I commend the Senator for her comments on this legislation. And I prefer calling it the Breaux-Snowe amendment and thank her for her contribution in that regard. I wanted to--the Senator served in the other body, as I have. And the statement that some have said is that, ``Well, you know, we really think that 75 percent is an appropriate amount. That is why we should pass a maintenance-of-effort requirement, and the States will have 75 percent, and then when we go to conference we will come back with 45 percent, and that will become law.'' And my concern is--and I ask the Senator to comment--the other body has a zero requirement for the States spending anything. Does the Senator from Maine also have the same concern about what would happen in the conference if we start out and figure it with a substantially lower amount than the body of this amendment?
John B. Breaux: “I commend the Senator for her comments on this legislation. And I prefer calling it the Breaux-Snowe amendment and thank…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing concerns about state funding requirements in relation to the Breaux-Snowe amendment.
Share
More from John B. Breaux
It's certainly not a newsworthy item that someone has found out that there's a Federal program in Washington that could be subject to waste, fraud, and abuse.
I will take a few moments to explain my position on this important legislative effort and point to the fact that I have worked on a substitute amendment that has the ability to bring both sides together in a way we have not yet achieved…
Senator Landrieu and I rise today to add our voices to those who have been calling for a comprehensive national solution to the asbestos litigation problem. Several members of both parties have recently come to the floor to discuss this…
I will even go along with saying you can bring it back at 5 percent, if you are going to use it for job creation or research and development, for capital expenditures. And If you are going to use it to rebuild your pension fund for…