Once again, I heard what she read into the Record. I already read that. I understand exactly what it says. I think maybe I haven't made myself clear: The underlying bill injects clarity into the law, which hurts plaintiffs in their cases. This will hurt women in bringing their cases. It will take years to try to get clarity through the court system, if we ever get clarity. That hurts plaintiffs in these lawsuits. Defendants like to throw up unclarity. So I guess, perhaps, if you wanted to argue from that point of view, let's have a confusing bill. I am going to get clarity into the bill that actually helps women. And it is the irony of this whole proceeding that the bill that is supposed to help women, that they say is going to help women, hurts them. I am trying to help women with my amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time. {time} 1545
Share
More from Bradley Byrne
After a long, embarrassing month, the House will finally transmit the Articles of Impeachment against President Trump to the United States Senate. Yet I understand Speaker Pelosi and her managers will continue to push for witnesses in the…
Today the Democratic majority is not judging the President with fairness, but impeaching him with a vengeance. In the investigation of the President, fundamental principles which Americans hold dear, privacy, fairness, checks and balances…
I was listening to the gentlewoman talk and I don't know that she has read my amendment, because my amendment actually solves the problem that she poses. There are some circuits that have given opinions just exactly as she said. What my…
The Insurrection Act was passed in 1807 and signed into law by Thomas Jefferson as a delegation by the Congress to the President of the power granted under Article I, Section 8, Clause 15 of the Constitution to call forth U.S. Armed…





