I would say to the chairman, who I have great respect for, this bill should have gone, the $87 billion bill has enough policy in it, enough money in it that it should have gone through the typical two-step process. The authorizing committee should have had a hand in it and we did not. We asked for it and did not have that opportunity. In light of that, I would ask him to take a broader view of what happens here on the House floor in the appropriations process to acknowledge the fact that we did not get a chance to put it through committee and, therefore, give us a chance to make a little bit of law, which is not very complicated law. Most of this stuff has been around a long time. We whittled down a package of old ideas to deal with inequities and deficiencies and shortcomings in personnel policy. This stuff has been around a long time. It is not complicated. There is no reason we should not be able to add it to an appropriations bill.
John Spratt: “I would say to the chairman, who I have great respect for, this bill should have gone, the $87 billion bill has enough…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the appropriations process for the $87 billion bill.
Share
More from John Spratt
I want to welcome everyone to our hearing this morning on The Social Safety Net: Impact of the Recession and of the Recovery Act.
The moral of the story is, if the leaders of both parties don't want a commission to succeed, if the leaders of both parties aren't willing to put both parts of the budget, taxes and spending, on the table, the chances that it is going to…
shouldn't we stop creating new programs, now agencies, new commissions and new discretionary spending?
This bill fully funds national security activities in the Departments of Defense and Energy, including top-line funding increases for DOD as well as fully funding Iraq and Afghanistan operations. This is the fourth consecutive year that…





