mrs. lowey: i thank the chair and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. campbell: thank you, madam chair. and i appreciate the lady from new york's comments. but i don't think it changes any of the facts that i laid out and i would argue and again not just for this one, there are others that could have been brought up as well, but that this is essentially a charitable contribution. and whether it's my district, your district or anyone else's, we have a number of such things in which charitable contributions should be made. i really don't think that the taxpayers that -- of this country elected us to be conduits with their tax money. and i think they elected to us spend their money as little -- as little of their money as possible on things of only national priority and federal nexus and i'm afraid i don't see where this and other projects like this rise to that standard and with that, madam

price: i yield two minutes to mrs. lowey. mrs. lowey: i'd like to thank the gentleman from north carolina for writing a strong bill that provides much-needed funding for critical initiatives, several of which i'd like to mention. emergency communication gaps remain for many first responders. the bill includes $50 million for interoperability grants, $45 million for the office of emergency communications and $80 million for command, control and interoperability research and development. these important programs will benefit first responders in all of our communities. the bill also includes $887 million for the urban areas security initiative. nearly $50 million more than f.y. 2009 and this is the only program designed to exclusively assist high-risk urban areas such as new york and i thank the chairman for substantially increasing its funding. however, i would be remiss if i did not mention the securing the cities initiative which is not funded in the bill. this program seeks to prevent the smuggling ofs i list nuclear material into

mr. serrano and ms. lowey protect their cities and have defended the program. we take a back seat to no one. and i have respect for those efforts. and our understanding of new york's unique needs and our understanding of how successful this pilot program has been. as a matter of fact, though, the money for carrying out the remaining aspects of this program is already in the pipeline. and these very arguments for the importance of this program, i believe, are the best argument for taking a more long-term approach for getting away from a pilot program, getting away from yearly amendments, yearly earmarks and making this part of our permanent long-term protective efforts. and of course, we will work with the new york delegation to find the funding resources that will let them do just that. i pledge my cooperation in that endeavor. i hope the spirit of this opposition is well understood. we do want to work on this matter. we just believe that this amendment is not the right approach. and therefore, we ask for its defeat. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the qu