No, Mr. Chairman, he would not, because his amendment is really an amendment to the amendment of the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce). The gentleman from California (Mr. Royce) is taking about $5 million out of the bill. The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Jackson) is putting it back in. So, no, his amendment, I do not think, would be appropriate because there was no removal of the money he seeks to get.
Discussing amendments related to funding during a committee meeting.
Share
More from James T. Callahan
My question is, to facilitate these multibillionaires who are against this bill, Mr. Speaker, I want an opportunity to offer an amendment which limits the reductions in this tax to the first billion dollars. I think that this will satisfy…
When I bring my amendment up, I will ask some of you that have been coming up to me telling me all day long, ``Sonny, you are doing exactly the right thing,'' I am going to have some handouts, and I want some of you to take these handouts…
Joe Moakley was a friend, a true friend. In reflecting on Joe's history here in this House of Representatives, he recognized something that very few first-term Members of Congress, very few second-term Members of Congress recognize: that…
The issue is the pipeline, and the issue is what is going to be put in the pipeline. The gentleman from Florida has already said that they already have pipelines going into Florida; they want to build more pipelines because they need more…
Other voices in this conversation
