On the recordFebruary 15, 2011
The continuing resolution before us enacts historic spending reductions but it does so by striking a careful balance between deficit reduction and other important goals. I regret the gentleman's amendment goes far beyond the point of balance, and thus, I must oppose it. Mr. Chairman, deficit reduction is the bill's top priority, and our bill already significantly reduces the Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Account. As written, our bill cuts that account to 35 percent below current levels and 38 percent, or nearly $900 million, below the fiscal year 2000 budget request. Our bill cuts the excess and provides only enough funding to continue past commitments, leaving little room left to cut. While I support the intent of the gentleman's amendment, as it aims to reduce further spending, we must do so responsibly and with a careful balance among deficit reduction, jobs, and our Nation's energy security. The gentleman's amendment fails to maintain this balance and would, to my mind, create undue job losses which would be considerable and irreversibly damage this particular program. I yield back the balance of my time.
