The gentleman really raises the crux of this whole debate. If, in fact, this body believes that we should go out and expand the concept, create more regional commissions, fund it with Federal dollars, and put the money into those regional commissions for these kinds of programs, then, in fact, they should vote against the Klug amendment. But in so doing, you have to make a choice. That means we are going to be spending not $147 million. We are going to be spending billions of dollars in putting money out into all of those other regional commissions and communities, and if we are going to do that, you have to pay for it or you are going to borrow the money from the future by increasing the deficit, and so if you are going to pay for it, you either have to pay for it by cutting other programs or you have to pay for it by raising taxes. I do not believe this body is willing to do either of those. I do not want to increase the debt. So I would urge adoption of the Klug amendment.
William Orton: “The gentleman really raises the crux of this whole debate. If, in fact, this body believes that we should go out and…”
Editor's note · Context
Debating the implications of funding regional commissions and the Klug amendment.
Share
More from William Orton
there is a question whether the current law does apply to contract authority, which is the issue I am raising, and that is why I wish for the chairman to be on record.
CBO has it wrong, but under the gentleman's proposal CBO would have it even more wrong and we would have even higher deficits.
I will be very brief just in stating my support for the amendment. Indeed the President has, as indicated, indicated that he would do this administratively. I believe it is good to put it in statutory language. I support the amendment by…
in closing let me just say we do not want to make this a partisan fight. This motion to recommit is not partisan. This motion to recommit does nothing to the bill which we are adopting except one thing: making the line-item veto effective…





