JOSEPH A. HALL: “like so many times when I stand up here, I am very fond of the author of the amendment, but I do not like the amendment.…”

“like so many times when I stand up here, I am very fond of the author of the amendment, but I do not like the amendment. The name of Udall is almost a sacred name in the West. The salient part of this bill, I think of this entire bill, that the gentleman from Texas (Chairman Barton) has brought to us and we have passed through committee and subcommittee, is that it covers waterfront, and that means that we need all energy sources. This is just another of the sources that we pool together. I think assuring reliable, economical, and environmentally sensitive domestic uranium mining industry is essential to be a part of this bill and to carry out and make the fullness of the bill. As the gentleman from Texas (Chairman Barton) pointed out, section 631 of the bill reported by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, I do not know how many votes were against it, but the committee authorizes a modest research and development program; it is $10 million a year over a 3-year period. I think they have allocated the money out according to the good it will do. This program would be cost-shared, and it is consistent with far larger programs for other electricity generation. It makes no sense to eliminate this important funding and forego opportunities for this. For all of these reasons, I oppose the Udall amendment.”