What I was trying to say earlier in the evening was that had this amendment been crafted so that we were talking about sexual crime, a rape crime against a woman, or whatever, that was a Federal crime for the second crime, just as Mr. Frost's is a Federal crime that we are dealing with. Although an underlying predicate crime was a State crime, the second crime had to be a Federal crime, and that is not the case with Ms. Slaughter's, then I would be much happier, let us put it that way, with what we are doing tonight because I feel that the nexus would be there; there would not be any question of even a doubt about the constitutionality, and so forth. That is not what we are doing.
Joe Cunningham: “What I was trying to say earlier in the evening was that had this amendment been crafted so that we were talking about…”
On the recordMay 7, 1996
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of an amendment related to federal jurisdiction over sexual crimes.
Share
More from Joe Cunningham
Jun 23, 2026
I saw firsthand, being in Congress, the reputation the Democratic Party has earned about talking down to people, being too preachy, too woke.
Apr 30, 2019
There's very little that is more important to the future of our nation than fixing our crumbling infrastructure.
Oct 28, 2019
This issue is certainly on the minds of South Carolinians, many of whom dedicate their free time to support local beach cleanups in an effort to preserve our beautiful, God-given natural resources.
Feb 5, 2020
Exposing our vibrant ocean resources to incredibly loud seismic airgun blasting and dangerous offshore drilling is simply not worth the risk.





