Political Quotes

Jim Sensenbrenner: This substitute is really a cop-out, because what it does is it punts the ball right back to the bureaucrats in the…

On the recordJune 6, 1996
This substitute is really a cop-out, because what it does is it punts the ball right back to the bureaucrats in the office of the Secretary of Health and Human Services. It does not compel the Secretary and the bureaucrats to approve the submittal that has been made by the Governor of Wisconsin. It allows the Secretary to cherry-pick and approve some and modify others and disapprove others, which means that the whole W-2 welfare reform plan that was passed by the State legislature does not get approved, and it does not even set up an automatic deadline as I read this. It just urges the Secretary to do it by the end of July. There is precedent for legislatively approving welfare waivers that have been requested by the States and I referred to 3 instances during my remarks in general debate: In 1987 Washington State welfare waivers were legislatively approved in a budget reconciliation bill as were New York waivers. In 1989 Minnesota had some waivers legislatively approved. That is exactly the same procedure that we are using here today with the waivers that have been requested by the State of Wisconsin.
Said by
Jim Sensenbrenner
Republican · Wisconsin

Editor's note · Context

Criticizing a substitute proposal regarding welfare reform during a House floor debate.

Share

More from Jim Sensenbrenner

Feb 13, 2020

Do I put the question before or after it is passed? The SPEAKER pro tempore. At the time the Chair puts the question on passage.

govinfo.gov
Dec 10, 2019

It is amazing to me that, again, the things that will come out of this markup is not the simple fact that they are going to mark up this and they will send it to the floor.

congress.gov
Dec 10, 2019

This is the third time in the last 40 years, 45 years that this committee has sat to the Articles of Impeachment against the President of the United States.

congress.gov
Feb 13, 2020

I appeal the decision of the Chair. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The terms of House Resolution 842 are unambiguous and so, consistent with the ruling of the Chair on September 16, 1977, to permit an appeal in this case would be tantamount to…

govinfo.gov

Other voices in this conversation