Hal Rogers: “I know the motivation of the offerer of the amendment, and I sympathize with his general premise. However, I am…”

“I know the motivation of the offerer of the amendment, and I sympathize with his general premise. However, I am obligated to speak against the amendment because the amendment would eliminate the money for FEMA. Under this proposal, FEMA would run out of money in May. The $9.55 billion in the bill for the operations in the Gulf Coast would be eliminated. Housing assistance would stop; debris removal would stop. There would be no emergency communications in place for the upcoming hurricane season, which is only two months away. And $13.5 million for the Inspector General would be cut, almost ensuring fraud, waste and abuse of the $35 billion in supplemental funds we have appropriated so far for the Gulf Coast. So I would urge a ``no'' vote. Although I understand the gentleman's motivation to try to separate out the disaster funding from the military funding, that would ruin the disaster assistance for the Gulf Coast. I urge a ``no'' vote.”