I will make these very quick points: First, that section 108 is an eligible use of economic development funds. And, therefore, there is no reason to have a separate set-aside of funds, as is proposed here in this amendment. In fact, in this bill we have added $1 billion in CDBG funds for the fiscal year. So there will be plenty of opportunities for States to do exactly as the gentlewoman calls for, and we believe that is the best way the program should be run. With that, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.'' Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters). The question was taken; and the Acting Chairman announced that the ayes appeared to have it.
Share
More from John Parker Sweeney
on rollcall No. 407, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''
I am proud to stand here in support of this resolution, a very important resolution introduced by the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers). I think we are at a critical period of time in this Nation's history, and it comes a couple of days…
I do so in opposition to this amendment which I understand takes part of the program and makes it available into the first quarter of fiscal year 2010. The problem with that is that this adds an unneeded complication to the administration…
Protecting and securing America's homeland remains a top priority within our national borders and abroad. Global stability or instability directly affects the United States in all areas, rural or suburban. Investing money now to defeat…





