But as I read this, none of the funds made available in this act may be used to provide assistance to any State or local government or official that restricts any government entity or official from sending or receiving funds, and I am not sure what agency the gentleman is referring to. But ``none of the funds that are used to provide assistance'' would now include all of the funds flowing to airports from the TSA; and it would apply to FEMA funds, I would assume. It would apply to all of the first responder funds that are in this bill. I would assume it would apply to all the port funds that are in this bill.
Martin Sabo: “But as I read this, none of the funds made available in this act may be used to provide assistance to any State or local…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of funding restrictions in a legislative act.
Share
More from Martin Sabo
The minister of the church that I go to locally is a former Navy chaplain and also served in the Marines. He felt strongly enough about this issue it was part of his sermon yesterday. His response to the 6-year problem was that if this…
Reclaiming my time. All of the money that is needed for borders, for ports, all of the money we have appropriated can be spent?
I understand the majority has the right to close. The Acting CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is correct.
I have read the chemical bill language, and I do not understand whether that language preempts the ability of a State to adopt more stringent requirements than the Federal standards.





