Mr. Chairman, what we have heard is a myth. Nothing about this bill coordinates with any of these speeches that we have heard. The public is invited twice in this bill to state their opinion. We have a scientific panel of the finest academicians in the United States, 11 of them, and they must be hydrologists, wildlife biologists, fisheries biologists, entomologist or pathologist, fire ecologist, silviculturist, economist, soil scientists, and the State forester. Does that sound like some sort of effort to, in the name of salvage, to cut down the forest?
Robert Smith: “Mr. Chairman, what we have heard is a myth. Nothing about this bill coordinates with any of these speeches that we have…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of a bill related to forest management.
Share
More from Robert Smith
I say to the American people, what few may be up this morning watching these proceedings, that this is probably our last best chance to pass prescription drugs in the 107th Congress, and I think it is critical we do so. I am optimistic we…
I think there are a couple of steps that I would recommend. First, agencies must be forced to consider the indirect costs of the regulations on small businesses.
It has the same interest in defending the American people regardless of their minority, their race, religion, their culture, their sexual orientation, their disability, their agenda. It seems to me the government's business is not to pick…
I am angry to say that we are no closer to having a prescription drug program for our seniors. When the Senate debated the addition of a prescription drug benefit to the Medicare program in July, there was clear agreement that such a…





