I rise today to join my colleagues in offering my prayers and condolences to the victims of Saturday's senseless violence in Tucson. To the families and loved ones of those who lost their lives or were injured, know that every Member of Congress and their staff stand with you today. This legislative body was designed to be a forum for the will of the American people, and Congresswoman Giffords has always met her constituents in accordance with that spirit. She and her staff members who accompanied her on that Saturday possessed a deep understanding that a Representative of the people's House must listen and remain as accessible as possible to the people. The citizens who lost their lives Saturday morning were exercising their patriotic duty to participate in the democratic process: a widely respected Federal judge; a dedicated church servant; a great grandmother who deeply believed in her country; a former secretary and homemaker; and a 9-year-old girl, herself a leader, getting an early glimpse of how our democracy works. And it is with an especially heavy heart that we mourn the loss of Gabe Zimmerman, a dedicated member of Congresswoman Giffords' staff and a member of this congressional community who was also a tireless servant to the people of Arizona's Eighth District. That those voices and lives were cut short is a national tragedy of the highest order.
Tom Latham: “I rise today to join my colleagues in offering my prayers and condolences to the victims of Saturday's senseless…”
Editor's note · Context
The speaker addresses the tragic shooting in Tucson and offers condolences to the victims and their families.
Share
More from Tom Latham
We would be more than happy to accept the amendment in the interest of time if we could move on.
The gentleman makes a very compelling argument, and we would accept the amendment.
I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill and, therefore, violates clause 2 of rule XXI. The rule states in pertinent part: ``An amendment…
All this would do is limit the employees of HUD, and it would do nothing to the PHA employees. PHA employees are not HUD employees; and all you are doing is limiting funding to HUD employees, so it would have no effect as far as the PHAs…





