David Obey: “I think the amendment of the gentleman from California is a constructive amendment because it both attempts to target…”

“I think the amendment of the gentleman from California is a constructive amendment because it both attempts to target some of the high priority items that ought to be purchased and, second, it does not attempt to put this committee in an illegitimate straitjacket, as did the Committee on the Budget in its gratuitous determination of exactly what amount would be provided. Under the Committee on the Budget, under the rules that they would want enforced, it would be permissible and within budget rules if we produced $700 million in acquisition, but it would be against the rules as exceeding the budget amounts if we provided $690 million. That is ludicrous on its face. I think the gentleman's amendment, by saying up to $700 million, brings it back within the legitimate approach of the appropriations process, and at the same time it tries to meet some high-priority needs of the country with respect to Yellowstone and the California lands in question.”