Let me try to bring the debate back to the issue here. The issue before us is not to rehash or redo the State legislative enactment; that is the law of the land in the State of Wisconsin. What we are trying to do here, what we are talking about is process. There is a process for when States ask for waivers. Like it or not, that is the process that has been used. So, what the Republican proposal today does is cut out the public's input into this process. Do not give me this baloney about the bureaucrats and everything else. The 30 days is so the public, and I will give you some of the names who have asked for this opportunity from Wisconsin and from out of Wisconsin, but they just want an opportunity to be heard. Why are we cutting that out? What do we have to fear?
Gerald Kleczka: “Let me try to bring the debate back to the issue here. The issue before us is not to rehash or redo the State…”
Editor's note · Context
Addressing the importance of public input in the waiver process during a debate.
Share
More from Gerald Kleczka
But then, lo and behold, we have the worst tragedy to beset this Nation on Tuesday; and operators in the city of Milwaukee, like some other unsatisfactory operators, have to raise the price of gas dramatically. This does not resolve the…
So this is 2002. So we are talking about something that might happen and might not happen in 8 years from now?
The question I was going to ask of my colleague from the Republican side of the aisle was in here is a provision to reinstate the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund excise tax. Evidently he is for oil spills. We want to clean them up. There is…
But is it not true that they would stand to lose money in 2010 if we do not repeal the sunset?





