On the recordJune 1, 2012
I appreciate the recognition and rise to express, first of all, to my colleague and friend from Louisiana my appreciation for his argument today, and particularly the football analogy that he used. I say that as a Notre Dame graduate, and I would congratulate him on his victory the last time our two teams played on the field. Having said that, however, both he and my colleague on the Democratic side, I join with the chairman in reluctant opposition to the amendment. The chairman has opted for a policy of no new starts, a policy that I strongly support and have opted for during these times of budgetary constraints. I would point out that while there is only $10 million in the amendment before the House today, the fact is this project will cost several billion dollars by the time we are done, and starting it now is a cost that we cannot afford to adequately fund because we do not have the resources in the bill. Over the last several years, we have, in fact, terminated hundreds of ongoing projects, to our great dismay and to the weakening of the infrastructure of our economy in this country. But until we as an institution, the Congress, have the intestinal fortitude to adequately fund our infrastructure in these types of very necessary investment-- that is not the argument before us--I cannot support adding to the inventory of projects that we must start but cannot. If the allocation for the bill were different, I might be able to support the gentleman's amendment.…
