Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 2007
ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2007 -- (House of Representatives - May 24, 2006)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Again, we are here debating these things and whether some of these things ought to be funded at all. There are programs that are not requested in the President's budget which some of us feel are appropriate. Some of them would be things like money to reimburse States for criminal costs associated with illegal immigration. The President hasn't requested that in his budget, but many of us feel it is appropriate that it ought to be put in there. I believe even the gentleman from Arizona believes that that is an appropriate thing.
Now, of course, if we would put that in there, that would be an earmark, because it would be Congress directing the spending rather than the administration making that request.
Earlier the gentleman mentioned the NREL laboratory and the fact that they had to lay off something like 32 people. What wasn't said is that this committee gave them unlimited reprogramming authority, that if that was going to happen, they could have reprogrammed the money. But they didn't do that. They chose not to use it. They chose to lay the people off. And then, magically, when the President was going to come out there for a press conference, guess what? They found the money to rehire those individuals. At the same time, the Secretary goes to, I believe it was Australia, and announces a new program down there without any funding authority whatsoever.
So to suggest that things done by the administration are appropriate but things done by Congress are inappropriate and, as the gentleman and I have talked many times, the fact is you are not going to reduce spending by eliminating these things. You are going to do it by getting a budget resolution which is lower so that that money isn't available.
But I guarantee you if you cut out this money, or any of these other earmarked projects, the money is going to be spent on something else. That is the reality, and that is what we have to address.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://thomas.loc.gov/