|
|
|
July 26, 2006, 4:15 am
By
Calif. Dem. Rep. Diane Watson
Once we start making exceptions to the nuclear proflieration treaty, I can see other nations that would propose to develop nuclear energy. I would feel quite hypocritical if we accept some nations and say no to others.
It's another contradiction to sell F-16's to Pakistan when India and Pakistan have fought historically over the region of Kashmir.
|
|
|
July 25, 2006, 1:56 pm
By
Mich. GOP Rep. Thaddeus McCotter
I support Rep. John McHugh's selection as one of the 50 handsomest people who work here, even though he will now be more difficult to work with. I would also like to register the complaint that not one of the 50, male or female, was bald.
|
|
July 25, 2006, 1:41 pm
By
Colo. GOP Rep. Tom Tancredo
To the extent that it expands the guest worker/amnesty program, it is of little or no value.
|
|
July 25, 2006, 12:49 pm
By
Vt. Dem. Sen. Patrick Leahy
The first thing would be for the president of the United States to actually follow the law of the Constitution, which he is not doing. The second would be for the Republican rubber stamp Congress to actually hold the president to the laws it has passed.
|
July 25, 2006, 12:43 pm
By
R.I. Dem. Sen. Jack Reed
Today I joined with the Center for American Progress in releasing a report card that graded the Bush Administration's Iraq policy on four key areas:
* Security and Stability: F
* Governance and Democracy: C+
* Economic Reconstruction: D-
* Iraq's Impact on U.S. National Security: F
This report card is a sobering report. Too often this Administration has dealt in slogans and glib assumptions. This is an accurate assessment of where we are and what we must do to really make progress.
Read more...
|
July 25, 2006, 12:23 pm
By
House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer
Today, I was joined by other leading Democrats to propose the PROGRESS Act, a comprehensive bill that will lead America in a New Direction towards energy independence. Making our nation energy independent is vital to our national security, our economic security, and our environment, and we can't let another day pass without action. We owe it to future generations of Americans.
|
|
July 25, 2006, 11:51 am
By
Nev. GOP Sen. John Ensign
I think that it will certainly make Nevada more prominent. I would love to see the Republicans join them, but obviously the chances of that are a lot slimmer. It will bring more national attention to our state and that is good. It will help the local economy when people are visiting our state.
|
July 25, 2006, 11:16 am
By
N.H. GOP Rep. Jeb Bradley
Earlier this year, the VA was entertaining a proposal to curtail the hours of operation at VA Medical Center emergency rooms across the country, including one right in my home state of New Hampshire. This proposal would have hurt veterans. When faced with a dire medical emergency, the last thing a veteran and his or her family should be considering is the potential out-of-pocket costs incurred from visiting a private medical facility.
Thankfully, the VA has shelved this proposal until they have determined a policy that will allow qualified veterans to be treated at other facilities with the VA assuming responsibility for payment of that care. To prevent any future proposals similar to this one from being implemented without Congressional or public input, I have introduced legislation in the House that would give Congress ample opportunity for oversight on any proposal that would curtail hours of operation at emergency rooms within the VA Health Care System. I urge my colleagues to support this bill and ensure that our veterans receive the health care they deserve.
|
July 25, 2006, 9:51 am
By
Mass. Dem. Rep. Edward Markey
The Bush Administration claims that the India nuclear deal will be a "net plus" for nonproliferation. But that argument doesn't add up at all. How could a huge exemption for India from U.S nonproliferation laws and international norms be a "net plus" for nonproliferation?
Let's talk about what this legislation really will do:
* It will allow India to dramatically increase its production of nuclear weapons by shipping India fuel for its civilian reactors, freeing up their entire supply of domestic uranium for use in weapons.
* It will throw fuel on a simmering nuclear arms race in Asia: We know that Pakistan will not allow a nuclear disparity to develop between itself and India, should India ramp up production of nuclear weapons.
* It will blow a hole in the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
* It will reward India for decades of bad nuclear behavior.
* And it will send the wrong message to Iran and North Korea.
The President's proposal to ship nukes to India is a terrible idea.
|
July 25, 2006, 8:10 am
By
Texas GOP Rep. John Culberson
The President signed a civil nuclear deal with the government of India last March. It allowed the U.S. to export nuclear fuel, reactors, and expertise to India in exchange for international safeguards and nuclear facility inspections. This agreement represents a significant foreign policy shift because historically the U.S. refuses the sale of civilian nuclear technology to countries that did not sign the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Since it dramatically alters U.S. policy, Congress must approve the treaty before the U.S.-India pact can take effect.
I believe the United States must increasingly look to India as a strategic partner. India is the largest democracy in the world, is transforming into an economic powerhouse, and occupies a vital strategic position between the Middle East and China. India also shares a long history of combating Muslim extremism and is an important ally in the global war on terror. For all these reasons, I believe the United States should take steps to improve its relationship with India. I support H.R. 5682 and will vote for its passage in the House.
|
Most Viewed RSS Feed »
