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.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing funding for WIC during House floor debate.
Share
More from Edward Livingston
Mr. Chairman, I think that in the words of the gentleman that just preceded me to give the enforcers the right to enforce and the wherewithal to enforce is a great proposition if there were adequate, competent and reasonable enforcers; or…
a number of colleges throughout this country are vigorously attacking their students' constitutionally protected right of free speech and association. The controversy centers on a decision by some private schools to ban all single-sex…
Part II amendment printed in House Report 105-473 offered by Mr. Livingston: CHAPTER 7 DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT Community Planning and Development community development block grants fund For an additional amount for…
Mr. Speaker, the people of China are light years better off today than they were 15 or 20 years ago. There is a whole world of difference between the way the Chinese people were treated by their own Government back then and the way they…





