Roy Blunt

if the rule is promulgated it absolutely prohibits future activity in this area?

That letter from Alice Rivlin, the Director of OMB, says: Here are the people who have to show up for work if the government shuts down. The government did shut down, we all remember, in 1995, and these people did show up for work. On…

I've always thought that your job may be the best job in the Federal Government. I hope for your sake I'm right.

it's not just one side giving you all their money and saying, 'Do whatever you think you ought to do with this.'

Spending our Federal dollars to kill the use of coal in this country but not improve our Nation's water infrastructure is a far cry from a common sense approach to protecting the environment.

I think there are $220 million of private funds that have already been pledged.

we need to do the kinds of things that will be a good lesson, going forward, to encourage that.

I do not know how many Senators have holds on the nominee, but it must be so many that there is no interest in doing anything about the holds that are out there.

the Park Service has to be willing to look at this in a different way than they have before.

Thank you, Chairman Reed and Ranking Member Murkowski, for holding this hearing today.

But you can veto these projects even while they are going on based on what I think I just heard you say to Senator Murkowski?

EPA is requesting $8.153 billion, which is $296 million (3.5 percent) below fiscal year 2012 enacted levels.

I think at least 5 million of them would say, 'I really don't like the sense of that.'

I think that that is an untested--what she was--what the Senator was referring to was a court decision yesterday that was related to a veto after a project had already been permitted, not in advance of it.

I want you and my colleagues to both understand that this is not about trying to force a project to be built or anything else.

And you would have ultimate authority on the wetlands question based on this veto potential that you always have on an issue like this? Is that right?

I actually have a hold on the nominated Administrator.

State Revolving Funds, which provide critical support to how municipalities finance water infrastructure projects, will be cut by almost a half-billion dollars.

I think you should say, if I was going to sequester something at the EPA, I think I would sequester this surveillance flying around at the top of the list.

I really don't like the sense of that. That the EPA can do things that, I don't know that law enforcement without any reason can just fly around.

This is not very complicated. All the Essential Services Act says is that the people whom the government said had to show up if there is no money to run the government would also be the people who would be prioritized and would be allowed…

first of all, I wish to talk about the bill that is on the floor. I agree with Senator Franken--this is a bill that enjoys bipartisan support. We saw in the budget debate just how broad and how bipartisan that support is. It is the right…

I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business as my remarks will not relate to the business at hand. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

I have serious concerns with the way the EPA is prioritizing spending.

The agency should not spend taxpayer dollars on massive, burdensome regulations that hamstring the economy, kill jobs, and hike up electricity prices.