I quote from the unofficial record from 6:51 p.m. Monday on the floor of the Senate, the Senator from California: The Supreme Court said in an identical bill, it is far broader than just one procedure--identical bill. The Senator from Illinois just repeatedly said this is the exact same bill, exactly the same language--``identical bill.'' The Senator from California said that is correct. So she is saying this is an identical bill, and then she suggested we need to send it back to committee because we need hearings because it is a changed bill. Which is it? Is is a changed bill or an identical bill? It is not an identical bill, I concede that point to her. It is different. The language is substantially different. The Senator from California said: We meant to cover more than one procedure with this language. Why would we want to do that? The Supreme Court said: The reason we are striking down your language is that we believe it covers more than one procedure. So we are going to craft language so the Supreme Court can come back and say, well, it covers more than one procedure? Maybe my colleagues think we are not serious about banning this procedure.
On the recordMarch 12, 2003
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Debating the characterization of a bill and its implications during Senate floor discussion.
Share
More from Rick Santorum
Dec 27, 2020
It's pretty inexplicable to me. You know, the fact that he went ahead and signed these two bills is -- there really isn't a good reason to have held off.
Dec 22, 2020
I think this puts Republican, particularly two senators in Georgia in a very tough bind to have a president, you know, having voted for the National Defense Authorization Act now, having to decide whether they're going to buck the…
Oct 30, 2020
If you're a young person, that's not a particularly enticing thing to hear and -- because that's going to have a huge impact on you, and your ability to provide for yourself and your family.





