I, again, agree with the urgency of the issue that has come up in terrorism, and I think it does appropriately ask for collaboration. I hope that the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook), within that context, that the gentleman and I might be able to work together as this subcommittee goes to conference since, probably, the Subcommittee on Homeland Security will be part of the same overall omnibus conference in that process and to make certain that rail somehow is not left out and that the security on rail is to our liking as well.
John W. Olver: “I, again, agree with the urgency of the issue that has come up in terrorism, and I think it does appropriately ask for…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing collaboration on rail security in the context of terrorism during a subcommittee meeting.
Share
More from John W. Olver
Woman, I demand a recorded vote. The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Louisiana will be postponed. Amendment Offered by Mr. Scalise
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.
Well, I don't know how this amendment is going to solve the problem that you have exactly, but the chairman has agreed to adopt it. So I will state an objection because I really don't understand how this is going to solve your problem, but…
How does that guarantee that California's gas tax moneys will not be used for high-speed rail?





