not demonstrated the same commitment when it comes to arms control.
Modernizing our strategic deterrent is part of ensuring that a nuclear war is never fought, but so are arms control efforts.
It is important that the government now start to take responsibility for that.
Who makes a decision to dispose of property like that when you have a backlog for people who are working in the military who need housing that is affordable?
We are keenly aware of the need to modernize the Army of today in order to meet potential great power competition in the future.
Similarly, Russia continues to expand its global influence, conducting mass misinformation campaigns, inserting itself into the domestic policies of foreign nations.
After of two decades of focusing on counterinsurgency and counterterrorism, the Army needs to refocus on preparations to oppose a near-peer adversary.





