But isn't it ironic that while I was trying to argue for a student bill of rights and free speech, that we're not allowed to have free speech and a bill of rights in the United States Congress. How in the world, when we're having 27 amendments, and this amendment was overwhelmingly supported by our party, we only have, out of 27, four from Republicans, and two of those are Republican opposed. If we have time for 27 amendments, why can't we have an amendment for free speech? I just don't understand. I never understood the opposition to the amendment, but what an insult to the American people that when we want to debate whether there should be a student bill of rights on campuses, which is being adopted and introduced in many places around the country, that the United States Congress can't even debate on the House floor a free speech amendment and protection for speech in colleges. This is an outrage, an embarrassment, and a humiliation to the Rules Committee.
Mark Souder: “But isn't it ironic that while I was trying to argue for a student bill of rights and free speech, that we're not…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the lack of debate on a student bill of rights and free speech amendment in Congress.
Share
More from Mark Souder
My biggest frustration is that ICE--under both Republican and Democratic administrations--has not done enough to support the program.
the proposal to end the FFEL program and replace it with direct federal student lending will have negative consequences on students, it is fiscal madness and the alleged financial benefits to the federal government are likely illusionary.
Veterans get ping-ponged back and forth. Right now in Indiana, we're online in this budget to get a new hospital in Fort Wayne. We haven't had investment since before World War II. But they get ping-ponged down to Indianapolis because of…
the notion that federal financial aid has promoted college access to the United States is a myth not a reality.





