Mr. Chairman, let me repeat again, this amendment increases a program which we have already increased by 63 percent. It cuts fossil fuels which we have already cut by 4 percent. There is nothing wrong with research for more efficient power plants or distributed generation technologies or pipeline improvement. Those are some of the programs this amendment would cut. This amendment is well meaning but it is ill advised and ill targeted. I have defended weatherization longer than any other person in this Chamber, and I stand here today urging a no vote on this amendment.
David Obey: “Mr. Chairman, let me repeat again, this amendment increases a program which we have already increased by 63 percent. It…”
Editor's note · Context
Opposing an amendment related to energy programs during a House committee discussion.
Share
More from David Obey
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…
This is a very human institution, and it's affected very much by our personal relationships with one another. Very frankly, for the first 20 years that Jack and I served on the Appropriations Committee, we were often adversaries. There…
This amendment was a Republican amendment offered by Mr. Cole from Oklahoma. It was not slipped in. It was voted in in the subcommittee appropriation bill 5 months ago.
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…





