I'm pleased to discuss this matter with the gentleman. This issue was brought before the committee rather late, after we had marked up. The point was made on a bipartisan basis that the authorization for this program was not adequate. We accepted the authorization change on our bill and supported an increase in the authorization, I believe to $30 million. The bill is already marked up, and we have funded this program at $8.9 million, recognizing that, like a lot of accounts in this bill, additional resources are needed. We would be pleased to work with the gentleman as the bill moves forward to see how we can augment this funding. That's a difficult proposition, but we do commit ourselves to looking to see how and where we might be able to find some additional resources to fund these accounts, and we look forward to working with the gentleman in that regard.
On the recordJuly 25, 2007
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Discussing funding and authorization for a program during committee proceedings.
Share
More from Alan B. Mollohan
Jul 25, 2007
No. It's terminal. It's a bad offset. It degrades the Census Bureau's ability to collect economic statistics, which is terrible. But please.
Jul 26, 2007
under this project, funds would be used to support the East Coast shellfish aquaculture industry. I think the gentlelady has eloquently stated the merits of this request. The committee has looked at it, vetted it, spent hours going over…
Feb 2, 2010
A day that I am going to do my best to remind everybody of every chance I get is June 1st, because that is the day that the United States starts living on credit and charging everything that we do to our kids, sending them the bill.





