It is designed so that Members of the Senate who under pressure from the administration or because of persuasion from Senator Byrd or whatever other reason, they want to vote against Senate Joint Resolution 41, the real thing, but they want to go back home and say, ``I voted for a constitutional amendment for a balanced budget.'' And so this gives them a way to cover themselves. If there was any real desire on the part of the majority leader or anyone to pass this, there would not have been a suggestion that we have to have 67 votes to adopt this amendment. I can never remember in now my 19th year in Congress anyone ever suggesting for any amendment you have to have 67 votes to pass it. The proponents would not have suggested that if they believed it was desirable to pass it.
Editor's note · Context
The speaker discusses the motivations behind Senate Joint Resolution 41 and the requirement for 67 votes.
Share
More from Sen. Paul Simon
I want to pay tribute to Senator Thurmond, who has been a pioneer in fighting for this. I believe Senator Thurmond told me he has been fighting for this for 35 years, but it has been a long time. I am proud to be associated with him in…
I think he has made an important point; this amendment is introduced for political cover only.
Yes, it is. If any such right currently exists under 42 U.S.C. section 1983, this Act does nothing to preclude such an action.
we are all heavily dependent on our staffs and the support people around here. We are dependent on the pages and the people who take down our words and the people who tell us what is pending, the people who guard this establishment and the…





