I think the public is increasingly coming to ask those questions. They are asking the question, ``Why do you now seek another $600,000, bringing the cost of this to just under $2 million, and why are you projecting it further into the President election year?'' As I indicated, I think the extending of--indefinitely--the proposal of Chairman D'Amato and his colleagues undermines the credibility of this investigation and would obviously contribute to a growing public perception that is being conducted for political purposes.
John Sarbanes: “I think the public is increasingly coming to ask those questions. They are asking the question, ``Why do you now seek…”
Editor's note · Context
Addressing concerns about the cost and timing of an investigation during an election year.
Share
More from John Sarbanes
This bill takes important steps to support the ongoing restoration of the Chesapeake Bay by reauthorizing NOAA's Chesapeake Bay Office and authorizing the agency's long-running Bay Watershed Education and Training, or B-WET Grant program.
But these are dramatic changes that can bring us to a new place and, I think, have given many people a sense of hope instead of despair in the face of what we are seeing with a warming planet.
I hope that today's hearing is the first step in continuing that legacy of strong bipartisan support for the Chesapeake Bay in this Congress.
Each of which--each of which--would hamper EPA's ability to regulate air pollution and, unfortunately, continues this Republican agenda of putting Big Oil interests over the interests of the public.





