On the recordJuly 11, 1996
I understand why no Member on the other side agreed to yield. We have a tradition around here of yielding. But when your arguments are as thin as theirs, you do not risk rebuttal. Let us talk about the points here. First of all, we are told that this is not political. Now, people may understand why we do not speak here under oath. No one in the world believes that this is not political. We are told we must do this because the Hawaii Supreme Court is threatening them. The Hawaii Supreme Court decision in question came in 1993. The process in Hawaii, which is now still going on, does not end until, at the earliest, in late 1997 and probably 1998. There is a trial that has to take place that has not even started. Why, when the decision came in 1993 and the process will not end until 1997 or 1998, are we doing this 3 months before the election? Oh, it is not political, sure. Second, there is a very false premise, the notion that this is to protect States from having to do what Hawaii does. Every Member on the other side who sponsored this bill believes that that part is unnecessary. Every Member believes that the States already have that right. What is being protected here is not the right of States to make their own decision but the right of States to vote Republican in the 1996 Presidential election.
Source
govinfo.gov




