On the recordFebruary 6, 1995
Is it not true that as we write proposed constitutional amendments, the one concern we have is that the wording that goes into those amendments is not something that falls within the purview of the Congress on a daily basis? By that I mean they could simply rewrite or change a law and it would change the meaning of it. The Constitution, as we know it and as we are certainly pledged to uphold, is a document that we are constantly trying to comply with instead of change. The language that is put in the Daschle amendment used, as I mentioned earlier, and as the Senator has mentioned, and the Senator from Utah mentioned--the word ``aggregate'' sums, and it used a variety of other words that, is it not true, every year the Congress could pass by a majority vote here in the Senate and the House and change the definition and therefore change the approach of the amendment itself?
Source
govinfo.gov




