Senate Proceeding on Jul 30th, 2009 :: 2:12:00 to 2:16:50
Total video length: 4 hours 30 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

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

Views:22 Duration: 0:04:50 Discussion

Previous speech:

Next speech:

2:11:58 to 2:12:18( Edit History Discussion )

David Vitter: end of the day it hurts our people. had helps their chance to get good jobs. i yield the floor and reserve the balance of my time. mr. vitter: madam president? the presidin senator from louisiana. mr. vitter: madam president, let me briefly address some of the issues an misconceptions -- and

2:12:00 to 2:16:50( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: David Vitter

2:12:19 to 2:12:40( Edit History Discussion )

David Vitter: misconceptions that have come up by focusing on four key points. first of all, i believe the senator from illinois said why would we want to take anything out of the stimulus and sp job creation? i have a news flash: there is no job creation. unemployment is going up. -- up agai

2:12:41 to 2:13:01( Edit History Discussion )

David Vitter: the unemployment numbers say it all. this is the projection from the proponents of the stimulus about unemployment peaking at 8% and then coming down. tragically this is the reality, joblessness goes up and up up toward 8%. so there is no job creation right now. number two, the senator from

2:13:02 to 2:13:23( Edit History Discussion )

David Vitter: illinois said: why would we want to move from o another pocket, that doesn't do anything. well, it does do a lot if the pocket we're moving money from is stuff that wouldn't be spent until after 2011 and we move it to a pocket focused on real,

2:13:24 to 2:13:46( Edit History Discussion )

David Vitter: concrete roads and highways and bridges spending that can be done now, that's a big change in terms of the type of s we're talking about and it's a big change in terms of the timing of the spending. the biggest reason for the stimulus having no significant impact on unemployment is the

2:13:47 to 2:14:08( Edit History Discussion )

David Vitter: type and the spending. on the timing side only 10% of the entire $800 billion stimulus has beenpent to date. on the type of spending only 3.5% of the whole bill was ever for roads and highways and bridges.

2:14:09 to 2:14:30( Edit History Discussion )

David Vitter: and only 1% of that -- 1% of the 3.5% has been spent yet. so, yes, we' from one pocket to another so as to not run up more debt. and in the process we're having a lot more immediate positive impact on employment and that's very important. point number response to the senator from

2:14:31 to 2:14:51( Edit History Discussion )

David Vitter: california, if she would like to wall off any stimulus money, the money for roads and highways and bridge control and say the president can't use that money in this transfer, i would be very open and supportive of such a second-degree amendment.

2:14:52 to 2:15:12( Edit History Discussion )

David Vitter: i did not do that simply to give the administration maximum flexibility in terms of working out those details. however, again, the senator from california would like to propose a second-degree amendment to wall off true highway funding or flood-control funding or whatever, iould be happy to support that.

2:15:13 to 2:15:37( Edit History Discussion )

David Vitter: fourth and finally, i believe -- i really couldn't believe my ears but i thinkhe senator from california said that the underlying bill involves defic reduction. now, let's get real here. world. i know things are turned upside-down so office like

2:15:38 to 2:16:00( Edit History Discussion )

David Vitter: "alice in underlying bill racks upore debt, more deficit. that's the wholeotivating factor of my amendment. the underlying bill does nothing but borrow more. don't take my word for it, look at the fact that there's a budget point of order against the underlying bill which i will point out and raise for consideration of the senate.

2:16:01 to 2:16:23( Edit History Discussion )

David Vitter: so the underlying bill clearly how couldn't it? we're taking money from the general fund to fill in the highway trust fund. guess what? we're deficitpending in the general fund. we're already through the general fund, racki deficit. so if you take money from there,

2:16:24 to 2:16:44( Edit History Discussion )

David Vitter: you have to backfill that. if you spend the same amount with more borrowing, more deficit, more debt. so, again, if you care about andebt, this is the responsible amendment to support and the responsible approach to take. the underlying bill racks up more debt. the vitter amendment avoids

2:16:45 to 2:16:50( Edit History Discussion )

David Vitter: that. and, again, there is point of order against the