No, there is none. There is none. But the offset that the gentleman has used is salaries and expenses, salaries and expenses is an account which, in the tightness of this budget, in trying to do for section 8 and CDBG and the other places, we have already cut a bit, not a great deal, but a bit, and I oppose, as I said before, in good conscience, the movement of salaries and expense moneys into this where we know that it is not going to be spent with any alacrity and any expedition.
John W. Olver: “No, there is none. There is none. But the offset that the gentleman has used is salaries and expenses, salaries and…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing budget allocations and the movement of funds during a House floor debate.
Share
More from John W. Olver
At this point, I really don't know whether your understanding is anywhere close to mine. I think this is an amendment deserving of opposition, so I am opposing the amendment. I think this amendment should not be adopted, and you can do as…
There are no funds made available in this Act for high-speed rail. None. And so, since this is a 1-year bill, I don't think this amendment does very much. The gentleman from California has a problem with a process that has been going on…
Reclaiming my time, the language of the amendment, as I have it before me, says none of the funds made available by this Act may be used for high-speed rail in the State of California, or for the California High-Speed Rail Authority.
I think I'm doing the correct thing there. And I'll yield, again, for the continuation of what the gentleman from California is saying.





