Mike Conaway: “this bill left our committee on a bipartisan basis and with my enthusiastic support. I agree with many of the laudatory…”

“this bill left our committee on a bipartisan basis and with my enthusiastic support. I agree with many of the laudatory comments made by my colleagues across the aisle. You will hear that there is a broad group of associations, commodity groups, and, most importantly, producers that support the bill that left our committee. Now you need to know the rest of the story. My colleagues and I were repeatedly told that the necessary offsets would not come from tax increases. We have just heard Chairman Rangel confirm that his taxing committee provided taxes for the offset. I was misled, I hope unintentionally, but nonetheless misled. Over the last 48 hours, poison pills have been added that the cynical among us would conclude were intentional; short-sighted, but intentional. Each of us must weigh the good and bad in all the legislation that we consider. Great judgment is required. Last week at this time, almost at this exact time, I fully expected to be here tonight perhaps fighting off bipartisan opposition to this bill, but nonetheless supporting this bill, not participating in a raw, partisan fight that was totally unnecessary. This bill is proproducer and prohungry around the world, but it is antibusiness and antimanufacturing jobs. It is an affront to States rights and unnecessarily panders to unions. Sadly, we have gone from a bill that should have passed with broad bipartisan support to one that will not enjoy that support.”