I am happy to tell my colleague that in reviewing the consent agreement we did not undo anything. The consent decree does not say anything about a rerun election. It says that the Teamsters will pay for the 1991 election and it says taxpayers will pay for the 1996 election. It does not say anything about who will pay for a subsequent election. We are trying to clarify that. We had 56 votes who say the taxpayers should not, that the Teamsters should. I think that is consistent with the consent decree. I might mention, the CRS just studied this, and whose legal analysis I will refer to again, says the Congress has the right to do this, period.
Don Nickles: “I am happy to tell my colleague that in reviewing the consent agreement we did not undo anything. The consent decree…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the funding of elections in relation to a consent decree.
Share
More from Don Nickles
I have every confidence that in comparing President George Bush and Senator John Kerry, that Oklahoma will make it 10 in a row. We will vote overwhelmingly to reelect President George W. Bush as our president.
I am happy to debate my colleague, or any colleague, on the budget. We spent several days debating the budget. I am more than happy to debate it. I will tell my colleague that we basically have assumed a freeze in nondefense, non-homeland…
You cannot afford to make fossil fuels' tax equal to the enormous subsidy that wind currently receives.
If you no longer allowed intangible drilling costs to be expensed, you would shut down the shale revolution.





