The Public Record
Mr. Chairman, let me just engage my colleague in a colloquy to get a better understanding of what he is trying to do. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman says that he is exempting from the attorney's fees provisions for any private settlement. I…
I make two comments in response to the gentleman's statement. No. 1, he underestimates the will of my Governor, since North Carolina is one of the three States to that qualifies to get these funds under this bill currently. I think you are…
I do not come to make that argument today, although there are some very serious constitutional questions about a part of this bill. But the bulk of the bill I would concede is constitutional, so I guess I should be relieved that I am not…
Mr. Chairman, before we rush to judgment on this, I think we ought to at least let our colleagues and the American people know what we are doing here. In the spirit, whether it is bipartisanship or whatever, the American people deserve the…
This amendment gives that responsibility to the States or the localities which are applying for funds under this bill. Basically what it says is if you have an 85-percent service requirement, your prisoners have to serve 85 percent of…
If the gentleman offers it, if he votes this one down, let him offer some amendment that will make this constitutional, and then maybe we can talk about supporting it, Mr. Chairman. However, do not come in here and say ``Oh, no, yesterday…
the language is simple. It says, point blank, this is the only place you will find these words in the Constitution, there being no other reference to habeas corpus in the entire Constitution, and listen, let them resonate in this body, if…
If a person is probably innocent, which is, I mean, that is what your words are, probably innocent, I submit to you he should be given a shot, and that is all this amendment says.
Let me go back because the gentleman from New York [Mr. Schumer] has reminded me that under present law they actually would have the right to raise it, but once this bill is passed, they will not have the right to raise it.
just for the brief purpose of assuring the gentleman that this is not a radical change. January 1995, January 23, 1995, this year, the Supreme Court said that this is the law. And all I am trying to do is stop them from changing the law. I…
In that section it says, ``The court shall only consider a claim under certain circumstances.'' I agree with the gentleman that this is not the standard for an ultimate disposition of the case, but it is the prevailing standard for…
This is not about bad guys and good guys. What we do when we subvert the Constitution of the United States to try to get some bad guys is that we subvert the Constitution of the United States for the good guys also. We cannot afford to do…
Mr. Chairman, I want to make sure the gentleman is clear. This is not about whether we support the death penalty or not. There is nothing in this that deals with the death penalty. It is not about the length of appeals. It is about how you…
this bill puts us in a position of sitting here on this floor and getting into these kinds of irrelevant debates. I agree with my friend, the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Hoyer]. We ought not exempt this one agency without exempting other…
I will not take a minute. I would just rise in opposition to this amendment and say that this bill already speeds up the appeals process. My amendment that I offered that would have tried to redeem people who come forward with evidence of…
I was just looking at the language, and it refers to section rather than bill. There are several sections in this bill, and what I am trying to be clear on is that your language applies to the entire bill, not just to one particular…
That is the ultimate standard we are talking about; that is not the standard for review. The standard for review, based on the Supreme Court's recent ruling, is the standard that I have picked up in my amendment.
Under current law they would have the right to do it, but under this bill they would not have the right to raise it.
Let me be sure that the gentleman understands my amendment because I think he has a misconception of my amendment or he has a misconception of the law. My amendment only gets the person who is filing the habeas in the courthouse. This is…
I am beginning to wonder what happens when the Republicans' 1995 political contract comes into conflict with the people's 1791 contract with the American people, the Constitution. I thought the conservative approach was to uphold the…
I will probably vote for it, but I do think that we need to point out some things to the American people about this bill and some concerns that I have. No. 1, there is a provision in this bill that talks about when a person is on probation…
it seems to me the only way one could conclude that this guts the bill is to say that the rest of the bill is somehow inconsistent with the fourth amendment. I am wondering whether that is what the gentleman from Florida is saying, because…
what ever happened to our gift ban? Last year the House voted two separate times to stop lobbyists from paying for Members' meals, entertainment and other ``gimmees,'' but the Republicans in the other body stopped the gift ban in its…
If we have 60 amendments and each one of them is valuable, and we agree to exempt them by majority vote from this bill right now, and we acknowledge that they are valuable, what is the problem with exempting 40 different things, if we…
I understand that, reclaiming my time, I understand it in the context of this bill in this debate. But I bet the gentleman 10, 15 years ago, had he asked somebody would we be today amending the Constitution to require a three-fifths…
Politicians like Melvin Watt
