Video archive of the US Congress

House Proceeding on Dec 10th, 2009 :: 0:30:20 to 0:36:35
Total video length: 1 hours 23 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:333 Duration: 0:06:15 Discussion

Previous speech: Next speech:

Jeff Flake

0:30:16 to 0:30:36( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Flake: pass this legislatiotoday. i have a right to close but in the nd i will urge my colleagues to vote yes to consider the rule. mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from arizona. mr. flake: i thank the chair. here again, i'm here claiming time on the unfunded mandates point of order because it's about the only opportunity

Jeff Flake

0:30:20 to 0:36:35( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Jeff Flake

Jeff Flake

0:30:37 to 0:30:57( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Flake: we've had. and all throughout this appropriations season i did something similar because it was the only opportunity i got. i was offered few opportunities to offer amendments to earmarks during this appropriations seas. but let me give you some of the examples of earmarks that are in this bill. just a couple of examples of

Jeff Flake

0:32:05 to 0:32:27( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Flake: dollars in no-bid contracts to private companies and we have an earmark, a specifically designated earmark for defense procurement assistance. yet, it's in this legislation, and it was in the prior legislation that we dealt with under, as i said, the

Jeff Flake

0:32:28 to 0:32:48( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Flake: legislative equivalent of marshal law earlier this year. the bow tancal institute of texas will enhance its collections. $290,000 to reduce slum in pennsylvania. $700,000 for an arts pavilion again, these may well be worthy

Jeff Flake

0:32:49 to 0:33:09( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Flake: programs. i'm not sure if the federal government ought to be funding them. but in any case should any member have the right to designate that portion of funding for his or her district without the ability of other members to challenge it on the house floor, that's the question we have here, and we went through a process the entire year where we were told

Jeff Flake

0:33:10 to 0:33:34( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Flake: we can't have open debate, we can't allow members to challenge these ear house floor because we have to rush these bills through to avoid an omnibus. here we are in december with an omnibus. we all knew we'd be here. during the year 2006 to 2008 when the majority party was

Jeff Flake

0:33:35 to 0:33:55( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Flake: majority republicans had the white house, they said we would have these bills in order if it not for the white house. now as the ranking member of the rules committee stated, the majority party is in control of the white house, has a huge majority here in the house, and a 60-vote majority in the senate and still we're here with an omnibus.

Jeff Flake

0:33:56 to 0:34:17( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Flake: we knew we'd be here. so you can only conclude that we rushed through this process during the entire year just to shield members from uncomfortable votes, to be forced to defend $250,000 for the brooklyn children's museum or $600,000 for streetspe beautification in california.

Jeff Flake

0:34:18 to 0:34:38( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Flake: $200,000 for a farmer's market in kentucky. now, if it weren't for that, why in the world did we have to shield members from these uncomfortable votes? so, mr. chairman, i simply -- i wanted something different to come with this new majority in

Jeff Flake

0:35:00 to 0:35:20( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Flake: it doesn't speak well for our leadership to allow this kind of thing to happen. and particularly at a time when we have stories after stories after stories in the newspapers about particularly problems with defense procurement when you have no-bid contracts to private companies that are -- that's in legislation, that we

Jeff Flake

0:35:21 to 0:35:42( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Flake: aren't allowed to challenge. i realize the defense bill is not part of this legislation. that will come next week, but it will come, again, with one rule, no ability to amend, no ability to challenge. but when that defense bill came to the floor earlier this year, there were more than 1,000 earmarks, more than 500 of

Jeff Flake

0:35:43 to 0:36:03( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Flake: which represented no-bit contracts to private companies. i offered more than 500 amendments to challenge some of those and i was allowed 8% of the amendments that were offered. and so we were only allowed to challenge just a fraction of those no-bid contracts to private companies.

Jeff Flake

0:36:25 to 0:36:36( Edit History Discussion )

Jeff Flake: shields those projects and those members from many vetting or criticism or debate or anything else we shouldn't be dng that. yet, we're still doing it.

Personal tools

MetaVid is a non-profit project of UC Santa Cruz and the Sunlight Foundation. Learn more About MetaVid

The C-SPAN logo and other servicemarks that may be found in video content are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Metavid