On the recordOctober 22, 1997
I read today that Roger Ebert, I guess it was today, has an article in which he says there should be a new category of Nobel Prize for Movies. Well, I am going to add one. We should immediately ask that they institute a Nobel Prize for Inconsistency, because you would win it. There would be a problem: Under the rules, you could not accept the money, but maybe we can put it to the deficit. Because I do not think in recorded parliamentary history there has ever been a greater gap between people's professed principles and what they have voted for than there is in this bill. The last speaker for the bill, against the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York [Mr. Boehlert], said it is about States. He was absolutely right. The premise of most of this bill is that States cannot be trusted to deal fairly with property rights; not State local officials, not State zoning boards, and, God forbid, State courts. Because what you are about to vote for is a bill that says let us tell every unelected life-tenured Federal judge in the country that they have not been sufficiently activist.
Source
govinfo.gov




