This is confusing. I know that there is disagreement between House and Senate bills, but from all the interpretations of what we have been doing, I think it is clear that no one can dispute that if we want to spend money that has impact on jobs, maintaining or creating jobs, the best money spent is on existing programs, where plans are made, where States are ready to spend it. Am I wrong?
Discussing the impact of spending on jobs during a debate on House and Senate bills.
Share
More from Martin Sabo
let me just simply thank the chairman for his support of the amendment. The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Sabo). The amendment was agreed to.
I will continue to reserve my point of order, and I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I would like to have the gentleman explain the amendment to me. What is it that somebody at the Federal level has to do?
we are told by Customs and Border Patrol that this amendment has no effect on its operation because it only shares information when it is required by international treaty, the same as what this amendment says. So to the best of my…
I would make a parliamentary inquiry of the Chair. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman may state his inquiry.
Other voices in this conversation
