I was absent on Wednesday, March 8, 2006, for personal reasons. My intended votes are as follows: Rollcall vote 27 on the Cardoza Amendment to H.R. 4167--``aye''; rollcall vote 28 on the Waxman Amendment to H.R. 4167--``no''; rollcall vote 29 on the Capps, Stupak, Waxman, Eshoo Amendment to H.R. 4167--``no''; rollcall vote 30 on the Wasserman Schultz Amendment to H.R. 4167--``no''; rollcall vote 31 on the Motion to Recommit on H.R. 4167--``no''; rollcall vote 32 on the Final Passage of H.R. 4167--``aye.'' ____________________
Charles Norwood: “I was absent on Wednesday, March 8, 2006, for personal reasons. My intended votes are as follows: Rollcall vote 27 on…”
Share
More from Charles Norwood
in conclusion, I will simply say to my friend, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) that this is not an amendment that justifies or does not justify the previous amendment. This is an effort to get the facts on what we already know. If…
I actually did not know who to come to talk to because we did not know who would be leading against this amendment. If I may, it is a very, very simple drafting error in the bill on line 7 where we are saying that law enforcement personnel…
it gives me absolute pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson), my friend and neighbor, who lives right up the road from me in Columbia.
it seems tonight is the night for many of us to talk about the hurricane and the disastrous effects it has had on our country. I heard earlier a couple of my Democratic colleagues berating the majority leader about hurry up with money…





