Let me complete this thought. To raise funds, all these people have to do is have a cocktail party before a board meeting. I do not mean to be trite. I think there is room to be working together. I think the difference is to have these people engaged more thoroughly. Questions have been raised about the right percentage. Questions have been raised about whether they should forfeit funds if they cannot meet the grant. Questions have been raised about how the funds are raised and questions about whether in-kind contributions should be allowed. All of those are legitimate concerns. My inclination at this point is to see if we cannot work this out off the floor, see if we cannot come to some way to better involve these grantees in the process. I would like to proceed by withdrawing this amendment and working with my colleagues to see if we cannot come up with some meeting of the minds that allows us to move forward to an objective we all share.
Editor's note · Context
The speaker discusses concerns about fundraising and grantee involvement in the amendment process.
Share
More from Sherrod Brown
The frustrating thing is that this shouldn’t be controversial. We’re talking about basic consumer protection here.
I thank the gentlewoman from California, (Ms. Kamlager-Dove), my dear friend and colleague for leading our CBC Special Order hour this evening. Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate Ms. Kamlager-Dove's voice in Congress, from the way she fights…
today I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring our administrative team. Their hard work and dedication make our day-to-day operations possible. They are the glue that holds our office together, from making sure staff have the technology…
I am honored to stand with my CBC colleagues in this fight as we stand up for the people we represent. For decades, the far right has sold this country a lie, a lie that racism ended in 1965, a lie that discrimination is ancient history…





