I would simply say that what is at issue here is not whether we ought to have a strong defense or not. It is not whether we ought to provide our troops with the best equipment money can buy or not. Obviously we need a strong defense and obviously we need to provide the best weaponry that money can buy for our troops. The question is, do we really need to buy nine additional bombers that the Pentagon is saying we do not need, the Secretary of Defense is saying we do not need, especially when we have other higher priority items in the military budget. I think the answer to that question is no. I think we ought to heed those some 20 studies that have been conducted on this matter. This amendment is supported on a bipartisan basis and I would urge the House to adopt it.
David Obey: “I would simply say that what is at issue here is not whether we ought to have a strong defense or not. It is not whether…”
Editor's note · Context
Debating the necessity of additional bombers in the military budget.
Share
More from David Obey
Why do you keep saying we're borrowing money to add to the summer youth program when this bill fully offsets every dime that we're spending on it?
I would point out that more than half of all disaster relief since 1993 has gone to just four States: Louisiana, Florida, California--the gentleman's home State--and Mississippi; and 80 percent of all disaster relief since 1993 has gone to…
41 years ago my friend and mentor, Wisconsin Senator Gaylord Nelson, had a surprisingly simple idea. At the time, the country was fighting an unpopular and unwinnable war, and students were rising up in protest and holding teach-ins on…
We are not adding one dime to the deficit by what we are adding to the summer jobs program. We are fully paying for it by cuts in other programs.





