Mike Levin: “The reason I sought the floor to ask the Senator from Virginia the question is because the argument he makes seems to be…”

“The reason I sought the floor to ask the Senator from Virginia the question is because the argument he makes seems to be based on a premise that there is a civil penalty history to this language but not a criminal penalty history. It would seem to me that would be greater protection for any potential defendant or contractor because there is a higher standard of proof. But putting all that aside, my question is, then, would there be any objection to simply restoring the civil penalty for that violation, material overvaluation of any good or service? Since the Senator says there is a history in terms of civil penalties for that activity, then I was very curious to find out whether he might object if we simply restore the civil penalty for that violation.”