I have their testimony here from that debate a year ago. Those committee members stood and said, I agree, we should phase it out over 3 years, I can read the gentleman their testimony, and on that basis oppose the elimination over a 1-year period. For that reason my amendment simply proposes to keep pace with a phaseout over three years and not to eliminate in 1 year.
Discussing the funding for the National Endowment for the Humanities and proposing a phased reduction.
Share
More from John Shadegg
I have spent a great deal of my life advocating for the victims of crime. It seems to me this is an outrage that exists in current law. The victims of crime should not be revictimized. In this case, American law does revictimize those…
So the reason you wouldn't want to stand on the floor and vote for that Senate bill is not just because of the policy in it, it is because that bill will contain the Cornhusker Kickback, right?
I kind of think the American people are fairly bright. I think they see through this. If you are deeming a bill passed in a rule, aren't you actually passing that bill and aren't you voting for that bill? And isn't this just a trick or a…
Wait, the gentleman's telling me that never before in Federal law have we ordered people to buy a particular product, that we don't do that in Federal law as a routine matter?
Other voices in this conversation
