Kit Bond

If we do not go along with the Flexible Voucher Program, that should really be fun to get rid of about two and a half of those stacks, or more.

We need to look at not only how are we helping the poor, but how are we helping the middle class.

Cleaning up lead paint has triple value. First of all, it helps children. It makes them safer.

We believe that this will not only continue to cause greater stresses on local governments' budgets, but on the poor themselves.

Investments in housing is an investment in the American economy.

Gentlemen, we have probably more problems with this budget than any budget we have been submitted.

I hate to draw this to a close, we are having so much fun, but I am going to ask you one final question on New Source Review, something of course that is not very controversial.

I would refer you to a bill I have been shopping around for a number of years, called The Fishable Waters Act.

Total maximum daily loads, that is the limited pollutants in waterways.

When you talk about TMDL, you strike fear in the hearts of agriculture, small communities.

I, too, share your great concern about Homeland Security.

You've asked for a $124 million increase. Right now it is very difficult to find that.

We have got to explore the technologies aggressively to get these pollutants out.

I spoke on this issue, and I thought I spoke for you, apparently I did, when I said that the cuts in the Clean Water SRF was not acceptable.

I commend you and your administration for taking the steps for the first time to do something about mercury.

I will have quite a few questions for the record about the cost of the Moon/Mars vision, the international partners, and a number of other things.

If it turns out that the Aldridge Commission has recommendations that contradict what NASA is asking for in fiscal year 2005, are you going to come back to us, or are you doing some back channeling?

Maybe we should seek some clarification on that, because is time wearing it out? Is the number of flights wearing it out?

Are we going to be tempted to force more missions in to get the space shuttle, to get the International Space Station fully established by 2010 as the President indicated?

The President's directive is very clear on that.

I am still concerned about the retirement issue.

But facing the end of the shuttle in 2010 we ought to be thinking now.

I think that we will need to be hearing more specifics on which options you're pursuing.

Maybe I'm not quite clear, but all of these things that we're exploring are assuming, No. 1, either we have the shuttle, and if you're going to save money by not doing the shuttle recertification in 2010, I am gathering that there won't be…

Is aeronautics going to become a poor stepchild?