It is the fourth year on or about tax filing day that my colleagues have brought this same amendment to the floor of the House. It has failed on each prior occasion. They know it will fail again today. And this amendment is not here as a serious legislative undertaking; it is here to make a political point. If it were here to make a serious legislative point, as opposed to going through a political charade, this bill would have gone through the appropriate committees, one of which would have been the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the Committee on the Judiciary. I cannot imagine bringing a proposed constitutional amendment, an amendment to the most sacred document in government that we have, without going through the Subcommittee on the Constitution and going through the Committee on the Judiciary. Now, the reason that we did not go that route, or the majority did not go that route is because this is not a serious legislative undertaking.
Melvin Watt: “It is the fourth year on or about tax filing day that my colleagues have brought this same amendment to the floor of the…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the lack of seriousness in a proposed constitutional amendment during House debate.
Share
More from Melvin Watt
What was needed in this industry was somebody to make responsible decisions and not let access overburden safety and soundness.
I have an amendment at the desk which was made in order under the rule. The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment. The text of the amendment is as follows: Page 5, insert the following after line 23 and redesignate…
There is no rational reason, if you think about it, why a superior tax lien would be having an interest rate of 10, 11, 12 percent when a lien subordinate to it is going at 4 percent or 5 percent.
I thank the gentleman for yielding time. Mr. Chairman, I want to rise not so much in opposition to the manager's amendment, but in opposition to the bill and so that we can try to make sure that people understand what it is that they are…





