Don Nickles: “To give an example--I appreciate the question--there are a lot of things in this bill. My friend from Arizona pointed…”

“To give an example--I appreciate the question--there are a lot of things in this bill. My friend from Arizona pointed out a couple of them earlier today. There is one where the President said, some of these provisions don't relate to homeland security, including $11 million to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, for economic assistance to New England fishing and fishing communities; $26.8 million for the USGS survey for urban mapping activities. The administration said that is not urgent; it wasn't requested. If section 2002 is not stricken, those things will have to be funded or you don't get funding for New York City. You don't get funding for homeland security needs that are requested. There is billions of dollars in here that the President did request that we are putting in jeopardy because of this bill's 'all or nothing' approach. We do that on normal appropriations. We don't do it on emergency bills. The reason we don't do it on emergency bills is that the emergency bills are outside the budget. They are special. They are figures over and above set spending levels. We have agreed to a budget. We have agreed to caps. We shake hands. That is what we are going to abide by. But when it comes to emergencies, we say we are going to waive the budget. The budget no longer applies. Therefore, caps no longer apply. This is the national emergency. That is what we passed, the $40 billion following the World Trade Center. It is a national emergency.”