I want him to know that I think I would speak for the chair, as well as myself, when I say it was heartbreaking not to have more money for this bill because of the way in which communities came forward and wanted to be included. But we thought that pretty soon you are going to have every community from a rural area in the United States included in this bill, and for good reason. What made it heartbreaking, of course, is that we are not just talking about another bill that will throw some money out here for communities, even hard-pressed communities. What was really so rewarding was to hear experts who had looked at the program testify as to its benefits and its efficiency. There came a time in the hearings when I wondered if I was hearing a discussion of a Federal program when its efficiencies were being touted the way they were. What the chairman and I did was to work on making these efficiencies even more widespread with new ways to not only measure performance but to reward performance.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the importance of funding for a community-focused bill during a House floor debate.
Share
More from James Norton
I strongly oppose this unprecedented, undemocratic, and paternalistic disapproval resolution. This disapproval resolution would sabotage the District of Columbia's tax filing season and credit rating. The substance of the D.C. law that is…
We write to you, in unison, as representatives of the District of Columbia's business organizations, urging you to oppose the Joint Resolution of Disapproval H.J. Res. 142 and Joint Resolution of Disapproval S.J. Res. 102 that would…
the poor in our country have assumed a high profile today because of the state of the economy. I hope that the gentlelady's resolution helps us to bear in mind that the poor in our country need a higher profile throughout the 110th…





