a couple of hours ago I was on the Senate floor urging and encouraging the House to act on a compromise proposal to deal with the current fiscal issues before us that included the ``no Washington exemption'' from the ObamaCare language. As I said, I think that is very important for two reasons; one, the principle. I think the first rule of American democracy should be that Washington lives by the same rules as it imposes on America under ObamaCare, under everything; secondly, a very practical consideration. I think the quicker we do that, the quicker we start getting things right. The quicker we start understanding in a gut, personal way the real challenges and burdens of ObamaCare, the quicker we start changing that. I return just a couple of hours later to congratulate the House because they are apparently moving in exactly that direction. All indications are that they will be going to the Rules Committee very soon with a package that features--that has as its centerpiece that ``no Washington exemption'' from ObamaCare language. Again, I think it is important for all the reasons I said. I also want to point out that assuming the House passes that--I think they are going to tonight--that ``no Washington exemption'' language will be the only thing--the only substantial thing in that proposal that has not been essentially agreed to by Senate Democrats. Everything else is detail, a date here, minor provisions.…
Share
More from David Vitter
the picture a lot of us see, a majority of us see since the deal that we disagreed with was Iran taking negative actions, horrible actions in some cases against us and our allies, particularly in the categories of terrorism, human rights…
Thank you, Senator Inhofe, for those important clarifications to preemption and for another question that is very important to clarify in order to capture the full conngressional intent of the bills preemption section. This Act is intended…
When TSCA was first enacted in 1976, the Act created a higher level of judicial review for certain rulemakings that would restrict chemicals in commerce. Congress took this approach because it wanted to ensure that rulemakings that would…
Protecting innovation and not materially altering the new chemicals process was a critical part of the final compromise. Every effort was made to ensure EPA has the right tools to review new chemical substances but the amendments to this…





