Thomas E. Petri: “I rise to speak against the substitute. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I apologize to you and Members since I had not had…”

“I rise to speak against the substitute. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I apologize to you and Members since I had not had an opportunity to read the amendment and it was not submitted to anyone or printed in the RECORD to stand to my feet to object. I have reserved a point of order and perhaps could have saved some time, because it appears to me, at least on the face of it, that it is legislating on appropriation and would not withstand a point of order. Leaving that aside, nonetheless, it is somewhat of a symbolic argument in that the issue really here is pending the negotiations going on in Colorado to come up with a viable project that honors the Indian treaty rights and is environmentally sensible at the same time: Do we continue down the road of a roughly $750 million project that is a road to nowhere, at great expense to the taxpayers' spending, money that is in the pipeline; or do we stop what is being done now until we have a new project that in fact there is a consensus for? We are arguing not to throw good money after bad. Let the negotiations go forward. Do not bias those negotiations by continuing to spend money on a project really to nowhere. And, therefore, I would oppose this amendment since it would encourage and permit the spending of money that might be wasteful.”