First was a rather impassioned speech by Senator Grassley. It was a really good speech. He talked about citizens knowing the Constitution and how that facilitated by reading "The Federalist Papers" (click here). He wants people to understand the Constitution. He believes a well educated public about their Constitution leads to a deeper understanding of their rights, hence, their government.
He talked about shifting some of the money in the bill to increase funding for wing power. He is the first person I have ever heard speak of the bill that provides subsidies to the petroleum industry. He stated it is an old bill written in the 1960s. He believes the industry should not be subsidized by the federal government anymore.
That was the first time I ever heard anyone in the federal legislature speak up to end silly spending on petroleum.
April 25, 2016
...Tomorrow morning, (click here) the chamber will vote on an amendment by Sens. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) to add $95 million for wind energy. The proposal faces opposition from Energy and Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), a longtime critic of federal support for wind.
She spoke about the entitlements and how the federal government gave a pledge to the people in establishing Social Security and subsequent taxes to afford it. She pointed to many entitlements such as Medicare, Medicaid and the Children's Insurance Fund as being promises that cannot be dissolved. People have come to plan their future regarding these programs.
She addressed discretionary funding and non-discretionary funding both in the general fund and military. She frequently provides this information to her constituents to provide real insight to the government's spending. Basically, she seeks to demystify the government and it's budgets.
It is not a bad idea. I really do believe the people want that information and what the future looks like.
But, I was pleasantly surprised by the two authors to the bill. It sounds as though the Senate is coming together to provide for the American people and their best path forward. It was refreshing. I hope it continues.
He talked about shifting some of the money in the bill to increase funding for wing power. He is the first person I have ever heard speak of the bill that provides subsidies to the petroleum industry. He stated it is an old bill written in the 1960s. He believes the industry should not be subsidized by the federal government anymore.
That was the first time I ever heard anyone in the federal legislature speak up to end silly spending on petroleum.
April 25, 2016
...Tomorrow morning, (click here) the chamber will vote on an amendment by Sens. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) to add $95 million for wind energy. The proposal faces opposition from Energy and Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), a longtime critic of federal support for wind.
Also tomorrow, senators will vote on an amendment by Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Sen. Dean Heller (R-Nev.) to steer $50 million toward Lake Mead, to be followed by a vote on a proposal by Arizona Republican Sen. Jeff Flake to cut $69 million from the Army Corps of Engineers' construction account....
How is the Army Corp going to be funded? Through emergency monies as needed? There needs to be a plan in place to fund the Army Corp through emergencies at the very least. There should be an amendment in regard to emergency funding for the Army Corp.
After Senator Grassley spoke, Senator Diane Feinstein spoke about the national debt. She pointed out right now the interest is 6.5 percent of the monies owed. She also stated it could go to 13 percent in the future if the interest rates go up. Currently, she pointed to the fact the interest rates are very cheap and do not impact the country's funding today.She spoke about the entitlements and how the federal government gave a pledge to the people in establishing Social Security and subsequent taxes to afford it. She pointed to many entitlements such as Medicare, Medicaid and the Children's Insurance Fund as being promises that cannot be dissolved. People have come to plan their future regarding these programs.
She addressed discretionary funding and non-discretionary funding both in the general fund and military. She frequently provides this information to her constituents to provide real insight to the government's spending. Basically, she seeks to demystify the government and it's budgets.
It is not a bad idea. I really do believe the people want that information and what the future looks like.
But, I was pleasantly surprised by the two authors to the bill. It sounds as though the Senate is coming together to provide for the American people and their best path forward. It was refreshing. I hope it continues.
