Mr. Chairman, this is a very good debate, and I think it is on the level that we should be debating such issues as this. The gentlewoman from Florida, my friend, she correctly pointed out that both of these bills exclude military intervention, and I say to my colleagues, ``Quite clearly, if you want to invade Haiti, if you think that a military intervention by the United States is the right way to go, you simply vote against each amendment, and by the way, as far as I can tell, the language is exactly identical. I don't see any difference in the language between the two bills. But let's look at what is different in the bills.'' Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from California, his bill would tighten the economic sanctions. Well, if my colleagues think sanctions are going to work, then that is in the bill. But let us also look further into what the gentleman from California is talking about. He is talking about when people are escaping from the island, that we supply them lawyers. Read the bill.
E. Clay Shaw, Jr.: “Mr. Chairman, this is a very good debate, and I think it is on the level that we should be debating such issues as this.…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of two bills regarding military intervention and economic sanctions related to Haiti.
Share
More from E. Clay Shaw, Jr.
Oh, Ms. Norton, I am sure you will be quite surprised to know I agree with you. She should be trained. And this is exactly what the Republican bill has said. The Republican bill says that this woman who is on welfare deserves a second…
What you are asking, you are adding up, just taking aid to families with dependent children.
Because it was not paid for. It was a budget buster, and this is something that I feel is very irresponsible. We are not helping--we are not helping even the kids on welfare----
Well, he says that there is a health crisis in this country, and we cannot even get a health care bill out of the Committee on Ways and Means.





