I rise to urge a vote against this rule. There are a lot of things in this rule that I would like to protect. But not at the expense of waiving points of order so that the action that Congress took last year on the California Desert Act can be, by fiat of the Committee on Appropriations' will, reversed. I also do not think that we ought to reverse the Outer Banks Protection Act. I just do not think that we ought to be asked to pay the price for being asked to pay in terms of ignoring our responsibilities to the environment in order to pass this rule. I think if Members are genuinely interested in having a bipartisan approach and a bipartisan rule, they will quit using the appropriations process to accomplish an ideological agenda that would not be possible under normal parliamentary circumstances. I would urge strongly a vote against this rule. We can do better.
David Obey: “I rise to urge a vote against this rule. There are a lot of things in this rule that I would like to protect. But not at…”
On the recordJuly 12, 1995
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Opposing a rule related to environmental protections during House floor debate.
Share
More from David Obey
Mar 24, 2010
I largely agree with my friend from Oklahoma. We have one simple dilemma: both in the case of the Cobell settlement and the Pigford settlement, the administration has asked us to provide the money. We do not yet have an understanding of…
Jul 1, 2010
Somehow we are being told that we are committing a mortal sin because we are trying to attach some material to the bill sent to us by the Senate. I would simply point out that just a few weeks ago, as the gentleman from Massachusetts…
Feb 23, 2010
I feel an obligation on behalf of the families, there were 30 people from my District who died in the attack on 9/11.





