So I am correct. In other words, if patience tends to run out and the clock tends to run out and the weather begins to worsen and the contingencies they represent, we could, in effect, say third reading of this bill, closing out those amendments that the Senators, who have said they would perhaps offer them, refuse to come to the floor to offer them. They will be cut out; is that correct?
Hatfield is discussing the implications of time constraints on amendments to a bill.
Share
More from Mark Hatfield
in 1989, I joined with my colleague, Senator Lautenberg, in support of the retention of the standard of proof long required for certain categories of Soviet and Indochinese refugees who have faced continuing persecution. The so-called…
we have done so by indicating that States should not approve waivers for local education agencies or schools unless a reform plan is in place and the waiver will assist the LEA or school in reaching its educational goals. Mr. President, my…
I intend to vote for the Republican substitute budget resolution presented to us today because its guiding principle is that we must strive harder to reduce the deficit, cut the growth rate of entitlement programs, and enable private…
the Simpson amendment to the pending legislation, the National Competitiveness Act, includes important reforms to the Davis-Bacon Act of 1931. While I strongly support the continuation of the Davis-Bacon law, I do believe changes need to…
Other voices in this conversation
