Mr. Speaker, it was my own position that this money was not needed, that there was ample money in the pipeline for all of the deserving recipients of WIC funds. However, my personal position was different from the vote of the House yesterday which supported the position stated by the gentlewoman from Ohio [Ms. Kaptur]. That vote was 338 to 89. So in view of that vote, I believe that we should indeed be instructed and would intend to support the House position of $76 million versus the Senate position of $58 million. Mr. Speaker, I would accept the amendment.
Edward Livingston: “Mr. Speaker, it was my own position that this money was not needed, that there was ample money in the pipeline for all…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing funding for WIC during House floor debate.
Share
More from Edward Livingston
I was prepared to close, but evidently we are going to have continue to have rhetoric that sometimes compels me to answer. I left the floor a little while ago to take care of some very important business, and when I returned I was advised…
I certainly rise to support his bill. It is one of the most important bills in the appropriations process, at least from the standpoint of a Member who lives in New Orleans, in the center of the Mississippi River Valley watershed, because…
I would point out that this gentleman shares the concern of the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) about extraneous issues. That is why we divided the U.N. arrearages, the IMF, and the abortion lobbying restrictions and put them on a…
The gentleman is fundamentally correct. It was not the intent of the committee to interpret the facts of the situation but rather to highlight the problem for future action.





