I don't disagree with the gentleman's comments. It's a good program, although it has been a flawed program. Hopefully, it's been improved. My point is that this could be better done in the private sector, a fee or whatever paid directly to whatever private entity out there that would be nonprofit for this. Why should the taxpayers have to subsidize it? That's really the issue here.
Share
More from John Fleming
The only reason to have done that was to foreclose the possibility that Trump could run for re-election.
Oh, absolutely, no question. But then you always have to apply that to over time, some places get hit three or four times over a decade.
There is no question about it, EDA does fantastic work, and I will be 110 percent committed to its success, efficacy, and efficiency while I am leading it and while it is funded.
To present a responsible budget that addresses the highest priorities, the President has recommended the elimination of numerous programs.
Other voices in this conversation
