I wonder if the Senator from Georgia agrees with this proposition. Does he not believe, as I do, that if this bill were to come back to the Senate with this modest experiment on medical savings accounts included, it would have a significant majority of the votes of the Members of this body, Democrats as well as Republicans, and would easily go to the President, and that one of the reasons for this filibuster is to prevent that majority view from prevailing and to prevent the embarrassment of the President either having to veto this proposal as he has threatened to do or actually to back off and sign it?
T. Gorton: “I wonder if the Senator from Georgia agrees with this proposition. Does he not believe, as I do, that if this bill were…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the potential support for a bill including medical savings accounts during Senate debate.
Share
More from T. Gorton
In response to my colleague, the senior Senator from Nevada, let me say that your understanding of the issues affecting Lake Tahoe is correct. Your concerns seem reasonable, as does your interpretation of the language in question.
I expect that the $2.5 million grant program administered by NFWF will leverage at least $2.5 million overall in additional, nonfederal funds.
My home state, too, has experienced the disruption that a federal endangered species listing can cause. I therefore appreciate the importance and urgency of the funds sought by the Senator from Maine.
The Senator is correct. Section 156 states, ``nothing in this section shall be construed to expand the existing statutory authority of the Secretary.'' The interpretation suggested by our House colleagues would require additional statutory…





