The bottom line is, if we do not adopt this Boxer amendment, then what is in this bill to encourage fixing the problem? This is ironic, because the idea is to stop the litigation, fix the problem, have a cooling off period where we remediate the problem. David Dreier and Chris Cox in 1998 understood it. They put it in their bill. My friends on the other side, having indicated they would be inclined to take this amendment with some changes, I agreed to those changes. Yet, we were still unable to reach an agreement. I am perplexed, I say to my friend. What are we doing here anyway? What is this about? Is this about protecting the consumer? Is this about getting things fixed? Is this about standing proud of the good computer companies that are making the fix?
Barbara Boxer: “The bottom line is, if we do not adopt this Boxer amendment, then what is in this bill to encourage fixing the problem?…”
Editor's note · Context
Addressing the need for an amendment to encourage problem-solving in a legislative bill.
Share
More from Barbara Boxer
We Democrats, we do have a very good and diverse coalition. It truly is diverse, everywhere you look at it. But in terms of leadership in Congress, it is true, they’re getting older.
They've sold their soul, this party used to be called the Grand Old Party. And now it's a cowardly party of lies.
The point -- but I do think there`s an important point to this poll. And that is, we Democrats, we do have a very good and diverse coalition. It truly is diverse, everywhere you look at it. But in terms of leadership in Congress, it is…
Frankly, anyone who runs on that as an issue should be defeated, overwhelmingly by everybody.





