Actually, it is a bit more complicated than that. See, it says that a bill, a resolution or a legislative measure changing the internal revenue laws shall require for final adoption in each House the concurrence of two-thirds of all Members of that House voting and present unless that bill, resolution, or other legislative measure is determined at the time of adoption in a reasonable manner prescribed by law not to increase the internal revenue by more than a de minimis amount. Well, I guess, then, what we have got to have is a certain amount of litigation, I suppose, about what constitutes a de minimis amount. I think that is really what we need. We need a process around here that makes it even more difficult for us to come to a consensus about how it is that we are going to tax and spend the money that we have to do here each year. I think it is going to be actually an extraordinary constitutional battle if we pass a constitutional amendment that says it has to be decided by the courts how much a de minimis amount is that we are allowed to raise taxes in order to qualify under this constitutional amendment.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of a proposed constitutional amendment regarding tax increases.
Share
More from Anthony Weiner
I demand a recorded vote. A recorded vote was ordered. The Acting CHAIR. Following this 15-minute vote, proceedings will resume on those amendments printed in the Congressional Record on which further proceedings were postponed, in the…
I am not going to permit myself to be distracted by this issue any longer.
I have made terrible mistakes, that have hurt the people I care about the most, and I am deeply sorry.
You may recall, I was standing here approximately 2 hours ago waiting to speak with several other Members on the efforts of my Republican friends to eliminate Medicare as we know it, and for reasons that are known only to the Chair, I was…





