Michael Burgess Quotes

I believe that States should be credited for their non-Federal investment in revenue-generating transportation facilities to address their regional transportation needs.

One of the things we have to understand is that federal transportation dollars require a local match. If that money isn't there, that money goes to another state.

If taxpayer money were limitless, we wouldn't need a budget at all.

The term 'cost shifting,' as I use it, refers to those items in a university's budget that used to be reimbursed by the federal government but are no longer paid for by them.

Why should a city be mandated to do something by the federal government or state government without the money to do it?

I think the governors would all agree that what we don't want from the federal government is unfunded mandates.

I'm sort of suspicious of most economic development projects, but the ones that encourage taxpayer-funded relocation bidding wars should be declared unconstitutional.

Government ... simply has no bottom line.

We are not opposed to public transportation. We are opposed to wasteful boondoggles.

We won't accomplish our goals by creating a new federal bureaucracy or by bribing states with their own taxpayers' money.

When the fountains of government [borrowing] abundance began to dry up, when through lack of funds and the impossibility of negotiating fresh loans the state was forced to check the extension of bureaucracy and to put a stop to public works, then and then only did the Italians realize what it meant to have allowed themselves to be made one of the most heavily taxed nations in the world.

A healthy national infrastructure requires not just competent engineers but also a government—and a public—willing to pay for it.

In many parts of our country, geography and population density can make it difficult to attract private investment. These communities depend on federal investments to maintain and upgrade their transportation systems and stay competitive. And we know that it's an investment worth making. Because when rural America succeeds, we all do.

Taxpayers across the U.S. have invested hundreds of billions of dollars building our nation's infrastructure, and that investment should be protected.

No state can invest the kinds of dollars in infrastructure necessary on their own. They need federal help.

If the federal government is dumb enough to give it to us, we'll be smart enough to take it. In Minnesota's case, we are not a net taker of money from the federal government.

Maine's welfare program is cannibalizing the rest of state government. To all you able-bodied people out there: Get off the couch and get yourself a job.

Taxpayers don't want their money spent more than a very, very slender amount on actual buying art or paying for concerts.

Many other states ultimately - they might not have the same balance sheet as Wisconsin - but collective bargaining from the federal level... these are big issues, and these costs need to be put under control.

What America really needs is a long-term bill that makes significant investments in our transportation infrastructure and reforms the highway trust fund to ensure it remains solvent for years to come. This will require bold ideas and a bipartisan effort.

We don't spend money properly in Washington, D.C. We jump these massive bills to massive bills.

As our leaders in Washington confront tough decisions about our budget priorities, I urge them to continue federal funding for public broadcasting.

Whether it's federal highway funds for the Thruway or Tappan Zee bridge project or the corrupt Cornhusker deal, Senator Gillibrand is willing to sell out our hardworking families. She has failed to address the problem that taxpayers in New York send much more to Washington that we get back.

Robin Vos and Scott Fitzgerald want to have good public schools, good roads and good health care for the people of Wisconsin. We just have to find a way to do it. I think we can.

Budgets can make or break reputations and governments.