But I would simply observe that, as I said earlier, if this amendment is adopted, then under the rules the next amendment that I would be able to offer will indeed eliminate the earmark for the wind tunnel, which is what the amendment is designed to attack. Mr. Chairman, I would also say that if we really want to do something about protecting the Federal Treasury from the cost of disasters, in my mind what we ought to do is to require States to join an experience-rated self-insurance program, so every time there is a disaster States do not come to Uncle Sam with their hand out; that they can simply, on the basis of their own experience, do just as we do in workmen's compensation and prepay for disasters, so every time a disaster comes we do not have to call up Uncle Sam and jimmy the budget.
David Obey: “But I would simply observe that, as I said earlier, if this amendment is adopted, then under the rules the next…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing amendments related to federal disaster funding and state self-insurance programs.
Share
More from David Obey
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.
To hear the gentleman talk, you would think that this bill is being gobbled up by a huge number of earmarks, causing the deficit to explode. The gentleman used a chart. I've got a chart too. This bar represents the total spending in this…
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…
But the truth of the matter is that I think we know better and that it does matter.





