Rep. G.K. Butterfield, D-N.C.:
Madam Speaker, during the final vote series last night, I inadvertently voted “no” on the DeLauro amendment No. 44 that would prohibit the use of funds to train the Afghan Special Mission Wing. I would say for the record that I support the amendment offered by Ms. DeLauro, and had I voted correctly, I would have voted for the amendment
- Congressional Record, July 24, 2013
Rep. Duncan D. Hunter, R-Calif.:
Mr. Speaker, the purpose of my statement is to inform the House that my absence last week, from July 8 to July 12, and on Tuesday of this week, July 16, was due to a necessary surgical procedure called anterior cervical disc fusion, performed by an outstanding team of professionals. With recovery underway, I’m eager to get back to work alongside the rest of my colleagues.
Rep. Mark Sanford, R-S.C.:
Mr. Speaker, I was absent for votes on Tuesday, June 25, 2013, due to Flight #4042 being delayed by approximately four hours before departing Charleston International Airport. Had I been present, I would have voted in the following manner:
H.R. 2383—To designate the new Interstate Route 70 Bridge over the Mississippi River connecting St. Louis, Missouri, and southwestern Illinois as the “Stan Musial Veterans Memorial Bridge.” Vote: “yes.”
H.R. 1092—To designate the air route traffic control center located in Nashua, New Hampshire, as the Patricia Clark Boston Air Route Traffic Control Center.” Vote: “yes.”
- Congressional Record, June 27, 2013
Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga.:
Mr. Speaker, on Thursday June 20, 2013, during a rapid succession of two-minute votes, I mistakenly voted “aye” for rollcall No. 281.
This amendment seeks to dismantle the U.S. sugar program, which has operated successfully for decades at no cost to taxpayers, and provides a stable supply of sugar for Americans at affordable prices. Doing away with the U.S. sugar program would cost thousands of jobs, destabilize the U.S. sugar supply, and would not result in a discernible change in the price of sugar for Americans. The price of sugar continues to drop, and is currently at its lowest level in a decades. Passage of this amendment does nothing to decrease the price of sugar, and will only assist companies to offshore jobs, cut labor and health care costs, and leave American farmers penniless.
Supporters of this amendment complain about high prices for sugar. Yet restaurants give sugar away and that one can buy a five-pound bag of sugar for almost nothing. This amendment will do nothing to create a free market for sugar and will only subject the U.S. to distorted world sugar markets that will cost farmers their livelihoods and American jobs.
- Congressional Record, June 26, 2013