but the obama white house didn t want that neil: it started it started with bush. the argument was that that was not an option. did you buy ha? of course it was an option. companies do that all the time. it neil: in that meltdown period twasn t, you disagree? you could maybe make an argument i disagree with it. the banks were in meltdown mode. but there was nothing to stop g.m. and chrysler from going through a normal, as opposed to a politicized bankruptcy process. the unions would have been forced to make concession it s probably not on pay, work rules because that s where you get the big inefficiencies that make u.s. oughtie companies less competitive. neil: you just hit the nail on the side car there. dan mitchell, thank you. not a dollar in aid unless you match it in spending cuts. meet the congressman who is perfectly happy to get in chris
of delay. this was not done to try to kill the bill. it was a very straightforward argument, how worry we going to pay for it? i think chris christie would appreciate that. neil: quickly in the follow-up today, by tonight, we will be done with everything. will you vote for it? no. i am i am pretty certain that the last amendment tonight will pass, taking us to $60 billion. tell ultimately include the things like alaska fisheries and things in north carolina, damaged years ago, job placement programs, legal services, the roof on the smithsonian, weather balloons and satellites. that will end up in the bill tonight. that s unfortunate. i will have to vote against it. neil: it is. it robs the people who need the money. i think that s the riivetion here, neil. people are worried they are not going to get the money, congressman, very good having you. thank you. neil: so lance wants a second chance forgive me for sounding unforgiving, but not another dupe for this dope.
congressman from louisiana says, this is not an immediate need. why is this in here? they are trying to cut back the smaller funding that some described as pork when the bill came out of the senate, right after christmas. neil: you are an encyclopedia. this is what they are voting on in the house. this is the mulvaney amendment, aimed at matching dollar for dollar, whatever you grant in sandy aid, you make cuts in other budgets, by his math, 1.6% in discretionary spending to pay for what could be a $50 billion tab. this is not going to get in the way of folks getting sandy aid. this is said to be more perfunctory. they have some of the pork out of these various measures. but it will be perhaps late into the night before a package is done and agreed to. now to the politician who said, well, have you to pitch the pork or he is going to pitch a fit. get this, this guy is from new
budget cuts. we have a senior capitol hill producesser in the thick of t. we will have the guy behind that amendment in just a second. first to chad on where this aid is going now. what can you tell us? reporter: this is an amendment on the floor right now, offered by republican congressman nick mulvane tow institute an christmas-the-board cut of 1 pbt.6% of all discretionary spending, the funding that congress is responsible for each year, including defense. what mulvaney wants to do with this amendment is offset some of the costs of the sandy bill, worth $17 billion. mulvaney said, look, we want to get the mon tote folks in new york, connecticut and new jersey. he is from south carolina. they certainly get hurricane there is. but he says, if these tough budget times, we have to offset this. neil: the amendment isn t given good prospects in the house. a lot of republicans are scared of the response that they got
following catreenasm we rescinded 40% of the costs. there is precedent for this. i do wish it passed because i could have supported the underlying bill. i was appreciative of the opportunity to make the debate and have the argument and say, look, we have to start paying for these things. it is not right that we borrow money from china to take care of folks in nide in the northeast. neil: and we borrow money from china to pay china. having said that, i am wondering, congressman, you were willing to take the likes of chris christie and others, who crittedicized you and your colleagues for playing games with aid, sandy aid, how do you feel about that? i think that chris christie s objections were differentit think he is very much upset about the delay. i can t argue with him on na. we should have voted on this last year. but i can t imagine that mr. christie would attack me for wanting to pay for it. it sounds like something he might otherwise support. this was not done in the terms