The implementing agencies with their comments rejected the rule from New York. It sounds like New York is confused. Mr. DeFAZIO. New York may be confused, and everybody is confused because they have not seen what it is that they are objecting to and would, again, suggest that the best course of action would be to actually see it. The gentleman from Ohio brought up something very weird, saying that, somehow, if we used a simple resolution of disapproval, they couldn't write a new rule. He is confusing it with the bill you passed last year, which said that the rule is rejected and you can't use anything you use to write that rule to write a new rule. A number of us raised questions about that at the time. You did pass that last year. That is probably what he is thinking of. This is a simple resolution of disapproval. It would not have any impact on future actions of the Agency. I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Maryland (Ms. Edwards).
Bud Shuster: “The implementing agencies with their comments rejected the rule from New York. It sounds like New York is confused. Mr.…”
Share
More from Bud Shuster
I thank the gentlewoman for offering this amendment. This amendment adds additional considerations to a GAO study that we have included in our bill. I believe looking at navigation safety is an important addition. Mr. Chair, I am prepared…
I claim the time in opposition to the motion to recommit. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 minutes.
As the designee of the gentleman from Florida, I offer amendment No. 6. The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment. The text of the amendment is as follows: Page 27, line 14, strike ``and''. Page 27, after line 14, insert the…
I claim the time in opposition, although I am not opposed to it. The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 minutes. There was no objection.