Political Quotes

On the recordJune 14, 2011
I rise today to discuss an amendment to the Economic Development Revitalization Act of 2011. In February of this year I introduced a 7-Point Jobs Plan aimed at creating jobs, investing in education and training, assisting small businesses, reinvigorating American manufacturing, and eliminating bureaucratic redtape. Among other things, my bill aims to provide EDA assistance for areas hit hard by job losses, and specifically those communities harmed as a direct consequence of the Base Realignment and Closure, or BRAC, process. The amendment that I am offering today would build on this plan by making it easier for communities affected by the BRAC process to access Federal funding to further their economic development goals and to recover from the loss of jobs. Currently, most Economic Development Administration, EDA, projects are subject to a 50-percent match; however, the EDA is allowed to increase the Federal share--up to 80 percent--based on the relative need of the area in which the project will be located. The bill being debated would expand the list of circumstances under which the Federal share may be increased. My amendment would simply clarify that communities affected by ``military base closures, realignments, or mission growth'' are among those eligible for a reduced local cost share. Maine has lost more than 5,000 military and civilian jobs as a result of the unfortunate decision to close Brunswick Naval Air Station.…
Said by
Susan Collins
Republican · Maine
Source
govinfo.gov
Jun 14, 2011

Share

More from Susan Collins

Aug 16, 2026

Relocating Portland’s station to the mainline is a commonsense investment that will mean shorter trips, fewer delays, and better connections for passengers traveling throughout Maine and New England.

king.senate.gov
Aug 5, 2026

I was pleased that the bill prevents the OMB from implementing its proposed rule, which would politicize grants and harm small, rural communities, families, and biomedical research.

reason.com
Jul 15, 2026

This overheated language, this completely inappropriate rhetoric against the Supreme Court, endangers the lives of the justices and erodes public trust in our system of government.

huffpost.com
Jul 29, 2026

It would undermine the goal of awarding funds based on scientific merit and value, rather than political ideology.

propublica.org

Other voices in this conversation