On the recordApril 7, 2014
A number of questions come to my mind after just hearing the sponsor of the motion. They don't necessarily go in this order. One is: Why does she want to hide from the American public the actual facts of what they are doing to the American public, as far as spending the taxpayers' money? The second question that comes to mind is: Why, when the opportunity was given to the other side of the aisle to work with us, to amend the bill or change the bill on those areas that they disagree with on its merits, why did they instead come with this proposal, this motion on the floor totally extraneous to the underlying message and purpose of the bill? {time} 1830 Mr. Speaker, many times we come to the floor and people say that the bill before us is a commonsense piece of legislation. Well, I am going to say it again because this is a commonsense piece of legislation. The underlying bill, maybe we should have had a different name to it. Maybe if we simply called the bill what it is, the ``Knowing What You Are Spending Bill,'' then the other side of the aisle would have agreed with us, wrapped their arms around the bill and us and said let's move forward, because who can disagree with actually know what you are spending? That is all this bill does. It doesn't eliminate any programs; it doesn't cut any programs; and it doesn't diminish any programs.…





