House Proceeding on Mar 9th, 2007 :: 0:32:59 to 0:37:14
Total video length: 58 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Download OptionsEmbed Video

Views:261 Duration: 0:04:15 Discussion

Previous speech:

Next speech:

0:30:40 to 0:32:59( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Pete Sessions

0:32:49 to 0:32:59( Edit History Discussion )

Pete Sessions: speaker, at this time i'd like to yield five minutes to the gentleman from louisiana, dr. buice knee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana is recognized for five minutes. mr. boustany:

0:32:59 to 0:33:12( Edit History Discussion )

Charles W. Jr.Boustany: thank you very much, mr. speaker. my colleague has been very eloquent on this subject. i rise in opposition to this rule. i'm deeply disappointed in the rules committee and its actions

0:32:59 to 0:37:14( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Charles W. Jr.Boustany

0:33:12 to 0:33:25( Edit History Discussion )

Charles W. Jr.Boustany: yesterday by limiting the number of amendments that we could have taken to the floor. we all recognize that there's a gap or a shortfall in the funding that exists to help deal with our water

0:33:25 to 0:33:39( Edit History Discussion )

Charles W. Jr.Boustany: sfrass. and this is most -- infrastructure. and this is most pointedly affecting our small, rural and disadvantaged communities. but i have to say the actions of the rules committee and the

0:33:39 to 0:33:54( Edit History Discussion )

Charles W. Jr.Boustany: majority on the rules committee really disappoints me, because what we've seen now is politics trumpeting practical policy. sure, we don't agree on davis-bacon. and have an up and down vote

0:33:54 to 0:34:05( Edit History Discussion )

Charles W. Jr.Boustany: is fine. but that's a political vote. and we're all frozen in our positions. bewe could have -- but we could have taken a chance by creating exemptions. i hoped to offer two amendments to this

0:34:05 to 0:34:19( Edit History Discussion )

Charles W. Jr.Boustany: bill yesterday, and they were not ruled in order for the bill. one would have exempted small disadvantaged communities, as defined by law, from davis-bacon big labor provisions in the bill. this

0:34:19 to 0:34:32( Edit History Discussion )

Charles W. Jr.Boustany: would have given our small communities a chance to access these funds. what good are the funds if the community can't get to them? the gentlelady across the aisle here says, talk to local leaders.

0:34:32 to 0:34:44( Edit History Discussion )

Charles W. Jr.Boustany: i could tell you, i've spoken to local leaders, democrats and republicans alike, those who favor this across my district, which is largely rural, and they have uniformerly told me that

0:34:44 to 0:34:57( Edit History Discussion )

Charles W. Jr.Boustany: these davis-bacon provisions and this state-revolving loan fund would really put a burden on our small communities. it will inflate the cost by 20% to 25%. so on one hand we're saying, yes, let's

0:34:57 to 0:35:09( Edit History Discussion )

Charles W. Jr.Boustany: create the revolving loan fund, let's fund it. and on the other hand we're telling our small communities, no, you can't have the money, because you can't afford it. you can't afford the match.

0:35:09 to 0:35:20( Edit History Discussion )

Charles W. Jr.Boustany: you can't afford to access this money. you know, our small and rural communities are the ones most often in need of adequate waste water infrastructure. i visited every community in my district.

0:35:20 to 0:35:32( Edit History Discussion )

Charles W. Jr.Boustany: this is a huge need, and i want to support this underlying bill. but we could have acted responsibly. we could have created exemptions that help our small and rural and disadvantaged communities,

0:35:32 to 0:35:45( Edit History Discussion )

Charles W. Jr.Boustany: but, know, we've chosen to play politics instead of dealing with good, practical policy. my amendments would have put the power back in the hands of local leaders. but, no, the federal government

0:35:45 to 0:35:58( Edit History Discussion )

Charles W. Jr.Boustany: , the federal government is the one that has to dictate and mandate all. once again, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have chosen to empower big labor at the expense of small, disadvantaged

0:35:58 to 0:36:10( Edit History Discussion )

Charles W. Jr.Boustany: communities and local leaders. i have to say i'm deeply disappointed. there's plenty evidence -- the c.b.o. has noted that repealing davis-bacon, raising the threshold for projects that it covers,

0:36:10 to 0:36:24( Edit History Discussion )

Charles W. Jr.Boustany: will allow appropriators to reduce federal funds and we can get more bang for the buck. the department of labor, after nearly 50 years, has not developed an effective program to issue and

0:36:24 to 0:36:36( Edit History Discussion )

Charles W. Jr.Boustany: maintain current and accurate wage determinations. and it may be impractical to ever do so. there are many problems with this. we could have acted responsibly, but, no, we've chosen

0:36:36 to 0:36:49( Edit History Discussion )

Charles W. Jr.Boustany: to play politics. i urge my colleagues to oppose this rule. we could have done better by the american public in putting together a bill that would create the state-revolving loan funds and allow

0:36:49 to 0:36:57( Edit History Discussion )

Charles W. Jr.Boustany: our communities to access them. i urge defeat of the bill and the underlying bill. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of

0:36:57 to 0:37:14( Edit History Discussion )

Charles W. Jr.Boustany: his time. who kwleeleds time? -- yields time? the gentleman from texas. mr. sessions: yesterday in the rules committee we had an opportunity to receive a number of amendments and have feedback

0:37:14 to 0:37:31( Edit History Discussion )

Pete Sessions: from members who were talking about these important water projects. and i found one amendment yesterday that was presented very interesting. it was rejected by the democrats, but it says this -- this amendment

0:37:14 to 0:39:43( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Pete Sessions