I would just also have to rise in reluctant opposition to the gentleman's amendment. I think he is right to be concerned about what some of the impacts could be. But I think he is also wrong in the assumption that giving flexibility to the States to implement these programs, carry out these programs, that they are not going to be concerned about the health, safety, and well-being of their children. So I think that we at the Federal Government, I think, too often take the assumption or have the assumption that the States and local governments cannot be trusted to do these things. Hopefully they will be challenged to do them and to provide the kind of necessary measure of care. But they need the flexibility in order to do that.
Editor's note · Context
Opposing an amendment regarding state flexibility in implementing programs for children's welfare.
Share
More from William Clinger
Mr. Chairman, this bill, the Federal Acquisition Reform Act of 1995, is an important piece of legislation, which the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Spence], chairman of the Committee on National Security, and I introduced along with…
Just to briefly say, Mr. Speaker, the President has agreed to the date. Obviously he is confident that he is in fact going to be reelected. I do not share that confidence, but he believes that he will be. Therefore, he is going to have…
75 percent of the American people support the line-item veto, and have supported the line-item veto for a long time. It has been suggested that there are a number of reasons why we should not enact this legislation. It has been suggested…
State and local governments can sleep safer tonight because we are about to put the menace of unfunded mandates behind lock and key. Congress has recognized, on a bipartisan basis, that its penchant for passing the costs of programs on to…





