It prohibits employment discrimination and preemption of State and local civil rights laws with Federal funds, it provides offsets for the costs of the bill, it deletes the sweeping new provisions permitting agencies to convert more than $47 billion in government programs into private vouchers without congressional review, and it protects participants from religious coercion. If Members do not believe in employment discrimination and if they support the civil rights laws of their community, they should vote for the substitute. If Members are concerned about the administration having unfettered discretion to turn billions of dollars of social services into vouchers without any congressional review, they should vote for the substitute. If Members think that the charitable deductions established in this bill should be paid for by a slightly lower tax cut to the very wealthy, rather than by raiding the Social Security and Medicare trust funds, they should vote for the substitute. If Members are fiscal conservatives and think tax cuts must be paid for, they should vote for the substitute.
Jerry Nadler: “It prohibits employment discrimination and preemption of State and local civil rights laws with Federal funds, it…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing a substitute amendment related to employment discrimination and civil rights in a bill.
Share
More from Jerry Nadler
A nonbinding resolution—or any action that doesn't require the release of the Epstein files—is nothing more than a political smokescreen designed to shield Republicans who refuse to demand full transparency and accountability from the…
Let's be very clear. Sexual offenses and domestic violence are serious crimes and are already grounds for deportability and inadmissibility, as they should be. Unfortunately, this bill is so poorly drafted that it would result in extremely…
This bill will put an end to those intimidation tactics, restore transparency, and ensure the public knows exactly who is wielding federal power in our communities.
The warrantless arrest of any legal permanent resident seemingly solely over their speech is a chilling, McCarthyesque action in response to the exercise of First Amendment rights to free speech.





