David Thomas: “first of all, let me rise to comment on the specific amendment which we are supposed to be dealing with during this…”

“first of all, let me rise to comment on the specific amendment which we are supposed to be dealing with during this time, and I do not know about the desire for Members to have a referendum on the CAO. I am concerned about the language of the amendment which the gentleman from California, who as a member of the Appropriations Committee and the authorizing committee has the ability to move freely between the two areas, and attempt to write policy from an authorizing committee position in the appropriation. We are supposed to have that be against the rules. It is legislating on an appropriations bill, but the Committee on Rules did make it in order, notwithstanding that. My problem is that it builds a fence around the $4 million. I would be less opposed to the amendment if he gave the $4 million to the House Committee on Oversight so that we could place it where the Members could get the best use out of it. This amendment places it where the gentleman from California thinks we can get the best use out of it. Where we are is the gentleman from California, notwithstanding the fact that he is in the minority, still wants to basically run the place and tell people what to do. I do not deny that that is a desirable position, it is just that I wanted 16 years to be in the same one and I would now like to exercise it. But the gentleman from California apparently does not want me to because he wants to tell me where to put the money.”