I think that raises an interesting point, because what the gentleman is now suggesting is exactly what I said before, that we are engaging in wish-list politics out here, because he cites the $100 million and then suggests that in this one bill for this one agency that $50 million of that money ought to be usurped. The fact is that bill covers NASA. It covers the energy projects at the Department of Energy. It covers a very vast budget well beyond the National Science Foundation, and in one fell swoop it is suggested we should come out here and simply usurp $50 million for a budget bill that has yet to pass either House. We know the budget bill on which the gentleman from New York is relying has passed this House. The budget conference report has yet to pass either House. Even if it passes, the fact is there is only $100 million there to work with, of which the gentleman wants to take 50.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing budget allocations and the implications of proposed funding changes.
Share
More from Robert Walker
The point is that here we have this Tetracofico that includes these four items, including the giant money bag that we know from the original bill was a $12 billion item. It is not here, but guess what is coming, folks. Guess what is just…
in the modern era you cannot have an effective economic policy without global security. The weaknesses showing up in our domestic economic arena are related to an ineffective foreign policy. This administration's foreign policy failures…
earlier this month the three ranking members of the committees most concerned with health care reform wrote their counterparts, the chairmen of those committees, and asked that we in the spirit of bipartisanship handle the health care…
the bill before us is a very, very broad bill with regard to economic development going to the entire economy of the United States as described in the section of the bill delineating the coverage, and so in this case the coverage is very…





