One of the votes was a rejection of 77 to 22 and the other one was a rejection of 74 to 23, and people can reach their own conclusion on those votes rather than my presenting a conclusion, which was, I thought they were overwhelmingly rejected. I am not allowed to say ``overwhelmingly rejected,'' but 77 and 74 can be concluded by anyone on their own. To that extent, Mr. Speaker, I certainly want to correct the record in emphasizing that it was overwhelming rather simply make sure that the vote of 77 and 74 noes is on the record.
David Thomas: “One of the votes was a rejection of 77 to 22 and the other one was a rejection of 74 to 23, and people can reach their…”
Editor's note · Context
Addressing the interpretation of voting results during a floor speech.
Share
More from David Thomas
Reclaiming my time, millions of Americans are thankful they now have prescription drugs at significant savings. I know it is difficult because another line went through one of your typical political arguments. Test us. See if we are just…
That is boilerplate language that is used. This is something that we do virtually every year because there are always accounting errors, and this allows for the correcting of the accounting errors.
This morning we will have approximately 1 hour of debate prior to the cloture vote on the motion to proceed to the Gulf of Mexico energy security bill. The vote will occur at about 10 o'clock today, and immediately following that vote we…
In many ways, through my foundation, my last mission is to bring awareness to IAWL and those who are suffering.





