I was distressed that this bill received just 12 hours, really, of discussion. And there were a lot of things that are unknown. For example, we did know that only arguably 12 States would qualify. I must point out, California is not among those 12. But we did not specify who gets the excess funds. So it is possible that Florida gets California's money or not. This is a real issue because right now the money we are talking about, the $1.5 billion, is in the violent crime trust fund. Those funds are currently flowing to States and localities. Every State is getting some of that money and so it will be a real loss to cops and prosecutors who are currently getting funding if States do not qualify and we know some do not and some will never. So this is important. I know you have a few closing remarks but this bill is flawed in so many ways that I hope to have an opportunity to go through some of them.
Zoe Lofgren: “I was distressed that this bill received just 12 hours, really, of discussion. And there were a lot of things that are…”
Editor's note · Context
Addressing concerns about a bill discussed in the Committee on the Judiciary.
Share
More from Zoe Lofgren
I rise in opposition to reauthorizing FISA section 702 without meaningful reform. At a time when the Trump administration is building a sweeping surveillance apparatus, trampling civil rights, and disregarding the rule of law, Congress…
I just note that when the standards setting organization sued Public.Resource.Org, the D.C. Circuit Court said this in ruling for freedom of the law: ``Once a standard is incorporated by reference into the law, it effectively becomes part…
My fear is that the chaos the new administration is sowing will be enough to leave our science and technology enterprise in ruins, with Chinese Communist leaders in Beijing popping champagne corks.





