Lynn N. Rivers: “I wish to speak today on 2 issues: the severability that has been discussed here and also the free speech issue. I want…”

“I wish to speak today on 2 issues: the severability that has been discussed here and also the free speech issue. I want to speak especially though to the idea that the unwillingness of the sponsors to include a severability provision in this bill is somehow an indictment of the bill. As I said earlier, research shows us that only four bills in this entire Congress have progressed without a severability clause, four bills out of 4,965 bills. Virtually every Member in this House who has sponsored a bill, including everyone sitting on both sides of the aisle has routinely included that in their bill. Now are we arguing that this is the only constitutionally controversial bill that this body has ever considered? Absolutely not. The argument seems to be that an unwillingness to accept a severability clause indicates a weakness, that somehow people who are supporting this believe that there is a problem constitutionally. I will point out if, in fact, the numbers I am given are correct and we see a lack of severability clauses in only a handful of bills, that means the chairman of the Subcommittee on the Constitution routinely does not have a severability clause in his bills, that the chairman of the whole Committee on the Judiciary routinely does not have a nonseverability clause in his bill. There seems to be a standard for this bill unlike any other, and I think that that is a problem. Virtually every issue that comes before this body has this sort of clause.”