The question is very simple, I say to my colleague from Illinois, one of the foremost leaders of this House: Why do we choose this particular think tank to bestow this direct congressional line item? I'm amenable to taking the $42 million and saying, let's see if they can use it at Cornell or the University of Illinois' Peace Institute or at the Cato Institute or--I was going to say a more conservative one just to mix it up a little bit. The point that I'm making is, it's just why it has this status in the budget. It shouldn't. It had it once. It keeps it. It keeps it. It keeps it. It keeps it. Look at this. Have you been to the State Department recently? It doesn't look this good. Have you been to the Pentagon recently? It doesn't look this good. I mean, this is pretty darned good, and it's $100 million of U.S. taxpayer dollars. Go out and raise it like every other think tank. General Petraeus is right. Let's keep the United States Institute of Peace, but let's stop paying for it in this way.
On the recordFebruary 16, 2011
Editor's note · Context
The speaker is questioning the funding of the United States Institute of Peace and its budgetary status.
Share
More from Anthony Weiner
May 31, 2011
I'm protecting my wife, who every day is waking up to these insane stories that are getting so far from reality.
May 30, 2011
What people really want to talk about are things like the debt limit vote tonight or things like -- like the -- the oppressive disparity between the very well-to-do in this country and people that don't have as much or the fact that it's…
May 2, 2011
the other side was a wholly owned subsidiary of the health insurance industry called the Grand Old Party.
Jun 5, 2011
I have engaged in several inappropriate conversations conducted over Twitter, Facebook, e-mail and occasionally on the phone with women I have met online.





