What we have just heard is the fundamental argument we always get on any science program, that we cannot cancel it because they just started it and there might be potential, or we cannot cancel it because they have invested so much money they might as well finish the project to see if it pays dividends. There is never an optimal point to terminate a science project according to many people in this Chamber, but I will say fundamentally that if the program is going to be terminated in the near future, we might as well save the money today.
Scott Klug: “What we have just heard is the fundamental argument we always get on any science program, that we cannot cancel it…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the rationale for terminating science programs during a committee meeting.
Share
More from Scott Klug
I think anything but the contrary. The public, which should be involved in this decision, has already been involved in the decision. It is the residents of the State of Wisconsin who had 30 hearings and town meetings, 120 hours of debate…
I think simplicity simply says we charge on the Federal lands what we charge on the State lands. We do not have to have a program that is going to put us through all kinds of calculated relationships based on beef prices in the future…
Given the size and availability of U.S. coal reserves, the security of the domestic coal supply and the comparative economics of coal as a fuel, free market forces are operating to select and commercialize the most efficient and…
The final vote on W-2 presented legislators a choice. We could continue along a seemingly endless path that had fostered impoverished dependency on government aid. Or we could try a new direction in the hope of leading all Wisconsin…





