I think I have a better understanding now why the Republicans did not want to have the line-item veto apply this year. It was this type of provision, this type of provision that allows the State of Louisiana and the State of New Hampshire to benefit at the expenses of taxpayers throughout this country. It should not be in this bill, it should never have been put in this bill, and it is a disgrace that we have this in a bill at a time when we are trying to work together to bridge the gap between the two sides of this House. I am ashamed that we have this in this bill, and I am sorry it is here. This was a good faith attempt by Members on our side of the aisle to reach a compromise.
Thomas M. Barrett: “I think I have a better understanding now why the Republicans did not want to have the line-item veto apply this year.…”
Editor's note · Context
Addressing concerns about a provision in a bill that benefits certain states at the expense of taxpayers.
Share
More from Thomas M. Barrett
Several of the previous speakers have said that no man is above the law. I passionately and fervently agree, as do the Members on this side, and that is why our censure resolution specifically states that the President remain subject to…
Mr. Ruiz has coined a rallying cry for parents and others concerned about childhood lead poisoning: 'Stop Using Our Children as Lead Detectors.'
The articles incorporate language which clearly condemns and, in effect, censures the President. I quote from the articles: "In all of this William Jefferson Clinton has undermined the integrity of his office and has brought disrepute on…





