I appreciate the time and will begin my remarks in opposition, first of all, by again thanking my friend and colleague from Ohio (Mr. Hobson), all of the members of the subcommittee, and the staff, who have done a very good job on this bill and improved the circumstances for people's safety, health, security and employment opportunities. I would like to make a couple of points. The first is, we've heard a lot about the expenditures that are enumerated in this legislation, and that certainly is worthy of debate. What has been lost today, but was covered earlier this year when the bill originally was on the floor, is the fact that there are significant cuts that have been made in this bill to programs that we felt could be either eliminated or reduced because they did not have the same value and merit as those contained in the legislation we're considering today. And I would note that there were 37 different DOE weapons programs that were cut.
Peter Visclosky: “I appreciate the time and will begin my remarks in opposition, first of all, by again thanking my friend and colleague…”
On the recordJuly 17, 2007
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Opposing a bill while acknowledging improvements made by colleagues and discussing budget cuts to various programs.
Share
More from Peter Visclosky
Feb 5, 2020
We are keenly aware of the need to modernize the Army of today in order to meet potential great power competition in the future.
Feb 5, 2020
Moreover, it is hard to understand how we can continue our counterterrorism mission or train and equip Afghan forces if we pull out all of our forces within 14 months.
Jan 8, 2020
I deeply appreciate Mr. Rush yielding time to me. I also thank him for organizing this Special Order. I thank my colleague from Chicago, Mr. Davis, for participating, and earlier today, Andre Carson, a Member from Indianapolis, for also…





