Patricia Schroeder: “So then I kind of hear that as the answer is ``no.'' Let me say the one thing I worry about the gentleman's amendment…”

“So then I kind of hear that as the answer is ``no.'' Let me say the one thing I worry about the gentleman's amendment not being inclusive enough also on is that the gentleman says in and around any facility or location considered by the unit of local government to have a special risk. Now, what I was trying to do in my amendment is say that lots of localities have been hesitant to enforce this right of women to have access to a health care clinic, and I think that that might be the big duck in which local communities could duck out from under this. They could say, ``Well, we do not consider it dangerous,'' because that is really the qualifier on it. What I would like to ask the gentleman from New Mexico is, if this would be possible, because I think he is trying hard, and I appreciate what he is trying to do. What if we were to offer an amendment to the gentleman's amendment, first, you would have (i), ``in and around schools,'' which has no qualifiers in front of it. What if you then had (ii), ``in and around women's reproductive health clinics,'' again with no qualifiers, like schools, and then you could do other facilities that have qualifications. We could draft that and make that an amendment to the gentleman's amendment. I think that would be clearer on point because the issue here being one of a constitutional right that we think has a much higher Federal level of calling than just random crime.”