To put this in context, we have to remember we are going to spend close to $3 trillion--we probably will spend $3 trillion this year in the appropriating accounts and in our budgets. There is no way we can manage all that efficiently, but certainly every tool that we can get that helps us manage it efficiently we should have. This is just another tool in the tool box to make sure we don't waste the taxpayers' money.
Judd Gregg: “To put this in context, we have to remember we are going to spend close to $3 trillion--we probably will spend $3…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the need for efficient management of federal spending.
Share
More from Judd Gregg
The issue for nuclear is that, because it does these good things, like reduce carbon and have reliability and be part of the diversity mix, it gets no credit for this in the marketplace.
My experience in these debates, the person who wins is the person who establishes himself with the American people toward the audience, this can be a huge audience, as being one reasonably likable.
It makes no sense to close down nuclear reactors if they still have useful life.
It makes no sense whatsoever, and it's apparently--certainly makes no sense for the same people to be urgently arguing to deal with climate change and then either quiet or urgently opposed to nuclear power.